Home arrow Archives arrow Open Forum
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Open Forum
INDIA Bloc Discord: WB, PUNJAB TO EKLA CHALO, By Insaf, 27 January 2024 Print E-mail

Round The States

New Delhi, 27 January 2024

INDIA Bloc Discord

WB, PUNJAB TO EKLA CHALO

By Insaf 

West Bengal and Punjab have put a spoke in the INDIA bloc wheel, as of now. Both TMC and AAP respectively have said a big no to seat-sharing with Congress and on Wednesday last announced they would go alone (ekla chalo) for 2024 battle in their States. Some view it as a setback to unity efforts against BJP, others see it as regional parties posturing for some hard bargaining. TMC supremo and Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee told media “Let Congress fight 300 seats on its own. The regional parties are together and can contest the rest. However, we will not tolerate any interference by them (Congress) in Bengal…at national level, TMC as part of INDIA bloc, will decide its strategy after elections. We will do whatever it takes to defeat BJP.” Apparently, Didi is not just peeved Congress is asking for too much, turning down her seat-sharing formula, but rather its state unit president Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury who has been persistently making uncharitable remarks and worse the party did not extend basic courtesy of informing about Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Jodo Nyaya Yatra, entering her State on Thursday! 

Her counterpart in Punjab, Bhagwant Mann is on the same page. Said he: “We are not going with them (Congress)…Punjab will become a hero in the country and AAP will win 13-0 in the polls”. Moreover, it has already held discussions on probable candidates and names of 40-odd are being considered. A jarring note, alright, in the backdrop of AAP and Congress having tied up for Chandigarh mayoral polls, to be held on January 30. Congress will have to weigh options but has been quick in appeasing Didi. Said its spokesperson: bloc INDIA “can’t be imagined without Mamata Banerjee…TMC is an important pillar of the alliance.” There’s hope of overcoming ‘small differences’ and asserted the bloc ‘will fight Lok Sabha polls in West Bengal and all (partners) will participate.” The state BJP, which has been gaining ground, is amused and questioned ‘ideological conviction’ of the bloc. “It was all about just opposing Prime Minister and BJP to protect their own political identities.” Not off the mark, but it should remember the proverbial saying ‘politics makes strange bedfellows.’

*                                               *                                               *                                               * 

Bihar Rumblings

The Modi government’s shrewd decision to bestow country’s highest civilian award, Bharat Ratna posthumously on socialist, Jan Nayak and former Bihar Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur months before general election appears to have set the cat among the pigeons. The media is abuzz questioning whether Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is going back to BJP camp as his speech praising Modi on the eve of Thakur’s 100th birth anniversary on the one hand and taking a swipe at dynastic politics has raised many an eyebrow. Worse, Rohini Acharya (Lalu Yadav’s daughter) choosing to take a potshot at him with X posts “changing his ideology as the wind changes its direction”, (deleted later), wouldn’t bode well for ruling JD(U)-RJD alliance. Importantly, BJP is silently watching for it may well have scored more than anticipated. The sheer timing of the award would help it earn support among backward castes, especially EBCs (Thakur’s caste being part of it), which Nitish is increasingly wooing with the caste census. Plus, it would try to dent the hold Lalu and Nitish have as the OBC leaders. At same time, a question that’s doing the rounds is whether the award would be rewarding for the BJP to get Nitish away from INDIA bloc and into NDA. Tale of jumping on and off the bandwagon?

*                                               *                                               *                                               *

Manipur Treads Dangerously

Manipur continues to tread dangerously! Wednesday last apparently saw the subordination of the Biren Singh government to a radical Meitei group Arambai Tenggol, with a large number of armed volunteers. In all, 37 of the state’s Meitei MLAs and two Meitei MPs representing the valley areas met at Kangla Fort in what is being reported as “summons” issued by the group. They all took an oath to promote and pursue Tenggol’s demands, which include removing illegal Kuki tribes from the ST list, replacing Assam Rifles with another force and scrapping the Suspension of Operations agreement with armed militants, who allegedly killed civilians. This after, a special Home Ministry team arrived in the troubled state for talks between Meitei and Kuki communities. 

