By Subhash Gatade
“Change is in the air”!
A retired academic who had his last assignment as Vice Chancellor of a leading university said to me the other day, while we were discussing the contemporary political scenario. Frankly admitting that he had supported Modi’s candidature then and had even discreetly campaigned for him, during 2014 elections, he said that what a ‘disaster’ it has been these last four and half years to our polity with him at the helm of affairs.
What surprised me more was that he was from Eastern UP and belonged to one of the dominant upper castes in the region.
Interestingly ‘talk of change’ is not limited to the retired academic, this feeling is widespread. Talk to anyone on the street or listen to your fellow passengers on public transport and one can experience the change in the mood of the people.
Question arises why there is this perceptible change in the narrative despite the fact that media has largely – barring some significant exceptions – remained uncritical of the acts of commission and omission of the present dispensation and has opted to become what is derisively called as ‘embedded media’
The book under consideration “Truth in Fetters : Broken Promises and Shattered Unity’ written by renowned writer-activist Ram Puniyani – who has many books to his credit – and who has been very consistent in raising issues around secular politics, tries to answer this question.
Explaining the background of Modi’s ascent, how he was helped by a section of the Corporate houses and the media which created a ‘blitz in his favour’, how the propaganda of Gujarat Model of development caught the imagination of the people and how he benefitted from the Anna Hazare movement and even the Nirbhaya movement, he underlines how his ‘alluring promises’ – which were revealed to be basically ‘Jumlas’( gimmicks) to quote Amit Shah, President of BJP – helped him win the battle for Delhi and how under him power was increasingly concentrated and how under him benefits of corporates ‘’have become synonymous with development’( page 10). He shares a critical observation. ‘The lessons of four years of experience of Modi rule is a wake-up call for opposition parties to hang together, else the victim will be the very concept of democracy itself!’(Page 13)
The book is divided into eight sections and has thirty chapters is basically a collection of author’s articles which have appeared in different publications since ascent of Hindutva Supremacist forces led by Modi but it does provide an overview of the regime and how it faltered in delivering things despite getting comfortable majority.
The first section ‘Modi as Chowkidar’ tells how demonetisation ultimately helped the corporate world and unleashed untold miseries on ordinary people, explains how this ‘battle against black money’ as it was projected by Modi and Co. was based on a false premise :
Eighty per cent of the estimated black money is stashed away in overseas tax havens ; roughly 15 per cent of such wealth is in the real estate , gold and shares . Its only 5 % of money in the form of currency notes. It is to go after this 5 % that 86 % currency had been demonetised..(Page 18)
It also exposes how the likes of Neerav Modi – who ran away with Rs 11,300 crores and who was last seen in a group photograph with Modi at Davos ; Vijay Mallya, with 9,000 crores of bank dues and Lalit Modi escaped the dragnet of law machinery, thanks to their proximity with the ruling dispensation. This section ends with the poser to the ‘anti-corruption’ warriors’ like Hazare, Kejriwal who seem to be ‘sleeping when corruption of bigger order is in progress’ (Page 24) and once again brings forth the role of ‘RSS think tank Vivekananda International Centre’ and the full mobilisation planned by the BJP behind the Anna movement which brought the saffrons ‘rich political dividends’.
