Category: Opinion

Why Foreign Policy Is Never An Electoral Issue?

By Seema Guha
It is surprising that for a country like India, which likes to project itself as a global power, the foreign policy narrative during elections remains limited to Pakistan

For a nation which sees itself as a future global power, it is surprising that foreign policy is never a major talking point in the election season. What goes as foreign policy is a national security narrative focused mainly on Pakistan, terrorism and the need for a strong leader like Narendra Modi to keep India safe.

This buys into the domestic tirade against an “unpatriotic opposition” which plays to Pakistan’s tune. Indeed, this is not the first time that Pakistan comes into play during election season. The “Mia Musharraf” jibe at the Congress party was after all popularised by Narendra Modi in 2014. However, the mainstay of BJP campaign theme that year was not Pakistan, but development and good governance.

Having failed to deliver credibly on any of its poll promises made in 2014, the BJP has pounced on nationalism as the recipe to return to power. The Pulwama terror attack which killed 42 CRPF men in South Kashmir could not have come at a better time. The suicide attack outraged the country. India’s bombing of the Jaish-e Mohammed centre at Balakot gave a fillip to the BJP’s strong leader narrative. The IAF hero who was captured when his plane was shot down over PoK and his subsequent return home, enthralled the urban Indians glued before their television sets to soak up every bit of the action details.

Much of this ultra-nationalism passes off as a foreign policy achievement for the BJP in its election campaign now, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself declaring that India had got inside the enemy’s territory and hit hard. While there is still debate on the amount of losses incurred on Pakistan, the super efficient BJP election machine has ensured that all this is of no consequence. Modi’s connect with the voters is perfect. Anyone questioning the state narrative is anti-national. The opposition dare not raise any doubts for fear of being dubbed as enemies of India.

While foreign policy is rarely an electoral issue for most developing countries, the relations with neighbouring countries often raised to bolster own and vilify the opponents. South Asian nations are a case in point. For a while in Bangaldesh, India was used by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party of Khaled Zia much in the way Pakistan is being by the BJP. Sheikh Hasina was constantly attacked for being an Indian stooge. In Nepal’s last elections, the fact that Prime Minister Oli took on India for its blockade of Nepal in 2015 played a significant part in winning elections for the Communists.

India’s foreign policy has seen a continuation of the Nehruvian vision by successive governments. Even though critics have torn into Nehru’s non alignment movement, we have continued with our lip service to it. The Congress manifesto this year “affirms its firm belief in the continued relevance of the policy of friendship, peaceful co-existence, non-alignment, independence of thought and action, and increased bilateral engagement in its relations with other countries of the world” reads the party’s manifesto in response to a muscular policy allegedly adopted by the Modi government.

The one new idea offered by the Congress is establishment of a National Council on Foreign Policy, where members of the Cabinet Committee on Security would me domain experts to advise the government from time to time. The rest is pretty much the same. There is not much difference between the policies of the BJP and Congress on external affairs.

The biggest tactical shift in India’s foreign policy was brought in by the Manmohan Singh government in 2006 by signing the India-US civil nuclear deal. But the UPA government hesitated to take this either to its logical conclusion or posit it as an achievement before the electorate. The ground for changing equation with the US was set in motion by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee with the  Strobe Talbot-Jaswant Singh dialogue. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has further enhanced the Indo-US partnership by signing three of the four foundation defence agreements which would help the Indian and US troops to operate together. But do such important strategic policy decision make it to the poll campaign banners? Hardly.

In the Indian foreign policy and security establishment, as well as people psyche, there is concern about moving too close to the US. So while Delhi is cautiously moving towards the US camp, it is hesitant to take the final leap. We have little idea of either the BJP or the Congress take on this. The US is keen for India to jointly patrol the South China Sea, in a show of cooperative action against Chinese assertiveness in the region. Yet like the previous UPA government, the NDA has also so far not agreed to it for fear of escalating tension with its giant Asian neighbour.

So far both the Congress and the BJP has continued with the policy of going ahead with co operation with China despite the boundary issue not having being resolved. All this is pragmatic but now with the Belt and Road Initiative of President Xi Jinping, the question is should Delhi continue to stay away? The answers are not simple but need to be debated in public. Should India go ahead and take part in certain projects which would enhance connectivitiy or oppose the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor? Does India have a realistic chance of getting back POK? All of India’s neighbours except Bhutan, have signed in. Italy has too. That should be an eye opener. The foreign policy debate in India should have been much more robust. Can India continue to ignore SAARC? How long will this boycott continue?  But on every question on SAARC, Pakistan props up and the debate goes nowhere till relations improve. We need Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi to talk all this though.

There are reasons why foreign policy is not a part of the election discourse. In a country still struggling to lift millions of people from grinding poverty, unemployment, caste and religious divisions, foreign policy does not resonate among the general voters. It is a subject confined to strategic experts and academic and power circles. India is not an advanced democracy like either Britain or the US or France. It is a democracy in the sense it holds national and state elections every five years and very little else. Questions of human rights, transparency and seldom raised except by intellectuals and activists. It does not concern the general public.

It would be of some concern to people living in border villages along the LoC who are suffering Pakistani artillery in Kashmir or Punjab. In Tripura, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Manipur and Assam, the one point agenda is to detect and deport the alleged Bangladeshi migrants who have entered the north east. All together these states carry less than 40 Lok Sabha seats in a 543-member of the Lower House. For the states that carry the lion’s share of constituencies, like Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, or Madhya Pradesh or Andhra Pradesh, where villagers struggle to make ends meet, does India’s foreign policy really impact their lives?

Thus, it will be quite some time before foreign policy discourses become part of India’s election debate. Till that happens, the electoral debate will circle around either ‘jumlas’ or basic livelihood issues.

]]>
Indian Army Is People's Fauz, Not Modi Ji Ki Sena

Indian Army Is People’s Fauj, Not Modi Ji Ki Sena

By Lt Gen Ike Singha
Time has come for a public outcry in support of no politicisation of the armed forces

Prime Ministers will come and go but Indian Army will remain the final bastion of this nation. Our defence forces have a long track record of being apolitical and are respected worldwide for their professionalism. Indian Army is the army of its people and has always acted to save its citizens from external aggression and internal disturbances or insurgencies. 

Insurgency in Punjab was controlled largely due to the fact that Indian Army under their Chief General Bipin Chandra Joshi had cleared all rural areas of militants and had left the populated urban areas to the Punjab Police. The Chief had decided that the army would not take any credit but would continue to provide area security and actionable intelligence to the state police, allow it to take the credit and re-establish its credibility. That is the mettle Indian Army is made of and the politicians of all hue and cry must adhere to the opening sentence of the code of conduct laid down by election commission that clearly states that politicisation of the army should not be resorted to.

The fire brand Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Yogi Adityanath in an election rally has remarked that Indian Army is Modi Ji Ki Sena. It is a well-known fact that this CM also had an army of his own. Indian Army is an instrument of the state and does not belong to any political party in or out of power. The credit for giving a political clearance for operating across the Line of Control should rightly go to PM Modi. Again, the credit of placing all instruments of intelligence gathering or monitoring the movement of inimical forces as also tracing the moment of own troops in territory controlled by the enemy must go to the National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.

