POLITICAL DIARY

New Delhi, 31 May 2008

Uncork The Champagne…

UPA FIZZ JUST RAN DRY!

By Poonam I Kaushish

Celebrations are normally great fun. Lots of masti, some khaana-peena and loads of mirch-masala gup-shup. A time to wipe the worries, dismiss the problems and rejoice in the vacuous rhetoric of a litany of achievements. Enjoy!

At the risk of sounding a party pooper, are you kidding? The festivity at the Prime Minister’s dinner said it all. Never mind the phony assurances served to the aam aadmi as the tastiest dish. The high point was the grand entry of dushman-turned- dost Samajwadi leader Amar Singh even though he came an hour late.

The relief on Manmohan Singh’s face was palpable as he scurried from his table to sit with his khaas invitee to the exclusion of all present. Forgotten in the euphoria was the irony that the 2004 gate-crasher at Sonia Gandhi’s dinner for the UPA allies had become the most–prized guest. Never mind that Sonia and Amar Singh did not exchange greetings.  Should we measure this as the UPA’s success or desperation?

Less said the better of the “there is no reason to party’ Left brigade who after much dilly-dallying attended the dinner because it didn’t want to loose its numero uno position of being the main benefactor of the Congress. It was worried that if it distanced itself now then other parties would occupy its prime place at Sonia’s high table.

Moreover, Messers Karat and Yechury could not stomach the fact that the Congress was seeking to replace it with the Samajwadi and other new allies. Which would put to rest its dreams of forming a grand Third Front. Thus, the back seat driving and tu-tu-mein-mein could resume later. Should we measure the souring of Congress-Left ties as success or failure?

What of the Grand Dame of Indian Politics. It was all dressed up with no invites of a promising future, no grooms and no swayambar. In the last four years it has lost 14 State Assembly elections out of 25. Since 2005, the only major wins for the Party have been in Haryana and Assam.

In 2007-08 it has lost critical states like Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh and, recently, Karnataka. Worse, there is no Congress rainbow in sight in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Delhi, Jammu and Kashmir and Mizoram which go to the polls later this year and the general elections next year.  Should we make merry that the Party is looking at the situation (read power) skidding out of its hands?

Given the Party’s penchant for dynasties, it has insulated its ruling Goddess Sonia-who-can-do-no-wrong and ‘yuvraj deity’ Rahul against any finger-pointing backlash. If the ground beneath the Congress is slipping fast, very fast in State after State, blame it on intra-party politics, backstabbing and fighting between senior leaders, stick-in-the-mud recalcitrant allies, the moon, sun, stars et al. But not Sonia-Rahul. No matter that everything from A to Z is decided by the undaata, her alone.

Should we celebrate the tragedy that the raison de atre for the Party’s defeat is because the Congress has tied its kundalini to Sonia’s stars and refuses to see what the asli stars foretell: time has cut the dynastic umbical cord?  Yesterday it was UP, today Karnataka, tomorrow Lok Sabha, who knows?

This not the only problem. The link between the Congress’s electoral underperformance and organisational disarray cannot be overstated. Karnataka is only the tip of iceberg where former Chief Minister Krishna made no bones that the blame for the Party’s defeat rests squarely on the “central leadership. My not contesting was a crucial mistake. I would have led from the front and the situation would have changed.” This was a "grave blunder," he added. Are we to rejoice that another senior leader has joined the Arjun Singh bandwagon of cribbers? Recall, the Union Human Resource Development Minister was the first to indirectly question Sonia’s style of functioning and coterie culture.

Things are no better in the Party unit in Madhya Pradesh. Union Ministers Kamal Nath and Jyotiraditya Scindia and former Chief Minister Digvijay Singh have to play second fiddle to handpicked ‘Sonia-stooge’ Suresh Pachouri, who hasn’t one electoral victory to his credit. In Chhattisharh, the Party is caught between the claims of warring Ajit Jogi and VC Shukla for the top slot. In Maharashtra governance has gone for a toss as the Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh is busy keeping tabs on thorn-in-the-flesh leader Narayan Rane’s audiences with Sonia. What to speak of the near-complete decimation of its grassroots organisations in UP and Bihar.