The second section IndianNation: Freedom Movement’ basically veers around the belittling of Nehru legacy and creating a false binary between Nehru and Patel. It is a different matter that Patel himself was very clear about it. In fact foreseeing that attempts would be made by interested quarters to drive a wedge between him and Nehru, he himself had categorically stated in Indore on 2 October 1950, just three months before his death:
Our leader is Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. Bapu appointed him his heir and successor during his lifetime and even declared it. It is the duty of the soldiers of Bapu that they abide by his orders. One who does not accept this order by heart would prove a sinner before god. I am not a disloyal soldier. For me it is unimportant what my place is. I only know that I am at that very place where Bapu asked me to stand.1
The author also tells that Patel had been very clear about the role of ‘Modi’s ideological parents – Hindu Mahasabha and RSS – in the murder of Gandhi and had said (Page 32)
“… as (a) result of the activities of these two bodies ( the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha), particularly the former, an atmosphere was created in the country in which such a ghastly tragedy become possible.. The activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of the Government and the state.”2
We can also refer to his speech in Madras (1949), where he underlined how apart from other challenges before the nation the government was dealing with the ‘RSS movement’:
We in the government have been dealing with the RSS movement. They want that Hindu Rajya or Hindu culture should be imposed by force. No government can tolerate this. There are almost as many Muslims in this country as in the part that has been partitioned away.
We are not going to drive them away. It would be an evil day if we started that game, in spite of partition and whatever happens. We must understand that they are going to stay here and it is our obligation and our responsibility to make them feel that this is their country.3
The denigration of Nehru and glorification of Patel serves another dubious purpose for the Hindutva brigade. ‘As BJP’s ideological camp did not participate in the freedom movement, they do need an icon that was part of the freedom movement. This is why they want to iconise Sardar Patel’ (Page 32)
The third section titled ‘Hindu Nationalist Agenda’ deals with different themes ranging from the ‘Puzzle of RSS role in freedom movement’, attempts to ‘Change Constitution’ or questioning the idea of secularism, ‘RSS agenda in Education ‘and how with ascent of BJP not only ‘Scientific Temper has taken a hit’ but also one is witnessing ‘Death of Dissent’
No doubt much has been written about RSS’s non-participation in the freedom struggle or their Supremo’s instructions to cadres to keep themselves away from it (Page42- 43) what is less discussed how Atal Bihari Vajpayee, behaved during freedom struggle and how he had issued a ‘confessional statement in the court’ (Page 43) when he was arrested in the ‘Bateshwar incident’ which also helped him released from jail.
In the chapter ‘Gita, a Scriputre’ not National Book’ Ram discusses attempts by the BJP to elevate it to a book of philosophy rather than a religious scriptures ‘and explains how ‘Dharma spoken of in Gita is essentially Varnashram Dharma, which is a graded hierarchy, which is against the spirit of Indian Constitution’ and tells ‘State sponsoring a (Gita) festival is a violation of secular ethos. (Page 64). He also discusses how Ambedkar viewed Gita in his work ‘Philosophy of Hinduism’ and said ‘Bhagwat Gita is a Manusmriti in Nutshell’.
The section ‘History as Divisive Tool’ through various debates which have taken centrestage during these last four years – around Taj Mahal, film Padmavat or Tipu Sultan etc. – underlines how ‘With the Hindu Nationalist BJP in the seat of power, an exercise in history re-writing is being undertaken on lines parallel to what was done in Pakistan’ ( Page 79) whereas the section ‘The Communal Agenda’ taking up issues of killing of Afrazul Khan by Shambhu Lal Raigar, lynching for cow, opposition to organising Christmas fest etc discusses the growing communalisation of the polity and society.
“What has changed during last few years in the understanding of the likes of Shambhu and killer of Akhlaq, Pehlu, Juned or floggers of Una, is that they feel empowered due to the utterances from those in power. The subtle message percolated down is that it’s their government and they can get away with heinous crimes. When Central ministers come and put tricolour on the body of the accused of the murder of Akhlaq, what message will go down? (Page 105)
The last section focuses itself on the ‘Vilification of the Congress’ and the issue of ‘Left and Electoral Alliances’. Underlining the difficulties to ‘walk on the path of secularism in our country which has suffered the impact of ‘divide and rule policy’ the author makes an important point which needs further elaboration.
The present criticism of the Congress, it being called a Muslim party, it being called against Hindu interests, seems to be a continuation of the arguments which began with Hindu communalists in 1880s, via the articulations of Hindu Mahasabha-RSS-Godse, which have become intensified during last couple of decades.
