Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Ruchika’s dad meets PC; Govt to support Rathore death PIL

Updated on Wednesday, December 30, 2009, 20:25 IST Tags:Ruchika Girhotra, Chidambaram

Zeenews Bureau

New Delhi: The Girhotras got support from the highest quarter on Wednesday after they met with Union Home Minister P Chidambaram who assured them full support in the case of molestation of Ruchika Girhotra by Haryana’s former DGP SPS Rathore in 1990.

Ruchika’s father Subhash Chander Girhotra, his lawyer Pankaj Bhardwaj and Anand Prakash, their family friend met with Chidambaram at the latter’s invitation. They discussed the 19 year old case with the Minister who, they told the media, gave them a patient hearing.


"We are completely satisfied with the meeting. The Home Minister knew everything about the case," Bhardwaj said outside the Home Ministry here.

He added that the minister had discussed the possibility of slapping the charge of abetment of suicide of a minor against Rathore, amongst other options available. Bhardwaj said he had also suggested what all legal remedies were available for a stricter punishment to Rathore.

“I have been asked by him to provide all documents related to the litigation. We will be most likely called again by the minister,” he said.

Ruchika’s father also said they were satisfies at the meet’s outcome.

“The minister gave us a patient hearing. He was very sympathetic towards us,” Girhotra added.

The noose around the former Haryana top cop, who has found guilty of molesting 14-year-old Ruchika, who later committed suicide, was tightened last night with the police registering two FIRs and moves were afoot to file a fresh case of abetment to suicide.

Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily told a TV channel he would support a PIL seeking death sentence against Rathore.

“All those people who conspired or abetted in this offence will be lined up as accused--that is possible and that is how this case has to be shown as a model case for the entire world,” he added.

Haryana police has registered two FIRs on the basis of complaints by Ruchika's father Subhash Chander Girhotra and her brother Ashu regarding alleged tampering of the post-mortem report by police and harassment of Ashu including attempt to murder him.

Rathore today sough interim bail from the Panchkula sessions court but was denied the same.

The Union Home and Law Ministries are also considering appealing against the trial court's verdict in the case to seek enhanced punishment for Rathore.

It is good that the UPA government is supportive of the idea of death sentence to Rathore. The guy deserves it. But what about our infamous Afzal Guru? He organized the Parliament attack which killed cops and almost destabilized India. The Supreme Court has awarded him the noose. But UPA government does not want to go ahead because it wants to appease Muslim votes. Rathore, of course, is a Hindu.

http://www.zeenews.com/news591403.html

Monday, December 28, 2009

Kalyan to launch party on Jan 5


BJP president Nitin Gadkari may favour the return of Kalyan Singh to the party, but the former UP chief minister has said he will float a new party, and there is no question of him joining the BJP. The name of his party and its organisational set-up will be announced here on Singh’s birthday on January 5.
Singh is in Delhi, doing the groundwork for formation and registration of his new party with the Election Commission.
On Gadkari’s statement, Singh said, “It’s a good move but I am forming my own party now as my issues can be best addressed by my own party. There isn’t any chance that I will go back to the BJP. Just wait for January 5 and more details will be available.”
Asked if any BJP leader had approached him after Gadkari’s statement, Singh replied: “I have neither been approached by anyone from the BJP, nor have I spoken to anyone after I decided to form my own party.”

This is not the first time Singh will be floating his own party. He had earlier formed the Rashtriya Kranti Party, which he merged with BJP in 2004. Last month, after parting ways with SP chief Mulayam Singh Yadav, Singh had said that leaving the BJP was his biggest mistake.

Kalyan Singh is truly an example of a failed politician still harbouring vainglorious dreams of a comeback. He failed due to the cause of all failures - a bloated ego. He has Uma Bharthi for company. Maybe they should knock on Mayavati's doors and offer themselves as casteist candidates.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/kalyan-to-launch-party-on-jan-5/559077/

