Terrorism and the Elections

The failure of the BJP to notch up a victory in Delhi has started a lively political debate in India regarding the electoral marketability of the "issue" of terrorism. Some have argued that, much like that of Madrid train bombings of 2004, the impact of the Mumbai terrorist attack of 26/11 on Indian voters has been transformational. It has been suggested that terrorism has been elevated to a "national issue", which is an euphemistic way of saying that the people of India refuse to see it any longer as a communal issue and refuse to believe any particular political party is any more serious about dealing with it than any other.

This pipe dream of the English language press has been played up no end, with newspaper after newspaper effectively congratulating the voters of Delhi for rejecting the "communal" BJP in favour of the secular Congress. The message was so shrill that a version of this was picked up by the BBC and the Associated Press, but not before the Indian liberals had carefully inserted the words "Hindu Nationalist" before the BJP and had made sure to remind the world that the Congress was "the party of Mahatma Gandhi". One wonders why no newspaper ever reminds African Americans that the Republican Party is "the party of Abraham Lincoln".

Back home, the Oracle opines that this might be a case of reading too much into a small state election. Delhi, after all, is the smallest of the four heartland states that went to elections and the personal popularity of Sheila Dikshit, her focus on state issues and the highly informed electorate of Delhi (which can discern State and Central government powers/concerns very easily) played a huge part in the outcome. The BJP certainly has reasons to worry, after whittling away a healthy pre-election lead; and then losing dismally in the immediate aftermath of a "spectacular" terrorist attack.

But not too many! If you look carefully at the electoral history of India, you will notice that major events have, of themselves, rarely proved to change public opinion overnight. What one needs is time... time for a political party to build a political campaign around the event. In the case of Delhi, this is precisely what the BJP lacked... enough time to make political capital over the Mumbai terrorist attacks. A simple example of this phenomenon would be the following: the burning of the Sabarmati express did not have an immediate effect on electoral outcomes in Gujarat. In fact, the Congress won handsomely in several small, local elections held after the Godhra incident, leading at least one senior Congress leader to say smugly: The Congress has swept all the elections in Gujarat pre-Godhra and post-Godhra. If Narendrabhai had not crisscrossed Gujarat on his Gaurav Yatra, or if VHP cadres had not campaigned in the tribal areas of Gujarat wearing tee-shirts with the message "क्या आप गोधरा को भूल सकते हैं ?", the outcome might well have been different. Kandhmahal would be another case in point, where the BJP made very little impact in local body elections despite the highly publicized communally charged situation on the ground. Again, the BJP hardly campaigned in Kandhmahal on the issue of Hindutva.

The lesson for the BJP is that it cannot hope to benefit from any communally charged situation unless it actually campaigns on the issue. As far as Delhi is concerned, the BJP never had the time to work the issue into the campaign. A last minute advertisement in the newspapers does not count as a campaign and it gives ammunition to BJP bashers in the media. Compare this to the situation in Jammu, where the BJP's performance was stellar. There the BJP had time to convert the groundswell of public anger into votes, by means of an effective campaign. At one point, the BJP was leading in 17 seats, a score that shrank to 11 (which is still a gain of 10 seats!!), probably due to widespread public realization that, of the 4 parties: Congress, PDP, NC and BJP, the BJP alone has no chance at power at all. Nevertheless, Ghulam Nabi Azad's statement that the BJP's gains are "worrisome" is extremely reprehensible. The connotation that the BJP is somehow anti-national is reprehensible and rather ironic, particuarly because the Congress party declared that it was open to tie up with a party that was both "secular" and "nationalist". The PDP does not make the grade as either "secular" or "nationalist" and the Congress should know that. Apart from that, the Congress should be reminded of its seat sharing arrangement with the Muslim League (IUML) in Kerala. Of course, Ghulam Nabi toned down his remark later on to say that "BJP has won but Jammu has lost, because the BJP will never make it to power". Yet, the act of an elected leader thus belittling the verdict of the people as well as the accompanying admission that the new Government of J&K intends to punish the Jammu region is despicable.

The issue of terrorism remains at the heart of the Indian election. The media should stop insulting the intelligence of the people by suggesting that the masses are being somehow anti-national by linking Islam to terrorism. For what it's worth, people will never stop linking Islam to terrorism, nor Walt Disney to Mickey Mouse. However, the BJP must admit that the "old Hindutva" package has outlasted its utility. No longer do the people of India respond emotionally to the building of a temple in Ayodhya, Bhojshala or in Chikmanglur. People want peace and progress and terrorism threatens both of these aims. It is not very wise to think that people will not respond positively to a message that aims to deal with terrorism with a heavy hand.