Adding to its woes is the spiraling prices and rising inflation. Pulses, wheat, vegetables, tomatoes, potatoes, oil et al have become the bane of the aam aadmi. Bin bijli, bin jal, bin aloo (without power, without water and without potato). Whatever happened to the Congress ka haath aam aadmi ke saath!

Increasing unemployment, illiteracy, ill-health and suicides by farmers are the touchstone of the much-hyped and illusionary deal of roti, kapada aur makan. Look at the irony. Cellphones go abegging, yet people continue to beg for food. Do we measure success by the fact that the common man is being made to pay for the follies of the Government which waited much too long to read the signs of the agrarian crisis facing the country leading to spiraling prices?

Besides, the Congress defeat in Karnataka has not only rendered the Government lame duck but a domino effect has started surfacing in New Delhi. The UPA is branded as unpopular and the Congress a sinking ship. Already staunch ally RJD Chief Lalloo Yadav has castigated the Finance Minister for ‘giving short shrift’ to the aam aadmi and the plight of the farmers. He is reported to have said, “yeh GDP, FDP kya hai, aloo-pyaaz itna mehanga kyuin hai?” The other allies followed suit.

The Left has made up its mind to snap ties with the Grand Dame. But when and on what issue would be decided later. Till yesterday it was the nuclear deal today it has a plethora of issues: price rise, inflation and terrorism. Prakash Karat understands that the law of diminishing returns has set in and there are no political gains if they continue to support the Government. Do we cheer the curious political setting where the Left is confronting the UPA and also desperately looking for an exit route to re-establish its credibility? That too after enjoying power without responsibility.

Ironically, while all its allies have done their electoral calculations for the next round of elections, Sonia has yet to disclose her mind. Raising a moot point: Can such a Party hope to ride the crest of victory again? Sadly, as oft is the case, power breeds arrogance and absolute power breeds absolute arrogance. Ultimately, much will depend upon Sonia’s political will and priorities in the weeks and months ahead. If she can do no more than cleanse the stinking sycophancy cesspool and replace ‘I’ with ‘We’, the Congress could still stand a chance. Or else let the UPA fizz continue to run dry.  ------ INFA

(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)

POLITICAL DIARY

New Delhi, 24 May 2008

Of Terror & Vote-Banks

WHAT ABOUT THE NATION, MR PATIL?

By Poonam I Kaushish

Foot-in-the-mouth disease is known to afflict many politicians. Perhaps it has something to do with their inflated image of self importance, which makes them forget to put their brain in gear when engaging their mouth. Or perhaps, it has something to do with perfecting the art of doublespeak. On being caught, it’s promptly dismissed as a ‘misquote’. Either way, they as well as we know it is a whole lot of balderdash, a weak excuse to cover their backside.

This one simply takes the cake, in fact it is unforgivable: The country’s Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil has equated hardcore terrorist Afzal Guru’s pending death sentence with that of Sarabjit Singh languishing in Pakistan. “People are saying that don’t hang an Indian in Pakistan, Sarabjit, and then they are demanding hanging of Afzal Guru here...this is not fair,” said Patil.

Clearly, either the Home Minister is playing obtuse or he does not understand the fine distinction that his utterances spell doom. One, it could lose New Delhi the right to ask Islamabad’s pardon for Sarabjit on the ground of mistaken identity. Two, both the accused are Indians, so how can Pakistan claim the right to seek Afzal Guru’s pardon? No matter these Patil gems came at a time when his colleague Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee was negotiating for Sarabjit’s pardon and the Pakistani Prime Minister had advised his President to oblige.

Making matters worse, Patil suggested that Afzal Guru could not be hanged just because political parties were demanding so. “Just because I don’t shout or enter into a ‘tu tu main main’ with others doesn’t mean I am soft. I am doing my duty with commitment that is all that matters. We have to follow the law...a humanitarian view has to be considered,” (sic) he asserted. Really? What about showing remorse for the families of those who laid down their lives to defend Parliament. Or does minority appeasement and vote-bank politics override India’s unity and security?