New BJP chief’s new line: need to work for last man in the queue


In his first press conference at the party headquarters, BJP president Nitin Gadkari today projected himself as an outsider in Delhi politics. And topped up his hour-long press conference with the promise to reach out to non-BJP voters — Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the minorities.
Invoking two slogans — Deendayal Upadhyaya’s “making the lot of the man standing last in the queue better” and “nation first, party next, and self last” were painted on the banner used as a backdrop at the conference venue — Gadkari said he hoped that Upadhyaya’s portrait and message would be “the roadmap for every BJP leader”.
In a party struggling to fight growing RSS influence — Orissa and Rajasthan being the latest examples — Gadkari left none in doubt where his sympathies lay. To a question on whether he agreed with L K Advani’s 2005 Chennai speech — in which he said the impression that the RSS micromanaged day-to-day affairs of the BJP was not good for either of the two outfits — Gadkari claimed no one would say the RSS interfered in BJP functioning.
“During my stint as Maharashtra BJP president, not once was I instructed by the RSS,” he said. “The party and the philosophy are most important. Sangh ka vichar hamare jeevan ki nishtha hai (the Sangh philosophy is a question of life-long commitment),” he said.
The promise to strengthen the NDA was dismissed in a sentence although the text of his statement had one paragraph on the NDA.
Claiming he had “nothing to lose” and indicating that he would not be daunted by BJP biggies in running the party, Gadkari used his image of an outsider in Delhi politics to the hilt. “I don’t know the Delhi roads or Delhi’s weather, but I expect support from everyone.”
He vowed to check the “culture of sycophancy” in the party and added that the issue of indiscipline would be dealt with utmost seriousness. “We need to understand the spirit behind the term discipline. Indiscipline is not a subject for discussion but for execution. No indiscipline will be tolerated,” he said.
Hindutva’s pet themes found space in Gadkari’s pronouncements — he blasted “appeasement politics” and also called for “stringent measures to check terror strikes”.
Agreeing that the “crisis of credibility” in politics was a huge problem, Gadkari said that contesting an election could not be the sole objective of a political party. In consonance with the RSS, he also spoke about the “ill effects” of globalisation — a booklet that was distributed had Gadkari echoing Dattopant Thengadi’s world view on westernisation and he also said “there was a difference between modernisation and westernisation”, that he was “all for swadeshi, and against westernisation”.
Invoking Gandhi’s principle of trusteeship, Gadkari called for a paradigm shift in expanding the canvas of political parties. He said that under his leadership, the Maharashtra BJP had adopted 500 families affected by farmer suicides in the state.


Gadkari's priority should be to strengthen the organisation and transform BJP once again into a cadre based party par excellence, which has Hindutva as its ideal. For this a lot of study class modules have to be prepared. While this work is going on, Gadkari has to ensure that the party delivers where it is in power. For this he has to set up a high calibre and experienced team capable of working round the clock to set targets and oversee implementation. And last but not least, he has to appoint a key man, like Arun Jaitley, to be the political spokesperson of the party. Gadkari should not be bogged down into answering day-to-day political questions the press would raise.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/new-bjp-chiefs-new-line-need-to-work-for-last-man-in-the-queue/559069/0

Sangh does not influence BJP in its day-to-day working: Sushma

Senior BJP leader Sushma Swaraj on Monday said party's new chief Nitin Gadkari was the choice of the organisation and asserted that RSS did not interfere with its day-to-day affairs.
"Gadkari was the choice of BJP and Sangh merely put its stamp of approval on the decision," she told reporters here. The leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha strongly denied that Sangh influences BJP in its day-to-day working saying that her party worked on its own.
"We, however, get guidance and valuable advice from the Sangh from time to time," she said.
Replying to a question, Swaraj said that the biggest challenge before BJP today was to emerge as a better and more viable alternative to ruling Congress.
She said that adverse news reports that had been associated with the BJP were no longer there and expressed confidence that party's new leadership was working well towards its goals.
When asked how could Gadkari, who failed to get BJP in power in Maharashtra Assembly elections, do well at the national level, Swaraj said that such things do not count in politics.
"It is not necessary that Gadkari should fail at the national level also just because he did not perform well in Maharashtra," she said.


The way RSS influences its Parivar organisations is not through organisational interference, but through the influence of its pracharaks who are working in the Parivar organisations in key positions.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Sangh-does-not-influence-BJP-in-its-day-to-day-working--Sushma/560620

Gadkari defends BJP's decision to make Soren Jharkand CM

BJP president Nitin Gadkari on Monday defended the party's decision of supporting Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader Shibu Soren to form the next Government in Jharkhand saying that stability and interests of the people of that state were the only concerns.
Talking to reporters in Mumbai, Gadkari said it was Congress and not Soren who was responsible for corruption in politics. "The Courts have also taken a decision in his favour," he said.
Gadkari said BJP had no option but to support Soren to provide a stable government in the interests of the people of the state.
Meanwhile, Soren who is set to take oath as Jharkhand's chief Minister for the third time, arrived in the city to meet Gadkari at the BJP state office in South Mumbai to discuss the nitty gritty of government formation.


Though my best wishes are with Nitin Gadkari, I feel he has compromised hopes that he would lead an idealistic party that the BJP and Jan Sangh once were in the tradition of an idealistic RSS.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/gadkari-defends.../560610/#postComment

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Kerala questions NIA taking over terror cases in state


Updated on Sunday, December 27, 2009, 21:44 IST Tags:Kerala, questions NIA, taking over terror cases

New Delhi: Kerala Home Minister Kodiyeri Balakrishnan on Sunday questioned the National Investigation Agency's (NIA) reported decision to take over two terror cases in the state.