The credit of planning and coordinating operations goes to the Director General Military Operations acting in behalf of Army Chief and the Northern Army Commander. The Corps Commander was responsible for coordinating and provision of all resources at his call to support the operation. The actual credit of launching the surgical strikes across the enemy lines goes to the Commanding Officer, the team commanders and the troops of Special Forces who went across and risked their lives and the pilots of Indian Air Force and their base commanders. If the PM, NSA, the then Army Chief or the Army Commander take credit for launching surgical strikes, then they are far from the truth. Unfortunately, for this nation, they are all taking credit, time and again, to gain votes or favours for plum appointments within and outside the country.

Number of movies and web shows like Uri and certain others have misguided the nation in showing that the operational and tactical wisdom flowed down from the PM and the NSA. The PM and NSA have had no formal training in military matters and are not well equipped to lay down operational plans. Such operations had been done earlier also but in a covert manner to impose your will on the erring opponent. The difference is that this time it was made public and the surgical strikes are being milked time and again to score browning point against political opponents. It is but natural that when corned in this issue, the opposition starts doubting the veracity of the claims and starts asking proof of these operations. Both the ruling party and the opposition have done ample harm to the credibility of our armed forces as also the confidentiality of the operational plans.

The time has come when there needs to be a public outcry in support of no politicisation of the armed forces. When you talk to the common man on the street he has a lot of respect for the armed forces. The best way to build nationalism is to have conscription wherein every abled man and woman does military training for a specific period. USA and some European nations have had conscription from time to time. Israel and some of its Arab neighbours still have conscription. It will be argued that India, because of its burgeoning population, cannot afford to have conscription. Shall we then lay it down as a legislation that all individuals aspiring for government jobs and public life must have a compulsory two years military training? That will cover all future politicians and bureaucrats.

Very systematically, the bureaucrats and the politicians over the last seven decades have been bringing down the status of the premier institution of defence forces, in successive pay commissions. The biggest user of the pay commission, the defence forces never have had a representative in the pay commission. The Ministry of Defence has not been integrated with services Headquarters like in all modern democratic nations and behaves like a higher Headquarters without having any practical knowledge of matters military. No modernisation has taken place either in the ten years of UPA government or in the last five years. The civil military relations in the county are at its lowest ebb under the present government. Although in principal, this government has given One Rank One Pay in the beginning of their tenure, the bureaucracy has successfully insulated the politicians from the services and have ensured in holding the government from completing its promises. The rapid changes of Defence Ministers who have been political light weights shows that the PMO has little time for ensuring true national security except for resorting to rhetoric and pushing agendas in the name of national security. This must change with the new government in office this summer otherwise we will get a rap on our knuckles again like 1962.

]]>
Generation Shift In Indian Politics

Election 2019 Will Witness Generational Change

By Mahendra Ved
This Lok Sabha elections, 500 million young people will vote in the country, 15 million of them for the first time

This had to happen, sooner than later. India is used to politicians furthering their social and economic clout while professing to be “in service of the people.” Now, several private institutions are producing professionally trained politicians. “Serving public” may soon be like “customer care.”

Khadi, the homespun cotton that Indian politicians generally don is optional for the young wannabe with varying political beliefs prescribed kurta –pajama-jacket uniforms. They are attending training courses that will fetch them degrees, diplomas and certificates at convocation ceremonies.

The Parliament’s Bureau of Parliamentary Research and Studies runs an internship course for the young. But now a plethora of private institutions has come up to train the young to ‘connect’ and ‘engage’ with the people. Concept of “public service” may not be prominent in the syllabi, but thankfully, the Indian Constitution is.

They charge between Rs 300,000 to Rs 1.6 million per course, promising to make “better leaders.” The corporate touch is inescapable and so is the nudge from some of the political parties who want to “catch them young.”

It is not difficult to see that besides electoral politics, the graduate can become a lobbyist, a counselor, a PR man or an analyst. These are among the areas of interest for business houses, investors, visiting suppliers and deal-makers and foreign embassies. Or, join a NGO.

Whether this kind of education and training could produce a politician willing to get hands dirty, dine with the poor in their homes and join the rough and tumble of party affairs would seem seriously doubtful to an old-timer. But if there are cyber warriors, why not have cyber politicians? Haven’t harnessing knowledge, skill and technology, and using sociology and psephology, produced strategy room analyses, surveys and Exit polls for nearly four decades now?

This has not ended, but has slashed the role of the hands-on reporter who hits the election trail, talking to the tea vendor or interviewing a bus and rail rider to fathom the ‘ground’.  As this reporter gets tech-savvy the interviewees, too, are getting smart, saying what the TV cameras want. The current campaign is hugely being driven by the social media.  

This is inevitable as India urbanizes, educates and acquires economic heft. Political activity has evolved although it requires moving out in the blazing sun to a rough rural terrain. The cyber-boys and girls would need that at least during elections and when mass movements are launched.

Going by past experience, with each Lok Sabha election, roughly a third of the 543 lawmakers are replaced or are defeated and new ones ring in. Besides growing use of technology, the current run-up to the elections is a hugely transformational exercise. To assess it, one has to jostle with personal views, political preferences and professional objectivity required of a scribe.  

Out, at least from the LoK Sabha elections are  Lal Krishna Advani and  Murli Manohar Joshi two of the founders of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Appointed ‘margadarshaks’ (advisors) five years ago, they are now, as a television debater tellingly put it, ‘darshaks’, just onlookers.

Three other Ram temple movement leaders who witnessed demolition of the historic Babri Mosque in Ayodhya city in 1992 – Uma Bharati, Kalyan Singh (now Rajasthan Governor) and Vinay Katiar — are not among the contestants. The tumultuous event they led and much that happened in its aftermath have seriously challenged the idea of an inclusive India. How these five will face prolonged court trial for their role is best left to the future.

Three scores of BJP lawmakers have been changed. The process began in 2014 with an age bar of 75. Modi denied ministerial berths to Advani and Joshi. Now the generational shift in the party has reached the next level.

Sentiments apart and even discounting speculation over lack of personal equations among other reasons for their exclusion, the BJP needs to fight incumbency. All this is inevitable in India that is seen with justification as a gerontocracy.

This is also true of other parties. Elders have been forced to be flexible as they tackle pressures from young aspirants, many of them family members – even grandchildren. Former premier H D Deve Gowda and Sharad Pawar have had to change their Lok Sabha constituencies to accommodate young wards. Her retirement plans well-known, former Congress chief Sonia Gandhi has returned to the election arena.

Mulayam Singh Yadav, having lost control of Samajwadi Party to son Akhilesh, has accepted the same party nomination. This is after the perennial prime minister-in-waiting bid farewell to parliament and surprised everyone by wishing a victorious return to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Times are changing.

Part of this change is the idea of crowd-funding of election, not exactly new, is attracting the young. Kanhaiya Kumar, former leader of the Jawaharlal Nehru University, has adopted it. Parties and their nominees unlikely to be funded by moneybags may follow him now and in future. This ensures public participation.   

Young leaders are emerging even as ‘win-ability’ compulsions force them to field the old. While Akhilesh has won the family turf war, acrimony has surfaced in the other Yadav clan in Bihar between two sons of jailed Lalu Prasad. The two northern states are crucial for the Opposition alliances to challenge Modi/BJP.

