Flappers discoing in high spirits

Pankaj Sharma

25 April 2016

The Uttarakhand High Court’s decision to revoke President’s Rule was a tight slap in the face for the BJP.

What can one expect when the sensitive dynamics of national politics are handled by people with a traditional municipal-level hangover? The answer: a Bharatiya Janata Party-sponsored Uttarakhand fiasco. There could not have been a tighter slap on the BJP’s face than the quashing of President’s Rule in Uttarakhand. The dirty sheet for toppling the state government was spread under the direction of BJP bigwigs, who ignored the basic ethos of a democratic polity. A newly-appointed BJP general secretary took charge to further Prime Minister Modi’s dream of ‘a Congress-free India’. But the tables were soon turned. What Amit Shah is to Narendra Modi, this general secretary is to Shah—another nail in the BJP’s coffin.

Never in Independent India’s history has the Central Government invoked President’s Rule to stay the Speaker’s order to have a floor test. Never before in the history of India has Article 356 been invoked 36 hours before the disqualification of rebel MLAs comes into play. Never before has there been such a blatant interference—both in the Governor’s directions to have a floor test and in the Speaker’s order to disqualify of 9 MLAs—through the misuse of Article 356.

Federalism is a part of our basic structure. But this assault was all the more astonishing even though the legal luminaries of the Modi government knew of the Rajasthan judgment, the SR Bommai judgment, and the Rameshwar Nath judgment. The invocation of President’s Rule violated every line, paragraph, and spirit of these judgments.

The Rameshwar and Bommai judgments were based on concerns arising from horse-trading and allegations of corruption. In the event of horse-trading and corruption, the Supreme Court ruled that a floor test would determine the viability of the incumbent government. President’s Rule is not the answer, it said. The imposition of President’s Rule would, in fact, give more time for corruption and horse-trading. It is very clear that the law was deliberately and consciously violated this time. The argument made by Modi-government was that even though the courts are barred from reviewing the Speaker’s conduct inside the House, the imposition of President’s Rule is based on a super-structure that the Speaker refused to conduct a division of votes on the Appropriation Bill. But when the Supreme Court of India is barred from looking into the conduct of the Speaker under Article 212, how is the Central Government not barred?

The Governor sent three messages to the chief minister of Uttarakhand in writing that a floor test is to be scheduled on March 28. The Chief Minister wrote back twice, agreeing to the Governor’s order. But for the first time in the history, President’s rule was imposed even though the Chief Minister and the Governor were on the same page. As the Supreme Court has ruled time and again, Article 356 can only be applied when there is a breakdown in the constitutional machinery. In the eight reports written by the Governor, not once did he mention a breakdown of the constitutional machinery. “I, the Governor, therefore, recommend President’s Rule,” was never said. So, in Uttarakhand’s case, President’s rule was imposed by the Modi-Cabinet, even though the Governor did not recommend it.

Let’s take a look at the diary of events. On March 25—Friday—the disqualified Congress MLAs sought a stoppage of their disqualification proceedings. The High Court rejects their writ petition. On March 26—Saturday—the Speaker heard the disqualified MLAs for four hours and closed the hearing. But after repeated requests, he extended it to Sunday. The Modi cabinet met on Saturday night and on Sunday recommended the imposition of President’s rule.

During the recent proceedings in the Uttarakhand High Court, we heard the court saying that the Central Government is not a private party and it has a responsibility. The court also held that the 9 Congress MLAs will have to pay for their ‘sins’ of defection. The judiciary expressed its pains.

Modi must realize that his government is too big and important to be left to the likes of Amit Shah or his overenthusiastic but relatively inexperienced general secretaries. Ruling a country with a deep-rooted democratic ethos requires a sincere vision. People with the tendency to convert serious political issues into a street corner volleyball game are not only counter-productive to their own political outfits but dangerous in a democracy like ours. A political party must refrain from using such elements in the serious business of politics. BJP tasted it in the Bihar elections. It also faced the heat of projecting an over-enthusiast in the Delhi elections. If all this cannot open the eyes of Narendra Modi, what will? If he leaves decisions of serious importance in the hands of organizational flappers, he will find more blots on his forehead in the times to come.