The development which has largely gone unreported by the mainstream media, triggered a strong statement from a Kuki-Zomi body based in Churachandpur, the ITLF. It said: “For the first time in history, a militia that led attacks on innocent civilians because of their ethnicity and which openly displays sophisticated weapons stolen from police armouries was able to order state lawmakers, including the chief minister, to attend a meeting it had called and made the MLAs endorse their demands.” Worse, it added “Manipur state police and central security forces remained mute spectators as Arambai Tenggol leader Korounganba Khuman arrived at the venue in a police vehicle, and the militant group proceeded to administer an oath-taking ceremony to MLAs. All these happened even as a special team sent by the central government is camping nearby in the city. Why did the world’s largest democracy allow this… Today’s events have shown that Manipur’s government has submitted its authority to an armed militant group”. Nine long months have passed since May 3 last year, will the Centre have a solution or will it continue to remain a mute spectator and allow the crisis to deepen?   

*                                               *                                               *                                               * 

From Ram To Rashtra

From ‘Pran Pratishtha’ to ‘Rashtra Pratishtha’. With the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya completed before the Lok Sabha elections, Prime Minister Modi changes gears and sounded the poll bugle on Thursday last from western UP’s Bulandshahr. His message to the public at the massive rally: “On 22 January I got darshan (glimpse) of Lord Ram and today I get darshan of janata janardhan… in Ayodhya I said we from Dev to Desh and from Ram to Rashtra is the path we now have to take and complete our mission of an advanced nation by 2047…” Indeed, the timing was perfect to woo the voter and thus came along announcement of development projects worth over Rs 19,100 crore and the usual attack on Congress, wherein for decades after Independence, development was kept confined to a few regions only and UP ignored. Clearly, the BJP is aiming to score better than just 8 seats out of 14 in politically crucial western UP in 2019. Importantly, he chose to recall former chief minister, late Kalyan Singh, in his bastion and under whose tenure the Babri Masjid was brought down by kar sevaks. Guess, the toxic mix of religion and politics will pay dividends. ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

 

 


 

Lord Ram Temple: THE GLOBAL RESPONSE, By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri, 26 January 2024 Print E-mail

Round The World

New Delhi, 26 January 2024

Lord Ram Temple

THE GLOBAL RESPONSE

By Prof. (Dr.) D.K. Giri

(Secretary General, Assn for Democratic Socialism) 

The consecration of Lord Rama in the newly built temple in Ayodhya was done on 22 January with lot of pomp, grandeur and festivity. It was a day for national celebration. As the din settles down, the debate raging across the country is whether politics and religion should be mixed. In fact, such a debate is taking place in several countries across the world. Two questions, therefore, need to be addressed. One, is using religion in politics desirable? Second, how does international community react to religions? 

Mahatma Gandhi, who effectively used religion in his public activities, had famously said, “Those who believe religion and politics are not connected do not understand either”. Albert Einstein made a similar statement, “Those who believe that politics and religion do not mix, understand neither”.  It is true that, after the death of Karl Marks and decline of Marxism, religion along with other social identities has come back almost in a vengeance. On the positive side, religion is one of the potent sources for morality. Politics and morality are inseparable. Therefore, religion is used as a moral compass for people in public life, especially politics. 

In electoral politics, it is easier to mobilise people on religious slogans, metaphors and messages. Mahatma Gandhi used to call for establishment of Ram Rajya (governance on Lord Ram’s principles). Lord Ram is regarded as the maryada purushottam (greatest man of virtues). He lived his life on the basis of dharma (sense of duty). Many Indian politicians especially from BJP refer to raj dharma (duty in governance). On the other hand, religion creates emotionalism that drowns material issues facing the people. No wonder, Napoleon Bonaparte had commented, “Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet”. Politicians whip up religious emotions during elections to evade other substantial issues impacting people’s lives. 

Although religion can be a double-wedged political instrument, religion cannot be completely separated from politics. Indian Constitution includes secularism in its Preamble which does not prescribe a state religion, nor does it encourage state leadership to be actively participating in religious affairs. It was not practiced in letter and spirit by any government. And now, under the present ruling dispensation, the state is actively participating in religious activities. The Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the Chief Host was the cause celebre of this occasion. The Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, the PM and the Chief of RSS were the three main figures in the consecration ceremony. 

In this column and elsewhere, I have written several times on substituting secularism with a more practical and operable concept encapsulating religious pluralism. This should happen sooner than later to remove any confusion in the country and beyond about the dichotomy between the precept of secularism and the practice. The second question to engage with is the international response to India’s new image after the mega event of 22 January. 