However, in order to make the issue of terrorism more effective, the BJP needs a better public relations campaign. The party knows that it is not a favourite of the English language media and has not taken sincere steps to remedy the situation. The party's campaign managers have also been ineffective in sending out certain messages to the people. For instance, the BJP often comes under fire for having let out Masood Azhar during the Kandahar crisis. The Congress has been given a free hand by the media to twist the story so far out of shape that now it usually reads like as though the BJP Government eagerly surrendered to the terrorists, not with 189 Indian lives hanging in the balance. To my knowledge, the BJP has never mounted an offensive campaign to compare and contrast this with the shameful surrender of Indian national interests to the personal interests of Rubaiyya Sayeed in 1989. Instead, Advani has cowered, sinking to the extent of suggesting that he was not even part of the decision to release Masood Azhar. The BJP must learn to fight the media battle, or else, as the Delhi verdict showed, one does not always have enough time to hit the streets and campaign. The Congress instead, had the luxury of their campaign message being beamed directly into the living rooms of the city, without having to put a foot on the ground.

So, what have we learned? We summarize as follows:

a. The "old Hindutva" is dead: Construction of temples, etc. is no longer a major issue. Public discourse has moved beyond that.

b. "Hindutva" needs to be repackaged as anger against Islamic terrorism in order to make an impact. This is because terrorism threatens the promise of a rising India.

c. There is no automatic route from "communal incidents" to electoral victory: A lot of energy has to go into the campaign, before an issue can be translated into votes.

d. For "Hindutva" to be effective, the atmosphere must be conducive and the campaign effective: Kalyan Singh tried to evoke Hindutva out of nowhere in Uttar Pradesh in 2007 and it resulted in nothing but disappointment. Hindutva must be accompanied with a strong commitment to development, with Hindutva justified by the necessity to do "all it takes" to remove obstacles to progress. It's the idea of "Hindutva+". In Gujarat, they call it "Moditva".

e. The BJP needs to have better relations with the English language media. A crop of argumentative, English speaking leaders who can dictate the airwaves would be a pleasant change. There is nothing like the luxury of having the media campaign for you, for free.

Assembly Polls-II: Congress couldn't care less about losing 2 states

That the Congress read the results of the latest round of Assembly polls as a victory for itself shows how little the grand old party expects of itself. The Congress retained Delhi, while in Rajasthan, Gehlot's forces, soundly thrashed 123-51 five years ago, barely limped to within a small distance of the finish line. The BJP, on the other hand, registered convincing victories in two other states.

Although the Congress is probably sleeping more soundly than the BJP, alarm bells are sounding for the former across the country. The Congress has been shrinking in the South and the East and the West. One of the strengths of the Congress thus far was its ability to routinely unseat the BJP wherever it was incumbent (except for Gujarat, of course). With this election, all that has changed. The BJP is becoming the "natural party of governance" in Central and North Western India, building a solid bulwark from Orissa to Gujarat. The Congress is facing wholesale disaster in Maharashtra and has managed a half hearted mandate in Rajasthan. The BJP is also set to take advantage of the political mess in Jharkhand and Nitish Kumar seems to be holding in Bihar. As part of the long term picture, the Congress party is getting boxed into a strip of land around Delhi (Delhi-Punjab-Haryana), much like the Mughals in their last years.

The convincing nature of the BJP's victory in Madhya Pradesh has taken everyone by surprise and brought much fanfare to the humble Shivraj Singh Chouhan, one of the less fancied politicians in the country. The Chief Minister deserves much praise for singlehandedly bringing the party out of doldrums in the state. Less than a year ago, when the BJP suffered humiliating defeats in Khargonne and Sanwer Lok Sabha constituences, most pundits had written the BJP off. The Congress sensed the surge and called on its cadres to do an encore at a massive workers rally in Chhindwara. Then something changed: the people's Chief Minister decided to get involved. He stemmed the rot by camping for a month in Betul for the Assembly bypoll and gave the BJP some breathing space ahead of the election. Then, two months before the election, Chouhan began his "Aashirwaad Yatra". Although the Chief Minister's soujourn was captured by few television cameras, reports of rural mobilisation in response to Chouhan's reassuring message of continued, diligent development continued to surface throughout. Chouhan's tour transformed the electoral landscape completely; forcing comparisons of the former's developmental image with Digvijay's dysfunctional regime. Once the mood in MP had become more conducive to the BJP, changing party candidates projected the cathartic approach of the party and negated local anti-incumbency.

