Blinkering national vision

Pankaj Sharma

25 January 2016

Wild stories surrounding the fate of freedom movement icon Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose have found no trace in the recently declassified papers.

To the disappointment of some, the recent declassification of 100 files related to national icon Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose has not changed the national political discourse. There is practically nothing in these files that has the potential of creating political turmoil. The documents were widely expected to reveal the truth behind the “disappearance” of Bose seven decades ago. But the files released on Netaji’s 119th birth anniversary failed to shed much light on the “mystery” surrounding Netaji’s death in a plane crash in Taiwan on August 18, 1945.

For years, many have propagated rumours that Congress leaders of the time had hidden the truth behind Netaji. When Prime Minister Narendra Modi met a delegation of the Bose family last year and announced his government’s decision to declassify all the files relating to Netaji, certain groups began manufacturing stories. These stories contained inputs, suggesting a blast of such facts that would expose the role of Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi. However, these declassified papers present no such clues. Files released in the public arena last Saturday include those which the Prime Minister’s Office had in its possession. Suffice to say, wild stories surrounding Bose’s fate have found no trace in these declassified papers.

When Prime Minister Modi was personally present at the National Archives during the declassification of Netaji files, the walls of a museum in Kolkata were lined with black and white photos of Bose’s parents, of him as a young boy, his May 1942 meeting with Germany’s then leader Adolf Hitler in Berlin and a picture of his German wife, Emilie Schenkl, holding baby Anita. Netaji’s daughter Anita Bose Pfaff, who currently lives in Germany, believes that her father had died in Taipei. In an interview published in an Indian national, a day before declassification, Anita again reiterated her belief.

Declassifying the Netaji files is a welcome step. But the way it has been done and the timing has raised some serious doubts about the intention of the ruling party. A letter, which was allegedly written by Pandit Nehru to the then Prime Minister of England Clement Attlee on December 27, 1945, was given serious publicity before the Netaji files were to be opened for public consumption. The contents of this letter show Nehru referring Bose as “England’s war criminal”. Nehru allegedly told Attlee in this letter “Subhas Chandra Bose, your war criminal, has been allowed to enter Russian territory by Stalin. This is a clear treachery and betrayal of faith by the Russians.” Nehru also advised Attlee to “do what you consider proper and fit”.

In my opinion, the claim of “access to this letter” by certain media organisations is a deliberate controversy that requires a thorough investigation. If there is no mischief behind this letter, why is it not a part of the declassified papers? To get access to such an important document is fine, but why is nobody taking ownership of the letter “written” by no important person than Nehru? The government will be releasing 25 declassified files every month now and the nation should prepare itself to witness similar side shows in the coming months.

Historian Leonard Gordon has been asserting for quite some time that the declassification will not throw up any evidence to the contrary. He had expressed his opinion again and again that “it has been 70 years since Bose died in the crash and I have interviewed people who mattered. People, who know nothing, have no evidence, keep talking and create stories”. Gordon said long back that he would be surprised if the files provide any information disproving that Netaji died in the air crash in Formosa.

India and the world must know the truth about Subhas Chandra Bose. Was he killed in the plane crash? Did he spend his last days in Stalin’s jail? Was he in Mao Tse-tung’s Red China in 1949 and did the Nehru government had specific information about this? Was he in Faizabad of Uttar Pradesh till 1985? After all, what happened to Netaji? We all have the right to know. But while exploring the truth, we must refrain from taking political mileage. The transfer of Rs. 6,000 every year by the Congress party to Bose’s daughter Anita until she got married to an American citizen Martin Pfaff in 1965 and Nehru’s suggestion that 100 pounds be sent every month to Emilie Schenkel, the widow of Netaji “through private channels” in Vienna, should be seen through the right perspective. To distort the very spirit of these gestures is something that exposes the real intention of the forces working against a particular ideology.

After all the pontification and bluster, we will be left with one basic question: would it be in our national interest to allow the Netaji issue to become a part of gutter politics? Deliberately demeaning the grace of the leaders who played a major role in the freedom movement and nation building is a conspiracy to block the national vision. Those who think that tearing someone else down can build them up are bound to prove wrong. They should, at least, spare Bose and not make him a tool of petty politics. Netaji is the “Leader of Nation” even without your granting him this title.

Strong headwind for Modi to cross

Pankaj Sharma

18 January 2016

To form a Grand Alliance of regional parties and lead it from the front looks easy for the Congress.

The results of the municipal council and Nagar panchayat polls in Maharashtra are a clear indication that the direction of wind has taken a U-turn for Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) after Bihar Assembly election and Prime Minister Narendra Modi and party president Amit Shah are finding themselves helpless to adjust the sails to reach to their 2019 destination. BJP faced a stunning blow in Gujarat in early December and 2016 has begun for the right wing party with finishing fourth in Maharashtra. Congress has gained strongly in the home state of Modi and Shah after remaining almost totally absent from all tiers of the power structure by losing every election in the last 12 years and now the final tally in Maharashtra showed Congress on the top.

In spite of inherent contradictions, a grand anti-Modi alliance now does not seem entirely impossible and if the majority of the bigger opposition parties rally against BJP in 2019, it could lose as 69 percent electorate voted against it even at the time when its popularity was at the highest level in 2014. BJP, not the Congress, is now the principal party in the country. Not only does it have 281 MPs in Lok Sabha, but also Chief Ministers in eight states—Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Jharkhand and Haryana. In five states/Union Territories (UTs), its allies occupy the CM’s chair. With Jammu and Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab, Nagaland and Puducherry, BJP/NDA-ruled states are at 13. This is 40 percent of the total number of states/UTs in India. Contrast to this the Congress rules/shares power in ten states, half of which are in the Northeast. They are very small and do not play a dominant role in national politics. Even then, if many parties are keen to jump onto the anti-BJP bandwagon keeping in mind 2019, it speaks of the fact how fast Modi wave has diminished.

44 percent of total members of both the houses of Parliament and 22 percent of total members in all the state Assemblies are in BJP’s kitty. Congress has only 12 percent members in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha but it controls 24 percent seats in assemblies across the country. Other political parties have 44 percent of parliamentary share and 54 percent of Assemblies’ with them. As the grand old party is becoming more and more accommodative owing to a real threat, the scope of paradigm shift in political alliances has tremendously widened.

From being principally Hindi heartland party, BJP is trying to spread its wings to the states like Odisha, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Kerala, and Assam. BJP feels that its Hindutva agenda can attract at least half of the Hindu votes which are enough to win any election. But the colour of country’s political map is taking a fast change after the elections in Delhi and Bihar. Both the states have proved that a united opposition is an assured guarantee of BJP’s defeat. Arithmetic advantage of this formula in 2019 will be too much for BJP to handle. An umbrella alliance of anti-BJP forces will be taking a proper shape by next year.

464 parties participated in 2014 election along with independents. Only 17 parties recorded a vote share greater than one per cent, accounting for 86.9 percent of total votes polled. Excluding BJP, this leaves 16 parties to come to some sort of common understanding. TDP and Shiv Sena are currently with NDA but their relationship with BJP is in turmoil. The fact is that except for the BJD, TDP and Shiv Sena, all parties have had some sort of relationship with the Congress earlier.

Therefore, to form a grand alliance of regional parties and lead it from the front looks easy for the Congress. It is also a fact that it is not as simple as it appears because of the acrimonious history of some of the parties. SP and BSP can’t sail on the same boat. Similar is the case with AIADMK and DMK, TRS and TDP, Shiv Sena and NCP.

Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi will have to deal with some of their regional satraps also who will not want Congress to lead an alliance. In that case, the ball will go in regional parties’ court for leading the alliance. But when it will come to projecting the Prime Ministerial candidate how will Nitish Kumar agree on Mamta Banerjee? How Mamta and Mulayam Singh Yadav will agree on Naveen Patnaik? How Naveen will agree for Chandra Babu Naidu? And so on. The leadership issue will the biggest tangle and that might ultimately roll the ball in Congress’ hands as it is the only party with pan-India presence.

Watching Narendra Modi govern India, a potent grand anti-BJP/anti-Modi alliance in 2019 is bound to take shape. There is no honest drive in his regime to undo India’s crony capitalism. Modi is heavily relying on populist slogans and his “together with all, development for all” type rhetorical have already lost steam in public perception. Manipulative president of BJP, Amit Shah, has also lost his skills. Just one and a half year back, there were people who were not Modi’s most natural supporters, but who believed that an end to Congress rule was necessary. They all are highly disappointed with the governance Modi government has provided during this period. They believed in Modi and company election slogans and now feel swindled. They find that after campaigning the Amit Shah Way, Modi is now governing the Amit Shah Way.

Nobody could have imagined that Modi’s connect with people will be converted in such disconnect within one and a half years of his governance. Rural Maharashtra and Gujarat’s writing on the wall tells us of the times BJP is going to face on its route to 2019. If the ambitions of becoming Prime Minister will not hamper the success of mega-alliance, BJP is already preparing for its way out.

Ignoring the signs from Hong Kong

Pankaj Sharma

13 January 2016

The city’s Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying is bound to face political turmoil next year.

I met a few important “umbrella revolutionaries” during my visit to Hong Kong this week.  With elections for the post of Hong Kong’s Chief Executive slated for later this year, these “revolutionaries” are busy intensifying their movement. These young men and women have worked out a plan to repeat a series of sit-in street protests in coming months on the lines of their famous 2014 movement. The leaders of the umbrella brigade are demanding the withdrawal of Beijing’s decision to pre-screen the candidates for Hong Kong’s Chief Executive elections.

Most of the protesters I had met were students. They have been using umbrellas to protect themselves from police pepper spray. Umbrellas have now become a symbol of the movement. Protest leaders say that their campaign is not a revolution but a civil-disobedience movement.

Student leaders such as Alex Chow, Joshua Wong and Lester Shum believe that people must have the right to directly elect their representative without any interference from Beijing. But, China, which resumed sovereignty over Hong Kong from the British in 1997, wants to screen candidates before they stand for office. Beijing insists that candidates for the Chief Executive position must be vetted by an electoral committee of tycoons, oligarchs, and pro-Beijing figures.

Umbrella protesters also want the current Chief Executive, Leung Chun-ying, to resign, which he has flatly refused to do. There is a strong feeling in Hong Kong that Leung gives priority to China’s interests over Hong Kong’s. He was indirectly elected by 689 voted out of 1200 voters.

Even after becoming a special administrative region of China, Hong Kong still has an independent judiciary, common law, freedom of information and movement, and a reasonably free press. But a well-traveled young generation of Hong Kongers are not satisfied with semi-autonomy and want more freedom. They have always enjoyed Western-style freedoms and the desire for political enfranchisement that comes with it.

I have met several elderly people also who are actively opposed to the ideas of the umbrella brigade. They are not in favour of antagonising China and the memories of the bloody suppression of the 1989 Tiananmen uprising in Beijing still haunts them. They argue that, by doing all this, the students are only inviting Beijing to withdraw the freedoms that Hong Kong does have. The older generation is also more concerned about economic stability. It’s already hard enough to make a living in the hyper-expensive city. 

There is an ugly face of Hong Kong too, which is no less dominating. There are far more homeless people in Hong Kong these days as housing has become unaffordable. Skyrocketing rents and squalid conditions in shoebox apartments have pushed more people onto the streets as the number of homeless in the city hit an all-time high in 2015. The figure almost tripled over the past decade. Hong’s Kong’s lack of affordable housing has fueled the “McSleeper” trend, where the homeless sleep at McDonald’s outlets. Most of the homeless are male, aged between 45 and 64.

I have seen a sizable number of homeless people live in makeshift cardboard shacks under bridges and in parks in West Kowloon. A recent survey says that the number of “McRefugees”–a term coined for homeless people staying overnight at 24-hour fast food restaurants such as McDonalds–had quadrupled in the past two years.  

The average age of street sleepers in Hong Kong has fallen rapidly from 54 to 50 now. Moreover, one-fifth of the homeless are under 40. One-third of them are able-bodied working poor or unemployed people. Even though these  findings have been conveyed to Hong Kong’s legislative councilors, government schemes are not translating into action on the ground. Therefore, the son of a Government House guard, 61-years-”young” Chief Executive of Hong Kong, Leung Chun-ying’s whose ancestral origin is Shandong in China, is bound to face political turmoil in his career next year.

The steep rise in cost of living in Hong Kong is taking a serious turn. It is becoming extremely difficult for the common man to cope with the situation given their current income. The average price of even necessary food items are now so high that even middle-class Hong Kongers find themselves unable to afford these products. Apart from the democratic freedoms, the rise in prices is going to be one of the most important election issues in Hong Kong next year.

There was a time when people used to say that you can leave Hong Kong, but Hong Kong will never leave you. I feel, those times are coming to an end soon. Everything will depend on whether Chinese president Xi Jinping manages a successful political choreography to keep the basic flavor of Hong Kong’s free spirit intact or succumbs to the pressure of the Communist Party of China, which has powerful members such as Li Keqiang, Zhang Dejiang, Yu Zhengsheng, Liu Yunshan, Wang Qishan, and Zhang Gaoli. China will face irreparable losses if it ignores  Hong Kong’s pain.

One trap Modi must avoid in 2016

Pankaj Sharma

4 January 2016

PM should be aware of backdoor players that seek to privatise public sector banks.

Recent news stories reveal how Indian banks are entering 2016 with debt worth $60 billion. It is part of a  hidden Modi government-led agenda that seeks to create very liberal entry points for private banks in state-owned public sector banks. Sources suggest that study reports are ready for the same. These reports will either propose the privatisation of certain banks or a heavy downsizing in their operations.

The study reports prepared for the purpose state: “Indian public sector banks have been in bad shape for a while now, thanks to an overload of bad loans, which are close to topping Rs 3,00,000 crore.” These studies further stress that “with the emergence of payment banks as a new competitive threat, public sector banks will be reduced to carcasses if they are not privatised”. One of the study papers mentions the names of two banks that are already close to the 10 percent mark on bad loans. 

Vested interests have prepared a note saying that “at the end of June this year, just nine PSBs had gross bad loans below 5 percent of assets; four had non-performing assets (NPAs) in excess of 7 percent, and two of them were heading towards double-digits”. Suffice to say, the Indian Overseas Bank and United Bank of India could be the first casualties on the road to privatisation as their share of bad loans stand at 9.4 percent and 9.6 percent respectively.

Although Modi seeks to bring PSBs on track with improved management practices, expert reports have rejected  such measures, saying, “These steps may not eliminate the rot that has accumulated in the public sector banking system, which has been ruined by cronyism, excess manpower, and poor management. The truth is that PSBs are high-cost monsters and they are also relatively poorly invested in technology vis-a-vis private banks. This means they not only need more capital for providing against bad loans, but also extra money for offering voluntary retirement schemes (VRS) to excess staff, and for investments in upgrading technology.”

It is true that the banking business is no longer restricted to taking money from depositors and lending it to business enterprises and individuals. New innovations such as payment wallets, gold loan companies, and even e-commerce players are fast becoming quasi-financial set-ups. Taking advantage of this situation, a strategy note prepared for pushing privatisation argues, “table-banking will move towards mobiles and cashless payments, which will make the huge branch infrastructure of PSBs inviable unless these are put to value-added use like selling financial products or even as pickup points for e-commerce purchases”. 

The note sent to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) adds, “in this scenario, the HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank will leave their public sector counterparts far behind and the corporate jaunts such as Airtel and Vodafone will enter through the payment banking route and will take away many customers with them”. The note suggests two options to counter this problem and both are difficult choices. The first option is to get legislation in place to privatise some public sector banks before they become complete basket cases. Reports indicate that at least four of them currently have non-performing assets above 7 percent. The PMO has been advised that if the word privatisation is an anathema, then it will have to legislate a golden share where majority voting rights remain with the government but economic ownership and management can pass into private hands.

The other option is to shrink the worst-performing public sector banks into narrow banks. These financial entities may have the freedom to raise deposits. However, their lending operations could be either severely curtailed or restricted to investments only in Triple A borrowers and the government. This very idea has an eye on four banks—United Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, UCO Bank, and Bank of Maharashtra. Lobbies in favour of privatisation have reportedly told Prime Minister Modi and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley that they have very little room. These lobbies argue that it is time for the government to accept the inevitable and embrace privatisation. 

A special exercise to overhaul the working of the Indian banks operating in foreign countries is also underway. Though no one will formally accept the news, sources inform that 182 branches of 12 public sector and 3 private Indian banks are under the direct scanner of the PMO. The activities of all Indian officers and their local recruits working in PSBs across 30 countries are being watched closely by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence through Indian missions abroad. Moreover, 26 subsidiaries of Indian banks abroad and 7 joint ventures are also being subject to a thorough screening process. Additionally, 55 representative offices of Indian banks working in different countries are also directly under the PMO’s radar. Sources say, the outcome of a vigil kept on the activities of five branches run by a private sector Indian bank in China, Hong Kong, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, and Sri Lanka is an eye-opener for the PMO.

The December 2014 guidelines permit public sector banks to mobilise equity capital to meet Basel III capital adequacy norms, subject to the requirement that the government’s holding must be kept at a minimum of 52 percent. Thus, till now, recapitalisation of PSBs was largely financed through allocations from the Budget that raised the government’s stake. During the last 15 years, budgetary expenditure on recapitalisation of banks totaled Rs 81,200 crore. The expenditure that was undertaken in the four consecutive years between 2010—14 was around 72 percent of the total—Rs 58,600 crore. The actual money utilised for the purpose is not even half of the allocation. However, the Modi government now seems to be supporting the backdoor players, besides going for the privatisation of several PSBs. But let me tell you Mr. Prime Minister, beware of their designs.