Many common Indians would not know the efforts made by Indian foreign policy apparatus to popularise the event across the world. Indian embassies went into an overdrive to spread awareness about the temple. The Indian embassies held live telecast of the ceremony in Ayodhya. The images of Lord Ram and the newly-built magnificent temple were displayed in major areas of the foreign cities, from Times Square in New York to Eiffel Tower in Paris. 

The highlight of the celebration in the United States was a spectacular car rally in New Jersey with 350 cars adorned with Lord Ram flags. The Government of Mauritius granted a two-hour special break for Hindu officials to actively participate in the festivities. In Paris, a grand rath yatra was taken out during the pran pratistha celebration in Ayodhya. In Canada, mayors of Oakville and Brampton in the state of Ontario have declared January 22 as Ayodhya Ram Mandir Day. They emphasised the cultural, religious and historical significance of the temple’s inauguration and encouraged the residents to celebrate the event. Global streaming of the consecration ceremony was made available to several countries in the world. In the USA alone, the streaming occurred about at about 300 locations. The United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and Mauritius did the broadcast live at 25, 30, 30 and 100 locations respectively. 

In Nepal, another Hindu-majority country pran pratistha celebration was observed enthusiastically. Several temples across Sri Lanka – Colombo, Sita Eliya, Jaffna and other places celebrated the occasion. A special pooja was held at Sita Amman temple at Sita Eliya (formerly Ashok Vatika) where Sita was believed to have been held captive by Ravana. In New Zealand, the Minister for Ethnic Communities Melissa Lee, David Seymour MP and Indian High Commissioner Neeta Bhushan attended an event in Auckland. A Lord Ram temple, first of its kind, was inaugurated in Queretaro City in Mexico. The ceremony was performed by an American priest with idols taken from India. A Japanese company has produced an animated film “Ramayana: The Legend of Prince Rama” in 1992. The children performed a Ramayana play around the consecration ceremony in Ayodhya. 

Countries in South-East Asia have historically cultural links with Lord Ram. Even the East Asian country South Korea has the myth that Queen Huh Hwang-ok or Princess Suriratna was the princess of Ayodhya before she went to South Korea and married King Kim Suro of Karak Clan. Israel’s Counsel General in Mumbai visited the Ram Temple in Vadela in solidarity. At the same time, the Israel Embassy’s spokesperson Guy Nir posted a picture of himself watching the grand celebrations on television. 

The global celebration of the Ayodhya Ram temple inauguration underscores the universal appeal of Lord Ram’s life and his teachings. At home, people from other religions also accept Lord Ram as one of their ideals. However, the present government seems to project Ayodhya as the citadel of Hinduism akin to Mecca for Muslims and Vatican City for Christians. Ayodhya city is being developed accordingly with modern and sophisticated infrastructure like railway stations, airport, roads and hotels. These will attract international tourists, mainly Hindus, to the temple city of Ayodhya. World tourism would benefit the economy. India was known for Taj Mahal, henceforth it should also be a tourist attraction for the temple in Ayodhya. 

So far so good. What worries the observers is that the euphoria caused by the temple in Ayodhya at the birth place of Lord Ram where a mosque was super-imposed by the marauding army of Babar should not lead to the oppression of religious minorities. As the foreign policy maxim goes, a country’s image abroad is a reflection of what happens at home. Likewise, the strength of foreign policy of any country is a function of its assets within its boundaries. Social harmony is one of the major assets. 

It was disturbing to see the flag of Lord Ram put on the cross in a church as the consecration ceremony was going on. This act of vandalism was flashed on the social media. If it is true, are Hindus not doing the same as Babar did to the temple in Ayodhya? Mahatma Gandhi made another profound statement, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ”. We should not let Christians and others from abroad tell Indians, “We like your Lord Ram, but we do not like your Hindus”. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

THE REPUBLIC IN BAD SHAPE. By Inder Jit, 25 January 2024 Print E-mail

REWIND

New Delhi, 25 January 2024

THE REPUBLIC IN BAD SHAPE

By Inder Jit

(Released on 26 January 1982) 

Several questions, wild and not so wild, are being asked in New Delhi as India celebrates another Republic Day with traditional pomp and pageantry. Will India be a new Republic by January 26 next year? More explicitly, will India continue to be a parliamentary democracy or will it switch over to a presidential form of government? The Prime Minister, Mrs Gandhi, has stated more than once that she favours parliamentary democracy and that there are no plans to go in for any change. But speculation persists, thanks largely to her own partymen and the current atmosphere of unparalleled suspicion and deep distrust. No one is sure about what anyone might do, the Constitution and conventions notwithstanding. Even the President, Mr Sanjiva Reddy, and the Prime Minister, Mrs Gandhi, are not spared. There is talk of all manner of possible moves and counter moves. One thing alone is clear. Our Republic today is in bad shape. The system needs urgent attention if the structure is not to collapse.