Before the Uttarakhand fiasco, I was not sure whether Harish Rawat was capable of winning the forthcoming Assembly elections. But the BJP’s ‘keertan-mandli’ has now ensured that he wipes out the lotus from Uttarakhand in the coming election. The battle of Uttarakhand has already crossed the floor of the house and reached the fields. Thanks to the collective wisdom of BJP leadership and the role of its over-actors, this is one battle the party has lost even before it formally begins this winter. The BJP perhaps will understand now that activism alone is not enough. A positive commitment to democratic values is of fundamental political importance, for in a democracy what ordinary people think is important. Unfortunately, the BJP is relying on individuals who have contempt for basic principles and perceive politicking as akin to discoing with high spirits.

LSA with the USA is no child’s play

Pankaj Sharma

18 April 2016

The Modi government must tread cautiously when dealing with Washington.

The United States of America has been a strategic partner to India for quite some time. But the haste with which the Narendra Modi-led government has gone after the Logistic Support Agreement (LSA) with the US raises serious concerns. When Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and US Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter met in New Delhi last week and announced that they have reached an in-principle understanding to sign the LSA, defence experts were a little alarmed. 

The agreement will provide logistical support and fuel supplies to the militaries of both countries from their respective bases. It was earlier proposed by the US in 2004. Talks had gone on during the UPA-led government’s tenure. But no final decision was ever taken. Despite Washington’s persuasions, there was resistance within the then government because it saw this agreement to be intrusive. It also felt that the signing of an LSA would be misconstrued by India’s other strategic partners if it is drawn into a military alliance with the USA.

The LSA-MOU signed by Modi government is one of the three Foundational Agreements. The second is CISMOA—the Communications and Information Security Memorandum of Agreement, followed by BECA—Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement. The Congress-led government between 2004 and 2014 had refused to sign any of these agreements, despite direct and indirect pressure from the US. Its refusal to sign CISMOA was because of the clauses, which would allow the US to take into its embrace the complete communication network of the Indian Armed Forces. The fear was that it would jeopardise India’s operational preparedness and strategies.

But now, the Modi government has said that they want to have LSA on a case-to-case basis. But the fact is that case-to-case basis formal arrangements already exist between India and its other strategic partners. When there is a specific requirement, these arrangements can provide the necessary facilitation. Why do we need to sign a formal LSA with the USA?

Having a clear mandate to form the government does not mean pushing India into a deeper military alliance with the US and in return becoming part of Washington’s larger operational design in the Asia-Pacific and South China Sea. It will undermine the critical geostrategic balance and also the balance of forces in India’s extended neighbourhood. Such an agreement would also be detrimental to our strategic and security interests. Any such agreement will also require the presence of US support personnel for maintenance and repair in India’s military bases. The Modi government’s decision to sign the LSA is bound to invite opposition from our other strategic partners.

India has had strategic partnerships with many countries across the globe. But it has always been wary of being drawn into any military alliance. India adopted an approach that a strategic partnership with any one of its partners cannot be at the cost or expense of the other. That is why it has been able to maintain a balance on the global strategic map. An agreement for defence framework with the US was signed in 2005. A maritime security agreement was also signed with the US in 2006. Prime Minister Modi and his colleagues must understand that defence cooperation with a strategic partner country is one thing. But completely leaning to a specific military block is something which is contrary to India’s basic philosophy of non-alignment. 