Chhattisgarh followed much the same script; a "humble" Chief Minister with halting English who was fluent in the language of the masses, the message of continued development, new faces in the list of candidates and a sweet victory for the BJP. The election also showed the BJP's lock on the tribal vote and a much mellowed Ajit Jogi freely conceded that the Congress inability to appeal to the tribals had cost them the election. The BJP swept Bastar and almost all of South Chhattisgarh, affirming that tribals across the country, once a Congress core constituency, had switched over to the BJP nationwide. The stability of the tribal votebank makes them a precious asset to the BJP, be they the tribals of Gondwana, Jhabua, Dang, Amravati, Surguja, Ganjam, Mewar or the Scheduled Tribes down south in Karnataka.

The BJP's victory in Chhattisgarh is also a firm, democratic affirmation for the pro-national Salwa Judum. Although it is a pity that Congress leader Mahendra Karma who mooted the idea of the Salwa Judum ended up losing his seat, the nationalist stance of the voters has silenced many critics. The verdict is a fitting retort to the storm of misinformation created by zealous Indian liberals who have made a career in the West out of misrepresenting the unusually tolerant Hindus as the most bigoted people in the world. Documentary after documentary showed smug "human rights" workers hurling invective and prevarication at hysterical, sloganeering Salwa Judum rallies, but conveniently forgot to translate the slogan of "Bharat Mata ki jai" that was actually being raised at those events for the benefit of Western audiences. Of course, no one suspects that the people's verdict will cause Arundhati Roy and her ken to drop their anti-national stance, but one can hope she will be taken a little less seriously.

On the whole, the BJP seems to have done reasonably well in protecting two incumbent governments and seems to have discovered a workable formula for retaining power. Since most the lethargy, bureaucracy and corruption exists at the local level, MLAs tend to accumulate a fair bit of incumbency baggage. If the party can provide a leader at the helm who can be seen as a serious proponent of development, incumbency need not necessarily disable a party in the election. The other achievement for the BJP is the creation of solid regional leaders with a following all their own. The party has perfected the art of transforming lightweights into public icons: Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Raman Singh, Vasundhara Raje and B S Yediyurappa. Even the formidable Narendrabhai Modi used to hang around in the back alleys of the BJP's office at Ashok Road in New Delhi before he was catapulted into the Big League. The Congress structure of starving upcoming leaders of opportunity in order that all glory may lie with the divine family is the real reason why the party does not name its Chief Ministerial candidate ahead of an election. In this respect Sheila Dikshit has set a new standard of courage by not thanking Sonia Gandhi even once after the results in Delhi. We'll drink to kind, old, endearing Sheila ji ! And please, please change the age old Punjab alcoholic beverages act to bring the drinking age in New Delhi down to 18 from 25, if you can!

Assembly Polls -I : Congress celebrates as BJP falls short of its own expectations

The Congress and the BJP had approached the latest round of Assembly elections very differently. On the one hand, the Congress was ready to take whatever it could get, even though the party was supposed to be on the offensive in 3 states. On the other, the BJP set itself up for disappointment, happily anticipating a 4-0 result, even though it walked in with 3 incumbent governments. The race ended in a dull draw; the BJP forgot to celebrate its spectacular victory in 2 states, while the Congress workers could not care less that their party was steamrolled a second time running in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.

Delhi has the state that soured it most of all for the BJP. The BJP had been on a high in the state, sweeping the Municipal polls a year ago; even in August, BJP insiders had been assured that the party had a 5% lead over the Congress. All they had to do was grab the cake and eat it. For the BJP, this was a case of a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip. They named the wrong leader, paid heed to the wrong people while distributing tickets and even drummed up the wrong issues. It is fitting that disappointed BJP workers shouted slogans against Chief Ministerial candidate V K Malhotra when results were declared on Dec 8. V K Malhotra never quite had the charm of the suave Sheila Dikshit. Sheila Dikshit, despite her advanced years, speaks to those that talk about the future of Delhi, while Malhotra is a left over from the Punjabi politics of old.