The delicate balance between Parliament, the executive and the judiciary, wisely provided in the Constitution, has been disturbed. The executive has become all powerful, causing grave concern all round. Parliament continues to be under attack and has been largely reduced to a rubber stamp on the strength of a two-thirds majority. Ordinance raj, denounced by India’s first Speaker, Mr Mavalankar, as undemocratic, has become the order of the day. Last year, the Union Government even came forward with a virtual budget by ordinance. Top legal luminaries, including former Chief Justices of India, are “deeply troubled” over the present state of the judiciary and its ability to function independently. Mrs Gandhi’s decision to move Mr Shiv Shankar out of the Law Ministry has provided a breather. But the approach of Mr Jagan Nath Kaushal, the new Minister of Law and Justice, has yet to be seen. Will he as an old timer help restore health to the judiciary or will he, too, play political ducks and drakes with it?

Not only that. The very basis of democracy is being increasingly undermined. Democracy means rule of the people, by the people and for the people. This is made possible through time-bound elections which are free, fair and without fear. Yet there is an increasing tendency today in the ruling party to avoid inconvenient elections, in sharp contrast to Mrs Gandhi’s own attitude in 1977, which brought her kudos from the visiting British Prime Minister, Mr Callaghan. Garhwal stands out as a bad example, made worse by efforts on the part of the former Law Minister to defend the indefensible. The ruling Congress (I) has, moreover, refused to hold a poll in Delhi for over two years despite the Chief Election Commissioner’s repeated statements that he is ready to hold the poll at short notice. West Bengal’s Marxist regime, headed by Mr Jyoti Basu, has smartly outmanoeuvred New Delhi by recommending Assembly poll in March. Quiet efforts are nevertheless on to get the poll postponed so as to enable the Centre to somehow prevent the Marxists from returning to power.

The Election Commission itself is under attack from leading lights of the ruling party. (Significantly, criticism of the Commission has over the past few years come mainly from the Government and the ruling party … and not from the Opposition). The Chief Election Commissioner’s firm stand on the last Bengal Poll and his refusal to extend the date of filling complaints beyond January 16 has directly irked the ruling party and there is fresh talk of a three-member Election Commission. (The idea was originally advocated by Jaya Prakash Narayan who envisaged a Commission which enjoyed the full confidence of the Opposition. He, thereafter, wanted one of the three members to represent the Opposition.) The Election Commission started enumeration of electoral rolls in West Bengal from January 1980 and invited complaints from September last year. Yet, the Congress (I) made little effort to ensure correct rolls and until the end of December filed only three complaints. In sharp contrast, Mrs. Gandhi made the astonishing statement that 30 per cent of the rolls were fudged!

What were the hopes and expectations of the father of the Constitution, Dr. Ambedkar? Significantly, he had his anxiety about the future as reflected in his masterly speech on the concluding day of the Constituent Assembly. He asked will India lose its independence a second time, through the infidelity and treachery of her own people. Will Indians place the country above their creed or will they place creed above the country? What would happen to her democratic Constitution? Will she be able to maintain it or will she lose it again? India, he said, was not new to democracy. Time was when India was studded with republics and even where there were monarchies, they were either elected or limited. They were never absolute. Again, it was not as though India did not know Parliaments. Not only were there Parliaments but the Sanghas knew and observed all the rules of parliamentary procedures known to modern times. “They had rules regarding seating arrangements, rules regarding motions, resolutions, quorum, whip, counting of votes, voting by ballot, censure motion, regularisation, res judicata etc.”

India had lost this democratic system, Dr Ambedkar added and asked: will she lose it a second time? Significantly, he answered: “I do not know. But it is quite possible in a country like India where democracy from its long disuse must be regarded as something new --- there is a danger of democracy giving place to dictatorship. It is quite possible for this new born democracy to retain its form but give place to dictatorship in fact. If there is a landslide, the danger of the second possibility becoming actuality is much greater.” He next asked: If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form but also in fact, what must we do? “The first thing,” he said, “we must do is to hold to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives.” It meant that “we must abandon the method of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha.” Where constitutional methods were open, there was “no justification for unconstitutional methods.” These methods were nothing “but the Grammar of Anarchy.”

