Vehicle Lease Business

'We Put Elections In Top Gear'

Ajay Singh Bhadauriya, 52, of Uttar Pradesh, left real estate business to start a tour and travel company. He tasted success when he began providing all kind of vehicles for political rallies and roadshows. Cash and prompt payments are the best part of the business, he tells LokMarg:

I always look forward to the elections, not just because it is the most important time for a democracy like India, but because it is the busiest and the most lucrative time for my business. I run a tour and travel company with a fleet of over 300 SUVs and counting.

My fleet has all kinds of  SUVs: Lower-end models, such as, Mahindra Bolero and XUV; SUVs in the mid-range comprise, Tata Safari and Mahindra Scorpio; and high end SUVs like Toyota Fortuner etc. I also have a large number of motorcycles for the same purpose.

It wasn’t like that always. I suffered heavy losses in my family real estate and construction business when the slump hit the sector. I finally decided to wrap up most of my holdings, purchased about ten vehicles for a tour and travel outfit. In 2014 general elections, I smelled a big opportunity. I first offered leasing of my vehicles alongwith drivers to the BJP, which demanded many more vehicles for their roadshows. I invested heavily and it paid.

Today, 95 percent of my clientele comprises of political parties. Be it roadshows and meetings, or ferrying VVIPs to rally grounds and airports, my SUVs line up the convoy. Our expert drivers are always smartly-dressed and are well-versed with all the local routes.

For the past four years, most of our vehicles have been attached with the BJP. The demand has further increased after it came to power and now in the current elections. The ministers and other important leaders use government vehicles for official jobs, but we still provide services to them for other political assignments.

Besides Lucknow, we also provide services in neighboring districts. Sometimes, the demand is so high that we are forced to arrange vehicles from other services providers, who are happy to oblige because of better and timely payments. Most payments come in cash and promptly. This is clearly a win-win situation for both the parties.

Political parties are very good paymasters, even during the election chaos. During elections, we are provided with a rough schedule so that we prepare ourselves in advance. Most parties have a dedicated department that handles transport and other logistics. We are usually paid in advance during elections to ensure that we do not switch loyalties because of monetary issues.

My team prepared well for the current Lok Sabha elections and on May 23, we shall sit down for the book keeping and counting the profit. Till then, this is proving to be a good summer.

Pitroda Kicks Up Row On '84 Sikh Carnage

Indian Overseas Congress chief Sam Pitroda hit out at BJP for “twisting his words and distorting facts” to “hide their failures”, while reaffirming that he had acknowledged the pain of Sikhs during the 1984 Sikh massacre.

The clarification came a day after Pitroda, when asked about BJP’s claim that instructions to “kill” in 1984 had come from late prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, said, “It (riots) happened in 1984, so what?”

“I have noticed how BJP is again twisting three words from my interview to distort facts, divide us and hide their failures. Sad that they have nothing positive to offer. I acknowledged the pain of my Sikh brothers and sisters during difficult times in 1984 and deeply feel for the atrocities that happened. But these are things from past that are not really relevant to this election which is all about what did Modi government do for the last five years,” Pitroda tweeted on Friday.

He went on to say that BJP is attacking Congress with such “lies” as it has no vision to take India forward.

“Rajiv Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi will never target a group of people based on creed. BJP is talking about these issues and attacking Congress leaders with lies because they can not talk about their performance and have no vision to take India forward to inclusively growth and prosperity for all with focus on jobs, kids and more jobs,” he said in another tweet.

On Thursday, BJP, citing the Nanavati Commission report, had said “instructions to kill” came directly from then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s office.

“It’s on record of Nanavati Commission that probed the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, the biggest genocide of India in which the government killed its own citizens, that instructions to kill came directly from the then PM Rajiv Gandhi’s office. The country awaits justice for this karma,” the party had tweeted from its official handle.

