BJP leader Raje ready to quit, but on her own terms

CNN-IBN
Published on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:43, Updated on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 13:12 in Politics section
New Delhi: Former Rajasthan chief minister Vasundhara Raje is likely to resign as Leader of Opposition in state Assembly on Monday. Raje will be meeting senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) leaders in New Delhi.
She will also meet former BJP president M Venkaiah Naidu who is said to be acting as the mediator between her and BJP central leadership.
Before putting in her papers Raje is likely to insist on some benefits for herself and her supporters in the party.
Sources say she wants an honourable exit for herself and reinstatement of suspended MLAs. She is likely to agree to a position in the party's central leadership.
Sources close to Raje said that she had made up her mind not to prolong the crisis and obey the directive of the central leadership.

MLAs Rajender Singh Rathore and Gyan Dev Ahuja were suspended from the primary membership of the party on disciplinary grounds on August 18.
The BJP top brass's deadline for her to step down as leader of Opposition in Rajasthan also expires on Monday. BJP President Rajnath Singh had asked Raje to quit taking responsibility for the drubbing the party suffered in Rajasthan in the Lok Sabha polls.
Meanwhile, former RSS chief KS Sudarshan is also meeting BJP leader LK Advani in New Delhi. The meeting assumes significance as the BJP is grappling with leadership crisis following its debacle in the Lok Sabha elections.
However, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has already said that the BJP was capable of solving its problem.
The RSS is also preparing to hold its annual three-day meet in Dehradun. The meet will begin on Tuesday at the Aura Valley ashram.
Prominent RSS leaders like Mohan Bhagwat, Bhaiyaji Joshi and Suresh Soni have already arrived in Dehradun for the meet.

She is blackmailing BJP. Her's is a fit case for dismissal from the primary membership of the party.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-leader-raje-ready-to-quit-but-on-her-own-terms/100311-37.html

BJP asks Jaswant to quit as House panel chief

EXPELLED BJP LEADER HEADS PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE
CNN-IBN
Published on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 13:40, Updated on Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 14:00 in Politics section
New Delhi: The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday asked its expelled leader Jaswant Singh to step down as Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman.
The BJP is of the view that Jaswant was made PAC chairman in his capacity as a BJP leader and should step down now that he was no longer with the BJP.
A team of BJP leaders including Deputy Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj met Jaswant at his residence in New Delhi on Monday.
The 22-member Committee on Public Accounts is constituted by Parliament each year for examination of accounts showing the appropriation of sums granted by Parliament for expenditure of Government of India.
The Committee is also authorised to examine the annual finance accounts of Government of India, and such other Accounts laid before Parliament as the Committee may deem fit such as accounts of autonomous and semi-autonomous bodies.
However, the Committee is not authorised to examine the accounts of those public undertakings and government companies which come under the purview of the Committee on Public Undertakings.
While the Committee has 15 members from the Lok Sabha, seven of its members come form Rajya Sabha.
Jaswant was expelled by the BJP from the primary membership of the party for writing a book praising Pakistan's founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah on the first day of the party's chintan baithak (brainstorming session) in Shimla on August 19.
In the book Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence, Jaswant has written that Jinnah was a nationalist and has also blamed Jawaharlal Nehru for the partition of the country in 1947.

Jaswant Singh never misses an opportunity to reiterate that honour is greater for him than anything else. Now that he is no longer in the BJP, let us see if he is honourable enough to make a quick exit of House panel chief's post and also resign as MP. Particularly as he has been bad-mouthing Advani.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-asks-jaswant-to-quit-as-house-panel-chief/100328-37.html

Advani was at centre of ‘Cash for Vote’: Jaswant Singh

Updated on Friday, August 28, 2009, 23:32 IST

Zeenews BureauNew Delhi: In a startling revelation, a news magazine has uncovered that BJP Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha L K Advani was involved in staging the “Cash for Vote” drama in the House, as per ousted BJP leader Jaswant Singh. "Do you know this whole wretched thing of money for votes is a classic example of wrong decision making and it's extremely troubling that he did not stand up and say no. Advaniji was at the centre of this whole drama," he told the magazine.
Singh was referring to the episode in the Lok Sabha during the Trust Vote in July last year when three BJP MPs displayed bundles of currency notes totalling Rs one crore claiming they were being offered as bribe to support the government. Singh said the facts were clear and he stumbled on to the whole thing when a very strange looking fellow was brought to his house by Sudheendra Kulkarni, a former aide of Advani. The BJP however rejected the charge. "The charges of Jaswant Singh in a magazine suggest that the cash-for-vote was a BJP orchestrated campaign. We stoutly deny that. It was a campaign organised by the ruling party and its allies," BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar said. "It was a sting operation carried out to expose this deal by one news channel in which our brave MPs definitely co-operated with the channel. Had it been telecast when the Trust Vote was being discussed, there would have been a different result of it. But unfortunately it could not be relayed that day," he explained. Javadekar said charging BJP of "stage-managing" the operation is "entirely wrong". Three BJP MPs, Faggan Singh Kulaste, Ashok Argal and Mahavir Bhagora, had waved cash worth Rs one crore in the Lok Sabha during the Trust Vote on July 22 last year and alleged that the money was offered to them as bribe to vote in favour of the UPA. BJP also said the Kandahar was "wrong and uncalled for" as the hijack crisis was resolved after consulting all parties and experts. "People accusing Advani on Kandahar is wrong and uncalled for. The issue is already resolved and it is a 11-year old story. The government of the day took every party into confidence and, after the security experts' advice, acted in a way best suited for the time," Javadekar said. When Singh was asked by reporters whether he was seeking revenge from the leader who did not stand by him, Jaswant replied in the negative, stating that he actually pitied the man who went to such an extent in his lust for power. "It's a great sense of pity. Here was a man who has consumed by an ambition to be Prime Minister, and that desire made him commit so many mistakes,” he added. Vinod Mehta, while speaking with a news channel, remarked that BJP’s Sudheenda Kulkarni- who recently resigned from BJP- was the mastermind of the entire episode that unravelled during Trust Vote at the end of a discussion on Indo-US nuclear deal. Interestingly, when he was questioned by the media about his involvement, Kulkarni had pointed the finger at some other BJP leader without naming him, thus conceding the involvement of the party but washing his own hands off the entire episode. Jaswant’s charge that Advani told MPs to display money in Parliament comes at a time when the former is hit by controversies because of his book on Jinnah and has been sacked from the primary membership of the party on account of the same. The magazine quotes Jaswant as saying, “To me it is a matter of great sadness…” that Advani has failed as a leader. “Advani said they had two choices. They could take the money to the Speaker or the House. But Advani told the MPs to display money in Parliament.” Jaswant said he was not consulted on the matter but was ‘extremely saddened’ when it came to his knowledge. Citing the example of the army where leaders take responsibility, he said there were numerous examples when Advani would either keep quite or transfer responsibility to somebody else on occasions that troubled him and where he is likely to come under fire. "That is not the trait of a leader." On Arun Shourie's description of Rajnath Singh as a Humpty Dumpty, Singh said the BJP president was a provincial leader who should never have been pushed up. The expelled veteran BJP leader also lashed out at BJP, saying that it had become more of a cult and was not a political party any more. “It has been reduced to the proprietary partnership of a few. This has come about under the leadership of Advani. To explain superficially, the 116 BJP MPs today are like lost waifs," Jaswant said. The former External Affairs and Defence Minister said he did not support the decisions like banning of overflights to Pakistan and deployment of troops during 'Operation Parakram' when he was away on some visit. He said he was also greatly distressed when the BSF was sent into Bangladesh and a "wounding photograph" of the body of a BSF soldier being carried slunge on a bamboo appeared in the media. Recounting his meeting with Vajpayee, Jaswant said that when he went to meet the BJP Atal Bihari Vajpayee on the Ganesh Chaturthi day, he was able to speak through a voice box attached to his throat."I have come to seek your blessings," Singh told Vajpayee. "Kya ho gaya, kya ho gaya," Vajpayee replied and Singh says "It's enough actually. I asked for no comments about the furore. He just said that. That was all."

It appears that what Jaswant Singh is saying in accusing Advani of orchestrating the cash-for-votes drama is that Advani instructed the 3 MPs to bring the cash into the Lok Sabha and display it. Of course, Advani would have done it, already knowing that the 3 MPs were bribed. This is not to suggest that even the bribe was organized by Advani. Jaswant Singh does not appear to be saying so. But of course our electronic media has to make it sensational and therefore it has conveniently blurred the lines between fact and fantasy. -K.Venugopal - Mumbai

http://www.zeenews.com/news559106.html

No question of Jaswant visiting Pakistan, says son

New Delhi: Senior politician Jaswant Singh, who was sacked from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for his bestseller biography on Pakistan founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah, has no intention of visiting Pakistan and has not even applied for a visa.
Setting at rest speculation that Jaswant Singh was going to Pakistan, his son Manvendra Singh said: "He has not even applied for a visa."
"Where is the question of the Indian government denying him a security clearance to visit Pakistan?" he asked, referring to some media reports that Jaswant Singh had been denied security clearance by the Indian government for a promotional visit to sign copies of the book at a leading bookshop in Islamabad and for a speaking engagement.
"Moreover, there is no Pakistani edition of the book yet. The publishers may be pushing up the sales there. But for the moment he has no plans to go there," Manvendra Singh, a former MP who represented Barmer in Rajasthan, told IANS.
Jaswant, a former external affairs minister, was expelled by the BJP ended last week with the launch of his book Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence.
The biography of Jinnah by Jaswant Singh placed the onus of Partition on Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel that promptly led to his expulsion from the party. The Gujarat government went a step further and banned the book in the state.
However, Manvendra Singh pointed out that his father did nurse an ambition to go to Pakistan at "some point in the future".
"Sure, he wants to go there at some point in the future. But the dates have not been fixed."