Dr Ambedkar added: “The second thing we must do is to observe the caution which John Stuart Mill has given to all interested in the maintenance of democracy, namely, not to lay their liberties at the feet of even a great man or to trust him with powers which enable him to subvert their institutions.” There was nothing wrong in being grateful to a great man. But he quoted the Irish patriot Daniel O’Connel to assert: “No man can be grateful at the cost of his honour, no woman can be grateful at the cast of her chastity and no nation can be grateful at the cost of its liberty.” This caution, he pointed out, was far more important in the case of India than of any other country. For in India, bhakti or hero-worship was “a sure road to degradation and eventual dictatorship.” The third thing, he said, we must do is to make our political democracy a social democracy as well. Political democracy could not last unless there was at the base a social democracy as well. Social democracy implied recognition of society, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. The three formed a union of trinity. To divorce one from the other would defeat the very purpose of democracy.

Equally important was what Dr. Rajendra Prasad had to say as President of the Constituent Assembly: “We have prepared a democratic Constitution. But successful working of democratic institutions requires in those who have to work them willingness to respect the viewpoints of others, capacity for compromise and accommodation. Many things which cannot be written in a Constitution are done by conventions. Let me hope that we shall show those capacities and develop those conventions. The way in which we have been able to draw this Constitution without taking recourse to voting and to divisions in lobbies strengthens that hope. Whatever the Constitution may or may not provide, the welfare of the country will depend upon the way in which the country is administered. That will depend upon the men who administer it... If the people who are elected are capable and men of character and integrity, they would be able to make the best even of a defective Constitution. If they are lacking in these, the Constitution cannot help the country... India needs today nothing more than a set of honest men who will have the interest of the country before them.”

Mahatma Gandhi struggled hard to put some character back into us. Over the past two decades and more, we have recklessly cast away whatever little we had gained. Public morality has touched a new low. Accepted norms have collapsed all round. Appearances were once sought to be maintained, at least outwardly. Even the pretence is now shed. Conscience is no longer troubled in doing something wrong. There is no sense of shame in being found out. Lies are told brazenly and hawked as truth even in the country’s highest temple of democracy. Might is once again right and, as boldly stated by Mr B.K. Nehru recently, we have degenerated in one single generation from an honest society into a dishonest one. Status and position today are determined not by the character, calibre and culture of an individual but by the money one has somehow amassed. Unbridled pursuit of wealth has consequently become the be-all and end-all of all activity. India seems to be fast losing its soul in the rat race for material progress --- and joining what Yehudi Menuhin aptly described as the suicide gallop of the West.

Can something be done? Yes, undoubtedly. India has encountered such challenges before and successfully overcome them. Much, however, depends upon Mrs Gandhi in the first instance and on the people themselves in the ultimate analysis. Mrs Gandhi today enjoys a position and power which is unrivalled. None after her may have the same opportunity to pull the country out of its deepening crisis. She did well to give the country recently a new 20-point programme to put the economy back on its feet and tackle the demon of inflation. But a lot else remains to be done. There is need to reaffirm our commitment to the Constitution and give ourselves a code of conduct and values -- values which all can share and values which will rekindle trust between man and man. But mere commitment or a code will not do. An ounce of practice is better than a tonne of precept. Mrs Gandhi herself and those close to her will have to act according to the code and enforce it rigorously if India is to become a strong, healthy and truly prosperous Republic. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Opposition Unity And V.P. Singh, By Inder Jit, 18 January 2024 Print E-mail

REWIND

New Delhi, 18 January 2024

Opposition Unity And V.P. Singh

By Inder Jit

(Released on 11 October 1988)

All those interested in seeing a strong Opposition emerge as a credible alternative to the Congress-I at the national level will need to keep their fingers crossed. The Janata, Lok Dal-B, Congress-S and Jan Morcha are due to meet at a foundation conference at Bangalore today to launch their unified party to be called Samajwadi or Rashtriya Janata Dal. High drama preceded this meeting during the past fortnight and more. On occasions, the unified party appeared to be coming through. On others, its formation looked like going up in smoke. It was touch and go on Monday last week when the Steering Committee failed to meet. Hopes revived when the Committee met a day later on Tuesday. But a question mark again went up over its future by Friday night. Fortunately, Mr. V.P. Singh, backed by Mr. R.K. Hegde, Mr. Biju Patnaik and many others, persevered in their decision to hold the party’s foundation conference on October 11, birth anniversary of Jayaprakash Narayan. Nevertheless, one question remains. Will the leaders merely pay lip service to the Lok Nayak or will they truly emulate JP and put the country before self?