In response to this, Pitroda, while rubbishing the allegations, had said, “I don’t think so, this is also another lie, and what about 1984? You speak about what you have done in five years. It happened in 1984, so what? (1984 hua toh hua). What have you done? (Ab kya hai ’84 ka? Aapne kya kiya 5 saal mein, uski baat kariye. ’84 mein hua to hua. Aapne kya kiya?)”

“You were voted to create jobs. You were voted to create 200 smart cities. You have not even done that. You have not done anything that is why you keep talking here and there,” he added. (ANI)

]]>
Atishi Marlena And Manish Sisodia

Smear Paper: Gambhir-AAP Spat Hots Up

Delhi deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia on Friday said Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) will file a counter case against BJP candidate Gautam Gambhir for allegedly circulating pamphlets with derogatory and casteist remarks against AAP leader Atishi Marlena.

This comes a day after Gambhir sent a defamation notice to Atishi, Sisodia and Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, demanding an unconditional apology over the “defamatory” comments against him.

Speaking to ANI, Sisodia said, “The kind of language Gautam Gambhir has used in the paper is terrible (wahiyat). It is shameful to read it. How dare he speak against me, Arvind Kejriwal and Atishi Marlena? How is he filing a defamation case? We are the ones being defamed, we will file a defamation case against him. We will try to send a defamation notice to him today.”

“I advise Gautam Gambhir to see TV interviews of his party leaders and take the action which he has committed to do,” he added.

On Thursday, Atishi had accused Gambhir of circulating pamphlets with derogatory and casteist remarks against her. “They have shown how low they can stoop. Pamphlet states that ‘she is a very good example of a mixed breed’,” she had told media here.

However, Gambhir, while rubbishing the same, asserted that if proven guilty, he would retire from politics.

“If he has proof, then he must bring it today. My resignation would be written by Arvind Kejriwal and I will sign it publicly,” said Gambhir. “If they have proof I am ready to take retirement from politics today itself. I will take retirement on May 23 if they come with proof but what if he doesn’t turn up with proof? Will he resign as Delhi Chief Minister and retire from politics?” he asked.

Delhi, which has seven Lok Sabha seats at stake, will go to polls on May 12. Counting of votes will take place on May 23.

East Delhi constituency will witness a triangular contest between Gambhir, Atishi and Congress’ Arvinder Singh Lovely.

(ANI)

]]>
Janaki Mata Temple in Ayodhya

Ayodhya Panel Gets Time Till Aug 15

The Supreme Court on Friday extended till August 15 the tenure of the apex court-appointed mediation panel to find an amicable solution in the Ayodhya land dispute case.

Taking note of the request made by the three-member panel for an extension in the deadline, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi granted permission to the panel to submit its report by August 15.

Chief Justice Gogoi, while hearing the matter, said, “We are not going to tell what progress has been made, that is confidential.”

When the case came up for hearing today, the mediation panel headed by retired Supreme Court judge Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla submitted its report to the court.

The bench also comprised Justices SA Bobde, SA Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan and DY Chandrachud.

Karunesh Shukla, the counsel of a litigant Mahant Dharam Das, told ANI: “Mediation committee is positive that the process will be fruitful and successful and this the reason why the court has not stopped the mediation process and has given them till August 15.”

Another counsel for Das, Varun Sinha, contended that the contents of the report are powerful. “The material submitted by the mediation panel in the report are powerful, hinting that the things are going in the positive direction. The report, however, cannot be brought into the public domain, as ordered by the Apex court.”

The court had on March 8 constituted a three-member committee, chaired by Justice Kalifulla, for exploring possibilities of an amicable settlement to the land dispute. The panel also comprised Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and senior Madras High Court advocate Sriram Panchu.

The court had expressed the view that the proceedings must be conducted with “utmost confidentiality” to ensure its success. It had also said mediation proceedings would be held in Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh and the state government will provide the mediators with all facilities.

It had said the mediators will be at liberty to co-opt other members of the panel if needed and seek further legal assistance as and when required. The mediation process must be completed in eight weeks, the court had said. (ANI)

]]>
Cricketer Turned Politician

Gambhir-AAP War Gets Dirty In Delhi

Challenging Aam Aadmi Party chief to prove the allegations levelled against him, BJP’s East Delhi candidate Gautam Gambhir on Thursday asserted that he will be filing a defamation case against AAP leaders for “tarnishing” his image by alleging that he had made defamatory pamphlets against his rival Aatishi.

Gambhir’s comments came hours after he was accused of circulating pamphlets with derogatory and casteist remarks against his rival candidate Atishi Marlena.

“If they can get proof, I will resign right now and if they get a proof by May 23 I will resign on that particular day. But if Delhi chief minister and AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal do not get the proof, will he accept the challenge and leave politics forever on 23rd?,” Gambhir told ANI.

He also threatened to file a defamation case on the issue and said, “I will definitely file a defamation case against them. You cannot tarnish someone’s image just like that if you don’t have the proof. I have never given a negative statement against anyone so far in my election campaigning.”

Earlier in the day, Delhi’s deputy chief minister Sisodia had accused the cricketer-turned-politician of distributing pamphlets in an attempt to defame Atishi.

“Language in this pamphlet, distributed in East Delhi, is so abusive and low that everybody will feel ashamed while reading it. This letter with derogatory remarks is distributed by Gautam Gambhir to make himself win. We never, in our worst dream, had thought that he (Gambhir) would stoop to this low to win polls,” Sisodia had said.

AAP chief Kejriwal also reiterated the charges and raised similar questions.

“How can women expect safety if people with such mentality are voted in? Atishi, stay strong. I can imagine how difficult it must be for you. It is precisely this kind of forces we have to fight against,” he had tweeted.

Gambhir and Atishi are in a three-cornered battle along with Congress candidate Arvinder Singh Lovely from the east-Delhi parliamentary constituency which will go to polls on May 9. (ANI)

]]>
CEC Sunil Arora

Credibility Of Election Commission Under Scanner

Governing general elections in as vast and diverse a nation as India is never easy; it becomes more difficult when integrity and impartiality of the poll administrator are doubted

India’s polity, despite its robustness and seven decades’ working, is in turmoil as never before and appears divided. Causing and deepening the crisis, ironically, is an election that is being fought no-holds-barred.

Governing this vast and diverse nation is never easy. It is more difficult when integrity and impartiality of its institutions are doubted. And even more so when the political leadership in and outside the legislature that facilitates these institutions and works in tandem with them is in throes of an election.

In India, buck stops at the door of the Supreme Court on every other contentious issue. But the highest court is itself mired in a controversy involving none less than the Chief Justice of India (CJI). While handling it, it has seemingly divided members of the top judiciary on how to ensure justice and fairness, both real and perceived.

In the most piquant situation, a former woman employee last month wrote to all serving judges complaining of being sexually harassed and then victimized, by the CJI, Mr Justice Ranjan Gogoi. The CJI strongly denied the allegations. He said: “There are forces that are trying to destabilise the judiciary. There are bigger forces behind these allegations hurled at me.”

He did not indicate who the ‘forces’ could be. But he vowed that he would function normally during the six months left of his tenure.

The lady in question remains unnamed because Indian law mandates that victims of sexual assault and harassment not be named in the media. After appearing before a Gogoi-appointed panel of three serving judges for two days, she cried out alleging that the committee declined her plea for engaging a lawyer and that she would not get justice.  

The in-house panel of judges dismissed her plea stating there was “no substance” in her allegations and thus, gave a clean chit to the CJI. Prior to the committee’s verdict, two serving judges had reportedly asked that the lady be permitted to engage a lawyer or an amicus curiae be associated to ensure the probe’s fairness. However, the probe is completed ex parte, without her and its report will not be made public. Countering the ‘forces’ seeking to destabilize the top judiciary seems to have driven the judges committee’s unanimous decision.      

However, the woman is demanding a copy of the report. Sections of legal fraternity and women’s rights groups stated a protest outside the court demanding natural justice for the complainant.

As it seeks to get over its embarrassment, the apex court is being asked by many political parties to adjudicate on fairness of the conducting of the polls by the Election Commission, another august institution on whom India has been taking a bow from other democracies.

There is no last word on any issue. After five of the seven phases of this 39-day process were completed, the Supreme Court rejected a review plea filed by 21 Opposition leaders seeking further increase in random matching of the Voter verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) slips with electronic voting machine (EVMs).

Being directed by the Supreme Court on issues that actually belong to its turf, the EC is facing challenges more daunting than what preceding generations faced. Advances in communications technology have made regulation of campaigning, to ensure that it is consistent with the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), almost impossible. Clearly the existing legal framework is inadequate, unable to keep pace with rich and tech-savvy campaign cells of political parties.

Reminded by the Supreme Court that it had ‘teeth’ and must use them, the EC has done so partially, but is itself divided. One of its three members has dissented on whether campaign speeches, especially those by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Bharatiya Janata Party chief Amit Shah, have violated the MCC.

The EC’s efforts at curbing spouting of venom in the polls discourse are also being questioned. It is accused on both counts of favouring the ruling dispensation. “While complaints against other leaders were promptly dealt with, there was an obvious delay in taking up those against Mr. Modi. Few would have failed to notice that he has been running an abrasive campaign. He has stoked fears over India’s security, claimed credit for the performance of the armed forces and implicitly underscored that his party stands for the religious majority,” The Hindu newspaper said.

Five of the six orders have been dissented and the dissenting Election Commissioner has asked why his dissent is pot part of the final order.    

The Supreme Court this week permitted the opposition Congress Party to place on record all the EC verdicts. The party argued that the EC’s silence and delay “are akin to tacit endorsement”.

The Modi/Shah duo is accused of attacking Muslims, directly or subtly, invoking armed forces and of Pakistan-bashing — all three falling within the MCC ambit — to raise ‘nationalistic’ fervor, while calling all dissenters ‘traitors’.

Just how many instances of violence can the EC’s state-level offices record, report, issue notices and upon receiving replies, deliver verdicts? It imposes token no-campaign punishment on candidates for two or three days. Even these are being violated.

Too many disputes against the EC or its Returning Officers have been taken to the apex court. Tej Bahadur Yadav had emerged as the main opposition candidate against Modi in the Varanasi constituency. A former policeman sacked for seeking better food while on duty, his papers were rejected on the ground that he had failed to take EC’s permission to contest, which is needed for a government official removed or suspended. That certificate, Yadav complained, was sought at the eleventh hour and he could not comply. He told the court that he was debarred to allow Modi a walk-over.

The EC must also play the policeman. After three of the seven phases were completed, it confiscated cash, gold and silver, liquor, drugs and other items worth ₹3,205 crore, according to its data published on April 27.   

At this rate, wonders N. Bhaskara Rao, Chairman, Centre for Media Srudies, a New Delhi think tank, “we can expect more than twice this amount to be confiscated by the time the election ends. What is confiscated is likely to be less than five percent of what is being spent by all the candidates and parties. The total expenditure of this election is estimated to be about ₹50,000 crore, which is the highest amount for any election in the world.”

As things stand with two weeks to go to the May 23 outcome of these elections, the over-worked Umpire, its credibility questioned, is under stress as never before.

Having written on a dozen elections, one is clutching at the comforting but unsure thought that things would become ‘normal’ once this no-holds-barred “dance of democracy” is over.

But the thought on low depths that can be touched by people with fellow-citizens as they contest an election and on the performance of institutions with enduring records, formed and functioning under the Constitution, is deeply disconcerting.

mahendraved07@gmail.com

]]>
Narendra Modi At Rally

Six things to expect if Modi comes back as PM

A Modi regime 2.0 could mean changes with far-reaching consequences for India

When the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) national general secretary Ram Madhav in a recent interview with Bloomberg News’ editor-in-chief said that his party would require the support of its allies to form a government, there was much elation among the BJP’s baiters and opponents. Madhav merely said that his party would be happy if it won 271 of India’s 543 parliamentary seats and he forecasted that with the support of its allies, the National Democratic Alliance (a coalition that the BJP leads) would get a comfortable majority in the House for which elections are ongoing.

Five of the seven phases of India’s national election have been completed, and after the remaining two are done, the results are expected to be announced on May 23. But when Madhav hinted that the BJP was unlikely to get a majority by itself (in 2014, it had won 282 seats), the opponents of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party viewed it as some kind of admission of defeat. The thing is many observers, including journalists who have scoured the vast nation during the ongoing elections, have been reporting that although Mr Modi and the BJP have a distinct edge over their opponents, a voting wave of the sort that favoured them in 2014 is unlikely to be repeated. But the BJP and its allies could win the mandate to form the government again—with, presumably, Mr Modi as their Prime Minister for the second term.

Such predictions are fraught with the risk of being proved wrong—India’s elections have always been notoriously difficult to predict because of the country’s vastness and its complex diversities. Yet, many wonder what to expect if Mr Modi is back in power in New Delhi for another five years. His staunchest critics fear that it could unleash a regime of authoritarianism that could raise the insecurity that minorities, including the nation’s Muslims, who account for 14% of the population, face. Some believe the authority and autonomy of institutions such as the judiciary and fiscal regulators could get compromised by his government’s political interests.

A lot would depend on the margin of majority that the BJP (with or without its allies) are able to muster up in the ongoing election. If their margin of victory is not too slender, it could mean a strengthening of the Modi government 2.0’s ambit of power. Here are some of the ways in which such a phenomenon could manifest itself:

  1. More control over India’s media sector? In last year’s World Press Freedom Index rankings (compiled by the non-profit, Reporters Without Borders) of 180 countries, India was placed at a lowly 138 (China was 176 and North Korea 180). It is widely accepted that albeit its noisy, cacophonous, and crowded nature, India’s mainstream media is not exactly free. Media owners are compromised in many different ways and the content they publish is often compromised—either through self-censorship or fear of governmental retribution. The new wave of emerging digital publications are, however, still free; and many of them are vocal critics of Mr Modi and his government. If his regime returns to power, one could expect stricter controls for the digital media, and, of course, continued influence over older, mainstream media.
  2. Constitutional and other changes? As has been evident in the past five years, Mr Modi’s style of governance borders on the presidential style that is in vogue in many large nations—including the US. Mr Modi also wields considerable power, often unilateral, over his cabinet and council of ministers. For him to move toward a presidential form of democracy where people elect the president as the head of the executive (and not a titular position as exists now) may not come as a surprise. Mr Modi is an admirer of China’s President Xi Jinping; and of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, both politicians that rule with an iron hand and overwhelming control. Of course, China’s isn’t a democratic government like India’s is but with a sort of presidential system in place, the top boss of the executive could get to wield considerably greater powers as an individual.
  3. Further weakening of institutions? India’s central bank; its state-owned banks; its higher educational institutions; and research centres already face noticeable degrees of government interference. Vice-chancellors and other key appointments at educational institutions are often politically decided. There are instances to show that syllabuses, grants, funding, and courses, including areas of research, are often influenced by the government through its education and other related ministries. Such a trend could intensify in a second Modi regime. As could the interference of government in monetary policy. During Mr Modi’s first tenure as Prime Minister, the central bank, RBI, witnessed the exit of a high-profile and globally reputed governor, Dr Raghuram Rajan, ostensibly because he refused to toe the line of Mr Modi’s finance ministry. Many fear that a return of his government could lead to even higher government control over monetary policy.
  4. Changes in the way the judiciary functions? India’s judiciary follows the collegium system, which is based on a principle of judicial independence. This means the appointment of judges can be decided only by the judiciary without any interference from the legislature or the executive. The government, during Mr Modi’s regime, attempted to change this by setting up the National Judicial Appointments Committee (NJAC) under an Act of Parliament. However, the act was quashed by the Supreme Court, which restored the collegium system. If Mr Modi’s regime returns, many believe the NJAC could be revived. If it does, the appointment of judges, in theory at least, could be subject to external influences, namely from the government.
  5. More strident discrimination against minorities? It is widely acknowledged that the minority communities in India have witnessed sharpened discrimination during the past five years. Violence and instances of lynching related to cow slaughter, besides other forms of discrimination, have increased against religious and other minorities. Many fear that the fringe elements in the majority community could get a further boost if a BJP-led government returns to power. The National Register of Citizens, which is a register of all “genuine” Indian citizens in Assam, or a form of it could also be introduced in other states, especially those that share a border with foreign countries.
  6. Impact on the future of Kashmir? The state of Kashmir is empowered with a special status under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. For all matters other than defence, foreign affairs, finance and communication, Parliament needs the state government’s concurrence to apply other laws. The state also decides on residents’ citizenship status; property rights; and fundamental rights. The BJP has been opposing this special status to the state. In the context of the continued dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir, the return of the Modi regime could see revival of the move to abolish Article 370, which could lead to an upheaval in the state.
]]>
Rahul Gandhi In Arunachal

Can Rahul Pull It Off As Prime Minister

As the battle for the most powerful and prestigious chair in the country rages on, many voters have put their penny on Rahul Gandhi as the next Prime Minister of India. Does the Gandhi scion has the mettle to handle the power and responsibility that comes with the post? In a new series of articles, LokMarg will examine the various contenders for the Prime Minister’s job, starting with the arch-challenger, Rahul Gandhi.

Well before Rahul Gandhi took over as the Congress president, a large section of his own party members were not sure that he had the capacity to lead them. After all, the Nehru-Gandhi scion had acquired a reputation of being a non-serious politician who was yet to get a firm grip on the party’s organization. In addition, he had an uneasy relationship with other opposition parties and was unable to connect with the public on account of his poor oratorical skills.

The fact that Rahul Gandhi had been unsuccessful in delivering electoral victories for the party was another negative. These doubts about his leadership qualities were further fuelled by the Bharatiya Janata Party’s relentless and highly successful campaign, dubbing Rahul Gandhi as “Pappu”.

However, there has been a dramatic change in Rahul Gandhi over the past eighteen months. His oratory has improved considerably though he is not in the same class as Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Congress president is gradually coming across as a mature politician, who is fighting shy of taking on the Modi government and is more focused on handling the party organization. Rahul Gandhi further redeemed himself with a credible performance in last year’s Gujarat assembly polls, which was followed by victories in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.

More than a year after he took control of the party, the Congress president has finally shed the “pappu” image while his critics within the party have been effectively silenced.

ALSO READ: Transformation Of Rahul, Tweet By Tweet

But does this mean that Rahul Gandhi is now ready to shoulder the responsibility of leading the nation as its Prime Minister just in case the post-poll numbers favour the Congress. No,  the Congress president has still some distance to cover before he is accepted by the public at large as a credible alternative to Modi. For starters, he is sorely handicapped by his lack of administrative experience. Rahul Gandhi had an opportunity to fill this gap in his resume when he was offered a Cabinet berth in the Manmohan Singh government but he decided instead to focus on party affairs. Besides his lack of experience, Rahul Gandhi does not instill confidence in the voter that he can handle matters of state without fumbling or making a faux pas.

Congress leaders, of course, are quick to point out that his father Rajiv Gandhi also came with no previous experience in running a government when he took over as Prime Minister in 1984 in the wake of Indira Gandhi’s assassination. However, Rajiv Gandhi had the advantage of a massive majority in the Lok Sabha which enabled him to take decisive steps in both domestic and foreign affairs. Despite widespread skepticism, he pushed ahead with advances in information technology and telecommunications sectors. Rajiv Gandhi was also emboldened to take risky decisions like signing the Longowal accord in insurgency-hit Punjab, was responsible for a paradigm shift in Sino-India relations and sought to build bridges with Sri Lanka though he ended up paying a heavy price for it.

ALSO READ: Rahul’s Popularity On The Rise

Unlike his father, Rahul Gandhi is not expected to have the luxury of numbers in case he does get a shot at ascending the Prime Minister’s kursi. The Congress footprint has shrunk considerably over the past three decades and the party has gradually come to terms with the fact that it needs the support of coalition partners to come to power at the Centre as it cannot do on its own. There are lurking doubts that Rahul Gandhi has the temperament or the gravitas to deal with temperamental and demanding allies even if there is a remote possibility that the other opposition parties will concede the Prime Minister’s post to him. Undoubtedly, he will have to rely on Sonia Gandhi and other senior leaders like Ahmed Patel and Ghulam Nabi Azad to keep the allies in good humour.

Whatever other disadvantages he may have, the Congress president will have a large inhouse talent pool at his disposal to assist him in running the government. Besides, Rahul Gandhi comes with a long and rich legacy which is both a source of strength and weakness. On one hand, the party’s past experience provides a ready template for governance but on the other hand, it will also make it difficult for the young Gandhi to chart an independent path. Here, he will be hemmed in not just by his coalition partners but also by his party members. Remember the stiff resistance PV Narasimha Rao faced from Congress insiders when he deviated from the party’s set economic policy and drafted Manmohan Singh to liberalize the economy.

ALSO READ: Rahul Gandhi In A New Avatar

Nevertheless, the Congress brand name, though considerably diluted, will give Rahul Gandhi an edge over the other Prime Ministerial contenders in the opposition camp. The Nehru-Gandhi scion may be lacking in experience but he can always fall back on seasoned leaders like former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, P. Chidambaram, Anand Sharma and A.K. Antony to navigate him through possible minefields in the areas of economic and foreign affairs.

Like his mother, Rahul Gandhi has made it abundantly clear that he will build on the party’s pro-poor image with a special emphasis on addressing agrarian distress and the implementation of an income guarantee scheme for the needy as detailed in the party’s election manifesto. But it is equally certain that there will be no going back on economic reforms ushered in by Manmohan Singh.

Rajiv Gandhi’s friend Sam Pitroda is currently playing a key role in Rahul Gandhi’s dispensation and will continue to do so if the Congress president makes the cut as the country’s Prime Minister. Pitroda has been instrumental in planning and organizing Rahul Gandhi’s tours in the United States, Britain and the Middle East where he has interacted with both the Indian diaspora and global leaders, policy makers, think tanks and academics.

The intention is to position Rahul Gandhi as an international leader, to correct the perception that he is a dilettante, improve his image abroad and provide an opportunity to the outside world to get acquainted with his views on a vast array of subjects. As in the case of economic affairs, Rahul Gandhi is unlikely to deviate from the Congress position in the area of international affairs which will continue to focus on strengthening ties with both Russia and the United States and improving relations with the neighboring countries. An assurance to this effect has been conveyed during Rahul Gandhi’s trips abroad and his periodic meetings with visiting world leaders.

]]>
NRIs and Narendra Modi

Long-Distance Nationalism Helps Modi And RSS

Narendra Modi and RSS have a reliable and prosperous constituency among NRIs who have a translated, frozen and overly benign view of an India they left behind, writes Deepak Pant

 

The legal definition of an NRI is that of a ‘non-resident Indian’, though sometimes the person also attracts the sobriquet of a ‘not required Indian’. Physically located abroad, the NRI community – and the Indian diaspora – is spread all over the world; in some cases over generations with weak links to what was once their homeland. Many have frozen, nostalgic and mostly outdated memories of the India they left behind; India has, meanwhile, moved on. The dictum that distance makes the heart grow fonder may well be valid in the case of the NRI community: for example, Diwali is celebrated with more gusto and tradition in places such as Leicester in the UK than is the case in many parts of India. 

Caught between two cultural stools – their Indian cultural identity and the culture of the place of their location – most members of the NRI community turn more ritualistic than many Hindus in India. Most NRIs are not Indian citizens, so cannot vote in Indian elections, but that does not prevent them from joining the heat and dust of campaigning in large numbers. The BJP is clearly ahead of the Congress in terms of support in the NRI community; from the UK alone, over 2,000 volunteers have travelled to India at their own expenses to campaign for Narendra Modi and the BJP.

The RSS and its organizations have long worked among the NRI community in the UK and elsewhere, benefiting from large donations as well as spreading their version of ‘cultural nationalism’ to a grateful people caught between two stools. Britain has a considerable presence of the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS), which has been functioning since 1966. Its structure, principles and activities are similar to those of the RSS, whose head, Mohan Bhagwat, attended its ‘mahashibir’ in Luton in August 2016 to mark 50 years of its existence. It was the influential Gujarati lobby that influenced the David Cameron government before the 2014 elections to abandon the earlier policy of boycotting the Modi government in Gujarat over the 2002 riots.

As prime minister, Modi made a splash while addressing the diaspora at the Wembley Stadium in November 2015, while Cameron, who would often woo the Indian vote by appearing at large events addressed by Hindu religious leaders from India, among others, won much support from the Indian community during the 2010 and 2015 elections. The convergence and conflation of Indian with Hindu interests was evident before Modi’s November 2015 visit to London. At a ‘thanksgiving’ event at the Indian Gymkhana for the benefit of many organizations that had come together to welcome Modi, the influence of the Hindu-HSS-BJP lobby in the UK was evident. On the stage, against a backdrop of a large Modi image, were Dhiraj Shah (president of HHS), Baroness Sandip Varma (Conservative), Ranjan Mathai (Indian high commissioner at the time), Nat Puri (prominent industrialist), Virendra Sharma (Labour) and Stephen Pound (Labour). Other leading lights were also in attendance.

It may well be a case of ‘Begani shadi me Abdullah diwana’, since most of the NRIs cannot vote, but the largely pro-Modi/BJP community has also been courted by Modi during his foreign visits. The template of his visits to various capitals invariably includes an address to the local Indian community, which was not the case with previous visiting Indian prime ministers. At such meetings, Modi makes it a point to deliver feel-good speeches, insisting that the diaspora community has the same ‘khoon’ as that of any Indian. He gives the impression that he is setting things right in the country many had left due to various reasons. But all the while, his stated and unstated focus remains the majoritarian Hindu support base. For example, during the community address in Paris in June 2017, hundreds of members of the Bohra Muslim community resident in France but with roots in Gujarat waited patiently for him for hours, most of them holding small Indian flags. But Modi came, spoke and went away without as much as a cursory glance at them, leaving many of them disappointed.

For the ongoing Indian elections, the Overseas Friends of BJP has been in hyperactive mode. According to its officials, nearly 5,000 volunteers from the UK have travelled to India to join the BJP’s campaign, while others have been enlisted to make calls back home to support Modi as prime minister again. Others have organised bike rallies, flash mobs and pushed on social media videos taken at iconic places such as the Big Ben while extolling the achievements of the Modi government. Leveraging support for the BJP and RSS-backed groups in the 1.5 million-strong Indian diaspora, many of its members and supporters were active in campaigning for the BJP during the 2014 elections. A ‘Chai pe Charcha with Namo’ was also held in Harrow. The level of support for Modi and the BJP in the Indian diaspora far outweighs that for Rahul Gandhi and the Congress, even though the party’s units abroad have a history dating to the pre-independence days, when many Congress leaders studied in the UK.

Most NRIs have a translated, frozen and overly benign view of an India they left behind. They may not make much of a difference on the ground, but in the age of rapid communications, globalization and the internet, Modi and the ‘sangh parivar’ clearly have a reliable and prosperous constituency outside India on which they can fall back as and when required.

]]>