Rahul has found state satraps scuttling Congress’ alliances with other parties in Delhi, West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh. His gambit of contesting a second seat in Kerala, while boosting his party in the South where he hopes to do better than the BJP, has antagonized the communists, already angry with him for failure to align in West Bengal.

It is difficult to blame any single party. But many have seriously wondered if the Congress as the biggest opposition entity has frittered away the opportunity to show accommodation to others, thus conceding space to the ruling alliance.

The once-reticent Rahul’s in-your-face attacks on Modi have won him admirers and expectedly, counter-attacks from BJP and its social media acolytes.  In contrast, sister Priyanka’s striking presence and a conversational style appeal to listeners.

Some issues are out from the BJP’s armour. At his rallies, Modi doesn’t promise to build Ram temple anymore; nor does he defend government’s policies. It’s all hyperbole.

And some issues are passé for both sides. None talks of corruption, Rupee’s demonetization, triple talaq for Muslim women and lynching of Muslims by cow-protecting vigilantes. The opposition is silent on the Rafale aircraft deal. Call it prioritizing – or opportunism.

Overall, the opposition has fallen short in forging credible state level alliances, leave alone a national one. It is a difficult task given conflicting ambitions and support bases when transfer of votes from one party to another is not easy. The opposition does not have a tall leader who can parley across the parties.  It is advantage BJP.

With opposition alliances in many states gone awry, analysts say there is lack of clarity in opposition strategy and eventually, too much will depend on post-polls give-and-take. In 2004, that had helped the Congress race past a shocked BJP. But now, BJP is the predominant force led by the most formidable team of Modi and party chief Amit Shah, geared 24×7 into poll-mode, with full intent to retain power at any cost.

But with incumbency factor looming large, the numbers may elude Modi as of now. To get the numbers, Modi is trying hard to build sentiment, hoping to trigger a wave.

This explains his below-the-belt rhetoric. When critics are called “anti-national” and asked to “go to Pakistan” and the neighbour itself, accorded undue, exaggerated place in domestic discourse and is predicted to “die its own death,” one wonders what message electioneering in the world’s largest democracy is giving to others.

(The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com )

]]>
Punjab Farmer With Wheat Crop

Crop Diversification May End Farm Distress

By Kunal Bose
A diversified cropping pattern will help in mitigating the risks faced by farmers in terms of price shocks and production/harvest losses

If a country’s chief executive does not have an economics background and is not counselled by academically sound economists then he will be prone to making ambitious announcements which are more likely than not to run aground. More in an attempt to diffuse the growing unrest among farmers resulting from their not receiving right prices for their crop almost every planting season condemning them in growing indebtedness, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a promise in February 2016 that the government would ensure doubling of income from cultivation by 2022.

This is more easily promised than likely to be redeemed. Ahead of the start of the two sowing seasons, the government will announce minimum support prices (MSP) for 14 kharif (summer cum monsoon) crops and 8 rabi (winter) crops. All this besides, New Delhi will require of sugar factories to pay ‘fair and remunerative price’ (FRP) for sugarcane, revised every season (October to September) on recommendations of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP). The government has asked CACP to fix MSPs in a way as to ensure that farmers get at least 50 per cent higher than cost of inputs such as seeds, fertilisers and irrigation water and also unpaid value of family labour.

Whether the growers are getting MSP or are forced by circumstances to sell their crops below minimum prices, the government helped by largely an unquestioning media along with a huge publicity campaign could create a myth that finally deliverance had come for Indian farming community. In an ideal situation, farmers should see MSP as sovereign guarantee. In case they fail to realise MSP in the open market, they should be able to turn to official agencies to dispose of their crops at government guaranteed prices.

An on the spot survey carried out by Jai Kisan Andolan (JKA) a few months ago coinciding with kharif output arrivals in the market shows that on average the farmers were selling for anywhere between ₹500 (for cereals) and ₹2,000 (for dals) per quintal below the MSP. Yogendra Jadav of JKA says: “Farmers had lost around ₹1,150 crore in the first three weeks of the marketing season as they were forced to sell below the MSP.” No wonder then, the country saw protesting farmers arriving in thousands in Delhi and Mumbai to draw national attention to their privation.

The official procurement being over the years mainly focussed on rice and wheat, it has become a given that the weighted average of mandi prices of other crops such as a number of oilseeds, maize, tur and urad would trend below MSP. A spokesperson for Crisil Research says: “Our assessment indicates that crop profitability (in the past few years) has dropped across nine of the 15 states when assessment is made of 14 key MSP crops covering over 50 per cent of the sown area. We believe the challenge for the government goes beyond fixing MSP to ensuring farmers get it by strengthening the procurement machinery.” 

Close to 50 per cent of the net cropland area of 180m hectares (9.6 per cent of global coverage) being rainfall dependent, land productivity and crop size are influenced by monsoon behaviour. No wonder then, agriculture and allied sectors growth rate fluctuated between minus 0.2 per cent in 2014-15 and 4.9 per cent in 2016-17. While there are assurances from India Meteorological Department that the country will be spared El Nino, private weather forecasting agency Skymet says the southwest monsoon has a 50 per cent chance of being normal this year. So India is likely to have a good monsoon three years in a row creating condition for a good harvest.

But celebrations of the likelihood of good rains by farmers must await the prices they would be able to realise once their next crop is in the market. A structural weakness of the farm sector is that there is an inverse relationship between farm incomes and production. Prices of farm produce and incomes of growers tend to fall in times of bumper harvest. In this context is to be remembered that despite all the extension programmes the country is having over the decades, farm productivity here for most crops remains well below the world average, not to reckon the best that obtains in places such as Israel with the most efficient use of whatever little water is available, China and the US. To give two examples: First, Indian rice yield of 2,191 kg a hectare falls way short of the global average of 3,026 kg a hectare. Second, our wheat productivity of 2,750 kg a hectare also compares poorly with world average of 3,289 kg a hectare.

India will do well to take a lesson or two from China, which with less land than us under rice and wheat has remained at the top of world chart in terms of productivity and production volume. Thanks largely to the size of our cultivable area and normal monsoon rains in most major crop producing states in the current season (July to June), India is to have food grain production of 281.37m tonnes during 2018-19 compared with 277.49m tonnes in the previous agriculture season. Rice production is to be up 4.59m tonnes to 115.6m tonnes and wheat will be marginally better at 99.12m tonnes.

With this level of production, pressure will be building on the government to procure more rice and wheat than it normally does. Not surprisingly, therefore, the current season has seen the second highest ever wheat procurement of nearly 36m tonnes. Open market wheat prices are up by nearly 10 per cent. But with wheat MSP being pegged at ₹1,860 a quintal plus a bonus available at the state level, farmers would be inclined to give his produce to official agencies. Rice procurement is likely to be a record 45m tonnes. Procurement still falls short of expectations of farmers.

At the current level of procurement, India at the opening of 2019-20 agriculture crop year in July will have stocks of 77.2m tonnes, including 47.6m tonnes of wheat and 29.6m tonnes of rice. This will then be 36.1m tonnes higher than the ideal opening inventory for a season. Even while under the private entrepreneur guarantee scheme 15m tonne of covered space capacity has been created since 2010, safe and scientific food storage still remains a point of major concern. One also has to consider the major economic cost of storing grains well over the buffer norm. Of no less concern is the substantial loss of grains that India and many other countries suffer in the course of storage.