The problem is the unified party’s leadership has been resolved in favour of Mr. V.P. Singh, notwithstanding some unnecessary and graceless remarks reportedly made by Mr. Chandra Shekhar. Mr. Singh is undoubtedly the Opposition’s best bet today for the next general election. He is widely viewed as a fine person and a man of character and probity, unaffected by sharp Congress-I attacks on him and his policies. But he has still to show that he has vision and qualities of leadership required for guiding our huge country of over 800 million people and for providing a good government. (Remember, self-government is no substitute for good government!) Candidly, his popular image today no longer shines as brightly as it did when he founded the Jan Morcha or impressively triumphed over the Congress-I in the Allahabad by-election to the Lok Sabha in mid-June. Even his friends and known supporters are concerned, if not worried. Willy nilly, he seems at the moment to have needlessly reduced himself to the level of the other Opposition leaders, most of whom have little charisma and even less credibility.

Many Opposition leaders feel that “VP” has not shown the decisiveness and boldness expected of him as the new leader in the past few weeks. Mr. Singh, they argue, was given full authority by the Janata, Lok Dal-B, Congress-S and Jan Morcha to go ahead and form the unified party --- the SJD and a Steering Committee. But the exercise has left much to be desired and, in the bargain, not only raised doubts over the unity moves but even given a convenient handle to persons who have been basking in his reflected glory during the past year to attack him publicly. One can understand Mr. Singh’s desire to carry the leaders of all the four parties with him in the footsteps of JP. I recall his telling me some time back that the real art of politics lies in the management of disharmony and not just of harmony. However, the outcome so far has been far from flattering. The Steering Committee and its composition has not inspired much confidence, apart from the fact that it has attracted avoidable flak and created an impression of superficial ad hocism and absence of a national perspective. Surprisingly, Mr. Singh failed to consult all those concerned.

The Steering Committee, intended to be the nucleus of the new party, is dominated by persons from UP and the rest of the Hindi States. True, the Hindi heartland is crucial for winning the next poll battle. Nevertheless, the Committee needed to be more representative of various regions and special interests such as the minorities, women and youth. Surprisingly, the South is represented only by Mr. Hegde and Mr. K.P. Unnikrishnan, who hails from Kerala. Maharashtra, Punjab and West Bengal, too, are unrepresented. (Prof. Madhu Dandavate has been included only as a special invitee) Equally surprisingly, women are conspicuous by their absence. Several names come to mind easily, especially those of Mr. Mrinal Gore and Mrs. Premila Dandavate. The Committee’s strength could have been increased to at least 2 and even to 31 and not limited to 17, a figure which had no special sanctity. Advantage should have been taken of the experience and approach of the pre-independence Congress. Its Working Committee normally comprised 21 members plus some special invitees, if necessary.

The Opposition leaders have none but themselves to blame if their image has slumped and fresh doubts have arisen about their ability to provide credible alternative to the Congress-I. Far too many among them have been speaking out of turn --- often at cross purposes. Far too many meetings have been handled tactlessly, leading to avoidable heart-burning. A case in point is the meeting of the Steering Committee, which failed to be held on October 3. It should have been convened only after differences had been ironed out and ground work completed. Failure to hold the meeting only tarnished the image of the Opposition at a time when it desperately needs to win friends and influence people. Mr. Singh should have striven to ensure that there was no confusion over the Jan Morcha’s stand in regard to the basic issue of unity, leading to messy situation in which Mr. Ram Dhan felt emboldened to publicly attack Mr. Singh as well as the entire leadership of the Janata, Lok Dal-B and Congress-S and denounce it in astonishingly strong terms.

Not a little of the blame must go to Chandra Shekhar. Undoubtedly, Mr. Chandra Shekhar is a man of ideals and has not few other admirable qualities which made JP choose him as the youthful President of the Janata Party in 1977. Sadly, however, he has allowed his unrequited ambition to run away with his better sense and the ideal of selflessness advocated by his mentor --- JP. Instead of helping the Opposition parties to come together in response to popular demand, he has been dragging his feet and seems to have left no stratagem untried to block unity and “VP”. Mercifully, he did turn up at the Steering Committee meeting on Wednesday last even if he was late by an hour. He also greed to the persuasion of Mr. Singh and Mr. Hegde to head the Sub-Committee set up to draw up the SJD’s policies and programmes. But his attitude at the meeting and subsequently has left on observers the clear impression that he has been out to “delay if not sabotage” the birth of the unified party at its foundation conference on October 11. At one stage, he even wanted it called only the “sponsoring conference.”