"The state government was not consulted either by the Central government or by the NIA before the taking over of the two cases - bus burning case of 2005 and terror recruiting case," said Balakrishnan, who was in the national capital to attend the two-day politburo meeting of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M).

He said the state government has information only through the media that the NIA has taken over the cases.


People's Democratic Party (PDP) chief Abdul Nazir Maudany's wife Sufiya is the 10th accused in the bus burning case. The first accused in the case is south India chief of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) T. Nazeer, who is now in custody of Bangalore police.

The terror recruiting case was busted after the Indian security forces gunned down five infiltrators in Jammu and Kashmir last year while they were trying to sneak out to Pakistan through the Line of Control.

During investigation by the state police's Special Investigation Team, it was found that a terror brigade of 185 Malayalis was selected by the LeT and provided preliminary training at camps conducted in Kannur and Ernakulam districts.

"On what basis the NIA took over the cases in which chargesheets have been filed by the state investigative agency? Why it is being re-investigated," Balakrishnan asked.

Contending that such interference by the central agencies would hurt the federal system of the country, Balakrishnan said the state government would examine the legal aspect of NIA's decision.

"Don't put state government in dark," Balakrishnan said.

The NIA was formed by the Indian government in the aftermath of the 26/11 terror attacks in Mumbai and has the powers to investigate terror-related offences across the country.

IANS


The Marxist government in Kerala wants to bury the cases against Madani and his wife as gratitude for their support during elections. The NIA, as per terms agreed by all states upon its formation as an All-India body to fight terrorism, need to neither seek permission nor consult with the states in pursuing terrorist cases. It needs only to inform the state governments in due course. However, whether NIA itself would pursue cases against Madani to its logical conclusion has to be seen because both Congress and Marxists are hand in glove with Muslim terrorist outfits in Kerala.


http://www.zeenews.com/news590734.html

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Govindacharya calls on Advani, first meeting since 1999: ‘I had biscuits’

Hindutva ideologue K N Govindacharya called on senior BJP leader L K Advani at his residence last week, the first meeting of the two former party colleagues in a decade. Govindacharya, Advani’s one-time protege in the BJP, had a bitter falling-out with his mentor, after which he accused Advani of “deviating from ideological issues”.
“Yes, I met him (last week)... it was our first meeting after 1999, the year when I last went to his residence. I had biscuits, a yogurt-based drink, and that is all,” Govindacharya told The Indian Express.
Asked if his channel of communication with Advani would remain open in the future, Govindacharya declined to give a direct answer. He also parried questions on whether it was possible that he might go back to the BJP.
New BJP president Nitin Gadkari said in Nagpur recently that the “return of leaders like K N Govindacharya, Kalyan Singh and Uma Bharti to the party was not ruled out”. Gadkari is expected to enunciate a “policy statement” on the “homecoming of leaders who were once in the party” at a press conference on Thursday.

I think what is called for is the integration of all RSS affiliated organisations into one monolith organisation called, say, Sangha Parivar, headed and led by the Sarsanghchalak. This will avoid overlapping and duplication of organisational work, all of whose aim is to strengthen Hindutva. The primary aim ought not to be to win political power but to wield the power of organisation to set the political agenda in the right direction.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/govindacharya-calls-on-advani-first-meeting-since-1999-i-had-biscuits/557983/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+indianexpress%2Filvl+%28Top+Headlines%29

Monday, December 21, 2009

Karnataka panel holds NRN responsible for Bangalore Airport woes

22/12/2009

Bangalore: A Karnataka house panel has recommended black-listing of infrastructure majors L&T, Siemens and Unique Zurich Airport for a minimum of five years for "poor quality of workmanship" at the Bangalore International Airport (BIAL).
A joint house committee of the Karnataka Assembly has also recommended "appropriate action" against those, including Infosys mentor N R Narayana Murthy, involved in the decision making process.
The report, tabled in the Assembly on Monday, cited 'poor quality' of workmanship, trading shares for profit without showing an "iota of concern" for general public, entrusting all airport works among private players in Bengaluru International Airport (BIAL) for its recommendations.
It slammed "total apathy" towards users' needs and said the project partners, L&T, Siemens and Zurich, should not be considered for any work by both the government or its agencies for at least five years.
The committee said the decisions at each stage (right from project approval to construction) were not in accordance with the expectation of a world-class airport, and the present state of affairs is an outcome of such decisions.
Giving a list of officers involved in important decisions for initiating "appropriate action", it mentioned Infosys Chief Mentor Narayana Murthy, who was BIAL Chairman till 2005 and Rajiv Chandrasekhar, Chairman and CEO, BPL Innovations Business Group as also officials of the civil aviation ministry, Airport Authority of India and state agencies.
The Committee was set up to examine the lapses and suggest measures for improving the airport, which became operational in May last year, to international standards.
The report noted that in October this year, a promoter, the Unique (Flughafen Zurich AG) Zurich Airport, Switzerland, made a huge profit by off-loading 12 per cent (Rs 46.15 crore) of its 17 per cent (Rs 65.38 crore) stake at a over Rs 484.60 crore.
"The private promoter walked away with an over 1050 per cent return in just four years. This indicated that the private players have set their eyes on huge multiplication of their investment and have cut many corners for the sake of short-term profit," the report said.
The 21-member Committee, headed by D Hemachandra Sagar, was formed in September last year after several members alleged that the infrastructure created at the airport did not match international standards. Congress MLA D K Shivakumar alleged that BIA lacked very basic facilities.
The panel recommended that the airport be named immediately as "Kempegowda International Airport" after the name of the person who built Bengaluru.
Pointing out that the closure of HAL airport here (after the opening of BIA) negated the healthy competition and created private monopoly, it said the government should take necessary action to open the HAL airport.
It said the government of India should withdraw the order permitting BIAL to impose a user development fee (UDF) of Rs 260 on passengers as BIAL has failed to provide adequate facilities of international standard to the users.
Source: PTI
1-5 of 5
PreviousNext
K.Venugopal
#1
21 December 2009 23:48:23
This appears to be an unlikely charge. A perfectionist that NRN has proved himself to be through the creation of Infosys, the fault may lie elsewhere.


M.V.NAHUSHARAJ
#2
21 December 2009 23:43:19
The BIAL Report which is a Congress biased report,naturally is interested in nailing it's adversaries.Those whose palms were not greased are now up against those who refused grease them ! Since it not upto International standards,the airport is being named as Kempegowda Airport otherwise it would have been named after someone in the Sonia Gandhi family ! However,it must be known that there will be confusion over Kempegowda Bus Nildhana and Kempegowda Vimana Nildhana or Pathana,since more and more aircrafts are forcelanding now-a-days.

A Krishnan
#3
21 December 2009 23:35:52
I fully endorse the views of S B Chada. The panel's report smacks of personal vendetta against established and proven industrial leaders who were not full time employees and were advising the Government for the welfare of the city. If such people are targetted, no one will come forward in future to participate in programs to develop the city and the state.

The Joint House Committee has failed in nailing the real curlpits in BIAL and the contractors who did substandard works in connivance with those in BIAL. One only hopes that the real truth comes out instead of just blaming a few. As far naming the airport, the politicians can name it after any of the greats from Karnataka as long as it is justified. Why cant the airport be named after the Father of the Nation?

S B Chadha
#4
21 December 2009 22:18:14
From the facts included in this report, it appears that the committee headed by Mr. Sagar, Congress MP, appears to be totally biased and primarily interested in renaming the airport as also to lobby for opening of the old airport for reasons best known to them. The problems faced by the general public and poor workmanship at the complex seem to have been mentioned in passing only. The committee is also using this opportunity for maligning the name of Mr. Murthy since it is common knowledge that he has rubbed some politicians the wrong way during his illustrious career on the question of development of Bangalore.

If the work is substandard then it is imperative that the companies responsible for the same be directed first and foremost to rectify and correct the problems followed by suitable action against them. Next, personnel who finally accepted any shoddy or substandard work should be brought to the book and charge sheeted. If required, role of the BIAL functionaries should also be investigated to see if they are responsible for any lapses or faulty ovearll design.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3491447&ucid=255663#uc2Lst255663

Saturday, December 19, 2009

End of an era? Many BJP insiders think not.

Jury out on Advani
RADHIKA RAMASESHAN
New Delhi, Dec. 18:
They believe that as long as Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani are around, there can be no third presiding deity in the party despite the RSS’s exertions.

They cite how Murli Manohar Joshi, K. Jana Krishnamurthy and Rajnath Singh had to pay a price for ignoring or side-stepping the duo.

Today, when Advani redeemed his assurance to the Sangh of quitting as leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, his standing in the parivar ensured he was rehabilitated with a position whose mandate is not fully understood by anyone in the BJP. Those who know him emphasise he will not treat it as a “good service award”.

When Advani pushed the BJP’s electoral tally from 85 in 1989 to 120 in 1991, underlining its primacy as the polity’s second pole, he bucked the trends of Indian politics: his caste was unknown and he admitted to not being a practising Hindu.

Yet his “Ram rath” obliterated caste and gender divisions in its trail. He was probably the first politician to successfully use religion as a mass mobiliser.

When it was time to take a serious shot at power before the 1996 elections, however, the Sangh, tutored by the late Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar, figured out that the BJP would have to pick allies to reach majority. It decided Advani was not the man for the mission. The Sangh chose and packaged Vajpayee as the “moderate” face of a non-Congress alliance. Vajpayee eluded political labels with his ability to avoid taking positions on issues. Advani, seen as “a strident communalist”, gracefully accepted the decision.

Vajpayee did not reciprocate in kind: his thanksgiving speech did not mention Advani’s contribution to the BJP’s rise.

Vajpayee’s heart was never in the organisation — he was most comfortable in public shows and Parliament — but Advani straddled the space from the party apparatus to the legislative wing with ease. He had a rapport with the Sangh while Vajpayee was said to be a trifle dismissive of the men in khaki shorts except when it suited him politically.

That was not the only reason for Advani’s organisational prowess: as a head-hunter, he built a team that was the envy of other parties. He nurtured the talents of Pramod Mahajan, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, K.N. Govindacharya, Narendra Modi, Uma Bharti and others.

The jury is still out on whether his ambition to become Prime Minister was fanned by his confidants or whether it was self-generated. Whatever the truth, it took a toll on his politics.

The writer says Advani admitted to not being a practising Hindu. If I am not mistaken, Advani had said that he is not a ritualistic Hindu. This cannot be construed as not being a "practising Hindu". I think Advani also talked about his Sufi approach. Read in context, Advani only exclaimed that he is imbued with the Advaitic vision. This cannot be taken as not being a practising Hindu.

Advani: A BJP icon but lacking national vision

END OF AN ERA
CNN-IBN
Published on Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 10:33, Updated on Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:14 in Politics section
An era ended in Indian politics on Friday when Lal Krishna Advani, the man who was the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ideological mascot for three decades, stepped down as the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha. Sushma Swaraj has been named as the new Leader of Opposition.
So the change of guard and the passing of the baton has taken place. Advani stepping down as the Leader of Opposition also signalled the end of Atal Bihari Vajpayee-Lal Krishna Advani era.
Advani had held the position of Leader of Opposition since 2004. The party on Friday also amended its constitution, paving the way for Advani to be elected as the Chairman of the parliamentary party. His role is expected to be that of a mentor.
The stage is also set for BJP's Maharashtra chief Nitin Gadkari to take over as the party President from Rajnath Singh.
CNN-IBN special show tried to analyse the impact of Advani on Indian polity, his impact on the country and how history will judge him.
The panel of experts included senior journalist Vir Sanghvi, columnist Swapan Dasgupta, Outlook Editor-In-Chief Vinod Mehta and political commentator & author Jyotirmaya Sharma.
Advani and Vajpayee had been the guiding force behind the BJP since the formation of the party. The duo has also been instrumental in bringing the party to power at the Centre. With Vajpayee already retired and now Advani also abdicating a huge responsibility has Indian politics witnessed a major change?
Is this really the end of an era in Indian politics?
“Yes and No! I don’t think you are going to see the last of LK Advani. He has not abdicated but merely stepped aside. He may have become the Bhishma Pitamah but Bhishma Pitamah still fought in the battle of Kurukshetra. It does mark the transition, the end of the Atal-Advani era,” said Swapan Dasgupta.
“It is a transition and the end of a generation in the BJP. It is the end of a generation that was part of the Jan Sangh and created the BJP. It is the start of an era and now people who will run the BJP have only been a part of the BJP,” Vir Sanghvi said.
Vinod Mehta credited Advani with making BJP a truly national party but added that he had been forced to quit.
“This is definitely an end of an era because he was unquestionably the man who brought BJP to power. But is has been an undignified exit. This is not a voluntary retirement. This is a forced retirement. This is not the script that Advani wrote for himself. Just a few months back he was saying he would stay the full term. So he has been pushed out,” said Mehta.
Dasgupta, however, said that Advani has managed to become taller by resigning as Leader of Opposition.
“You can say that the era ended with the loss in Lok Sabha elections. But by this Advaniji has actually salvaged quite a lot of his authority within the BJP. Now he has established himself as an alternative moral authority,” said Dasgupta.
But on the other hand Sanghvi claimed that Advani was only playing political games.
“He said that he would retire after the Lok Sabha defeat but he withdrew his resignation. He wanted to hang on, install Sushma or perhaps Arun Jaitley or someone his own as his successor and ensure that the Advani era continued,” said Sanghvi.
“His moral authority depends on what role the RSS wants him to play post retirement. The script has been written by the RSS. Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley want to stamp their own authority on the party and they would not like any back seat driving. I think Advani era is over,” said Mehta.
Dasgupta pointed out that BJP was facing a crisis and the RSS had taken a decisive stand as the party did not know what the real BJP was.
It seems that the script of Advani quitting has been written by the RSS. Nitin Gadkari as party President, Arun Jaitley in the Rajya Sabha and Sushma Swaraj in the Lok Sabha all have RSS backing.
“Yes! It is a script written by the RSS. There is hardly any difference between the BJP and the RSS,” said Sharma joining the debate.
Sanghvi, however, disagreed saying that if the RSS had its way then Advani would have been out a long time ago.
“We must call a spade a spade. This is a triumph for the RSS and defeat for the BJP. There is RSS on one side and pragmatist and modernisers like Sushma and Jaitley on the other side. Therein lies the fault lines within the BJP as both sides will pull in different directions,” said Mehta.
Dasgupta said that politics and organisation are separate.
“While Sushma and Jaitley represent politics, RSS represents the organisation,” he said.
Sanghvi drew parallel with the Congress and said that BJP was just like the Grand Old Party of India.
“It is juts like the Congress where if the Gandhi family does like something it won’t happen. Similarly if the RSS does not like something then that will never happen in the BJP,” said Sanghvi.
Has Advani never got his due?
Atal Bihari Vajpayee became the prime minister of the country three times but Advani never got a chance to occupy the top political spot in the country.
“He has got more than his due. He never became the prime minister because the country did not want him to. He lost the election where he could have become the prime minister. He is looked upon as someone who emerged during the Rath Yatra and led BJP to power. We forget that he was in politics for a long time and he was not much more than Vajpayee’s secretary or speech writer. He was always second fiddle to Vajpayee. He became an extremist and espoused Hindutva. He made BJP a national party with his Rath Yatra. No one was going to ally with the BJP led by this man,” said Sanghvi.
Dasgupta said that Advani had his limitation which came in the way of him occupying the post of prime minister.
"He was never a mass leader with the flexibility that Atal Bihari Vajpayee showed. But where Advani is to be given his due is for changing the discourse of Indian politics. He recognised that he had raised a question and that played out. So he had to redefine himself and he recognised that,” said Dasgupta.
“I think Vajpayee got more of his due from politics than Advani. But politics is about power and Advani brought BJP to power. Advani is a flawed character,” Mehta added.
“In January 1996 Advani voluntarily said Vajpayee should be the prime minister because he realised that he had got the Hindu votes but to get to power the party needed incremental votes which Vajpayee could bring in,” claimed Dasgupta.
Mehta pointed out that it was Advani who got the BJP to a level where incremental votes could bring power.
The Ayodhya movement which the BJP would call his finest moment was perhaps also his worst moment. It branded him as a militant Hindutva leader, a hardliner for life.
“That is right. But I would say that after Ayodhya he became a shade among the shadow. Everyone is talking about him becoming the Bhishma Pitamah. But the BJP is the only Mahabharata which has two Bhishma Pitamahs and one Shakuni, which is the RSS. What Advani could have done to gain some moral status was to say boo to the RSS,” said Sharma.
“After two election defeats the mood in the BJP is different. After the loss in 2004 there was still a belief in the BJP that something had gone wrong and a bit of fine tuning was needed. But 2009 dawned on them that if they carry the RSS on their backs, they would never be fit to come to power or even a viable political force. Advani should have seized the occasion and said boo to the RSS and rid the BJP of the shadow of the RSS,” Sharma said.
Mehta said that Advani made some blunders that cost him dearly.
“He did not want to modernise the BJP as much as he wanted to modernise himself. On Ayodhya he played his cards very badly. He tried to separate the movement from the demolition. He did not even stay with his role in the Ayodhya movement,” said Mehta.
So it seems that Advani was a prisoner of his image.
“He got the image of a hardliner due to Ayodhya. It was image he never had before. He tried very hard to get rid of it. I don’t think he understood secularism and he certainly didn’t understand the Indian Muslim. He made a statement before the 2004 elections that the BJP would get Muslim votes as the party had improved relations with Pakistan. Many Muslims rose up in protest asking ‘are you suggesting that we are Pakistanis?’ He then praised Jinnah as truly secular and called Indira Gandhi, himself and others pseudo secular,” said Sanghvi.
Dasgupta, however, claimed that Advani did try to reform his image
“We forget Indian Shinning. Advani took BJP into an election on plank that was economic and inspirational,” he said.
Mehta was categorical in criticising Advani and blamed the veteran BJP leader of not having a moral centre. Sanghvi agreed with Mehta.
Is Generation Next of the BJP ready to take over?
Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, Narendra Modi and Nitin Gadkari are the Generation Next leaders of the BJP and now it is upto them to energise the party.
“If you are looking at the next General Elections you are probably looking at Rahul Gandhi as Congress’ prime ministerial candidate. Who does the BJP have who can compete with Rahul Gandhi? If you bring Narendra Modi, he is going to look like sinister Neanderthal and this guy is the bright guy. Or is it Sushma Swaraj who will be projected as the spirit of Indian women against this western educated boy,” Sanghvi said warning about the future of BJP.
“One leader will have to be projected as the prime ministerial candidate. At present there is a plethora of leaders. Rahul Gandhi will also have to deal with 10 years of UPA rule,” said Dasgupta.
“BJP may have got from the frying pan into the fire. There are two hugely ambitious politicians in Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley. A better bet would be Jaitley. Then there is the question of their relation with Nitin Gadkari who is an unknown,” said Mehta.
So if the Atal-Advani era is over, what is the direction that BJP will move in?
Sharma simply said “confusion and self destruction.”
“One cannot write the BJP off and it would not be in the interest of democracy. We need a strong Opposition if there is going to be any kind of check on the Congress. In 2004 the Congress did not win the elections but the BJP lost it. Advani and BJP were hoping that Manmohan and Sonia would lose the 2009 elections, but they did not oblige,” said Sanghvi.
“Both Sushma and Jaitley are very professional, seasoned and experienced politicians. If they can team up together they are a formidable pair. They probably hate each other more than they hate the Congress. Can they work as a team? That is why the referee with the whistle is very important,” Mehta added.
“BJP is part of the NDA and all of them are together due to anti-Congressism. There are some people who would like Mohan Bhagwat to run the BJP. But I don’t think they will run the BJP,” Dasgupta said.
Sanghvi added that Hindutva had run its course. According to him the BJP has no clarity on how to deal with economic issues and foreign policy.
“On both of these there is no clarity in the BJP,” he said.
Mehta said that Advani would be remembered like PV Narasimha Rao.
“He did some good but the evil will be remembered. The good will not be remembered,” said Mehta.
“A man who could not keep pace with his ambitions and who was consumed by hubris,” said Sharma about Advani.
“He will have an iconic status within the BJP. As to how he will be viewed by rest of the country is not clear,” responded Dasgupta.
“As a mediocre man whom history thrust into the limelight and who rose to the occasion for a brief period and then his own mediocrity reasserted itself,” Sanghvi said concluding the debate.



http://ibnlive.in.com/news/advani-a-bjp-icon-but-lacking-national-vision/107392-37.html?from=tn


Friday, December 18, 2009

Telangana mess: Did Sonia Gandhi blunder?

19/12/2009

For someone who has rarely taken a false step since scripting the Congress' success story over the last five years, Sonia Gandhi's slip-up on Telangana was an uncharacteristic blunder.
The sudden decision to announce the government's approval for dividing Andhra Pradesh was all the more surprising since the Congress president is known to err on the side of caution. Her trademark style of functioning is to listen to everyone before taking a major decision.
It is unlikely, however, that such wide-ranging consultations took place before the fateful step was taken. Whatever the explanation - that the government was spooked by the fear of Maoists in an area noted for violent agitations - fact remains that the hasty step was unwarranted if only because a negative fallout from such a decision was all too obvious.
There is little doubt that if more people had been involved for longer hours to consider all the implications of bifurcating Andhra Pradesh, the downside of the proposed split would have become too stark to be ignored. The subsequent statement against smaller states by Pranab Mukherjee showed that this aspect of the decision was not emphasised as much as it should have been.
Even if P. Chidambaram, who made the announcement, was concerned mainly with the Maoist threat, the destabilising impact of the decision was immediately obvious to Mukherjee because of the longstanding demand for Gorkhaland in his home state of West Bengal. Similarly, Sharad Pawar would have warned against the resuscitation of the Vidarbha demand in Maharashtra.
Arguably, a basic reason for Sonia Gandhi's faux pas is the decentralisation that has taken place under her. Unlike her mother-in-law and late prime minister Indira Gandhi, who emasculated all her ministers into ciphers to take all power into her own hands, Sonia Gandhi seems to believe in delegating authority.
The positive side of such an attitude cannot be denied. It has been evident from the clear division of the spheres of influence between the government and the party. As a result, Manmohan Singh has been able to pursue his policies without any let-up or hindrance, as was evident from the signing of the nuclear deal although Sonia Gandhi was not too enthusiastic about it.
At one stage, her remark that the communists had a point when they opposed the deal made Manmohan Singh say, almost in despair, that not clinching the agreement with the US would not be the end of the world.
Because of her lenience, the prime minister too has tripped up occasionally, as in Sharm-al-Sheikh where Pakistan wheedled a meaningful reference about the Baloch insurgency out of the Indian delegation. Just as New Delhi backtracked a few days later on the question, a similar retreat is apparently in the offing on the Telangana issue as well.
But it will not be easy to repair the damage to Sonia Gandhi's reputation for circumspection and political acumen - the latter exemplified by her refusal to accept the prime minister's post which had flummoxed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The false step will haunt her all the more if the demands for smaller states refuse to die down. The Telangana issue may prove to be some kind of benchmark not only because it has been pending for a long time but also because it had the approval of the states reorganisation commission of 1955. A second commission, if it is set up, will be hard put to negate the demand.
Like Telangana, the claim for separating the Darjeeling hills from West Bengal has been around for a long time - a hundred years, according to its supporters. The problem with Sonia Gandhi's blooper is that in both the cases, it is the Congress which will suffer.
While the party's base will be undermined in Andhra Pradesh, where it is in power, its hope of ousting the Left from West Bengal in the company of its alliance partner, the Trinamool Congress, will be dashed if the Gorkhaland agitation gains momentum.
Any such development will be worrisome for the Congress because it has to be remembered that its success in the last two general elections was not as substantial as it may have wished. The party still has to depend on its allies to survive. Its stumbling will not only weaken it but also embolden the allies. The confidence, therefore, with which the government is trying to push through its agenda, as on disinvestment, will be lacking in future.
The Telangana issue will not only lead to a messy situation with the divisive elements rearing their heads in almost every state but also affect the government's and the party's resolve on economic reforms as well as internal security. Even where foreign relations are concerned, India's unfriendly neighbours will be delighted at the prospect of balkanization, which a Chinese analyst wanted his country to encourage.
What is unfortunate, however, is that the entire situation could have been avoided if Sonia Gandhi had followed her customary cautious instincts.
Source: IANS
K.Venugopal
#1
19 December 2009 01:03:21
We should go in for smaller states for the sake of administrative benefits while all the time stressing on Indian nationalism for the sake of political and cultural unity.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3489171&page=0

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Was 'double agent' Headley reporting to FBI as well?

17/12/2009
Washington: The extensive use of terrorist tradecraft by Pakistani American terror suspect David Headley makes it evident that he "was not merely a low-level cannon fodder-type operative", according to US strategic think tank Stratfor.
Referring to Headley's alleged work as a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and FBI informant, Stratfor said: "Given the demonstrated - and considerable - nexus between heroin trafficking and terrorism funding for the jihadist groups operating in Pakistan and Afghanistan, such a crossover of an informant from narcotics to terrorism is no surprise."
If Headley were reporting to the FBI, it could also explain the very specific warnings that the US government gave to the government of India about plans to attack hotels in Mumbai in Sep 2008.
Following the warning, the government of India initially increased security measures at these sites, but the measures were dropped before the attacks were launched in Nov 2008.
Stratfor said at present, it is very difficult to ascertain if Headley was a double agent who was really reporting to LeT and HUJI the entire time he was ostensibly working for the US government, or if he was merely a rogue informant who was playing both ends against the middle for his own personal benefit.
The Dec 7 indictment of Headley, charged with scouting targets for the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, shows that he reportedly attended Lashkar-e-Taeba (LeT) training camps in Pakistan in February and August of 2002 and in April, August and December of 2003.
"This indicates that Headley progressed far beyond basic militant training, and it is likely that he was taught during his later training sessions the tradecraft required to conduct preoperational surveillance for terrorist attacks and to participate in the operational planning for such attacks," Stratfor said.
"One element of terrorist tradecraft that was evident in the indictment and the Oct 11 criminal complaint is Headley's careful use of language and of multiple methods of communications, including the use of cell phones and using long-distance calling cards, e-mail communication (using a variety of accounts) and face-to-face briefings," the global intelligence company said.
According to the Dec 7 indictment to conduct surveillance for the Mumbai attacks, Headley made five extended trips to Mumbai: one in September 2006, two in February and September of 2007 and two in April and July of 2008.
Noting that such rogue sources have been seen in jihadist cases before, Stratfor said: "If Headley was either a double agent or a rogue source, there may be some significant blowback for the US government as further revelations are made about the case."
Rahul Bhatt quizzed twice
Meanwhile, the National Investigative Agency (NIA) has quizzed Rahul Bhatt, the son of Bollywood filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, during the ongoing probe into Pakistani-American terror suspect David Coleman Headley's links to the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks.
Mahesh Bhatt told IANS Wednesday in Mumbai: "They quizzed him twice over the past one week at a secret location in Mumbai. They wanted to know the circumstances in which Rahul met him (Headley), why he aroused Rahul's suspicion, etc."
Bhatt emphasised that the NIA team was very cordial and appreciative of Rahul's bold step of bringing the matter to their notice.
Rahul had earlier said he helped the American rent a three-bedroom flat near Breach Candy Hospital in the city.
Headley, charged with scouting targets for Mumbai terror attacks, is currently in FBI custody in the US.
Source: IANS

K.Venugopal
#1
16 December 2009 23:16:19
I think we should revisit the case of the American national Kenneth Heywood whose wireless internet connection was used by Indian Mujahideen. The chap may not be as innocent as it seemed then.