Should not then India be laying greater stress on crop diversification, specially progressively moving land from wheat and paddy, the latter specifically in states such as Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh where water is scarce? The 2017-18 Economic Survey says: “A diversified cropping pattern will help in mitigating the risks faced by farmers in terms of price shocks and production/harvest losses.” The Survey acknowledges that because of the enormous volume of land under cultivation, the country has “tremendous potential for crop diversification and to make farming a sustainable and profitable economic activity.” It’s time India had gone in a big way to grow high value crops, including horticulture items for which the demand is strong both within and outside the country.

]]>
Woman Holds Narendra Modi Cutout

Is It Advantage Modi Before The Elections Begin?

By Sanjoy Narayan
Even before the first vote is cast, and campaigning reaches its crescendo, Modi is probably entering the fray with an advantage.

A few days ago, one of India’s most respected and well-known senior TV journalists posted a tweet that was telling. She was reporting from the field in Baghpat in Uttar Pradesh and her tweet said: “A commonly described refrain about @narendramodi–not Pulwama, Balakot, or PM Kisan–is “he works really hard and he isn’t gaining anything for himself” – talking to voters in Baghpat. #OnTheRoad2019”. India’s national elections are less than a fortnight away and, increasingly, the views gleaned from the ground seem to point to a public mood that favours re-electing Mr Narendra Modi, his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, and its several allies.

Dipstick surveys of the sort that journalists often resort to—talking to local cab drivers or roadside tea stall owners is one of the commonest tactics they use—are neither rigorous nor scientific ways of gauging the pre-election mood of an electorate, at least not of one that is as diverse, complex, and confounding as that of India’s. Yet, as we head for this year’s national elections (they begin on April 11 and go on for seven phases), what people outside the high-decibel chatter on social media platforms are saying bears consideration. Mr Modi and his government appear to elicit greater levels of faith among large swathes of India’s population. So, are they headed towards an election with a definite edge over their opponents such as the Congress party or the motley crew of other parties that have been trying to forge a grand alliance to oust the BJP-led government?

When it comes to campaigning for votes Mr Modi has a clear edge over his rivals. Whatever critics say, he’s probably the best orator in Indian politics today. His speeches may be peppered with “politically incorrect” statements (recently, while speaking to students at an IIT, he appeared to be mocking Congress president Rahul Gandhi as someone suffering from dyslexia), or repetitive homilies about how his government had delivered on what it had promised, or even inaccurate accounts of things such as India’s growth, employment generation, and poverty alleviation during his regime, but his oratorical skills are clearly a huge draw among ordinary Indians who usually come out in strength to listen to him at his numerous rallies. The average Indian sees Mr Modi as a strong, hardworking leader who is honest and selfless.

A gifted speaker, Mr Modi’s rally speeches are designed to touch the heart of his audiences. He speaks to them in simple language, although he has a penchant for coining acronyms, and is usually able to create a feeling of respect, admiration and trust among them. Through his tenure, he has leveraged this talent. His monthly radio talk, Mann ki Baat, which partly crowd sources its themes, and has a potential to reach 90% of Indians, is a huge hit. He has nearly 47 million followers on Twitter and has posted more than 22,800 tweets (Donald Trump has 59.5 million and 41,000 tweets) and even though he’s faced flak for not holding a single press conference since he became Prime Minister in 2014, his alternative way of keeping in contact with people seems to have borne fruit. No one except the media complains about the PM not holding pressers.

In several polls, confidence trackers and other devices of that ilk, Mr Modi continues to be head and shoulders ahead of his rival politicians when it comes to who most people would prefer to see as the leader of their nation. In contrast, the Congress president and Mr Modi’s main rival, Mr Gandhi, is still seen as a work in progress. That may seem amusing because at 48, Mr Gandhi may be a generation younger than Mr Modi, 68, but he’s already a middle-aged man.  Mr Gandhi’s election speeches are also not remarkable. He’s not as good a public speaker. But more importantly, his speeches lack the conviction that Modi’s speeches invariably seem to have. Also, during this election season, other than the announcement of a form of universal basic income for the poorest in India, in his public utterances, there has been little of his vision for a better India.

Mr Gandhi’s party just released its manifesto for the elections, spelling out what it would do if it came to power. It was no surprise that it promised a thorough investigation into the Modi government’s deal to buy Rafale fighter jets from France—a deal that the Congress and others believe smacks of corruption. But its main focus was on creating jobs; alleviating distress among India’s farmers; and, naturally, the minimum income scheme that Mr Gandhi had announced earlier, and in which Rs 72,000 a year would be paid to the poorest 20% of households.

The BJP is yet to release its manifesto—before the last election in 2014, it had done so only very late into the campaigning period. But it would be a real surprise if that document didn’t prioritise the exact same things that the Congress’s one has. The Modi government has been perceived to be tardy on issues such as employment generation and well-being of farmers. Political prudence would dictate that these issues would feature high up on the BJP’s manifesto as well. India’s problems—particularly on the economic development front are complex and so large that no aspirant for New Delhi’s seat of power can ignore them, least of all an aspirant wanting to be re-elected.

The outcome of India’s elections—they are complex and involve various permutations and factors that influence voters’ choices—are never predictable. The size and scale of itself is massive: 820 million voters; 930,000 polling stations; 1.4 million electronic voting machines; 11 million security personnel overseeing polling over seven phases. But so is the unpredictability of the voting trends. How a party fares in populous states such as Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh (now bifurcated into two separate states), and Maharashtra could be the determinant of whether it gets a shy at forming the government. Moreover, votes are cast on the basis of many other factors that go beyond economics and the personalities of leaders. Caste and religion create blocs of voters; and India’s population of 172 million Muslims who are its largest minority have not exactly been happy in the past five years under a government led by a party whose policies have always had Hindu nationalism at its core. Recently, at one of his rallies, while upbraiding the Congress for creating the term “Hindu terror”, Mr Modi implied Mr Gandhi was contesting from an additional Muslim-dominated constituency because he was afraid of losing from his regular constituency, UP’s Amethi. In 2014, when the BJP and its allies won 336 seats out of 543 in India’s lower house of Parliament, few psephologists had been able to predict that it would be such an overwhelming win. One reason why India’s pre-poll surveys often go horribly wrong is because of the diversity and sheer size of the electorate—huge numbers of voters; and a vastly diverse population, both in terms of demographics and psychographics. In a country of 1.3 billion, sometimes the biggest sample size you can manage to poll is quite often just not big enough. Yet, even before the first vote is cast, and election campaigning reaches its crescendo, it may not be wrong to say that Mr Modi is probably entering the fray with an advantage.

]]>
BJP Ahead Of Rivals In Campaigning

BJP Has A Clear Advantage Over Rival Parties

By Anita Katyal

While a lot can change in the course of a prolonged campaign, but as of today, the BJP enjoys a clear edge over its opponents

As political parties in India hit the campaign trail for next month’s Lok Sabha elections, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party looks to be ahead of its rivals, who are still struggling to put up a united front or come up with an effective and credible narrative to take on the saffron party. 