Mr. Chandra Shekhar was theoretically correct when he said some weeks back that the Opposition should seek to provide an alternative to the Congress-I and Mr. Rajiv Gandhi and not merely substitute. He, therefore, insisted that the proposed unified party and its policies and programmes were more important than Mr. Singh as the new leader. But this stand ignored certain practical realities in a country like India which continues to be soaked in feudal ethos. What ultimately counts here is the individual who leads a party and not the party and its policies and programmes. Nothing illustrates this more than the great success which the Congress achieved under the charismatic leadership first of Mahatma Gandhi, and thereafter under Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Mr. Rajiv Gandhi. The Janata Paty, too, won its great victory in 1977 because of JP and his leadership. Equally illustrative is the dismal failure of the CPI and CPM to make any great impact. The CPM has, no doubt, continued to achieve remarkable success in West Bengal. But the credit for this goes mainly to the personal popularity of its top leader, Mr. Jyoti Basu.

In retrospect, many wish that Mr. Singh had heeded the advice of some of his trusted friends and founded a new party, instead of taking on the sticky job of unifying the Opposition. He could have transformed the Jan Morcha from what Mr. V.C. Shukla smartly described as “a transit lounge” to a full-fledged party with a constitution and a policy. He could then have invited individual members of the Opposition as also intellectuals, academicians and professionals to join the new party. Alternatively, he could have invited the Opposition parties to merge with the Jan Morcha. In other words, he could (and should) have called the shots. There is little doubt that most of the rank and file of these parties would have gladly jumped on to his bandwagon, leaving their leaders high and dry. Mr. Singh could have thereby saved himself the trouble of having to knock time and again on the doors of Mr. Chandra Shekhar, Mr. Bahuguna and some others. In essence, he would have taken over the Opposition armies and forced their Generals either to surrender or take retirement.

Popular opinion increasingly favours a strong Opposition. Even those who continue to stand for Mr. Rajiv Gandhi feel that such an Opposition would be in the best interest of the ruling Congress-I and the country. Much ultimately will depend upon the quality of leadership Mr. Singh is able to provide and the success with which he and his supporters can neutralize the mischief of those who are unreconciled to his leadership and are certain to prevent him from functioning effectively. Bangalore could help resurrect JP‘s dream provided the Lok Nayak’s not remembered only ritually. He needs to be followed in practice and in action, in sharp and distressing contrast to the happenings after the Janata Government came to power in 1977. As we all know, JP died a sad and disillusioned person. Mr. Chandra Shekhar, Mr. Bahuguna and several others owe it to the Lok Nayak to give the country a credible alternative to the Congress-I, having failed to prevent the collapse of the Janata Government in 1979. It is time for them and other veterans to see the writing on the wall and, like Mr. Devi Lal, make way for the younger leaders --- and the new heroes. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Poverty Data: CONCOCTED, FOOLING PUBLIC?, By Dhurjati Mukherjee, 24 January, 2024 Print E-mail

Open Forum

New Delhi, 24 January 2024

Poverty Data

CONCOCTED, FOOLING PUBLIC?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee 

A very recent discussion paper released by Niti Aayog titled ‘Multidimensional Poverty in India since 2008-09’, authored by member Ramesh Chandra and senior adviser Yogesh Suri, claimed that nearly 24.82 crore Indians have been lifted out of poverty over the last decade. The paper showed a decline from 29.17 percent in 2013-14 to 11.28 percent in 2022-23. The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), based on Alkire and Foster (AF) method, identifies people as poor based on universally acknowledged metric designed to assess acute poverty, providing a complimentary perspective to conventional monetary poverty measures. 

Several economists have questioned the assessment based on the MPI as also the method of calculation. They contended that the MPI, which mainly measures possessions and access to certain services, is a poor and inaccurate method of estimating poverty, traditionally measured through household expenditures on certain goods and services. 

The projections of the report are based on the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) for which data was collected before the pandemic. Based on the overall numbers, it concluded that Uttar Pradesh managed to get 5.9 crore out of poverty followed by 3.8 crore in Bihar, which is the home to the highest share in the country. 