Underlining the ‘strength of Hindu nationalist politics’ (Page 152) which broadly involved ‘consistent work of spreading ideology through RSS shakhas’ and the ‘state patronage of its activities’ and how the intensity of Hindutva has gone up during last four years which has inflicted severe damage ‘on the roots of democracy’ the author appeals to a section of the left that it should shun its old understanding vis-a-vis BJP and try to weave broader alliances to save democracy’.
A major strength of the book is the way it takes us to a tour of the last four years and explains how Modi magic slowly unravelled before us; although it has its own weaknesses as well. It does not deal with what experts term as the ‘growing isolation of the Modi regime’ even from its close neighbours.4the way its policies have shifted vis-a-vis its arch rival’ Pakistan or how even close neighbours like Sri Lanka are forced to say that RAW is planning to assassinate its President.5
Like all such collection of articles – which although give a flavour of the actual debates taking place around particular events – this book also suffers from a contemporaneity of sorts. One also wishes that the proof reading of the manuscript should have been more elegant to avoid some errors.
Truth In Fetters
Broken Promises Shattered Unity
Media House, Delhi, 2018
Being fair and transparent
By Navin B. Chawla
Two phases of the 2019 general election have been completed. Polling has finished in 186 out of 543 parliamentary constituencies. Polling in Vellore, Tamil Nadu, has been cancelled for corrupt practices. Five phases still remain till counting is comprehensively undertaken for all the seven phases of the election, on May 23. The reason to complete all the phases is that the result of any one phase should not influence the choices that electors may make.
Having served the Election Commission of India (EC) for five-and-a-half years during which I conducted the 2009 general election, I have an insider’s view, but of course am not privy to the inputs that the EC has and on which its decisions are made.
As I have argued in my recent book, Every Vote Counts, several negative features of our electoral scene have worsened. Since the Model Code of Conduct came into effect, in just the first two phases this time, money power has so reared its ugly head that seizures made of unaccounted cash, liquor, bullion and drugs amounting to ₹2,600 crore have already surpassed the entire seizures made in the nine phases of the general election in 2014. Most depressingly, this includes huge hauls of drugs, the vast majority smuggled into Gujarat. Uttar Pradesh is awash with liquor. Tamil Nadu has seen the largest seizures of illicit cash —over ₹514 crore.
These vast sums intended to bribe or influence voters prove several things. The first is that these sums almost certainly represent only a fraction of current illegal spending, a tip of the iceberg as it were. They have been detected by the EC’s machinery acting on the basis of tip-offs, or else by the vigilance of electoral officials in the States. Unfortunately, the bulk of illegal tranches of money, liquor or freebies would have reached their destination. Second, political players have refined their methods in being many steps ahead of the EC’s observers and their vigilance teams by moving their funds to their destinations even before the elections are announced.
Does this not make a mockery of the statutory limit of ₹70 lakh that each Lok Sabha candidate has as his poll expenditure limit?
As a country we need to ask ourselves some hard questions. When every rule in the book is being broken, when there is no transparency on how political parties collect or spend their funds, when limits of candidate spending are exceeded in every single case, then the time has come to debate whether we need to re-examine our rule book. In order to supervise the matches in play, the EC has had to deploy over 2,000 Central observers for the entire duration, drawing them out from their ministries and departments at the cost of their normal work at the Centre and in the States. Thousands of vigilance squads are set up and must act on the information they receive, which is why the current level of seizures have already made this India’s most expensive general election yet. An intelligent guess may lead us to a final tally of spending in excess of ₹50,000 crore, the bulk of which is made up of illicit funding and spending.
It is by now clear as daylight that electoral bonds, far from enabling a legitimate and transparent means of political funding, have proved to be the reverse. The EC, in its own affidavit before the Supreme Court, has admitted as much. The Supreme Court’s order has made sure that full disclosure, albeit to the EC, has already effectively killed further funding along this route. Nothing is a better disinfectant for camouflaged funding than sunlight itself.
With my experience this compels me to say that any serious reform with regard to funding must come from the EC itself, for it is very unlikely that any government will take an initiative in this direction. The EC must take stock after this election is over. It should convene a conference of all stakeholders, including of course all recognised political parties, both Central and State. But this should not be exclusively confined to them, for they will tend to support the status quo or they will be unable to reach consensus. The list of stakeholders must also include the best constitutional and legal minds in our country.
In my book I have also raised the twin problem of candidates fielded with criminal antecedents. The 16th Lok Sabha that has now passed into history, saw almost 30% of its members declaring, in their compulsory self-sworn affidavits, the list of criminal cases registered against them. They are also legally obliged to declare their wealth and their educational qualifications. This is the result of two vital orders passed by the Supreme Court in 2002-2003, the result of a battle that the Association for Democratic Reforms fought tenaciously. Unfortunately, in the first phase of this election, 12% of the candidates perforce declared that they had heinous cases pending, while in the second phase the figure was 11%. It may be noted that these cases include murder, attempt to murder, dacoity, kidnapping and rape. Have we forgotten Nirbhaya and 2012 already?
The matter of the Model Code of Conduct and its administration by the EC has been the most frequently reported single issue in this election. For those of a certain generation, the 10th Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), T.N. Seshan — he once famously declared that “he ate politicians for breakfast” — was the man who made the country sit up and take note when he decided to level the playing field as never before. There is little doubt that he reminded the EC that it had powers inherently enshrined in Article 324 of the Constitution — powers so great that there is arguably no other electoral management body with similar powers.
I learned this during my years as Election Commissioner, and these are the powers I exercised during the course of the 15th general election in 2009; I was successfully able to confront three Congress-ruled State governments and one Congress ally too. One of them even convened a special press conference to declare that his government would move the Supreme Court against the EC’s “arbitrariness”, but I personally had no doubt about its outcome. As it happened, he chose not to in the end.
The point I seek to make, by virtue of my own experience, is that the powers of the EC are so enormous and so all-encompassing that they exceed the powers of the executive in all election-related issues during the course of the election period. Of course, these must be exercised judiciously, fairly and equitably, not least because every decision is analysed in every “adda”, every home, every street corner and every “dhaba” across the country, where the EC’s decisions must be seen to be fair and transparent. During the years precedent to becoming CEC, I was fortunate that Mr. Seshan advised me whenever I called on him. As a result I never felt any need to make reference to government or court, once the process was under way.
If there is anything for me to applaud thus far in this election, it is the decision made by two political parties which have selected over 33% women candidates — Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress (41% for 42 Lok Sabha seats) and Naveen Patnaik’s Biju Janata Dal (33% for 21 Lok Sabha seats). After years of patriarchy or at best lip service, these parties have taken a vital step towards empowering women politically.
Why Imran bats for Modi
By Ayesha Siddiqa |
It seems that people from very odd quarters — such as Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan — want Narendra Modi to win the upcoming elections. Khan’s recent comments, in which he desired victory for his counterpart as good for the future of a peace initiative, may be driven by pragmatic reasons, but it indicates the separation that exists between the two countries. Following comments by the Opposition and in segments of the social media, the federal information minister intervened and pretended that Khan, who can often open his mouth before engaging his brain, was misunderstood.
Intriguingly, despite India being the most significant country in the neighbourhood, its election outcomes have marginal impact on the region. Khan’s statement, in fact, indicates that disconnectedness in which the head of the government of a neighbouring state refused to measure the implications beyond tactical effect. It seems a right-wing government in India does not matter to Pakistan. Or, perhaps, a Modi-led right-wing government is a wish come true for the ideological right-wing in Pakistan. For the first time since 1947, people do not have to convince each other of how right Muhammad Ali Jinnah was in creating Pakistan: Not that Pakistan was ever designed for all Muslims of the Indian subcontinent, but it now sees its formula for ideological nationalism justified in the face of rising religious-ideological nationalism next door in India. I have lived through the times when Pakistan’s intelligentsia was confused in the face of Indian secularism and democracy. Despite having their own country, there would be an internal conversation about the Indian experiment being better. The last four to five years has brought about a change in that thinking.
The BJP leadership of the last five years cannot be held entirely responsible for all the political and sociological change. If anything, the last four years have helped expose the true colours of the rising Indian middle-class that does not necessarily think very differently from the Hindutva supporter on certain issues. There is no sign that the Congress under Rahul Gandhi would have the gumption to change the course of society. Hearing the young Congress leader speak at a university in London, he did not seem to possess the temerity to deviate markedly from the ideological path that the BJP has chosen for India. However, there is an opinion in Pakistan that a Congress-led government, or any dispensation other than the present formulation, may be more cautious in how it approaches issues in the region.
Meanwhile, the general sense is that with Modi at the helm of affairs, war and conflict will mark the tone of relations between the two countries. However, this would be beneficial for Pakistan’s nationalist project that gets strengthened with every news of mob lynching of Muslims and other minorities, from India. This is not to argue that the state of minorities in Pakistan is any better: But New Delhi no longer represents a secular ideal. For Islamabad, a non-secular India is easier to contest.
The only limitation that Pakistan faces in fighting a BJP-led India is its own internal problems, like the dearth of financial resources, and not the intent. This also means that conflict cannot remain the only shrill refrain: A resolution would have to be negotiated for which the establishment in Rawalpindi prefers a BJP-governed India. Khan’s statement basically means that he, and others who share his thinking, believe that a strong right-wing government is the only credible element with which Pakistan could settle its matters. The question then is, what happened after the Lahore declaration? Wasn’t it a BJP-government that was willing to talk peace? Or, what happened to the peace initiative between the A B Vajpayee and Pervez Musharraf governments?
Seen purely from the Pakistani establishment’s perspective, Kargil happened because the military wanted an equaliser at a time when the political government had not taken it into confidence. As far as the breakdown of talks at Agra are concerned, the right-wing in India was divided at the time and the segment represented by L K Advani did not want peace. For Rawalpindi, Modi represents a neat synthesis of India’s right-wing. Hence, the negotiations would be more comprehensive than ever before. The only problem, however, remains that how does one predict Pakistan’s deep state — whose contours, today, are even more difficult to define.
This understanding goes hand in hand with the thinking that the pragmatism of the Hindu right-wing would not stop Delhi from talking to Pakistan despite the latter’s habitual U-turn from peace initiatives. While the emphasis following most track-II dialogues, particularly after a bilateral crisis, is on the Indian members of the group to apprise their counterparts of the anger in India, the Pakistani side has always maintained that it is possible to pick up the conversation thread from where it was dropped. A decade into this behaviour, there is barely anyone on Pakistan’s side with the capacity to remind their own the highly problematic nature of this approach.
Not unlike today’s India, the cost of dissent in Pakistan is very high. There is little traction in the corridors of power towards an alternative approach to resolving the conflict. The deep state in Pakistan — which is not necessarily the entire military, but is symbolised by it — has gained excessive control of all discussions and dialogue. There is also the confidence that international and regional geopolitics allows Rawalpindi the opportunity to continue with its old approach. Money matters are critical, but it will not force a course correction unless Pakistan reaches a breaking point.
The Violent Misuse of a Sacred Symbol
By Manash Firaq Bhattacharjee
A friend had pointed it out to me, in an Arya Samaj Mandir. It was more than a decade ago, when a roommate in JNU, who hailed from Haryana, was entering into an inter-caste marriage with his long-time, Bengali girlfriend. The wedding was taking place against the wishes of their respective parents. There were only friends from the university, who were present to take part in the couple’s happiness. Such is the price of love, in a society where the celebration of “family values” and “religious values” have for generations, meant the celebration of patriarchy, caste interest, and economic interests. It inevitably meant the refusal to accept, the free laws of love. We were in the middle of the short ceremony when my friend drew my attention to a poetic line written on the wall: “Om means a thousand things. One of them is, welcome to the abode of the gods.”
Growing up in a Hindu household, I was of course aware of the symbol. It used to be drawn in red, on small urns made of copper, and placed before a deity. On the urn, Dūrvā (or Darbha, or Kusha) grass would be dipped in water. The Dūrvā grass comprises of three blades, which symbolises the sacred trinity for Hindus. Om, I slowly learnt, was considered the primordial sound, the sacred syllable, that would precede all chanting. The word has been associated with cosmic significance in the Aitareya Brahmana of the Rig Veda, as something that connects the liberated human spirit with the universe, as “essence of breath, life, everything that exists”.
It shook me from inside, to see the photograph of the Om symbol, being violently engraved on the back of a man I learnt is Nabbir, an undertrial Muslim prisoner in Tihar jail. Nabbir was forcibly marked and denied food for two days on April 12, allegedly by the jail superintendent. This is not just a terrible incident, but marks of a sickness that can quickly, if unchecked and not punished by law, spread into a fascist method of torture and humiliation. This is a bizarre act of classifying a non-Hindu victim.
It is necessary to pay attention to what is taking place in this incident. A language of horror is being established through this act of power. By engraving the symbol, the Muslim prisoner’s body was robbed of its sovereignty. Sovereignty here is political in the religious sense. The invisible presence of the sacred exists in the prisoner’s body. The marking of the Hindu symbol on his back, is a violation of the prisoner’s sacred world, where the meaning of sacred becomes territorial. The body is no longer the body of a man who can exist within his ‘human rights’, despite his lack of political rights as a prisoner.
What is ‘human’ within the man’s belief system is intrinsically his ability to exist as a man who belongs to a god. It is a spiritual relationship that belongs to the realm of another law, where governmental power is marked off, and ideally has no control over. What has occurred in this case is precisely this ‘human’ breach between governmental power and sacred power. The superintendent did not limit himself to the task of holding juridical authority over his prisoner. That limit was overcome by a violent superimposition of another authority (or power) that the superintendent had no right to use over the prisoner.
The act of marking a Muslim prisoner’s back with a Hindu symbol is not a sacred but a territorial act, where the mis/use of power involves marking someone with sacred symbols as proof of dominance. The act of marking the prisoner’s shoulder with the sacred symbol that does not belong to the world he inhabits within, is to humiliate his inner sense of sacredness by deliberating implanting an alien symbol on his body. That symbol is also torn from its own sacred universe, and made to symbolise something territorial.
In the Tihar jail incident, everything is reduced to the trembling of a body, where the sacred is turned into a mark of horror. It is a space where everything corresponds to nothing, where symbols are reduced to bones, where the holy is reduced to what in the Book of Revelation (13: 16-17) is called “the mark… of the beast”. The “essence of breath, life and everything that exists”, what is symbolic of Om, is violently taken away from the prisoner. He is left to breathe, and live, only his humiliation.
Whether you believe or not in the human soul, we can name the soul as an invisible entity that remains in correspondence with something unnamable. It is this soul that all forms of barbaric power want to control and humiliate, in order to reduce the human to a nonhuman status. Even in the Germany of 1938, Jewish prisoners were marked by a yellow star, which was a perverted form of the Jewish Star of David. When history repeats itself, it is not just as tragic or farce, but sometimes pure horror.
Low voter turnout may hit Mufti’s prospects in Anantnag
Srinagar: With the overall voter turnout in the first of the three-phase polling in Anantnag Lok Sabha constituency settling below...
Polling begins on very dull note in Anantnag
Anantnag, Apr 23 Polling began on a very dull note in the first of three phase polling in six of...