Arguably, if Indira Gandhi’s killers can be hanged, why can’t a terrorist who attacked Parliament? Are we to believe that Afzal Guru is being let off the hook simply because of religious considerations? That the Government does not want to do anything which may even remotely hurt the Muslim sentiment. Or be misconstrued as ‘deliberately’ singling out a person who belongs to a minority community, specially with elections to many State Assemblies later this year. Terrorism or no terrorism. More so, ignoring the fact that the Muslim clergy too has condemned the terrorists for bringing a bad name to the community.

The tragedy of Patil-speak is that it has descended to the base level of a Government-Opposition war of words. The Congress tom-toms the BJP-led NDA Government’s Kandhar fiasco to counter the Saffron Sangh’s shrill ‘UPA soft-on-terrorist” verbal blasts.  A case of the pot calling the kettle black! So busy are they in scoring brownie points that in their collective wisdom all have fuzzed the larger picture. We are talking about deadly terror which has enveloped India in its octopus-like embrace. Over 270 of the 670 districts in the country are terror-prone. Of these, 70 districts have already been ravaged by terrorists. Terror has already cost us more than 72,000 civilians and 12,000 security personnel. In the last three years alone, Islamic terrorists have killed 5,617 people. Can we then compartmentalize terror on the basis of caste and creed for the sake of votes?

As oft happens, the discourse on terrorism gets bogged down in a parrot-like repeat of predictable standard State response, mostly soft and ritualistic --- of more of the same. Merely curing the symptoms, not the disease. The Prime Minister talks of a new federal agency, the Chief Justice of India for a new legal framework to tackle terrorism and the Opposition clamour’s for ‘tough’ anti-terror laws. All wallow in the false belief that terror is merely a mind game which can be won peacefully by merely waving the white flag.

Recall, the Prime Minister had talked of setting up a federal agency after the Hyderabad blasts in September last. Excellent idea as it would be unencumbered by State boundaries and political interference. But nothing came of it. Simply because our polity uses terror attacks to hit at their rivals. Worse, our netas think small. The federal agency would result in them losing their exclusive control over law and order, a State subject and the powers to exert political and extraneous influence.

Clearly, the time has come that our polity should shed its blinkered communal approach. If the battle against terror has to be won, political considerations, communal pressures, administrative and police lethargy and a weak legal-judicial regime will have to be negated. New Delhi must realize that normal deterrence doesn’t work against a faceless and fearless enemy.

The only way to strike back is to carry the fight into the enemy camp effectively. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Former Punjab Governor, the late Dharma Vira was ever so right when under a spell of President’s rule during the height of Sikh militancy in the State he directed: “I have no use for live terrorists!” Indeed, the Kandhar fiasco would never have happened if only the three hijackers had been eliminated and not jailed.

The need of the hour is more effective intelligence gathering and implementation of existing laws dealing with terrorist crimes. One way is community policing, which would ensure accurate intelligence information leading to credible investigation. Interestingly, a former Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Ajit Doval, has blasted as “a myth the widespread belief that the terrorists strike anywhere, at any time and any target.”

In his view, they strike where their intentions and capabilities meet the opportunities. Hence, the success of counter-terrorism lies in degrading their capabilities, forcing them to change their intentions and denying them opportunities to strike. New Delhi, he feels needs to think of ways to neutralise their fast-growing domestic base, availability of hardware and human resource, collaborative linkages with organized crime, gun runners, drug syndicates, hawala operators, subversive radical groups et al.

We also need to revamp our anti-terror laws. Top experts agree that laws such as the defunct POTA are required. True, Parliament was attacked when POTA was in operation. Nevertheless, it helped in speedily tackling cases of terrorism and bringing culprits like Afzal Guru to book. A POTA-like anti-terror law would send a strong signal that India is no longer soft.

What next? Much depends upon the Government’s willingness to acknowledge without any sugar-coating that India is ensnared in terror’s vicious grip. Already prolonged inaction has proved much too costly and Patil-speak has worsened it. The Centre must launch major offensives to drive home the message that India has no use for a live terrorist.  Self-serving decisions of minority appeasement may feed the polity’s vote-banks. Ultimately, it will only spell double disaster. Enough of self-invited terrorism. India’s freedom and unity is at stake. ----- INFA

(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)

Round The World

New Delhi, 3 June 2008

‘Republic of Nepal’

CELEBRATIONS IN TRANSIT STATE

By Dr. Monika Chansoria

(School of International Studies, JNU)

Nepal braced itself to be referred to as a Republic from 29 May onwards as opposed to being the ‘Kingdom of Nepal’ when it became the world’s newest Republic with a historic Assembly session abolishing its monarchy. It gave the ‘unpopular’ King Gyanendra a two-week notice to evict the pink pagoda-roofed Royal Narayanhiti Palace or ‘get ready to be forced out.’

The eviction order thereby ended 240 years of royal rule in Nepal. Subsequently, the Royal Standard flying atop the Narayanhiti Palace was brought down by officials. For decades together, the Nepalese population considered its monarch as an incarnation of the Hindu God of protection, Vishnu.

The decline of the Nepalese monarchy has been rather dramatic and the heavily one-sided vote to abolish the monarchy culminates the process of the closing stages of the centuries-old Hindu monarchy Kingdom.

The transition towards ‘a secular, federal, democratic, Republic nation’ was formalized with a resolution moved by the Home Minister KP Sitaula and passed immediately by 560 votes in favour and 4 against by a special session of the newly elected Constituent Assembly. By means of this motion, King Gyanendra and other members of the royal family have been reduced to common citizen’s status, thus loosing all cultural, administrative and political powers.

However, hours before the announcement, few suspected royalists threw three crude bombs in Kathmandu, leading to chaos and wounding one person. Meanwhile, thousands of Nepalese people gathered on the streets of the Capital in support of their ‘Republic Day’.

Thousands of Maoists, now referred to as former insurgents and new members of the Assembly’s biggest political party ever since joining the political mainstream, also rallied in Kathmandu carrying hammer and sickle flags and pumping their fists in the air as they shouted slogans against the monarchy.

Referring to Nepal becoming a Republic, Girija Prasad Koirala addressed the Assembly and stated, “Today is the day when my dreams have been realized and similarly the dreams of the nation have perhaps also been realized.”

“This is the people’s victory. With today’s declaration of a Republic we have achieved what we fought for,” were the sentiments of former Maoist guerrilla, Kamal Dahal.

Apparently the Maoists, who emerged as the largest party in last month’s elections, were committed to removing the monarchy right at the onset. They entered the political arena after signing a peace deal in 2006 that led to the end of a decade-long period of violent insurgency. Thereafter, King Gyanendra was stripped of all his powers and forced to end his reign of royal dictatorship and restore democracy after widespread protests all over the country two years ago.

The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) finally became the mainstream Nepalese political party with an unprecedented mandate with their leader Prachanda, declaring that he himself would lead the new Government of the ‘Republic of Nepal.’

Moreover, the people of Nepal too spoke candidly with their vote and crucially the election witnessed nearly 65 per cent of the nation’s voting population exercising their franchise and delivering a mandate in favour of the Maoist party.

In what could be considered a key development, even though the United States has not yet struck out the Maoists from its terrorist blacklist, Washington has since inverted its preceding policy of not negotiating with the group’s leaders.

The US Government still classifies the Maoist group as a terrorist organization, with US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Evan Feigenbaum asserting, “The degree to which the United States would work with the Maoists depends on how well they stayed away from violence.” Adding, that Washington was working with the Maoists to try to encourage a stable, democratic and peaceful country.

The victory of the Maoists that practically sealed the fate of the discredited monarchy in Kathmandu saw them winning 220 seats of the total 601, with expectations to head the new Government.

Conversely, political squabbles already seem to be taking precedence with Maoist Chairman Prachanda making a terse statement on 30 May stating, “Our Party deserves both the posts of President and Prime Minister. Losers cannot get these posts,” apparently referring to the Nepali Congress (NC) Party and the Communist Party of Nepal (UML) who lost in the Constituent Assembly elections.