To begin with, the BJP has entered the race with a clear advantage after it emerged as the central pole of Indian polity following its incredible win in the last general election and the subsequent string of victories it notched up in state assemblies. 

This has set the stage for a “BJP vs others” battle.

Undeniably, the election has just got underway and a lot can change in the course of the prolonged campaign, but as of today, the BJP enjoys a clear edge over its opponents. Five factors are working in favor of the saffron party: strong leadership, an effective narrative, a well-oiled party organization, a killer instinct and the alacrity with which it placated its angry allies. Of course, the BJP is also helped by the fact that it faces a fragmented opposition with no clear single leader.

The BJP’s biggest asset is Prime Minister Narendra Modi. As in the case of Gujarat assembly polls and the 2014 Lok Sabha election, the coming electoral contest is all about Modi. The BJP and its candidates contesting elections are secondary as Modi has succeeded in converting India’s Parliamentary polls into a Presidential-style contest.

Modi’s projection and acceptance as a strong, decisive leader have strengthened the public perception that no one in the opposition camp can match up to him. The Pulwama terror attack and the Balakot air strikes have enhanced the aura surrounding Modi who is being publicized as the only leader who can be trusted to give primacy to India’s national security.

Modi swept the last election with the promise of “ache din” to the electorate which was mesmerized both by his powerful oratory and his Gujarat model of development. Last time he went to the people as a challenger while in this election he is approaching them an incumbent, having been in power for five years. But, it is to his credit, that he has managed to stave off the burden of anti-incumbency despite the fact that the country is faced with a faltering economy, high unemployment, and an agrarian crisis. As a political observer rightly pointed out, people are disenchanted with Modi for not delivering on his election promises but there is no anger against him. People are willing to give him another chance on the plea that it is not possible to meet all commitments in five years.

If Modi’s leadership is working to the BJP’s advantage, the party’s firm grip on the political narrative is also helping it to set the agenda in this election. There is no doubt that before the Pulwama attack and India’s retaliatory strike against Pakistan, the Modi government had looked shaky. The BJP was on the back foot after its governments were ousted by the Congress last December in the Hindi heartland states of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh as the elections here were dominated by livelihood issues like joblessness and farmers’ woes. This was seen as a direct indictment of the Modi government’s policies. For once, it appeared that the BJP and Modi had been successfully pushed on the defensive.

But Pulwama and Balakot altered the political landscape in BJP’s favor. The party and the Modi got an opportunity to showcase their credentials as hawks on national security. Both lost no time in unleashing its nationalist agenda wherein anybody questioning the government on intelligence lapses in Pulwama or challenging BJP president Amit Shah’s claims on the body count in Balakot, were immediately dubbed “anti-national”.  While the opposition was left with little option but to support the government, Modi, Shah, and the BJP’s foot soldiers fanned out across the country to push their nationalist agenda. The Congress has since tried to change the narrative with the promise of a minimum income benefit scheme for the poor but there are few takers for it as jingoism and patriotism are clearly the flavors of the season.

Strong leadership and a powerful narrative may have given the BJP an edge but it is not taking any chances. Its party president Amit Shah, like Modi, is a 24/7 politician who has a firm grip on the organization and keeps the rank and file on a tight leash. He proved his mettle in 2014 as Uttar Pradesh in charge when the party swept the polls. Shah has acquired a reputation for micro-management thus ensuring that the party organization is always battle-ready.

Both Shah and Modi have a killer instinct and are not known to balk when faced with a challenge. They are also willing to walk the extra mile in their quest to retain power. Shah demonstrated this in his handling of the BJP’s demanding allies like the Shiv Sena, the Shiromani Akali and the Janata Dal (U). The BJP president did not hesitate to accommodate their demands by conceding to them in seat-sharing negotiations. The allies have since all fallen in line. Similarly, Shah also managed to persuade smaller allies like the Asom Gana Parishad to return to the BJP-Led National Democratic Alliance even though it had walked out in protest over the Citizenship Rights Bill. Showing a streak of pragmatism, the Modi government chose to go slow on this contentious legislation, which gives citizenship to Hindus from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Bhutan, even though this legislation is in line with the ideology of the BJP’s mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. This Bill led to strong protests in the entire North-East region but the controversial legislation is all but forgotten as the BJP thought it better to put in cold storage when it realized it was derailing its mission to take control of this region once dominated by the Congress.

Vote For Calf And Cow

Catchy Slogans Reflect India’s Electoral Journey

By Mahendra Ved

Slogans are the essence of an election campaign as they project personalities and issues. In throes of its 17th Lok Sabha elections, India votes for those that carry a balance of wit and sarcasm.

Simple, black-and-white posters with the slogan “YOU can defeat S K Patil,” appeared in the summer of 1966, inviting voters of South Bombay, India’s principal hub of businesses and corporate headquarters. Trade unionist George Fernandes was challenging a powerful man of the rich. He won the “David vs. Goliath” contest and became “George, the Giant Killer”.

Slogans are the essence of an election campaign as they pithily project personalities and issues. Now in throes of its 17th polls, India votes for those that carry a balance of wit and sarcasm.

Meant to capture imagination of the masses, the slogans aim to be everything to everybody. It is difficult to impact a billion-plus people of varying age and income groups, of different faiths and castes.

No wonder, for the best of ideas to emerge, millions are spent in conceptualizing, then pushing them. It’s serious business for the parties as well as the advertising and PR firms. Who is engaging whom and the campaign content and strategy are kept secret.

The first general election in 1952 had “self-reliance” as its slogan, reflecting aspirations of a newly-independent nation, bearing Jawaharlal Nehru’s signature. For the next (1957), it was industry, the “temples of modern India.” The focus in 1962 was on India’s place in the comity of nations. All along his Congress party’s symbol was a pair of bullocks, symbolizing the farming India.

Change came post-Nehru, in 1967. Considered weak, Indira Gandhi found competition from the political right and the left. Bharatiya Jana Sangh, earlier avatar of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) sought to take its thunder away with the slogan “Har haath mein kaam, har khet mein paani” (job for every hand, water for every farm), both lighted by ‘diya’ (lamp). Its party symbol underscored this reality even as the country was getting electrified, urbanized and industrialized.

Congress projected itself as the face of development with Progress through Congress campaign in the 1960s. But he Left, of varying hues, challenged it. Socialist Fernandes and Communist party of India (CPI) chief S A Dange were among then Bombay’s opposition candidates. A telling wall painting asked the people, reversing the Congress slogan, to choose between “Congress Or Progress.”

With that election, the Congress’ preeminence ended and that also ended the era of innocence, if there was one.  “Vote for calf and cow, forget all others now” became the Congress symbol after it split and lost the pair-of-bullocks symbol. Critics mocked at its quasi-religious touch and likened the new pair to Indira and younger son Sanjay.

In those times of frequent shortages and price rise, Jan Sangh coined a funny but telling slogan about sugar and edible oil: “Yeh dekho Indira ka khel, kha gayi shakkar, pee gayi tel”.

But there was no stopping Indira, who sprang a surprise election. She fought the opposition’s “Grand Alliance” in 1971 with “Garibi hatao, Indira lao, Desh bachao.”  Shiv Sena’s Balasaheb Thackeray, known for biting political cartoons, caricatured Indira ceremonially riding an elephant, promising end to poverty.