Posted by venu1005 at 05:02 PM, Aug 27, 2009
Jaswant Singh should visit Pakistan. He would then do more that just write history - he would influence its unfolding. The liberal constituency in Pakistan, however feeble, would find reason to pursue peace with India, what with it having in Jaswant Singh a solid sponsor for India-Pakistan goodwill.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/no-question-of-jaswant-visiting-pakistan-says-son/100067-37.html

Advani's 'yatra' put off because of party crisis

Updated on Thursday, August 27, 2009, 16:01 IST

New Delhi: The crisis in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has led to another casualty: star leader L K Advani's much-hyped 'yatra' of next month that has now been postponed, party sources said on Thursday. The 'yatra', an Advani trademark since September 1990, was aimed at rejuvenating the party's demoralised cadres in the wake of the Lok Sabha poll debacle and before a round of state elections.
"We thought of timing it to begin before the Maharashtra assembly elections in October. This has been postponed," a senior party leader told a news service. The BJP is a major player in Maharashtra where it is allied with the Shiv Sena. The BJP is also a key player in Haryana. Advani, 81, had announced at the party's national executive meeting here in June that he would travel across the country to explain to party workers the reasons the BJP lost the Lok Sabha battle when it was hoping to dislodge the Congress. "In order to let party (members) know both the opportunities and tasks before us, I have decided to tour the entire country. I shall be visiting all the states, and more than one place in some of the bigger states," Advani had said. According to party insiders, Advani was to have begun his journey from the three states scheduled to go to the polls, probably in October: Maharashtra, Haryana and Arunachal Pradesh. However, the crisis that has now enveloped the party has forced Advani to do a rethink, party sources told IANS. The BJP expelled former cabinet minister Jaswant Singh last week for his controversial book praising Pakistan founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah. But there has been no end to BJP's troubles. Arun Shourie, a Rajya Sabha MP, also raised the banner of revolt saying some BJP leaders were behaving like "Humpty Dumpty". Adding to this, the defiance of former chief ministers Vasundhara Raje of Rajasthan and B.C. Khanduri of Uttarakhand has jolted the party. "For the time being, Advani's programme has been postponed. It may not take off for a while if this crisis does not blow over," said a senior party leader who cannot be named as he is not authorised to speak to the press. Unlike his previous "rath yatras", this tour was not to hold public meetings but to primarily interact with BJP workers at all levels and to get a first-hand account of what ails the party. The most famous of Advani's yatras took place in 1990 when the BJP was propping up the coalition government of Prime Minister V.P. Singh. Amid a wave of Hindu nationalist fervour, Advani was to have travelled from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh in support of a temple at the site of the Babri mosque. It was marred by violence. Advani was arrested in Bihar, leading to the collapse of the V.P. Singh government and fresh elections. The yatra is credited with building up the popularity of Advani and leading to the BJP taking power in New Delhi.

According to me, the real crisis in the BJP is the antics of Vasundhara Raje, who has mocked at the very concept of discipline. She has to be forthwith sacked. The cases of Jaswant Singh, Arun Shourie and Kulkarni cannot be categorized as indiscipline. Theirs were cases of having a difference of opinion on certain matters. The party took a timely decision in showing Jaswant the door as he was seen eulogizing the arch villain of partition. BJP would be unable to live with such a eulogizer amongst its leadership. Arun Shourie has only disgraced himself by giving an interview that sounded more like gossip and calling his party president names was unbecoming of Shourie. BJP can afford to continue with him in the party unless his defense turns out to be more pungent than his attack. As for Kulkarni, he has not attacked the party in any way. He only said that he is leaving the party and implying that he indeed intends to attack the party in future. Therefore it was gentlemanly of him to announce his decision to resign first. Hence, in all the three cases, BJP can afford to deal with the issues in its stride. But the case of Vasundhara Raje is different. Any license to discipline is an invitation to riddle the party with subverts. Sack her immediately and to hell with her. -K.Venugopal - Mumbai

http://www.zeenews.com/news558739.html

Advani knew all about Kandahar trade-off: Brajesh Mishra

Updated on Thursday, August 27, 2009, 16:04 IST Zeenews Bureau New Delhi:

In a startling disclosure, former national security advisor (NSA) Brajesh Mishra claimed on Thursday that LK Advani was in the loop regarding all the key decisions taken with regard to the hijacking of an Indian Airlines plane to Kandahar in Afghanistan. Mishra rebutted Advani’s contention that he was unaware about IC-814 being taken from Amritsar to Kandahar by terrorists. He also rejected the view that Advani did not know that a cabinet minister (Jaswant Singh) would be flying to Kandahar to secure the release of the hostages in exchange for the three most wanted terrorists. Speaking on the issue, Mishra said that a proposal was made in the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) that Jaswant Singh should go and bring back the hostages and it was agreed by the CCS. On being probed about Advani’s claim that he was unaware of the descion to send Jaswant Singh to Kandahar, he said, “I am not going to get into anything that then home minister Advani said. I will only draw attention to the fact that key members of the cabinet committee on security (CCS) George Fernandes, Jaswant Singha and Yashwant Sinha have very clearly said he (Advani) was there.” “Let put it more charitably as George Fernandes said, may he has forgotten, quipped Mishra.
Also, a news channel has quoted Mishra as saying, “LK Advani knew all about the IC-814 hijacking. Advani agreed to send the plane to Kandahar to free the hostages. The terrorists had threatened to kill all the 160 passengers onboard. Advani knew that Jaswant (Singh) was on the plane with the terrorists.” Advani had been claiming all along that he did not know that Jaswant Singh was on the plane with the three dreaded terrorists to Kandahar. The former NSA added that it was one of the most difficult decisions the NDA government had to take. Giving details of the trade off, Mishra said, “Initial demand was for release of 36 terrorists and 200 million dollars as ransom and interned remains of some terrorist buried here. There was a unanimous ‘no’ in the CSS on it. Later negotiations began and it was whittled down to the release of three terrorists in lieu of saving the lives of 160 odd passengers.” Taking on the media Mishra rued, “I don’t want to be too critical of the media but at that time they were sponsoring the family members of the passengers to protest seeking release of terrorist.” He also claimed that all political parties had met at Vajpayee’s residence during the height of the crisis and agreed that hostages should be brought back at all costs. Mishra’s views on the Kandahar hijacking comes days after former External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh embarrassed Advani by saying that he (Jaswant Singh) "covered" up for him (Advani) when he said that the former home minister was not aware that he was going to Kandahar with three terrorists in 1999.

It appears that what Advani meant was that he did not know that Jaswant Singh would be on the SAME plane as the terrorists till the plane took off. He did not mean that he was not aware that Jaswant Singh was going to Kandhahar. Upto a point of time it must have been taken for granted that Jawant Singh was going in a separate plane. Afterwards it must have been decided that sending two planes to Kandahar might be a security risk. This was a technical matter and Advani need not have been in the loop on this as it would have made no difference in the scheme of things for Advani to have been informed prior on this as the decision was not his to make.

http://www.zeenews.com/news558731.html

It would have been outrageous to allow 166 persons to be killed just to continue to keep 3 persons in jail, who in any case may have been let-off by one court or the other. 166 persons were saved, though 3 got away. The blood of 166 Indians would have been the greatest legacy of the NDA rule if any other decision was taken. About having details of the process of how decisions were arrived at, I do not think we would or should ever have it because they are in the realm of internal-security secrets and it is preferable that such ghosts are allowed to lie.
August 29, 2009 10:20 AM

Pokhran II tests not a failure: Navy chief

Zeenews Bureau New Delhi:

Navy chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta on Thursday said that 1998 Pokhran II nuclear tests were successful and dismissed claims made by senior DRDO scientist K Santhanam to the contrary. Reacting to the startling revelation made by the top nuclear scientist K Santhanam, Admiral Mehta said, “The tests were adequate. We believe whatever the scientists tell us. The scientists said the tests were enough and tested. We believe the scientists, as they provide us with nuclear capability.” Admiral Mehta statement came while he was addressing his farewell press conference in the capital this afternoon. Admiral Mehta’s statement came even as the Defence Ministry and former national security adviser Brajesh Mishra too dismissed Santhanam’s statement, by asserting that India has a “meaningful” number of nuclear weapons and an effective delivery system to go with it. Santhanam, a DRDO scientist who was associated with Pokhran II nuclear tests, had claimed that the tests were only partially successful as the results were much below expectations.
The startling revelations made by Santhanam have raised doubts over country’s nuclear prowess and its ability to conduct such tests. It has also stirred up a hornet’s nest by giving fresh credence to the earlier debates in the foreign media over the success of India’s nuclear tests Santhanam, who was director for 1998 test site preparations, claimed that the yield for the thermonuclear test or hydrogen bomb in popular usage was much lower than what was claimed. As per him the yield of Pokharan II tests can only be classified as a “fizzle” rather than big bang. In nuclear terminology, a test is classified as a fizzle when the yield is below expectation. Santham had also stressed that the country needs to conduct more nuclear tests to consolidate its position and improve its knowledge of nuclear weapon programme before joining Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). “Based upon the seismic measurements and expert opinion from world over, it is clear that the yield in the thermonuclear device test was much lower than what was claimed. I think it is well documented and that is why I assert that India should not rush into signing the CTBT,'' Santhanam said. Soon after the tests, the Indian authorities claimed that Pokhran II test was a huge success as it yielded 45 kilotons (KT). However, this was contradicted by the western experts who said that it was not more than 20 KT.

Did Pakistan conduct a more successful nuclear test than India?

http://www.zeenews.com/news558700.html

The rise, fall and rise of Jaswant Singh

Sidharth Bhatia
Saturday, August 22, 2009 23:09 IST

The official website of the Bharatiya Janata Party has no record of any leader named Jaswant Singh who was till the other day one of its most senior and respected members. Though the search for his name throws up 108 references, only one -- a three para press release announcing he has been expelled -- actually refers to him. The rest are irrelevant.
This is reminiscent of hardcore Stalinist parties, where a person becomes a "non-person" once he falls out of favour. Official records expunge his names and even his face is airbrushed out of old photographs. Verily it is said that the right and left parties have more in common with each other than they realise.
But of course we live in a noisy democracy and you cannot wish Jaswant Singh away. The media will take care of that. Post his dismissal, Jaswant Singh is more in the news than he ever was and is gradually emerging as a kind of folk hero, the misunderstood and injured man who paid a heavy price for just writing a book.
What should have been hailed as an example of scholarship and inquiry for other BJP members to follow instead turned into an act of villainy and betrayal. The BJP has an uncomfortable relationship with history; only received wisdom and sanctioned versions will do.

These are based on easily digestible mini-bites rather than serious research: Nehru, bad, Sardar Patel, good, Jinnah, evil incarnate, etc. Too much digging becomes uncomfortable -- it was not Jinnah who proposed the two-nation theory first, it was Veer Savarkar, or that Patel was no Muslim-baiter and had actually banned the RSS.
Jaswant Singh's crime was going beyond these caricatures and clichés. Perhaps his publisher's decision to release all the sensationalist bits to boost sales also rebounded.All kinds of conspiracy theories have been suggested about why Jaswant chose to write this book, but we get a hint in an interview he gave to a Pakistani journalist Anjum Niaz a couple of years ago.
"I was unable to convince myself that Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a demon (as some Indians believe). I was also unable to convince myself of the ideography of Jinnah as some in Pakistan believe. He was neither. He was a man of flesh and blood," Singh is quoted as saying. No doubt Singh was fascinated by his fellow Anglophile and the fact that his party colleagues hated Jinnah wouldn't have mattered to him.
Singh has always been a bit of an oddball. Not much is known of Singh's early life except that he went straight from school into the army. After he retired he is said to have represented some foreign companies in India.
Though not an academic, Singh has always thought of himself as a bit of an intellectual --he likes to read a lot and was also a columnist for a business magazine for a long time. He has also developed a persona of being a "burra sahib" in a party of desi/swadesi types, Anglisised and a man of refinement, far above the rest of the BJP types. A diplomat who worked with Singh when he was minister of external affairs recalls going into his office and being told, "I am the only minister who listens to Mozart at work."
Though Singh was part of the original founders of the BJP in 1980, he was not in the forefront as a politician for a long time. Part of the so-called Vajpayee camp, he was a liberal in the BJP framework.
When the ill-fated 16-day government was formed in 1996, he was made the finance minister but two years later could not get the same post, reportedly because the RSS stalled it. Instead, he was given the external affairs ministry.
That was a blessing in disguise for Jaswant Singh. Travelling the world and hobnobbing with diplomats was just up his street. After the Americans got upset at India's nuclear explosion it fell upon Singh to re-establish ties and he was in his element, meeting Strobe Talbott in third country capitals over oysters and single-malt whiskies. To his credit he did a good job but in December 1999, after he escorted terrorists to Kandahar his stock fell drastically.
Politically too, though he was a senior member of the party, he lost much of his clout after Vajpayee faded out of the scene. Rajnath Singh decided not to make him leader of the party in the Rajya Sabha, favouring the much younger Arun Jaitley and it was only after much protest that Singh was given a parliamentary assignment that gave him a front bench seat in the house. Much before he was thrown out his irrelevance in the party had become clear.
What now? It must be humiliating to be sacked like this on the phone and be reduced to being an independent MP. It cannot be edifying to be removed from the institutional memory of a party you helped found, to find your peers and colleagues refusing to acknowledge you. But Singh is no fool.
He will see possibilities of personal glory in this situation. For one thing, it lets him speak his mind freely which he has already started by claiming LK Advani knew of the Kandahar decision. He can also now push for the cause of Gorkhaland -- something the BJP is hesitating to do -- which will make him a hero in Darjeeling. The media, always looking for the "underdog" story will keep him alive. The old soldier will not fade away, he will fight to the last. Far from being down and out, this is going to be Jaswant's second coming.

Jaswant Singh has himself, in an interview after the publication of his book on Jinnah, said that while he found Jinnah acceptable as a person, his politics was "horrendous". The BJP cannot be seen as condoning the "horrendous" politics of Jinnah and that is what it would have seemed if it continued to keep Singh in company - never mind what Singh actually wrote. In politics images are as important, and sometimes more, than substance. "Rama's wife must not only be good, but must be seen to be good."

http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/column_the-rise-fall-and-rise-of-jaswant-singh_1284606

Now, how about some answers, Mr Advani?

Ayaz Memon
Saturday, August 22, 2009 23:41 IST

By all accounts, Jaswant Singh's new book is a well-researched, reasonably well-written treatise on Partition, and the references to Jinnah and Sardar Patel, while pointed, are innocuous and hardly worth the brouhaha. Likewise, the furore over Advani's reference to Jinnah a few years back were not laudatory as was made out.
If anything, both Jaswant Singh and Advani in their different ways have indicated that there were several, not just one villain of Partition.
How a consonance of views between two of the most senior functionaries of the BJP could lead to so much confoundment and such a dramatic split would have even been worth a parody were the inner-party functioning -- as Jaswant Singh continues to binge on spilling the beans -- was not so sordid.
Clearly, issues that have little to do with Jinnah, Patel and Partition have led to Singh's sacking. Suddenly you discover that the BJP is not a party with a difference, as has been tom-tommed for a couple of decades now, but in fact is riddled with as many shenanigans by top leaders, as much power-play and has as much dirty linen in the closet as the Congress.
I have not been an admirer of Jaswant Singh the politician (though for him to write a tome on such a complex issue with so much research at this age has raised him a few notches in my esteem otherwise) because he has always seemed out of sync with the BJP and has yet chosen to stay on for 30 years with only a whimper of protest once in a while.
Anglicised not just in his accent but also his worldview, he was (as it emerges more graphically now) clearly a misfit in the party. His haughty, almost feudal approach is now part of Indian political lore. His irreverence for established norms was evident in his passion for bhang would have embarrassed the ultra-conservative kooks and nuts in the BJP who wanted to inflict their own way of life on this country.
Jaswant Singh came from a non-RSS background and -- as he has admits now --- was an unwilling participant in the Hindutva agenda. He projects himself -- like Atal Behari Vajpayee -- as the 'liberal' voice within the BJP. But the question which Vajpayee eluded all the while must also be asked of Jaswant Singh: What compelled him to play ball with the Hindutva line except the lust for power?
It must be borne in mind that only side of the story has been heard yet -- that from a man who is hurt, angry and perhaps vengeful. But Singh has raised some searing queries for LK Advani. Was he in the know about the Kandahar episode where a terrorist was given safe passage out of India, and did he overrule Prime Minister Vajpayee's serious compunctions on the Gujarat riots? Did he stop him from sacking Narendra Modi and/or resigning himself too?
Considering the heavy price paid for these two events, in terms of loss of human life and disruption of the secular fabric, the country demands answers from Mr Advani.

"Ultra-conservative kooks and nuts" - Dear Ayaz Memon, such folks are not the sole monopoly of the BJP, as you seem to make it out. In fact, "hard core Hindus" of these days are informed by a radical streak made popular by Swami Vivekananda. Ultra-conservatism is today more identified with Islam. So a larger number of kooks and nuts are likely to be found in the Muslim League - but then it is not a party of consequence in India today, except in the state of Kerala.

http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/column_now-how-about-some-answers-mr-advani_1284621

Free-flow spirituality

R Jagannathan
Wednesday, August 19, 2009 21:12 IST

You may have read a story in DNA suggesting that as many as 65 per cent of Americans subscribe to the Hindu way of thinking about god -- which is that there are several paths to the ultimate. Among other things, the report says that 30 per cent of Americans think of themselves as spiritual, but not necessarily religious, and a quarter believe in reincarnation.
The report, based on a Pew survey of 2008 and a Newsweek poll of 2009, does not come as a surprise. Reason: as societies become richer and are freed from basic material cravings, they will seek higher forms of self-realisation. Organised religion, with its focus on dogma and scripture, is incapable of catering to the needs of evolved minds. Abraham Maslow, a pioneer in defining the human hierarchy of needs, built a pyramid of five levels. At the basic level, every individual has physiological needs (like food, sleep, sex). Next comes safety, followed by social needs (love and belongingness). At the fourth level, there is the need for esteem, and, finally, self-actualisation. The last could mean seeking a higher purpose in life, a spirituality that transcends self.
Society's hierarchy of needs mirror those of the individual, though no society is a homogeneous mass. It has several strata. Even in the rich west, there will be poor people with basic physiological and safety needs; even in poverty-ridden India, there will be a sprinkling of classes at the top with evolved self-actualisation needs.
That said, one can still make a few generalisations: the developed nations, which have fewer numbers of the absolutely poor and destitute, will have more people seeking higher levels of spirituality. Conversely, the poor will see better alternatives in organised religious structures, of the kind offered by traditional Christianity and Islam. In India, Hindu fears about conversions stem principally from this belief that the church and the mosque may be better positioned in terms of their social philosophies to meet the needs of the poor. Upper-end Hindu or Buddhist spiritualism appears more elitist.

Two caveats are in order here. First, by Hindu one is not merely referring to a specific religion called Hinduism, but a set of broad cultural beliefs about life, god and spirituality. You can be a Hindu by believing in any kind of god, or even no god. You accept that others may have different ideas about god. You can move far away from the base-camp of religion to find your own spiritual altitude, and you will still be reckoned as a Hindu. On the other hand, you cannot be a Christian or Muslim by accepting any other god or spiritual goal as true. Acceptance of these two faiths means implicit denial of other faiths. Which, for the spiritually evolved, can be a limiting factor.
Second, even as a religion, Hinduism is not one specific thing. It involves a range of ideas, often contradictory in nature. It is so flexible as to be practically meaningless at one end, but extremely meaningful at the other, if you look for your kind of meaning. My personal take on Hinduism is that it is essentially agnostic in nature because it allows you to customise god to your requirements. If god can be whatever I want him/her/it to be, it must be my creation rather than something separate from me. This aspect of Hinduism cannot but be appealing to people who seek god without religion.
The non-doctrinaire aspects of Hinduism stem from the fact that Hindus never really had a clear, God-given holy book. We have had the Vedas, but we also had not-so-holy, and earthy, ideas to enlighten us, from the materialistic Lokayata texts to the Kama Sutra. The idea of elevating the Gita to the status of holy book No 1 was an after-thought in modern times. It was probably done to counter preachers from Christianity and Islam who spoke of the superiority of their god-given holy books.
The downside is clear. By its very nature, Hinduism, with its open-endedness, may appear less appealing to the poor and the disadvantaged. It seems to offer less direct benefits, and more intellectual payoffs. As Gandhi observed, to the hungry, god is food. Other-worldliness is only for those who have already got everything they need.
Given the stage of societal development, many religions are obviously mutating to retainmarketshare in their geographies. In the US, even as Hindu ideas catch on, new spirituality gurus are emerging to take the idea of god beyond the confines of the conventional church. This is what explains the success of a Deepak Chopra there. Neale Donald Walsch's Conversations with God represents another effort to take Christian spirituality to a new level, beyond the narrowness of scripture. In Islam, ancient Sufism could be making a comeback as Muslims seek a broader meaning in the Koran.
In India, where the bulk of the world's poor reside, Hindutva and Dalit neo-Buddhism are developing as mass market rivals to traditional Christianity and Islam. To survive, religions have to broadband themselves for time and place.

That as much as 65% of Americans subscribe to the Hindu way of thinking about God may be an eye-opener to many. Swami Vivekananda, the first propagator of the ancient Hindu vision of Advaita or non-duality abroad in modern times, foresaw Advaita as the religion of the future. Since the days of the epics of Hinduism, the world domination of Abrahamic religions to the era of science and technology - when all that was worth striving for by man seemed to be external and separate from him, the Advaitic vision became a rarified spiritual practice of a few. With the declaration of the Advaitic message THOU ART THAT by Swami Vivekananda onto the world stage, the seeking of the ultimate within the seeker almost imperceptibly grew and today the pervasiveness of the search is becoming more and more visible. This will have far reaching consequences on the duality school of religions, particularly Christianity and Islam. Jesus will be rediscovered outside of the Church and Rumi would make more sense than Mohammad. Then, the Age of Aquarius will surely dawn.

http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/column_free-flow-spirituality_1283785

Let BJP analyse, we will not interfere, says RSS

25/08/2009
New Delhi: As BJP grappled with dissensions, RSS said on Tuesday that it will not intervene in its affairs and that the party will have to "analyse" the developments and take the right decision.
"I want to say this clearly that it is not the job of the RSS," its spokesman Ram Madhav told reporters here a day after senior BJP leader Arun Shourie demanded that the Sangh should take over the reins of BJP.
Madhav said RSS would provide "help and advice" to the BJP "but the political work has to be managed by them."
Referring to Shourie's contention that the BJP leadership is not able to handle the situation, the RSS spokesman said, "Whatever is there, it is their work to think about it."
"The job of analysing and taking the right decision is party's discretion, not ours," he said.
Asked if the RSS was worried over the recent developments in the BJP, he said, "the view of the RSS has already been voiced by our chief (Mohan Bhagwat). He also said what the organisation expects from its swayamsevaks. We don't need to make special comments."
In Delhi, RSS spokesman Ram Madhav said Sudarshan was basically discussing the Partition history and that there was a time when Jinnah was a "follower" of Tilak.
"Statements of our senior leaders are sometimes misrepresented and misinterpreted in the media. He (Sudarshan) was basically discussing the Partition history when there was a time in freedom struggle history when Jinnah was a follower of Lokmanya Tilak," he told reporters while referring to the former RSS chief's statement on Jinnah in Indore yesterday.
Madhav said Sudarshan was only stating that Jinnah later in life became a big advocate of India's Partition "and he was prodded and propped up by the Britishers and he played into their hands and became the major champion of Partition - that's all he said".
Source: PTI

K.Venugopal
#2
25 August 2009 06:50:22
If Arun Shourie had attended RSS shakha even for a single day, he would have caught the spirit of the RSS and he would have understood that the RSS has no need to "take over" the BJP in the manner of its swayamsevaks raiding the BJP offices and displacing the BJP office bearers! The RSS hold over the BJP is one of influence, not of dictatorial force. The RSS will continue to work with dedicated BJP workers, many of whom have put in a good measure of their life time to build up the BJP. The relationship among the Sangha Parivar is not one of "we" and "they" but of just "we". Clearly, all who are making the loudest noises against the BJP today are folks who have not been swayamsevaks. The RSS must invite non-swayamsevak BJP office-bearers to attend daily shakha and catch the spirit of Sangha. Then it will be a life long dedication to Sangha and BJP ideals.

http://news.in.msn.com/business/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3171844&ucid=179853#uc2Lst179853

BJP needs to define its ideology: Govindacharya

Rajesh Sinha / DNA
Monday, August 24, 2009 18:19 IST
New Delhi: The BJP's attempts to justify Jaswant Singh's expulsion on grounds of ideology have convinced few, if any, within or outside the party.
On Monday, former BJP leader and one of its key ideologues, KN Govindacharya, asked the party to define its ideology. He said the expulsion was a kneejerk reaction born out of an internal power struggle and the decision was taken without much discussion. "It seems one or two dominant leaders said he should be expelled. Those who may not have agreed with this feared that if they differ, it would be seen as dissent. So all of them agreed," he said.
He alleged that there was no dialogue in the party. Govindacharya said it was still not clear whether it was Jinnah or Patel that was the main issue for the BJP. "The initial statement from the party president said it was with regard to comments on Jinnah. Then, party leaders felt this would direct the fire elsewhere (towards Advani) and the party spokesperson said it was over Jaswant Singh's observations on Sardar Patel. The BJP should clarify," said Govindacharya.
The ideologue said a ban on writing has no democratic basis and condemned Singh's expulsion as an indecent, graceless, "summarily and shabbily" conducted. "In no way was it a mature decision by a mature political party," he added.
"The destiny of a worker should not be decided over a cup of tea. It is true that no worker is indispensable, but, at the same time, every worker is important," Govindacharya observed.
He also questioned the purpose of the chintan baithak. "Rajnathji said it decided that BJP would stick to its ideology. I cannot understand whether this is reform or reiteration? Had the party given up its ideology? Where was the deviation? He has not clarified. The BJP needs to codify its ideology or "decode" this," Govindacharya said.
He listed some instances, asking if they were in keeping with BJP ideology, particularly mentioning the growth in meat export during NDA rule, the huge increase in liquor vends in Rajasthan under Vasundhara Raje, and the numerous projects that are destroying the Ganga.
"Advani justifies all this saying ideology is irrelevant for governance; Rajnath lays stress on ideology. Who is correct?" Govindacharya said.


BJP's ideology, in a single word - being part of the Sangha Parivar - is nationalism. Nationalism, which if needs be defined, is about actions that bring about national integration and opposition to all things that bring about national disintegration, like the espousal of a two-nation theory. The BJP, during its first stint at governance, may not have been able to translate its ideology into a perfection 10 score of action. Particularly when it was circumscribed by the pressures of a coalition government. But I think even its greatest critics would concede that the NDA rule under Vajpayee was not without merit. It was under Vajpayee's stalwart leadership that India achieved a self-confidence that made it clear that the 21st century would be India's century.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_bjp-needs-to-define-its-ideology-govindacharya_1284840

Vasundhara: New trouble for BJP?

NDTV Correspondent, Tuesday August 25, 2009, New Delhi

Despite promising to obey party orders, Vasundhara Raje is still giving the BJP sleepless nights. NDTV has learnt that the plan to give Raje an honourable exit from Rajasthan has not worked out. That's allegedly because party president Rajnath Singh has refused to accept her conditions. Raje wants to select the person who will take over from her as Leader of the Opposition in Rajasthan. She also wants to be made a General Secretary of the BJP. Raje has reportedly told the party that if these terms are not met, she will not step down from her official post in Rajasthan.

Sack her. No one who is insubordinate to party decision has any right to be in the party. Otherwise we will have a party full of characters each pulling his or her own way and the party would be over.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/vasundhara_new_trouble_for_bjp.php?page=1#postcommentarea

Malaysian model to be canned for drinking beer

NDTV Correspondent, Monday August 24, 2009, Kuala Lumpur
Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarnor, a Malaysian-Muslim model faces an unusual punishment, caning. Her crime is to drink beer in violation of the Islamic Sharia law, which prohibits Muslims from consuming alcohol.
A mother of two, Kartika was arrested from a hotel lounge in 2008. Now she will be lashed six times. Kartika insisted that her sentence be carried out in public.
"I am not nervous anymore, but I am looking forward to it. I am not proud of being caned, that is not how I feel," said Kartika.
"In my head, I feel that this is hard to deal with. It makes me think a lot and makes me nervous," said Abdul Mutalib Shukarno, Kartika's father.
A statement earlier on Monday by Malaysian authorities that Kartika would not be caned, had brought relief, but it was short lived.
The authorities later clarified that the punishment had been postponed due to the ongoing Ramadan festival. But they say the cane used on Kartika will be lighter and smaller, as the purpose is to educate rather than punish.

Carrying out Allah's will. While Allah Himself carries out His will of punishment during the Last Judgment, Muslims, in His name, carry out punishments for breaking Allah's laws. Since this is plain earth and not heaven, why is Allah's punishment sought to be implemented here? Would not man's rules suffice man on earth? Surely, it is a case of man impersonating Allah on earth. No doubt an infringement in the eyes of Allah.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/world/malaysian_model_to_be_canned_for_drinking_beer.php?page=1#postcommentarea

Jinnah was secular at one time: Former RSS chief

NDTV Correspondent, Tuesday August 25, 2009, New Delhi



As the Jinnah controversy continues to haunt the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, there is more from the saffron quarters. Former RSS chief K S Sudarshan, on being asked whether Jinnah was secular, said Jinnah had many facets and at one time was totally committed to the nation."Jinnah had many facets. If you read history then you will come to know that Jinnah was with Lok Manya Tilak and was totally dedicated to the nation. And when Gandhi started the Khilafat movement, with the idea that currently we are opposing the British and if Muslims join in then their support will help gain independence. But at that time Jinnah opposed it saying that if the Caliph in Turkey has been dethroned what has India got to do with it. That time nobody listened to him, which saddened him. So he quit the Congress and left for England and only returned in 1927," said Sudarshan.Sudarshan's observation comes amid the flurry of Jaswant Singh being thrown out of the BJP for his praise for Jinnah.Party head LK Advani too had courted controversy earlier by talking about Jinnah in positive terms.

Osama bin Laden was at one time 'secular', what with holidaying in Switzerland and sitting astride a Cadillac and all that. But when American troops landed in his sacred land, he took to arms and a fanatic Islamic ideology. A Jinnah-like transformation, with more justification. What justification had Jinnah to seek to destroy a nation that had hosted Islam for over 1000 years in amity, suffered its fanaticism and got a chance with independence to start all over again? Anyone eulogizing Osama bin Laden of Al Queda fame is a terrorist – anyone eulogizing Jinnah of partition fame is a traitor.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/india/jinnah_was_secular_at_one_time_rss_chief.php?page=1#postcommentarea

BJP in need of Advani's authority, says Kulkarni

CRISIS WITHIN THE BJP
Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) leader and political advisor Sudheendra Kulkarni announced his decision to quit the party on Sunday following ideological differences. Kulkarni, a former editor of Blitz, has been a journalist for 25 years and had joined the BJP in 1995.
From 1998 to 2004 he was an advisor to former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and was also an aide to leader of Opposition LK Advani from 2004 to 2009. A former strategist and BJP ideologue, Kulkarni played a key role for the party during the General Elections 2009.
The BJP has been facing one crisis after another following the Lok Sabha election debacle. Jaswant Singh's book on Mohammad Ali Jinnah, rebellion by leaders like Arun Shourie, Yaswant Singh and Vasundhara Raje have shown that not all is right in the principal Opposition party of India.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I would not like to comment on what Arun Shourieji has said. But even though I am not in the party any more, I share the concern and anguish of tens of thousands of dedicated members, well wishers and members of the party… the party is going through a difficult phase and like all of them, I hope sincerely hope that the party comes out of this soon.
CNN-IBN: Arun Shourie is clearly that the entire top leadership, he referred to Mao Tse-Tung strategy of bombarding the entire central leadership and bringing in state leaders… do you think this is a crisis of leadership. Every one is targeting Rajnath Singh?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Of course it is a crisis of leadership and I think the biggest mistake was committed in 2005 when Shri Advaniji was asked to step down. When you undermine the authority of your tallest leader in this manner this is the logical consequence. Therefore I believe even now the authority of Shri Advaniji should be restored.
CNN-IBN: Do you believe Advani could have done more to keep all together?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Obviously he is the most experienced, most knowledgeable, fairest and the most selfless leader in the BJP. He alone can set things right. His authority should be restored. The party I believe is really missing Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee. This party was taken to great heights by Atalji because of his personality and because of his vision. He embraced even those sections of society who were not really attracted by the BJP and therefore the party must understand that there is a great merit and value in Vajpayeeism and it should be restored. The absolutely wrong action against Jaswant Singhji should be annulled. This as an outsider is what I feel.
CNN-IBN: Every one has criticised Rajnath Singh. Do you think Rajnath Singh must step down?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I won't comment on that.
CNN-IBN: You said you do shares the concerns of the party. But what Arun Shourie has said today is different. He said that the RSS…
Sudheendra Kulkarni: What I said is that I share the concerns of all members of the party.
CNN-IBN: How can a party move ahead if each leader is speaking in very different voice? He (Arun Shourie) said the party should take control.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I said that the authority of Shri Advaniji was undermined in 2005 and this is the logical conclusion. Therefore today young leaders and there are very capable young leaders at different levels of the party and they alone can take this party forward. But it needs the guidance of Advaniji whose authority should be restored.
CNN-IBN: There is a belief that Jaswant Singh and Arun Shouries are not mass leaders, Sudheendra Kulkarni is a journalist and their exit is not going to affect the party much.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I was a very ordinary activist of the party but Jaswant Singhhji is a founder member if the BJP. He occupied three very important portfolios in Vajpyee's government. He was also the deputy chairperson of the Planning Commission. He was convener of the NDA and you expel him without giving him a chance and what is the reason… his book that has not been read by a single person. It is a completely unjustified stand and as I said it is going to haunt the BJP for a long time to come and therefore the sooner it is rectified the better it is for the party.
CNN-IBN: Do you think that Arun Shourie will be sacked?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I don't want to comment on that.
CNN-IBN: You have said that solution if to restore LK Advani's authority over the party. There are others and Arun Shourie said it is upto the RSS now. Do you think the RSS needs to come in and take control?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I won't comment on what Shourieji has said.
CNN-IBN: All the leaders including Shourie seem to suggest that they have raised these issues at the National Executive, they have raised these issues in party fora and yet they chose to come out in public at some point in time and raise the issues. What is happening inside the party that none of these if getting addressed?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Arun Shourie is not just a journalist, he is a very eminent thinker of the nation. When he speaks then there is certainly some anguish in him. Therefore I think that with all that is happening in the party, deeper action is needed, corrective action is needed and in my view three things: there has to be one leader whose authority is unquestioned. Why is the Congress party so strong? It seems to be so strong because the top leader's authority is unquestioned.
CNN-IBN: But wasn't that supposed to be not the case with the party with a difference?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Exactly. Till Atalji was active in the party his word was final. Nobody questioned his authority. After him it was Advaniji. Unfortunately his authority was undermined in 2005 and right lessons must be learnt and his authority must be restored. He is capable of setting thing right.
CNN-IBN: Do you think what happened in 2005 is what's playing out in 2009?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I believe whatever is happening now is the logical consequence of the unfortunate action of asking him to step down as the president of the party.
CNN-IBN: Why is the BJP becoming so intolerant of any criticism?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Even though I am not in the party, I believe there is immense resilience in the party, there is lot of inner strength in the party, very capable leaders at all levels and a vast army of dedicated and committed workers and therefore this crisis will be overcome. I am sure it will be overcome.
CNN-IBN: Your optimism is not shared by many people. They are just watching and saying it is free fall now.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: No. There is no question of any free fall. All those who think so will be belied. This party, whatever is happening is unfortunate, but you will see that it will overcome all this.
CNN-IBN: So you are saying that Advani should come back as the president of the party.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: No. I am not saying that. But he is the tallest leader. He is capable of guiding the party. He is has been with the party since 1951 and he is…
CNN-IBN: You don't think that he should be looking to the younger leadership?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: What I am saying is that leadership is not a question of age. He is a very active person and therefore he is the most precious asset of the party.
CNN-IBN: What about the core question of ideology? There is a great amount of confusion in the BJP. What is the way forward?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: That is why I say Vajpayeeism.
CNN-IBN: Vajpayeeism is moderate.
Sudheendra Kulkarni: Yes. That is why I say the party must become inclusive. It must embrace all sections of Indian society including those sections which have remained so far outside the influence of the party. That is how the party will become stronger.
CNN-IBN: You have spoken about the humanism of Deen Dayal Updhayaya. You have spoken about Vajpayeeism. Do you think that the Hindutva agenda for the BJP is a problem and that the party is not in sync with the time and its right wing ideology that many are now pushing towards really the problem?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: What attracted me to the BJP is the philosophy of integral humanism which I think is one of the major contributions to political philosophy in the world. It is universal. You can't think of a more integral philosophy than of humanism. The BJP should rediscover the value of integral humanism. It should rediscover the philosophy of taking everyone one along. That is true nationalism.
CNN-IBN: But each of the three leaders who have either been sacked or walked out have said different things about this inclusive policy that you seem to be talking about. Is there a fault?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I can't talk about what others have said. This is what I believe in. I think after having worked for this party for 13 years I have seen Atalji the way he handled issues. There was certain invisible touch that resolved problems.
CNN-IBN: Has the BJP really lost the difference from the Congress? Is there really no difference between the two parties?
Sudheendra Kulkarni: I won't say that. Look at the way the Congress has emerged stronger. Today the Congress is talking about drought and it is asking its MPs to cut their salaries by 20 per cent and what is the BJP doing. It is very sad. That is why the BJP must emerge out of this crisis and come out stronger.

Advani's authority was not diminished during the Jinnah episode. Rather, the moral authority of the RSS over the BJP was fortified during the episode. This is what makes BJP a unique political party - always under the guidance of the moral authority of its mother organization. Kulkarni say the Congress is strong because it has an unquestioned leader in Sonia. The BJP is not in need of such a leader so long as the moral leadership of the RSS prevails in the BJP. The Nehru family has systematically decimated the organizational integrity of the Congress and reduced it to a pocket-borough of the Nehru family. Today it is at the whip and leash of Sonia and Rahul. Hardly a model the BJP would want to emulate. I suggest Kulkarni uses his sabbatical away from the BJP to study the unique link between the RSS and BJP and realize that this unique symbiotic relationship is the greatest guarantee that India would remain a moral democratic nation and not pass on into the hands of a dictator from the Nehru family, as it almost happened during the emergency, which was short-circuited thanks to the RSS.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-in-need-of-advanis-authority-says-kulkarni/99877-37-single.html

Shourie slams BJP leadership, says RSS should take-over

Updated on Tuesday, August 25, 2009, 00:43 IST Tags:Rajnath Singh, BJP crisis, Arun Shourie, Advani
New Delhi: Stoking fresh trouble in the crisis-ridden BJP, party leader Arun Shourie on Monday described it as a "kati patang" (adrift kite). He also virtually dared the party to take action against him but said if it did it, "they are only killing the messenger". Joining the ranks of dissidents in the party, which is reeling under internal dissidence after the Lok Sabha defeat, the journalist-turned-politician, who was a minister in the Vajpayee government, hit out at party president Rajnath Singh calling him an "Alice in Blunderland" and that the party was a kati patang (kite without a string).
"In my view, the BJP is a kati patang. Unless it is got hold of swiftly by....I don't see people within the party who now have such authority....if anybody can do it, it is only the RSS (that can do it)," he told a news channel. He later told reporters that like once Mao Ze Dong had said, "Bombard the headquarters. Clean up everybody from the top. Bring ten-fifteen people from the states who are competent, honest and dedicated and reconstruct immediately." Shourie said what was happening in the party now was that raising questions has become indiscipline. "Those who have brought about this situation and brought about the party to this pass, they are the fellows who are hurting the party's interest. They were planting stories for the past five years against each other, including Advani and Rajnath Singh. Is this discipline?" he said. The former Disinvestment Minister said the party is an important institution and the leadership did not listen to what was said or did not do anything after agreeing with what is being said. The party was being run like a private company in which top leaders were indulging in mutual projection and mutual protection. Leaders like B C Khanduri and Vasundhara Raje were being asked to resign as part of accountability for the defeat but the top leaders would not resign because they have already "owned up responsibility". Asked whether Advani should go, Shourie said removal of one leader is not enough. "My prescription is jhatka (one swift execution) not halal (slow execution). One or two is not enough. Saare ke saare (lock, stock and barrel). The current leadership cannot be expected to change the situation....There should be total transformation." Invoking RSS, Shourie said that the Sangh has been too liberal over the happenings in the BJP. "RSS should crack the whip...When they come in, there will be other consequences. I have been pleading with them that you keep out of politics. You just watch the conduct of individuals," he said. The Rajya Sabha MP ridiculed party spokesman Rajiv Pratap Rudy's comment that he was attacking the leadership as his term in the Upper House was coming to an end.
Claiming that he has raised these issues with the party leadership, Shourie said motives were being attributed to him whereas they want to project as if what the party did was without motives. Lamenting the fall in standards in the party MPs, he said the BJP's image took a big beating when its MPs were involved in the cash-for-query scam and that was why the people did not believe the party when its MPs displayed crores of Rupees in the Lok Sabha during the Trust Vote last year. "The credibility of the party was so low that people commented that the cash-for-vote scam was done by themselves. Nobody believes our word," he said. Deprecating the expulsion of Jaswant Singh, Shourie said it was done without anybody in BJP even reading his book on M A Jinnah. "It was a manufactured outrage," he said. Ridiculing the party's contention that Jaswant Singh was sacked for his derogatory remarks against Sardar Patel, he said BJP leaders did not want to mention Jinnah as questions would have been raised over Advani's 2005 comments about the Pakistan founder. Referring to Jaswant Singh's statement that Advani prevented Vajpayee from acting against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, he said that on a Prime Minister's flight to Goa in 2002 it was decided that Modi would be asked to step down. In the meeting, Modi also agreed but before he could say something there was an "orchestrated chorus" that he should not resign. Then Advani said it was already late for the public meeting and that the issue could be decided the next day and it was left at that. Virtually daring the party to take action against him, Shourie said Rudy's remarks only showed that they were waiting for such an opportunity. "Rudy says I want to become a martyr. We will make him one," he said to buttress his point that the party does not want to look at the substance of the problem. Shourie said he wrote a letter to the party president and it remained a secret but it was treated as indiscipline and they have made up their mind to act against him. He said the party wanted to behave as "decisive" by acting against leaders after RSS Chief Mohan Bhagwat's suggestion that "do something quickly". He also said the party leaders wanted to project themselves as strong and decisive and that was why they were trying to become Tarzan to dispel the image that they could not do it. He described them as Humpty Dumpty. Bureau Report

Shourie - what a fall. Shourie's Walk-the-Talk interview with Shekhar Gupta reveals that he has begun to become senile, though he has not yet, relatively, aged. It sounded more like Shourie was gossiping rather than giving a proper interview. Even a small-time executive in a business concern has to sign a confidentiality clause. But Shourie, always appearing to have gone on the strength of his moral character, is already back-biting the moment he decided that he would be more in the news as a rebel. With BJP not looking like coming back to power in the near future, what future has he with the BJP, he appears to have reasoned.

http://www.zeenews.com/news557972.html

RSS attacks Jaswant, commends Congress

Updated on Monday, August 24, 2009, 23:40 IST Tags:Jaswant, Jinnah, Congress, BJP
New Delhi: In a veiled attack on expelled BJP leader Jaswant Singh, RSS has said Mohammed Ali Jinnah is a "hate figure" in the collective Indian conscience and any attempt to change his image in the country is "destined to be doomed". At the same time, it defended Congress leaders for their "correct and nationalist stand of not accepting Muslim League as a sole representative body of the Muslims".
"Every nation has its unique ideas of history, sense of fair play and common memories of friends and enemies. So, in Britain, one cannot think of making a legend of Napoleon...it is so because trying to overturn these aspects is to insult the mass conscience," RSS mouthpiece 'Organiser' said in its editorial. Interestingly, the piece has no mention of Jaswant Singh nor any reference to his book 'Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence' which had stirred a hornet's nest. The journal said what historians and academics can attempt "perhaps becomes taboo for politicians. So, wise men avoid treading the area where only fools rush in". The editorial titled "No Jinnah for India" said that in the collective conscience of India, Jinnah "is a hate figure like Mahammad Ghori...Jinnah is disliked more because his actions are fresh in memory and millions of victims of his hate campaign are still alive". The 'Organiser' editorial said Congress proved "in polls after polls before Partition that it enjoyed the support of more Muslims than Jinnah...Jinnah cruelly and constantly insulted and heaped abuses on Gandhiji, Nehru and other Congress leaders for their correct and nationalist stand of not accepting Muslim League as the sole representative body of the Muslims". It claimed even if Congress wanted, "the nation would not have accepted Jinnah as the first prime minister of India". In a veiled reference to Singh's book, it said a number of books on Jinnah have been published in India. "Only time will tell if these efforts will succeed in de-demonising Jinnah in Indian public perception." It claimed since Pakistan does not have many national heroes, its "eagerness" to project Jinnah as a great leader is understandable. "But that will not change Jinnah's image in India. Every exercise in that direction is destined to be doomed," it added. Bureau Report


Jinnah is not a one-off figure of Indian history. He symbolizes separatism that continues to be propagated by the likes of Huriyat Conference leaders in Kashmir. Eulogizing the symbol of separatism is to justify more partitions in India. Freedom of expression is fine, but not at the cost of India's integrity - never mind what secular intellectuals like Arundhati Roy may say. (Remember her support for independent Kashmir?)

http://www.zeenews.com/news558027.html

BJP breaks ties with Chautala's INLD in Haryana

Updated on Monday, August 24, 2009, 16:17 IST

Chandigarh: Ahead of the Haryana Assembly polls, BJP on Monday snapped its alliance with Indian National Lok Dal led by former Chief Minister Om Prakash Chautala. The Saffron party also decided to go it alone in Haryana in the forthcoming polls. The announcement was made at a press conference here by senior BJP leader and party's in-charge for Haryana affairs, Vijay Goel.
The 90-member Haryana Assembly was dissolved on Friday night, seven months ahead of its term following a recommendation by the Bhupinder Singh Hooda government, paving the way for early polls. Accusing the INLD of adopting a "rigid" approach, Goel said, "The alliance has not broken because of us. The INLD adopted a rigid approach. Our workers wanted that we should contest on maximum number of seats, but they (INLD) adopted a rigid approach." Referring to the Saffron party's three-day "Chintan Baithak" meet at Shimla last week, he said there had been a discussion in the meeting that the BJP should fight on maximum number of seats in Haryana given its stature. He said the BJP was hopeful of putting up a good performance in the upcoming state Assembly polls. "We have good candidates who will fight. Our first priority will be to stop the anti-people Congress from coming to power again," Goel said. State BJP president Krishan Pal Gujjar, former MP Rattan Lal Kataria and senior state leader Harjit Singh Grewal were also present at the press conference. The BJP, whose state leadership had strongly objected to the alliance with the INLD last year after the two parties went separate ways in 2004, had been unhappy with the number of seats being offered by INLD to them for the polls. A senior state BJP leader said that INLD had offered them 30 seats to contest. The strength of Congress members in the outgoing Assembly was 63 while eight MLAs were from INLD, one each from BJP, BSP and NCP and ten independents. Six seats were vacant. Bureau Report

BJP should have a simple rule for alliances - is the alliance partner for a magnificent Ram Temple at Ayodhya? Compromising on its ideology has led to not only the organization being dictated to by its alliance partners, but even its leaders feel that they can eulogize the 'partitioner' of the country and get away with it.

http://www.zeenews.com/news557823.html

Jaswant expelled summarily and shabbily: Govindacharya

Home » Nation

Updated on Monday, August 24, 2009, 17:34 IST Tags:Jaswant Singh, Govindacharya
New Delhi: Coming to the defence of expelled BJP veteran Jaswant Singh, former party leader KN Govindacharya on Monday said the party top brass should have read the book and summoned Singh for an explanation instead of "summarily and shabbily" dismissing him. "The manner in which Jaswant Singh was expelled does not behove of a political party... though no member is indispensable, the destiny of a party worker cannot be decided over a cup of tea," Govindacharya, once a BJP ideologue, told reporters.
He said the BJP should have asked its intellectual cell to study the book, set aside a week for this purpose, summoned Jaswant Singh for an explanation and only then removed him. Govindacharya termed it as "summarily and shabbily" done expulsion and a "knee-jerk action taken in a hurry". The former aide of senior BJP leader LK Advani said it was the democratic right of an individual to write a book. Taking a dig at Advani, he said it was not clear whether Jaswant was expelled over his comments praising Pakistan founder MA Jinnah or for his views against Sardar Patel. "The barrel of the gun was turned towards Patel as it was felt that targeting him (Jaswant) on Jinnah may affect others," he said. Bureau Report


Appointing a committee to study the book first would only have been a formality as it was already well known before the actual release of the book that Jaswant had written an eulogy on Jinnah. The point is not that Jinnah was praised but that the pernicious two-nation theory, which Jinnah espoused, was sought to be glossed over by Jaswant. Rajnath Singh did a memorable job in forthwith and summarily sacking Jaswant Singh, showing that cavorting with an anti-national like Jinnah, though long dead and gone, is not a honourable thing to do, particularly in a party like the BJP which swears by India's integrity. Patronizing an anti-national, in however sophisticated a manner, is not a nonsense we need put up with, even for the length of a committee’s report!

http://www.zeenews.com/news557923.html

Assets row: CJI says Karnataka Judge is `publicity-crazy'

24/08/2009
New Delhi: Seeking to dispel the impression that he was against disclosure of assets by judges, Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan on Monday said the members of higher judiciary are free to do so.
He also said he has the right to speak on behalf of all judges as head of judiciary and this is the practice in judicial systems in other countries too.
"The public has a right to know what is happening in judiciary and I am saying that I stand by what I have said on disclosure of assets by judges," Balakrishnan said.
He said, "If the judges want to declare their assets, no one can prevent (them). How can I prevent? If the law comes everybody has to declare."Balakrishnan also attacked Karnataka High Court Judge D V Shylendra Kumar as being "publicity-crazy".
Shylendra Kumar was the first to openly disagree with the CJI's stand. He had written in a national daily that the CJI did not have the authority to speak for all judges of the Supreme Court or High Courts.
Meanwhile, senior Supreme Court advocate Shanti Bhushan believes if more judges disclose their assets then the people's faith in the judiciary will be restored.
"It is a step in the right direction as it will restore the people's faith. People will be expecting that those judges who have nothing to hide will come forward and declare their personal wealth, this way people can scrutinise how much wealth they have," Bhushan said.
Agencies
PreviousNext
Venu10
#1
24 August 2009 02:19:51
I am surprised that the Chief Justice of India should call a judge who has declared his assets as publicity crazy. Instead of commending the action of the judge, the CJ appears to have mocked him. I think the CJ should apologize.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3169736&boardsparam=PostID%3D178931

BJP narrow minded, limited: Jaswant Singh

DEVIL'S ADVOCATE JASWANT SINGH
Karan Thapar / CNN-IBN
How does Jaswant Singh respond to the criticism that by writing a biography of Mohammed Ali Jinnah, he has been playing with fire and he has been irresponsible or he has been horribly naive, and in either event he has ended denigrating the core values of his former party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Karan Thapar asked Singh on Devil’s Advocate.
Karan Thapar: Mr Jaswant Singh, let me start with a simple question. Jinnah is a red rag to the BJP, you know that as anyone else, therefore by writing a biography of the man you have been deliberately playing with fire and if you have ended up burnt, then you have only yourself to blame?
Jaswant Singh: Well of course, I am to blame for whatever I do. I don't transfer the blame to anybody, but I can question the decision which is different. There is a degree of simplemindedness in my expulsion because distinction has to be made between the late Mohammed Ali Jinnah's personal attributes as a human being and his politics.
The first, which is the personal attributes are admirable. His equations with human beings of all communities were a real example even then. His politics were abhorable, particularly after 1940.
Karan Thapar:Except for the fact that you have gone much further. You have said that Jinnah was a great man, you have said that Indians have demonised him, you have said that he is not the only one, perhaps not even the principal person responsible for Partition.
Now I put it to you that that is just not provocative, it's asking for trouble.
Jaswant Singh: Why should truth be provocative? Why should attempting to find what actually happened when Partition took place. You are a consequence of Partition, because in essence the then two provinces of India got divided. Punjab and Bengal, both still call themselves Punjab.
I'll come to what you have asked. I am not being provocative, I am being inquisitive and I wanted to find out for myself what caused it.
Karan Thapar:Except for the fact that there are some areas where being inquisitive is going to provoke trouble. You knew better than anyone else. After 30 years in the BJP, after being in the Jan Sangh before that there are certain red lines that one doesn't cross.
You have crossed it not just willingly; you crossed it almost deliberately. You defied a party.
Jaswant Singh: I crossed it knowingly but not has a red line. It is my understanding that in personal expression, finding out the truth about India's partition, no political party can lay down red lines. We are not living in Stalinist Russia. We are living in India where the tradition of shastrarth is foremost even in sanatan thought.
Karan Thapar:Let me come back to that point you are making by giving you an analogy. You are saying that writing a biography of Jinnah, which challenges the way Jinnah is perceived both by this country and more importantly by your former party and also Pakistan, is your right in your personal capacity. But that's tantamount to saying that Arun Jaitley in his personal capacity can defend Afzal Guru (terrorist on death row) because he has a right as a lawyer to take up whatever brief he wants, that's not how politics work and you know it?
Jaswant Singh: That's a choice. I don't want to go into which barrister or lawyer takes up which case because that would not be relevant to today's inquiry.
Karan Thapar:But the point of making is not which barrister takes up which case, the point I am making is that parties have co-beliefs and they expect their members to adhere and subscribe to them.
If you want to question them, be it intellectually or emotionally, do so from outside the fold but you can't expect to do it from within the party and then get away with it.
Jaswant Singh: Core beliefs? What is so core that I have disturbed ...and get away? I am not a criminal to get away.
Karan Thapar:The BJP believes that Jinnah is a villain, you don't share that. In fact, you question the demonisation of him. You end up saying he was a great man, that shakes the fundamental beliefs and they don't like that.
Jaswant Singh: Firstly he (Jinnah) has been demonised in India. I stand by that statement. He is a 'great man' was a term used by late Mahatma Gandhi. In my book, I have quoted Gandhi to say, it's in the Cabinet Mission, Shimla II, and Gandhi says, "Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a great man and a leader of a great party."
Karan Thapar:Except that in the interview to me last week, you agreed that you personally think of him as a 'great man'
Jaswant Singh: Yes, indeed I do.
Karan Thapar:But that sticks in the throat of your former party and you knew it would.
Jaswant Singh: I didn't think they would be such small minded as to hold a view against me which are the personal attributes of a historical person.
Karan Thapar:Do you really believe that as one of the most senior leader of the BJP, you could afford in your personal capacity to hold views and write opinions of Jinnah and Patel, which the party itself does not endorse and still expect the party not to take action against you?
Jaswant Singh: I did certainly. I didn't think my party is so narrow minded, so limited or so nervous about Jinnah and/or Patel as to get so riled by what I have written. I have a feeling, which I voiced also, that perhaps my former colleagues hadn't really read the book when they passed the sentence on me.
Karan Thapar:They even admit that they the passed the sentence on you because of what you said in the interview to me last week but that's another matter.
Jaswant Singh: Is that a curb on freedom of speech?
Karan Thapar:But you say that you didn't believe your party was so narrow minded, so small minded as to object to your holding certain views.
The truth is, that these views that you hold run against party discipline, they run against what the party considers core beliefs, were you being naive and thinking that you could say this and expect the party won't take action?
Jaswant Singh: No, I was not being naive. These are the views that I hold. I reiterate and I have not stated an untruth. On the contrary, the party should be worried if untruth becomes the core of the party.
Karan Thapar:You say that if untruth becomes the core of the party, but the problem is that parties hold to myths, whether they are truths or untruths is academic.
One of the myths your party holds to is the belief that Sardar Patel stood up against Partition to the end. You have questioned that myth by equating Patel with Nehru, by bracketing them together. Nehru is someone your party is happy to criticize; Patel they consider an icon. By bracketing one with the other, you have denigrated an icon and you did it deliberately.
Jaswant Singh: I have not denigrated an icon, I have simply pointed out the facts of history. Late Sardar Patel had the secretary in V P Menon. V P Menon was his advisor as well as Lord Mountbatten's advisor, the plan for Partition was sold to Patel by V P Menon. It's a fact of history.
Jawaharlal Nehru, in the month of March 1947, asks Patel, it’s an transfer or power, "please help me with the Congress Working Committee.
Karan Thapar: I concede readily that these are facts of history, you are not making them up, they problem is that you are rubbing facts of history into the face of myth the party cherishes and demolishing that myth.
No party expects it and you did it knowing that this was going to be the outcome and therefore I put it to you, were you playing with fire or were you being naive?
Jaswant Singh: No, I was neither. I was attempting to find the truth. It was a search for truth as to what lies or lay behind our partition.
Karan Thapar:You are really saying to me that nothing motivated you more than just what you call the search for truth?
Jaswant Singh: Absolutely.
Karan Thapar:In which case, let me ask you that what you wrote is a political biography of M A Jinnah? Why then have you completely ignored the fact that he knew of, he approved of and probably authorised the Tribal Pathan invasion of Kashmir which led directly to the October 1947 war, why do you over look that?
Jaswant Singh: I don't overlook it but the book ends with Partition and his death.
Karan Thapar:But this happened before Jinnah's death?
Jaswant Singh: I know but that's a separate subject. Of course, he had authorised it. I have also pointed out the great killing of Calcutta in vivid detail. I don't overlook any of the mistakes of his public life.
Karan Thapar:Except you called the man a 'great man', you said India has demonised and yet you completely overlooked and ignored the fact that he launched against India the first threat to Indian sovereignty and the first war that India faced.
And he did it within three months of Partition, that doesn't find mention?
Jaswant Singh: That would have required altogether a different and a separate book. Already it was running into 900 pages. The book had to be cut down. There are limits to it.
Karan Thapar:But shouldn't this have been part of a political biography of Jinnah by an Indian politician?
Jaswant Singh: No, I don't think so. It's a decision that an author has to make and a decision that is governed by many factors.
Karan Thapar:Authors always select what they want to put in. In that selectivity, have you lost your objectivity, have you lost your balance?
Jaswant Singh: I don't think so.
Karan Thapar:You have no qualms about leaving out this particular part?
Jaswant Singh: I have no qualms at all, as a former soldier I say this because that is an inquiry that goes very deep and to not just Jinnah ordering the launching but the conduct of the entire operations by Indian leaders too.
Karan Thapar:What happens if people turn around and say that by overlooking and ignoring this, you have not only written an one-sided account but you have exculpated Jinnah of the charge of launching war against India.
Jaswant Singh: I haven't exculpated because amongst the first of the sentences that I used in this interview was that a distinction has to be made his personal attributes and his public conduct. These two very different things.
Karan Thapar:That explains and underlines why you left this out?
Jaswant Singh: I haven't left it out. It was practically not possible for me to cover that and also to go into Jinnah's death and then go into what Pakistan today is.
Karan Thapar:Is it convincing to say that it was practically not possible?
Jaswant Singh: That's up to you. The author has to make a choice and the author might not be able to convince everybody.
Karan Thapar:You stand by that choice?
Jaswant Singh: Absolutely.
Karan Thapar:I want to ask you the difference between what you said about M A Jinnah and Mr Advani said and bear in mind, that one of the reasons publicly given for your expulsion by Arun Jaitely, when he addressed a press conference, is that you called Jinnah a great man.
On the June 4, 2009, Mr Advani wrote in the visitors' book in the Jinnah mausoleum in Karachi, he ended with the following sentence: "My respectful homage to this great man."
What's the difference between your calling Jinnah a great man and Advani calling him a great man?
Jaswant Singh: One expression is by Lalji Advani and the other is by Jaswant Singh.
Karan Thapar:That's the only difference?
Jaswant Singh: Also some phraseology.
Karan Thapar:That is it?
Jaswant Singh: I sure that is it. Hadn't this question best be asked to Advaniji?
Karan Thapar:The sentence begins "My respectful homage to this great man," now the Oxford English dictionary defines homage as acknowledgement of superiority, dutiful reverence.
In other words, it is the duty and the reverence that one pays to someone who one acknowledges as superior. What do you make of that?
Jaswant Singh: That he paid homage.
Karan Thapar:Should one pay homage to politicians or gods and gurus?
Jaswant Singh: That is really for Lalji Advaniji to make up his mind about.
Karan Thapar:Do you pay 'homage' to Jinnah?
Jaswant Singh: I don't pay 'homage' to Jinnah, I just make a separation between his personal attributes which were admirable and truly his equations with other human beings and his politics which was abhorrent.
Karan Thapar:When Mr Advani pays homage, one assumes that he is paying homage to everything that Jinnah stood for and not making a separation.
Jaswant Singh: It is for Advaniji to answer.
Karan Thapar:The point I am making to you is that are there double standards here? Has one set of criteria been used of Advani and another for Jaswant Singh?
Jaswant Singh: I am outside of the periphery of the BJP's radar screen, I wished they hadn't used the word 'expelled' and they had better choice of phrases to use.
Even in the academy we had better use of terms. If a gentleman cadet was found unfit for something, he was 'withdrawn.'
Karan Thapar:In other words, the 'expulsion' hurts you?
Jaswant Singh: Yes, it hurts me.
Karan Thapar:It could have also been done a little more gracefully?
Jaswant Singh: Oh without doubt, by personally coming and telling me. He hasn't even telephoned but that doesn't matter, now it's too late.
Karan Thapar:When at 1 o'clock, they telephoned you at Shimla to say that you have been expelled, did you ask them if they had read the book?
Jaswant Singh: It was Rajnath Singhji who had called and I certainly did ask, in Hindi of course, has the book been read?
And to which his response was, in Hindi, saying, "Haan bhai sahab, kitab kahi logo ne padi hai, bahut gussa hai (Some of us have read the book and are not too happy about it)."
Karan Thapar:But the book had been out for only 36 hours.
Jaswant Singh: Not even 36 hours, August 17 about 7:30 and August 19 about 1 o'clock, that's not even 36 hours.
Karan Thapar: In fact, on August 18, just 12 or 15 hours after the book was out, Rajnath issued a statement completely disassociating the party from the book?
Jaswant Singh: I believe and apprehended that it was without really reading it.
Karan Thapar:So when Rajnath claims that the book had been read, do you think he was lying?
Jaswant Singh: Ask him that question.
Karan Thapar:What's your feeling?
Jaswant Singh: I don't want to go into my feelings. I have blanked that chapter out.
Karan Thapar:Do you believe that the book had been read?
Jaswant Singh: It's quite a feat in speed-reading if you read almost 700 pages. I don't believe that my prose is fiction. It is not easy. It requires attention. It would be a remarkable feat.
Karan Thapar:I want to reiterate this point, Rajnath actually said to you at 1 o'clock in the afternoon on August 19, when he was expelling you, that the book had been read?
Jaswant Singh:Kafi logo ne padi hai (People have read the book).
Karan Thapar:Giving you the impression that he too had read?
Jaswant Singh: No, that was not the impression I gather. When you say 'Kafi logo ne', you are referring to second person.
Karan Thapar:In other words, the views they had formed were based upon the reading of the book?
Jaswant Singh: So I was told.
Karan Thapar:Which you find hard to believe because it's not an easy book to read?
Jaswant Singh: I do not believe that because it is not practical.
Karan Thapar:Did you question him about this?
Jaswant Singh: No, I did not. I don't question. It is undignified. It is not in my makeup.
Karan Thapar:So you accepted it even though ....
Jaswant Singh: I laughed.
Karan Thapar:You laughed?
Jaswant Singh: I laughed ruefully and I did tell him with some pain, I believe, I rather really wish bhai Rajnath Singhji, Advaniji aur aap personally bula kar baat kar lete (I rather Advaniji and you could have called me personally for a talk).
Karan Thapar:What was his answer to that?
Jaswant Singh: He kept quiet, and said, "phir baat karenge" (we will talk about it) and put the telephone down.
Karan Thapar:But woh mauka phir baat karne ka aaj tak nahi aya? (but that promise of calling up again hasn't taken place till today?).
Jaswant Singh: Woh mauka kaahaan se aayega, woh sadak toh chali gayi (where will the time come from? It's already too late).
Karan Thapar:Have you lost respect for people like Rajnath Singh and Advaniji?
Jaswant Singh: I don't want to answer that question. It is highly personalised comment. May god give them whatever they are looking for.
Karan Thapar:Justice or revenge?
Jaswant Singh: Good luck.
Karan Thapar:Jaswant Singh, a pleasure talking to you.

Jaswant Singh's case is one of conflict of interests. The BJP has its ideological interests to protect and cannot be seen as having a good word for someone who espoused the two-nation theory. Jaswant Singh of course has the right to freedom of expression but as a leader of the BJP his personal freedom ought not to transgress the organization’s interest so long as he is at the helm of affairs in the BJP. Therefore it would have been more honourable for him to have resigned before the publication of his book, particularly as he knows what effect Jinnah had on Advani. Now, it would be more honourable for him to resign his parliamentary seat before continuing to criticize the BJP.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bjp-narrow-minded-limited-jaswant-singh/99790-37-single.html