Strategic experts have seriously questioned the timing of the in-principle approval of the LSA. They are incensed that even the intent to sign this formal agreement was expressed soon after the recent embarrassment in Washington. Despite India’s acceptance in the global nuclear mainstream for its impeccable credentials on nuclear non-proliferation, we have been put on par with Pakistan. Prime Minister Modi was present there when the US chose to equate India with Pakistan when it came to the nuclear arsenal and recognition. The US continues to supply lethal weaponry—F-16 Aircraft—and other equipment to Pakistan. Is there any doubt in Washington that Pakistan, and its armed forces, in particular, do not have any friendly intentions towards India and its people?

India is now the world’s seventh-largest economy. It is also the sixth largest spender on defence and owns the third largest armed forces and a small nuclear arsenal. The government must properly reflect on the way India develops its relationship with the US. Suffice to say, the US has scores of arrangements, known as Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreements (ACSA), with allies, non-allies, and international organisations. A typical ACSA defines the objective as “reciprocal provision of logistic support, supplies, and services to the military forces of one Party by the other Party in return for either cash payment or the reciprocal provision of logistic support, supplies, and services to the military forces of the other Party”. But when it comes to actual benefit realisation, it is obvious that balance heavily tilts in favour of USA. The Modi government must recognise the importance of India’s time-tested policy of having strategic tie-ups keeping in mind its interests globally and regionally. The people of India will never endorse the handing over of our military sovereignty to any military block. Therefore, a Declaration of Intent to sign the LSA with the USA needs to be very carefully taken ahead. The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do. In strategy, it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things. Dealing with the US in strategic areas is no child’s play. Sooner we learn it, the better.

Wait for skull cap outcome

Pankaj Sharma
11 April 2016

BJP has historically played communal politics in order to create a strong Hindu vote bank for its benefit.

In the middle of next month when mercury will bob between 40 to 44 degrees, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Commander of Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) Amit Shah will also be facing a strong heat wave emerging from the electronic voting machines (EVM) used in five Indian states. The outcome of Assembly elections in Bengal, Assam, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Puducherry will heavily depend on how more than 55 million Muslim population answer to the political call during six weeks of voting exercise in these states.

Out of 184 million Muslims population in India, 25 million lives in Bengal. Assam is home for 17 million. Kerala has 9 million Muslim population. In Tamil Nadu, 4.5 million Muslims live and even in Puducherry their number is 75 thousand. More than 34 percent of Assam’s population is Muslim. In Bengal, their ratio is 27 percent and it is similar in Kerala too. Tamil Nadu has only 7 percent Muslim population and Puducherry 6 percent.

I am sure that despite national and international events such as giving a touching speech in World Sufi Conference, forming government with PDP in Jammu & Kashmir, a wonderful visit to Shaikh Zayad Grand Mosque in Abu Dhabi, and successful tours to many Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia and UAE, within his heart Modi knows about an innate connection he and Muslims have. It is bound to reflect in the elections for five Assemblies.

Modi tried to be politically correct while speaking at the Sufi Conference when he said that none of Allah's 99 names stand for violence and at a time when the dark shadow of violence is becoming longer, you are the noor—the light of hope. But his obligatory tokenism failed to influence the general opinion of Muslims. I have no clue what Modi personally think of Islam, but I know for sure that all his praise for Islam and hugging leaders of Muslim world gives more credence to the fact that he is a Prime Minister with an unwashable Hindutva tag. Deliberately ignoring the swooping down yogis and sadhvis of BJP is enough to wipe out any efforts Modi makes to woo his Muslim “brothers and sisters”.

One thing the media managers of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS), and BJP have successfully achieved is to project non-issues as core issues. We see a sense of pride that Indian media has acquired in giving undue coverage to the stories like a Muslim translating Hanuman Chalisa in Urdu or a Hindu family that adopts a Muslim child, or a Muslim girl winning a contest about the Gita. Sangh Parivar and its government’s tendency to over-highlight such incidences is seen as a speck in the beard. Are we passing through a phase when we need to repeatedly celebrate the natural sprinkles of our plurality?

BJP had got 171 million votes in 2014 general election. Now it claims to have a membership base of 110 million people which is around 10 percent of country’s total population and is more than 106 million votes what Congress could get in 2014. Wearing huge membership feather in its cap, BJP must not forget that two years of strongly promoting India’s Hindu identity have taken millions of moderate Hindus away from the party with a difference. Liberals had not joined hands with the hardliners in supporting Modi so that a Ram temple could be built in Ayodhya. This chunk of liberal Hindus had voted for his promise to promote development, create employment and easing the environment to do business. BJP government could not show any results on these three counts. The grossly disappointed large population of non-fanatic Hindus’ voting pattern in these Assembly elections will also be a deciding factor.

The pattern of Muslim vote had shown its importance in 2014 general election too and Modi's landslide win was because of nearly double the Muslims voted for BJP that time. In 2009 general election, only 4 percent Muslims had voted for BJP, but 8 percent of them had given their mandate to BJP in 2014. Until 1998 Lok Sabha election it was almost impossible for BJP to get any support from Muslim voters. However, in December 1999, the BJP leadership opened a small window for them in its party document known as Chennai Declaration. BJP initiated a confidence building exercise in the community. The year 2014 was the peak for BJP when it could harvest the yield of its one and a half decade old efforts. But against the party's half a century old history of stand on Muslim issues, Chennai Declaration hardly has the potential to change the hearts of Muslims towards BJP and hearts of BJP towards Muslims. RSS and its sister organisations also never swallowed Chennai Declaration and continued with the same mindset, the sour taste which Muslim community has felt in current Modi regime. A fallout of this is imminent in the outcome of assembly results.

BJP has historically played communal politics in order to create a strong Hindu vote bank for its benefit. It has started boomeranging. B.R. Ambedkar, who is BJP leadership's latest icon these days, often mentioned that "majorities are of two sorts--communal majority and political majority. A political majority is changeable in its class composition. A political majority grows. A communal majority is born. The admission to a political majority is open. The door to a communal majority is closed. The politics of political majority are free to all to make and unmake. The politics of communal majority are made by its own members born in it".

Modi and his BJP might ignore it as a non-issue, but Sayed Imam Shahi Saiyed, a cleric of a small Dargah in Pirana village on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, is alive in the minds of Muslims. They still recall that how he had gone up to the stage to greet the then Chief Minister of Gujarat at University Convention Hall and had offered Narendra Modi a “skull cap” and Modi refused to wear it, asking him to offer a shawl instead. Modi's non-acceptance to a particular cap lies in the very foundation of BJP-RSS ideology and the last two years have proved that old habits die hard. Therefore, BJP cannot gather thistles and expect pickles this time.

India intimidating hypocrites

Pankaj Sharma

4 April 2016

Indian has never shrugged its responsibility in the international arena

When Prime Minister Narendra Modi raised the possibility of individuals within the state structure getting friendly with terrorists during a working dinner with global leaders at a Nuclear Security Summit in Washington last Thursday, he was obviously hinting at Pakistan. Modi was forthright in his claim that international efforts and methods to counter global terrorism have become outdated, as terrorists now use modern technology and devices to plan attacks.

During his recent visit abroad, Modi did not spare even United Nations and argued that it hasn’t done enough to counter terrorism. While addressing the Indian diaspora in Brussels, he directly attacked the UN and said it was unfortunate that the global body was still unable to define terrorism and act on a resolution. To the uninitiated, a resolution would prescribe action against countries that support or shelter terrorism. He told the gathering that the UN has not performed its duty in this regard. If the UN does not address this problem, the world body will lose its relevance, he added. Some maintain that such strong criticism of the UN should have been avoided. But in my opinion, our Prime Minister has every right to question the UN’s failure to deal with terrorism, in spite of having all means to do so.

Modi could be seen as a Prime Minister who has aggressively expressed his opinion in a fashion that is normally beyond the boundaries of international diplomacy. But let the masters of diplomatic enclaves live in their paradise. I will give Modi the distinction of repeating what the Prime Minister of the erstwhile Congress-led government had said across international forums. While the world is feeling the impact of terrorism only recently, India has been at the receiving end for the past 40 years.

Modi also reminded the international community of how the world was jolted by 9/11. Till then, the global powers had not really understood what India was going through on a regular basis. India has been consistent in its position that terrorism cannot be defeated with mere guns. An environment needs to be created to ensure that the young people are not radicalised, he said. Modi is right in laying emphasis on this fact when he visited Washington and Riyadh this time. After the nuclear summit, Modi had tweeted that his Washington tour was full of fruitful meetings and interactions. Our Prime Minister is very prompt in using social media. But will his meetings with global leaders also bring prompt results?

It will be too early to conclude that Modi’s visit to Saudi Arabia and his meeting with the Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud’s son, Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud, will ensure the alienation of Pakistan from its old friend. Within diplomatic circles, it is believed that Mohammad bin Salman could be a potential successor to the throne. It is a good move on Modi's part to visit Saudi Arabia at a time when the Kingdom’s relations with Pakistan have hit a recent low. 

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have been allies for decades due to their shared Sunni Muslim majorities. The Middle Eastern country has also been a source of financial aid for Islamabad, with the Saudis presenting them a "gift" of $1.5 billion in 2014. However, a year later, Pakistan refused to provide ships and troops to the Saudi-led fight in Yemen. Pakistan has also avoided taking sides in Riyadh's dispute with Iran.

The only handicap Modi has in dealing with Saudi Arabia is his political party. It was the first visit by a BJP Prime Minister to Saudi Arabia and the fourth by an Indian Prime Minister after Jawahar Lal Nehru in 1956. Modi’s long meeting with the Deputy Crown Prince, who is also the Defence Minister and the Chief Economic Planner of the Saudi Kingdom, is being observed as an important event in diplomatic circles. When Chinese President Xi Jinping went to Saudi Arabia recently, he too had held a separate meeting with the Deputy Crown Prince. 

During his visit to Pakistan, the prince also met with Pakistani Army chief Raheel Sharif. US President Barack Obama, who hosted the prince at Camp David, last year, had found him to be “extremely knowledgeable and very smart”.

If Modi’s Saudi Arabia visit yields expected results in areas of information sharing and military relationship in times to come, it would be a serious achievement. The details of Modi’s personal interaction with Deputy Crown Prince and other members of the royal family are not in the public domain at present. It would also be interesting to understand how Modi dealt with Saudi expectations over India’s position on Iran’s role in the region and Riyadh’s keenness that India joins a Riyadh-led security coalition? Will it ever be possible for India to come out and support Riyadh’s war in Yemen?

India has always told the world not only what we stand for but also what we are against. How can a civilised world ignore the fact that the quantum of sanctioned killing by other countries is greater than the total number of people killed by all weapons of mass destruction in all of history? It is a haunting notion. It is serious. Straightforwardness intimidates hypocrites. Being the soothsayer of the tribe is a dirty job, but someone has to do it. 

The Indian leadership has never shrugged its responsibility in the international arena, ever since the days of Mahatma Gandhi. Any Prime Minister of India must follow this legacy in the best interest of the nation.

BJP’s ambition and rough road ahead

 Pankaj Sharma

28 March 2016

Upcoming elections in five States will prove to be a serious test for BJP president Amit Shah.

With Assembly elections on the horizon in Assam, West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Puducherry, the Bharatiya Janata Party president Amit Shah is on the road once again to fulfill his party’s dream of  a “Congress-free India”. The BJP recently re-elected the 51-year-old Shah as its president, despite major electoral defeats in two states. After having a free hand in reshuffling the organisation of the “world’s largest political party”, Shah has every right to believe that he is on the path to political success. 

But it won’t be easy for Amit Shah. Nor will it be a cakewalk for the Congress in the five poll-bound States. But it is as much a fact that the BJP’s chances of success are poorer. Assam is critical for the BJP while West Bengal is a test of its new ambition. In Kerala and Tamil Nadu, the BJP can at best hope for a few bonus points. In other words, the BJP president will practically have nothing much in his kitty this year.

Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand will go to the polls in 2017 with Manipur and Goa. Barring Uttar Pradesh, the elections in the other four States could be advanced ahead of schedule to the end of this year. The nation has witnessed the Modi-Shah duo’s desire to install a BJP government by hook and crook in Uttarakhand. But it has created a ground wave of sympathy for the Congress in the hills. In Punjab, the BJP has a very marginal role while its ally Akali Dal is suffering from serious anti-incumbency. In UP, even Amit Shah knows that repeating the 2014 Lok Sabha election tally will be difficult. 

Those who know Shah well say he is best at reassessing strategy, tactics and style and, therefore, is capable of playing political wonders. But after the blunders in Delhi and Bihar, several leaders within the party have raised doubts about his electoral prowess. It is a different thing that Shah managed to retain the confidence of Modi after the Bihar debacle. That is down to the internal dynamics between Narendra Modi, Arun Jaitley, and Amit Shah. If you have to ignore the outcome of the Delhi elections because of Jaitley’s maneuvers in installing Kiran Bedi, you will also have to ignore the failure of Shah’s strategy in Bihar.  

Shah’s current tenure as BJP president is not going to be smooth because he will have to manage conflicts between the liberals and hardliners within his party and in the extended family. It will also be difficult for Shah to manage a more restive Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. He will also have to solve the knotty questions thrown at him by seniors sitting in the Margdarshak Mandal. At a time when the BJP’s fortunes are on the slide after reaching a peak in May 2014, the master strategist Shah has to pass really difficult tests in years to come.

When Prime Minister Modi repeatedly talked of a “Congress-free India” during the general elections, he actually wanted the BJP to emerge as the default party for governance. Shah can now also repeat the same chant during every state election. But to make it happen, the BJP needs a base in Eastern and Southern India. There are no indications that the BJP will gain such ground during the upcoming Assembly polls in five States. 

The changing political realities in the Hindi heartland also tells a different story. Even in Gujarat, where it completely blanked out the Congress, the party is stuttering as shown by the results of the recent elections to local bodies. The political realities in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan are also changing fast where elections will be held in 2018. 

If BJP does not win Assam and shows no reasonable gains in West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, it would be seen as a referendum on the Modi government. Shah is then bound to face difficulties in keeping the morale of his party high. Unless he stops micro-managing every election and starts empowering regional leaders, he will face no respite from the bad weather. A top heavy high command culture has always proved suicidal for any mass-based party. The BJP is no exception.

There is a silent but strong group in the BJP which has shown that it is not inclined to join Shah’s orchestra. Murmuring by individuals with fundamental disagreements with the Modi-Shah style of functioning is not something new. Cracking down on them will never be easy. Modi’s invincibility is fading away. Shah is not somebody who can deliver own his own. 

Modi also has to pass the test of revamping his Cabinet after the Budget session. Modi feels that he is surrounded by a large number of underperformers. It will not be easy for Modi to replace the Ministers who have already been identified as poor performers. Back when he won a huge mandate in may 2014, Modi could form a Cabinet of his choice. Now these pressure groups are not so irrelevant. They are not going to sit quiet this time. Any reshuffle is bound to create some ruffles.

Sustainable development is the pathway to a bright future which offers a framework to generate economic growth and achieve social justice. This is one area where the Modi government hasn’t done much after taking over. If you have only leadership without any good governance, you can perhaps complete your tenure in office, but can’t reclaim your seat. We’ve seen over time that countries that have the best economic growth are those that have good governance, and good governance comes from freedom of communication. Modi, Shah, their party and parent organisation should realise this as soon as possible.