Expectedly, leaders of both these parties have expressed concern over Prachanda’s remarks. The NC Vice-President and Minister for Peace and Reconstruction Ram Chandra Paudel termed this ‘undemocratic’. He further stressed, “Demanding both the President and Prime Minister posts is nothing but totalitarian tendency.”

The UML leader Bharat Mohan Adhikari too said their Party could not agree with this statement. “The President and Prime Minister should be from different parties, he asserted.”

Not only that. The power-sharing issue has upset the other parties as well including the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum and the Maoists themselves. Furthermore, all the four parties are in favour of electing the President through a simple majority of the Constituent Assembly members while the Maoists favour a majority of two-thirds.

Subsequently, in what could be judged as a crucial turn of events, Chairman Prachanda has threatened as recently as 2 June, to launch a massive agitation in the next few days if the mainstream parties in Nepal prevented the former rebels from leading a Government. “We will have no option but to launch a struggle if the crisis were not resolved soon,” Prachanda said in severe rhetoric at a rally of supporters in western Nepal.

It appears absolutely clear that the declaration of the Republic of Nepal is just the first step in the long journey of the country’s political future. Evidently, the ongoing political bickering is testament to the fact that fine-tuning among the Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoists may not be all velvety.

Significantly, although the Maoists are now in pre-eminence in the Government, they still remain laden with the baggage of essentially being a guerrilla group with several queries persisting about the new power structure in the new-fangled Nepalese Republic.

Therefore, the primary and foremost challenge confronting Kathmandu today is to translate the mandate of the Nepalese people into fine and effective governance and bring about peace, political stability and economic development to the Himalayan country.

Undoubtedly, Nepal’s tumultuous transition from a kingdom to a democracy does indeed come about as a welcome transformation for the Nepalese people but the celebrations could well be in transit given the potential reality that in the long run, ongoing political wrangling amidst the Seven-Party Alliance and the Maoists might just take precedence over governance. --- INFA

 (Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)

Round The World

New Delhi, 27 June 2008

Indo-Bhutan Ties

PM’s Visit Cements Relations

By Monish Tourangbam

(School of International Studies, JNU)

The recently concluded visit of India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Bhutan was significant in ways more than one. While, the Wangchuck Dynasty is celebrating its centenary this year of the coronation of King Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, it also was the first trip by the Indian Prime Minister to the youngest democracy after Bhutan held its first ever elections in March.

Moreover, the visit also coincided with the 50^th anniversary of India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s visit to Bhutan in 1958. And last but not the least, Singh became the first international leader to be given the honour to address a joint session of the first elected Parliament of Bhutan on 17 May.

One of the prime issues of focus during the two-day visit was cooperation in the energy sector (read hydroelectric). Prior to the visit, the Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon briefed the media on the central need of forging a more diversified and contemporary economic and energy partnership in tune with emerging realities.

He said that hydroelectric power cooperation has been an important element of Indo-Bhutan relations as both countries have signed bilateral agreements to the effect that all surplus power from the three commissioned hydroelectric projects in Bhutan will be sold to India. In fact, Bhutan at present utilizes only 30 per cent of its total power generation. The remaining 70 per cent is sold to India and this is one of the biggest exports of Bhutan.

During his visit to the newest democracy, the Prime Minister dedicated the 1,020 MW Tala Hydroelectric Plant, built entirely with Indian assistance to the people of India and Bhutan. He also laid the foundation stone for the 1095 MW Punatsangchu I Hydroelectric Plant. According to India’s Ambassador to Bhutan, Sudhir Vyas detailed project reports for the Punatsangchu II and Mangdechhu Hydel Power Projects were also nearing completion. During formal talks, Singh and his Bhutanese counterpart Jigme Yoser Thinley raised the targeted aim of jointly developed hydroelectric capacity in Bhutan from 5,000 to 10,000 MW by 2020.

The increasing opportunities of India importing hydroelectric energy from Bhutan assumes importance, now that the Indo-US nuclear deal is in limbo and the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline is being constrained by strategic and political considerations. According to Menon, Bhutan has the potential of producing up to 30,000 MW of hydroelectric power. According to a study, even if half of this potential is tapped, it will to a large extent ease the chronic power shortages in Northern India.