Recall that the last poverty estimation was done in 2011-12 by applying the Tendulkar methodology after price indexation and based on the last consumption pattern data from the NSSO survey. As per that estimate, 21.9 percent of the population were below poverty line in 2011-12. Meanwhile, it is indeed surprising that poverty reduction has been announced though the government has not released the Household Consumer Expenditure Survey report for 2017-18, citing high divergence between the survey findings and administrative data. Many economists pointed out that MPI is not used as a measure of poverty and deprivation. They maintained that the MPI simply shows the percentage of people unable to access facilities provided by the government. 

Just on the heels of this report, the Oxfam came out with a more revealing and judicious report. it came out with the startling revelation that ending poverty, the target for which is 2030 under the SDGs may not be possible for another 229 years. This has been in sharp contrast to the Niti Aayog report that predicted India is likely to achieve Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of “halving multidimensional poverty well before 2030”.   

Oxfam observed that runaway inflation across the world has destabilised governments and pushed people to desperation but if there’s one thing that has grown faster than prices of bare necessities it is the wealth of the ultra-rich. It found that the “super charged surge” enjoyed by the wealthy in the last three years has meant that billionaires are $3.3 trillion richer than in 2020; their wealth growing three times faster than the rate of inflation. In fact, there has been 114 percent jump in wealth of the richest men since 2008. Their combined wealth has more than doubled – going from $406 billion in 2020 to $869 billion now. Moreover, one percent of wealthy people own 43 percent of all global financial assets. 

Mention may also be made of Oxfam India’s ‘Survival of the Richest: The India Supplement’ that reveals some stark findings proving that the gap between the rich and the poor is indeed widening. Some of the key findings from the India supplement are:-
the top 1 percent in India now owns more than 40.5 percent of total wealth in 2021 while the bottom 50% of the population (700 million) has around 3 per cent of total wealth.
 

While these contrasting reports of the government and Oxfam make interesting reading, it is surprising that why the present dispensation is trying to project things in a distorted manner. If one delves deep into the matter and considers other international surveys, there is little justification in the data projected as also the laughable estimation of the elimination of poverty by the year 2030. 

One cannot doubt the fact that the ground reality presented a stark rebuttal. Former finance Minister, P. Chidambaram expressed concern over Modi government’s alleged tendency to manipulate research and data. It was pointed out that the fact that the government manipulated data showing only 15 crore poor in India, then there has possibly been no justification of giving free ration to 80 crore people. Supriya Shrinate of the Congress pointed out that the Niti Aayog has measured poverty based on the government’s flagship programmes, ignoring the standard parameters adopted the world over. 

According to her, “The government’s recent growth figures suggested the consumption growth was 4.4 percent. If people are getting more money, why are they not buying basic stuff such as soap, hair oil, toothpaste, biscuit and so on?” Some economists and even the Congress are of the opinion that the government is compelled to rely on such manipulated data after its 10-year tenure because it has somewhat failed to solve the country’s economic problems. 

Let us turn to a recent UN estimate which found that over a billion people in India could not afford a healthy diet in 2021 and this puts a question mark on the government’s recent estimate of decline in poverty levels. The 2023 report on food security and nutrition released by five UN agencies earlier this week stated that 74.1 percent of Indians or 1043 billion people were unable to afford a healthy diet in 2021. The report also estimated India’s proportion of undernourished population at 16.6 percent during 2020-2023. Comparatively 66 percent of people in Bangladesh, 82 percent in Pakistan and 30 percent in China were unable to afford a healthy diet in 2021. The report from FAO emerged amid what some food security advocates and nutrition experts view as the Indian government’s efforts to deny the persistence of food deprivation and poor nutrition among large sections of the population. 

Meanwhile, one may also refer to the Global Hunger Index (GHI) which ranked India as low as 111 among 125 countries though the government alleged that it was “an erroneous measure of hunger with serious methodological issues” that displayed a “a malafide intent”. Some experts pointed out that though the government has been bragging about its food aid programmes and challenged the GHI, but it is quite surprising that its own estimate of 813 million people need food aid contradicts the government’s contention. 

Thus, the present estimation is not quite justified and does not reveal the true picture of the poor in India. The basics of decent livelihood which consists of nutritious food, potable water and a permanent shelter is possibly not available to at least 15 percent of the population. The government’s attempt to bring forward concocted data may not be acceptable to the really educated sections though the aam janata can be swayed with such irrelevant findings.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

 

 

<< Start < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Results 51 - 59 of 5956
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT