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.
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
No comments:
Post a Comment