The opposition said she actually wanted “Garib Hatao” — banish the poor. But “Garibi Hatao” worked, and to date remains the most effective slogan ever coined in India.

But when she announced snap elections again in 1977, after 19 months of internal emergency with media gagged and the opposition leaders jailed, Jaiprakash Narayan coined the slogan “Indira Hatao, Desh Bachao.” People heeded him.

The most emotive slogan came after her assassination in 1984. Jab tak sooraj chand rahega, Indira tera naam rahega (your name will endure like sun and moon). The sympathy it generated caused a landslide victory of the Congress.  

By the end of the 1980s, India was in throes of a movement to build a Ram temple in Ayodhya city where 16th century Babri Mosque once stood. The BJP and its affiliates’ slogan for the 1991 polls was “Bachcha bachcha Ram ka, Janmabhoomi ke kaam ka”. But in a repeat of 1984, the Congress gained sympathy after Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated.

Post-Babri demolition in 1992, the 1993 election in Uttar Pradesh witnessed the BJP’s surprise debacle. Mulayam Singh’s Samajwadi Party and Kanshiram’s Bahujan Samaj Party had forged a winning alliance. The slogan was Miley Mulayam-Kanshiram, hawa ho gaye Jai Shree Ram. The alliance had snuffed out the temple issue.

It is significant to recall it because the two otherwise competing parties have again forged what seems the most potent alliance to defeat BJP.

Confronted by caste and communal combinations in 1996, the Congress sought to adopt a secular high-ground with Jaat par na paat par, mohar lagegi haath par, seeking vote for hand, its symbol. But it lost to the BJP slogan, Bari bari sab ki bari, ab ki bari Atal Bihari.

Vajpayee did get his turn and ruled for six years. But in 2004, he lost in an election advanced by over-confidence amidst “India Shining” slogan. In many ways, Congress President Sonia Gandhi was its architect. The slogan in 2009 was “Sonia nahi yeh aandhi hai, doosri Indira Gandhi hai”.   It worked. Five years later, a listless party, without a worthwhile slogan, touched its nadir in 2014. Now, the mantle has fallen on daughter Priyanka,who resembles her granny.    

In 2004, seeking a comeback, the Congress party targeted “aam aadmi”, India’s growing middle-class population. Ironically, it has since been hijacked by one of the key drivers – and beneficiaries — of the anti-graft movement that targeted the Congress. Aam Aadmi Party chief Arvind Kejriwal rules Delhi.  

Sadly, this year there is more of name-calling than slogans to galvanize the conducting of an election campaign on issues. The current toxic discourse many jibes hit below the belt. A mix of personal and political malice, they don’t even qualify as slogans.

The Election Commission of India and its state-level offices ignore the good and the bad ones, and curb the ugly ones. Often, by the time they act, the damage is done.

India has been witnessing a sustained campaign in recent years, with or without elections taking place, transcending political and ideological differences, to malign and belittle opponents.

Amidst demonization of the Nehru-Gandhi ‘dynasty’, Sonia Gandhi can never leave behind her Italian birth and her son Rahul remains ‘pappu’, a simpleton. The latest is ‘pappi’, for sister Priyanka.

The Congress responds by launching personal attacks on Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It is necessary to condemn all those muddying polls discourse. But one comes across justification in the way other leaders across the world behave, especially US President Donald Trump who trashes critics, especially women. Who will work for this “climate change” and cleanse the world?  

Un-related to elections, Rahul’s “Suit Boot ki Sarkar” attacking Modi’s sartorial taste had hit the bull’s eye. But the polls campaign so far has not thrown up a positive Congress slogan. That task seems to have been conceded to Modi and the opposition slogans are almost entirely reactive.

Projecting India’s security as supreme, Modi has called himself the ‘chowkidar’ guarding the nation — on the border with Pakistan (China does not figure, though), and within the country from the corrupt and the “anti-nationals” (read all critics). This has been met with sharp rebuttal by the opposition that accuses Modi and his government of corruption, mainly in the Rafale aircraft deal, favouring select business houses, saying “chowkidar chor hai” (the guard is a thief). This is tit-for-tat, perhaps born out of years of Rahul’s belittling.   

Modi has sought to turn this charge to advantage by reinforcing it with “main bhi chowkidar hoon.” Now, his ministers and party leaders are using this as a prefix, a badge of honour. Many acolytes on the social media have followed suite. This has no known precedence.

Among others, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s campaign, also personalized, calls him “Aaccha hai, Sachha hai, Chalo Nitish Ke Saath Chalein.” Its rival Rashtriya Janata Dal is shying away, since its supremo Lalu Prasad is in jail. It has opted for “berozgari hatao, arakshan badhao”, focusing on jobs and reservation.

In 2014, BJP appealed in Modi’s name: Ab ki Baar Modi Sarkar. This time over, it is again in his name:“Modi Hai toh Mumqin hai” (With Modi, it is possible to achieve). ‘Chaiwala’, the humble tea-vendor has yielded place to “chowkidar.”  

“Your Chowkidar is standing firm and serving the nation. But, I am not alone. Today, every Indian is saying-#MainBhiChowkidar.”  The target is 400 seats out of 543: “Abki baar 400 ke paar”.

Two months from now we will know if the gatekeeper gets fresh mandate or some other(s) gate-crash.

The writer can be contacted mahendraved07@gmail.com

Will Lok Sabha Polls 2019 Be A Referendum On Modi?

By Mahendra Ved

The world’s largest democracy, a major economy but by no means prosperous, India is also the most expensive when holding its elections.

Its 2014 democratic exercise cost as much as the United States’ 2012 presidential elections, when Barack Obama was re-elected. The one beginning next month, estimated by New Delhi-based Centre for Media Studies, may cost $ seven billion, or INR 50,000 crores.

Another calculation by political scientist Milan Vaishnav is of a whopping $10 billion, based on growth in expenditure incurred for two polls conducted in 2009 and 2014.  The US spent much less, $6.5 billion while electing Donald Trump in 2016.

These huge sums do not come only from the state that funds conducting of the polls. Contestants receive contributions, overt and covert, from businesses, corporate sector and the untaxed and largely invisible farm income. Experience shows that they are made with the understanding that the next government will tweak laws to help recover that money. This breeds corruption.

Should such an expensive exercise be a cacophony that it now seems?

With three weeks to go, the air is thick with hyper-nationalistic fervor triggered by last month’s terror attack in Kashmir followed by India-Pakistan aerial stand-off.

Tensions have subsided but not really ended. Speculation persists over its resumption, should there be another incident on the border or in India-controlled Kashmir. Such eventuality, assuming the world community (mainly the United States) is surprised again, is certain to sweep all other issues out of the polls.

Leaving aside madcaps (there are some on both sides of the Indo-Pak border) who think that India engineered the Pulwama attack, it seems god-sent for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government and the ruling alliance.

To his credit, Modi did act tough, defying the nuclear threshold that has prevented a larger conflict, but not stopped Pakistan from using its so-called “non-state actors” for staging terror attacks. This was something his predecessors Manmohan Singh (in 2008 Mumbai terror attacks) and Atal Bihari Vajpayee (Kargil-1999, and attack on Indian Parliament-2001)  had not. Modi then swept the nation mounting an “I will not let the country down” campaign, converting the polls campaign into one referendum on national security.

His party, its ideological affiliates and a huge army of cyber warriors troll anyone critical of security lapses and/or seeking details of what precisely happened on the border.

The elections are now divided pre and post-Pulwama. The opposition is on the back-foot. As loyalty to the nation of those who ask questions, howsoever legitimate, is questioned, undoubtedly, this means political/electoral gains and losses.

People across the spectrum — media, academics and security experts among retired soldiers and diplomats – even individual families – are divided. Some ruling alliance stalwarts have gleefully given themselves more seats than they hoped to win earlier in parliament and state legislatures thanks to the border incidents. With Modi being projected as the superhero pandering to popular yearning of a strong leader, the pitch is queered against the opposition.  

However, past electoral outcomes have been mixed and indicate that there are limits to all this. For one, Kashmir and war with Pakistan do not resonate in India’s south as they do in the north and the west. Polls were won after conflicts, but not swept, be it in 1971 when Congress’ Indira Gandhi helped breaking-up of Pakistan and emergence of Bangladesh. BJP’s Vajpayee got the same numbers after the Kargil conflict in 1999. 

Electoral verdicts do not always match popular sentiments. The BJP lost in Uttar Pradesh 11 months after its cadres demolished the 16th century Babri Masjid in 1992.  And although it dubbed Manmohan Singh India’s “weakest prime minister” and BJP veteran L K Advani used the pejorative ‘nikamma’ (hopeless) after the terror attacks in Mumbai in 2008, the Congress improved its parliamentary majority and Singh got a second term.

But popular sentiments yielded results post-“surgical strikes” in Kashmir in 2016 by Modi Government. The BJP swept the polls in Uttar Pradesh despite the miseries caused by demonetization of the currency. Political engineering helped consolidation of the majority community’s vote at the expense the minority Muslims.

Most populous UP is the principal battleground now where the BJP is being seriously challenged by Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party. Credible reports indicate that the Modi campaign is working. That 11 of the 44 soldiers who died in Pulwama were from the state matters. But, this is as-of-now, since the difficult-to-fathom public mood can change. And none can fathom how the rural mind, in UP and elsewhere, perceives these polls.

Arguably, the public at large is more worried about dal-roti. If it is looking for options other than Modi, it doesn’t find credible faces among the opposition. What began as Modi-versus-the-rest effort has stuttered. Some contenders have emerged following state-level alliances, but a credible national alternative is absent.   

The communists who forged alternative fronts in the past, providing political edge by helping formulate socio-economic common minimum programme have become irrelevant.

Next, the Congress has failed to accept allies and also being acceptable as a key opposition driver. Its alliance-making is non-starter. Its past gives it a misplaced sense of entitlement. Rahul Gandhi, despite his belated surge at the national level in the last one year and winning in three key states, cannot match up against the prime ministerial ambitions of numerous state satraps. 

The impact of its ‘brahmastra’, the most potent weapon Priyanka Gandhi, will be known only when results are out. Rahul’s Ailing mother and former party chief Sonia is contesting to save her turf. Those who yearn for Congress’ return, if only as a lesser evil, may be in for a disappointment.

The Pulwama plank seems to have stonewalled the Rafael deal debate. It also excludes any discourse on day-to-day issues, especially on the troubled economy. The government version dominates through its massive propaganda machinery. Bulk of the media, both mainstream and social, the key urban drivers, are divided on pro and anti- government lines.

Politicians are generally not economists. And even if they are, they remain politicians first. Modi too is a politician, and a good one at that. All his major moves are politically motivated. His deft political engineering, now topped with “Pulwama patriotism”, has muted discussion on unemployment with job growth at its lowest in 40 years after statistics officially put out but discredited by the government itself.

His government continues to project demonetization of 86 percent of the currency notes three years ago in terms of curbing black money and denial of funds to militant bodies, when subsequent indicators have shown otherwise.   

Falling exports have yet to catch up the 2013-14 level. Industrial growth in January slowed down to 1.7 percent compared to the 2.6 percent in factory output in December last year. The GDP remains under-7 percent.

Equally serious is the farm distress. Thousands unable to repay debts have committed suicide. Minimum support price for farm produce and waiving of farm loans have come too late in the day.  Low inflation has been driven by falling food prices, cutting farmers’ incomes and pushing up debt levels. About 800 million depend on farming for their livelihood.

With Saudi Arabia, the largest source, committed to production cuts to keep crude oil prices low, it seems unlikely that India’s fuel and energy costs, a key factor for the economy, will stay soft for long. And with political parties opening the spending spigot in a bid to woo voters, inflationary impulses will quicken.

Modi remains way ahead of his rivals. But there is a risk to democrcy. Political analyst Vijay Sanghvi says Modi has isolated himself thanks to his governance style. “He has reduced the status and stature of every minister and party leader. No one informs him of rampant growth of corruption at lower levels.  Unemployment is more hurting as low grade jobs are lost.”

The newest campaign slogan “Modi Hai toh Mumqin Hai” (It’s possible with Modi) reinforces this and places him as the centerpiece of a nationwide campaign. 

This election is for the soul of India and its pluralism. But it would also be a referendum on Modi.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Expect No Miracle But Priyanka Makes polls Exciting

By Anita Katyal

As political parties in India get ready for the mother-of-all electoral battles, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra has emerged as the X-factor in the forthcoming contest.

Her formal entry into politics nearly two months ago as Congress general secretary in-charge of eastern Uttar Pradesh created a buzz in political circles. For starters, Priyanka succeeded in galvanizing an otherwise frustrated and dejected party cadre. 

Always seen as a natural and instinctive politician unlike her brother Congress president Rahul Gandhi, Congress workers had been clamouring for years that Priyanka is given a larger role in the party. Her resemblance to her grandmother Indira Gandhi, her easy connect with people and her ability to give speeches in flawless Hindi had convinced the party rank and file that Priyanka indeed possesses the Midas touch to turnaround the  Congress’s fortunes, not just in Uttar Pradesh but across the country.

However, Priyanka is a mystery for the Congress party’s political opponents. The Bharatiya Janata Party was, of course, quick to attack the Congress for promoting dynastic politics when Priyanka was appointed party general secretary. The BJP followed it up by highlighting her husband Robert Vadra’s involvement in dubious land deals. At the same time, the Modi government fast-tracked pending inquiries against Vadra soon after Priyanka’s plunge into politics. Her decision to back her husband and her public declaration that she “stands by her family” baffled the BJP as it did not know how it should react to Priyanka the politician. The Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi Party, which left the Congress out of their seat-sharing arrangement in Uttar Pradesh, is also wary about the impact Priyanka could make in this electorally-crucial state which sends 80 members to the Lok Sabha.

After its initial acerbic comments on Priyanka, the BJP decided to ignore the new Gandhi in the field. On her part, Priyanka also went underground after making a splash with a roadshow in Lucknow. The Pulwama attack and India’s retaliatory air strike against Pakistan sent the Congress into a tailspin and forced it to put its political activities on a temporary hold. Priyanka’s much-awaited press conference was called off while her tour programme was deferred. With the BJP riding high on its nationalist agenda, it appeared that the euphoria over Priyanka’s political debut had waned.

But now that the Lok Sabha election is round the corner and the country is in the grip of feverish political activity, Priyanka has come out of her shell. This will force the Congress party’s political rivals to reassess Priyanka’s political role.

After keeping a low-profile for the past two months, the new Congress general secretary finally addressed her first public meeting and, that too, in Ahmedabad, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s home turf. Her brief, understated speech referred to the Modi government’s failure to deliver on its promise to create more jobs while drawing attention to farmers’ woes and the issue of women’s security but without naming the Prime Minister.

At the same time, Priyanka has embarked on her first tour in Uttar Pradesh including a boat ride down the Ganga, from Prayagraj to Varanasi. Modi’s Parliamentary constituency. Undoubtedly, Priyanka is familiar with Uttar Pradesh. She has been managing both Rahul and Sonia Gandhi’s Lok Sabha constituencies, Amethi and Rae Bareli, for several years now. But so far, she confined her activities to the two Nehru-Gandhi bastions. She is now stepping out of this safety zone and in a new role. Her public foray will be monitored closely by her own party and its rivals as each one seeks to assess how people are reacting to her and whether she can live up to her reputation as the Congress party’s trump card.

But Priyanka has a tough job at hand. The Congress has been reduced to a bit player in Uttar Pradesh, having lost its traditional support base of Brahmins, Dalits, and minorities to the BJP and the two regional forces, the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party. With a defunct party organisation and no social base, Priyanka requires more time to get the Congress back in shape. She was given charge of Eastern Uttar Pradesh barely three months before the election which certainly does not give her sufficient time to build a cadre and carve out a social base for the Congress.

As it is, Priyanka has to contend with a resurgent BJP, which got an impressive 42 percent vote share in the 2014 Lok Sabha election in Eastern Uttar Pradesh, the area under her charge. At the same time, the SP-BSP combine, which brings together the social forces of Dalits, Yadavs, and minorities, also poses a tough challenge as it has an equally strong presence in this region.

The Congress is hoping that Priyanka will succeed in disturbing the BJP’s Brahmin vote and reach out to Dalits and minorities, particularly women, youth and workers. It is a tall order but in the process of rebuilding and strengthening the Congress, the party may end up helping the BJP as her outreach has the potential of dividing the anti-BJP vote. It is unlikely that Priyanka’s presence will work instant miracles.

The Congress rank and file will possibly have to wait till the 2022 assembly election to find out if Priyanka has what it takes to pull the party out of oblivion. After all, Rahul Gandhi did say that Priyanka is here for a long haul.

Manohar Parrikar: Destiny Ends A Brilliant Career

By Lt Gen Ike Singha

Manohar Parrikar was the most stable, effective, amiable and intelligent Raksha Mantri (RM) from the NDA 1 and 2 so far. He has been one of the few forward looking Raksha Mantris (RMs) of India who was pragmatic, hardworking, clear headed and open to suggestions. He always gave us an out of box solution to certain vexed issues. Shortly after taking over as RM he proclaimed that he would give the services a Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) provided all three services were on the same platform.

Passing away of Manohar Parrikar is a loss not to the BJP alone but the whole political community of modern India. Tributes have been received cutting across party lines because essentially he was a cultured and amicable person who generally maintained the dignity of his office. A young IIT graduate, Manohar Parrikar became the Chief Minister of Goa in 2000 at the age of 45. Prior to that he had been an RSS worker from school days and leader of the opposition in Goa assembly. In one of the election conclaves of BJP in Goa in 2013, he was the first one to suggest that Modi should lead a united BJP campaign at national level. Modi was grateful to him and as a goodwill gesture got him to the Centre as a full time RM in November 2014. Prior to him the significantly important portfolio of defence was given as additional charge to an ailing finance minister.

The defence budget being limited in resources, Parrikar was able to clearly and pragmatically prioritise procurements for the three services. While he understood the need for modernisation of all the three services, he was also able to devise a time bound procurement plan. He tried to streamline and simplify procurement procedures and ushered in a new procurement policy. He had a very analytical mind and his being an IIT graduate helped him in coherently finding the way forward. A patient listener, he was quite quick on the uptake and was able to suggest workable but sometime naive, out of the box solutions to the defence forces.

Although he had excellent managerial abilities at the highest levels, his understanding about the actual conduct of operations was limited due to lakh of actual combat experience. However, he was a quick learner and during his short stint as the RM, the Army conducted surgical strikes across the international border with Myanmar and across line of Control in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir.

As a first he ordered some high level studies to be conducted by a group of retired and serving officers to streamline efficient functioning of the armed forces. As a result of these studies, outdated organisations were pruned or closed down to spare manpower and equipment for newly desired capabilities and capacity building.

The man had a flip side of his personality. He had no penchant for customs and time tested traditions of the armed forces and tried to bring in contemporary business practices which were not always well received by the veterans community. He was seen taking salute at ceremonies like guard of honour, a very solemn affair, in Chappals and crumpled bush shirt. At the same time, he was immaculately dressed in suit and Oxford shoes when he attended similar ceremonies abroad especially in the western countries. This did not go well with maintaining the traditions, ethos and elan of our proud armed forces and the veteran community.

Although he promised institution of the post of CDS and exhibited a will to resolve the One Rank One Pay issue, the bureaucrats salvaged his efforts and did not let these resolutions go through. He took credit for surgical strikes stating that he told the army what to do and how to do disregarding and downplaying the immaculate planning by senior officers and bold and audacious execution by junior leaders and troops on the ground. He did shake the bureaucrats a bit in a bid to make them more accountable and efficient but could not change their moral fibre and archaic ways of functioning.

He deviated from the proven tradition of martial music on beating the retreat after Republic Day celebrations to contemporary Bollywood style music with band players swaying in a manner not conforming to the values and traditions of the services. He was highly criticised for this act by the veterans and he confessed that he should take advice from the senior serving and retired officers before introducing radical changes. Inspite of his lack of strategic and operational depth in matters purely military, as a senior level manager he always gave suggestions some of which were workable and deserved to be given a chance.

Parrikar gave a fillip to all stalled defence projects because prior to him the services were not able to approach and convince the part time RM the necessity and urgency. Once he got the complete picture, which took about three months of detailed briefings from November 2014 to February 2015, he was able to prioritise logically and suggest to us how to stagger big ticket projects over the years in order to fit into the allotted defence budget. 

The much debated Rafael deal also exhibited his pragmatic approach wherein he agreed with PMO that at least two squadrons required urgently for strategic reasons should be procured through the fast government to government lane. Once the PMO took full charge of the Rafael deal he told the Ministry of Defence (MOD) to maintain a standoff distance and stayed out of the controversy inspite of opposition trying to rope him in.

In one of our meetings on enhancing the capacity of defence industries, I suggested to him that these units only worked during day light hours and if we had three continuous shifts around the clock like the heavy steel plants, then we could triple our production. He quite liked the idea but unfortunately, continuity was not maintained as he was sent back to Goa to cobble a minority coalition BJP government, which non other than him could have managed to stitch ; since one to one, congress had 25 percent more number of legislators than BJP in the state.

Parrikar would be remembered for what he achieved in his short life. Goa will always remain indebted to him for all the development he carried out in the state. The armed forces would always wish he had a longer tenure with them.

(The writer worked closely with Manohar Parrikar during the latter’s tenure as Defence Minister)