Another important development during Singh’s visit was the formal announcement of India’s decision to start construction of the first ever rail-link from Hashimara in Northern Bengal to Phuntshoeling in Bhutan across the border. This link is to be called the ‘Golden Jubilee Rail Line’ commemorating Nehru’s first visit to Bhutan 50 years ago. The Indian Prime Minister promised that the link would connect Bhutan to the entire railway network in India.

Moreover, welcoming the assistance of Rs 100 billion pledged by the Prime Minister, Thinley asserted that the amount would be spent in developing hydropower, the proposed rail-link and 10^th Five Year Plan programmes, among other projects.

Though the antiquity of relations between the two nations can be traced to the influence of missionary Buddhism around the 8^th Century, substantive relationship between the two countries struck roots once India gained Independence. In 1949, Bhutan signed a Treaty of Friendship with India, thus institutionalizing formal relations between the two sovereign countries. In 1954, the then king of Bhutan, Jigme Dorji Wangchuck paid a State visit, which was reciprocated by Nehru in 1958.

In the face of numerous changes in international and regional dynamics over the years, India has remained the most important development partner for Bhutan. Reflecting on how Nehru arrived on a horseback in Bhutan in 1958, the Foreign Secretary commented, “Now the Prime Minister goes by plane. It just goes to show how economic integration and transport linkages have developed.”

On his arrival in Bhutan, interacting with Bhutanese and Indian media, Manmohan Singh said, “I have come with the message for the people and the Government of Bhutan that India stands ready to join hands to strengthen our relationship, to do our best for accelerated development of Bhutan.” Forty-seven delegates, including the National Security Adviser M.K.Narayanan, Principal Secretary TK Nair besides the Foreign Secretary accompanied the Prime Minister.

Reflecting India’s commitment to provide ‘every possible assistance’ to Bhutan in its period of transition, Manmohan Singh emphasized the importance of working with Bhutan in both the bilateral and the regional context, to ensure a peaceful South Asia. Indeed, India has actively supported the democratic transition of Bhutan by training poll officials and setting up Bhutan’s Election Commission, as well as providing over two million dollars in assistance, including electronic voting machines.

In what is almost an untainted relationship between the two countries, the security of the porous border has been of concern to India. As such, during his visit, the Prime Minister said New Delhi looked forward to continuing its cooperation with Thimpu on issues related to the national interests of the two countries and ensuring that their territories were not used for activities harmful to each other’s national security and interest.

At formal talks, the two sides agreed to continue their cooperation to keep their border safe and secure. In December 2003 and January 2004, the Bhutanese army had carried out operations to evict anti-India insurgent groups that had set up camps on Bhutanese soil, specifically United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB) and Kamtapur Liberation Organisation (KLO).

In recent years, the evolving relationship between the two countries has seen a momentum of desiring a more symbiotic relationship. The Bhutanese Prime Minister commenting on the absence of the ‘Big brother syndrome’ in India-Bhutan relations said the partnership in recent years in hydropower sector “is changing the nature of our bilateral relationship from a purely donor-recipient relationship to one of collaboration for mutual benefit.”

Besides, in February 2007, both countries signed a revised version of their 57-year-old Friendship Treaty that gives Thimpu more freedom in the crucial areas of foreign policy and non-lethal military purchases as long as such decisions do not damage India’s vital strategic interests. Article 2 of the Treaty, which says that Bhutan will be guided by India’s advice while conducting its foreign policy, has been substituted by a language that speaks of cooperation.

The credibility of the democratic transition in Bhutan will of course have to withstand the test of time. But, India, in most likeliness, will be patient and supportive as Bhutan treads hitherto uncharted territories. Further, there are no doubts in New Delhi as well as in Thimpu regarding the prime importance that India occupies in Bhutan’s calculations. It would be worthwhile to conclude by quoting Manmohan Singh who said, “The best in India-Bhutan relations is yet to come.”---INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)