Again, it wasn't entirely Malhotra's fault. He did what he knew best and that was the politics of old. The party was wrong in picking him in the first place. This shows the lethargy of the BJP command in New Delhi. In 2003, the BJP brought Madan Lal Khurana back from the wilderness and asked him to take over the reigns. The party suffered. The BJP tried the same botched policy yet again in 2008. A hardworking man with a clean image such as Dr. Harshvardhan should have been put up against Sheila Dikshit. Dr. Harshvardhan singlehandedly worked to bring the party a spectacular victory in the MCD elections early last year. If the BJP stops rewarding honest political achievement like it once did, it will have to face many more setbacks. Also the BJP's Delhi bigwigs did not want to step up to the plate; Arun Jaitley wanted to be a "national leader" and Sushma Swaraj would rather be the chief of the party's campaign committee than hit the streets of Delhi.

That apart, the issues that the BJP raised did not resonate well with the people. Delhi is distinct from all other Indian states, a "made in media" state as Rajdeep Sardesai cleverly called it. Naturally, this means that the Delhi voter is more informed and sophisticated than any other kind of voter in the country. This includes, among other things, the ability to discern state issues and national issues and global trends from the failures of the state government. Sheila Dikshit realized that her party was sinking and on the campaign trail she challenged her detractors to find fault with her administration for the issues facing Delhi. The approach worked, principally because Dikshit's work and initiatives have been fundamentally good for the city. The people of Delhi knew better than to accuse her for the terror attacks in Delhi and elsewhere, even in the face of extreme provocation in Mumbai. Some "issues" that the BJP raised, such as suggesting that Sheila wanted to build a death trap for citizens by creating the Bus Rapid Transit corridor, actually insulted the intelligence of the voter.

Dikshit has proved a winner in every way possible. One might remember that she kept away from the campaigning for the MCD polls last year; a clever ploy that allowed her detractors in the Congress to squabble in full public view and commit political suicide. She never had to take the blame for the Congress defeat in the MCD and she even went so far as to publicly congratulate the BJP on its resurrection. In Dec 2003, she had to suffer a humiliating 10 day wait after winning the election as party insiders tried to ambush her behind closed doors; she made sure that would not happen again.



Vasundhara Raje has every reason to feel sorry for herself, since she has been the only incumbent Chief Minister who has had to put in her papers after these elections. Apparently the last minute visit to the deity in Banswara has had not had an effect. Even before the results came out, the BJP had been nervous about Rajasthan. The party had won the state by a mere 2.5% margin in 2003, a margin that many would argue, would be impossible for an incumbent government to defend. Add to that a horrible caste war and a 78-95 loss does not seem so bad for the BJP after all. Rajasthan has a history of rotating governments and a 17 seat gap is one of the thinnest margins ever in the state. Besides, one must note that, technically, the Rajasthan Assembly is hung (a fact that many media outfits seemed to forget as Rajasthan was included as a Congress "victory" without much reflection; although the BJP did not get similar treatment when it was merely 4 seats away from power in Karnataka this year) Compare it to the 120-53 victory that the BJP achieved in 2003 and you see why Vasundhara Raje has no reason to be ashamed of herself.

Sure, the BJP failed itself in ticket distribution. The party held back decisions till the last minute, created lots of confusion and suspense, dropped lots of sitting MLAs, but it didn't quite work in the end. Chief Minister Raje didn't have a free hand in ticket distribution and had to defer to part "elders", who despite having no electoral worth whatsoever, were able to unduly influence the nomination process. The difference could not have been more stark; the exhilerating response to Vasundhara's rally on Nov 6 filled BJP workers' hearts with enthusiasm, while the same people were glum and complaining the day the party nominees were named. The common BJP worker and his Chief Minister have every reason to feel let down by their party. There have never been more favourable circumstances in Rajasthan for a ruling party going into elections and the BJP was unable to make the most of the goodwill for Raje.

The positive for Raje is that she has become a mass leader, a far cry from early 2003, when many suspected her ability to connect with the people. The party's top leadership has taken cognizance of the difficulties she faced and will, in all likelihood, give her a lot more say when the Lok Sabha polls are held next year. Since Lal Krishna Advani, unlike Vajpayee, has only nationwide recognition and instead of nationwide appeal, he will have to rely on state leaders to deliver for him. And Rajasthan is what many would consider "a natural BJP state". After losing badly to the Congress in the Rajasthan polls of 1998, the party rebounded spectacularly in the Lok Sabha polls held less than a year from that date. The Congress has secured a reluctant madate from the people and has already put a foot wrong by installing Gehlot, a man much disliked by the Jats. Hardly anyone in Rajasthan voted to bring back Gehlot's unresponsive administration.

(We deal with Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh in the next part)

Terrorists claim more casualties as heads roll in Congress

The Congress led UPA Government at the Centre has finally found itself under pressure to act. After the second attack in New Delhi months ago, the government promised to set up an anti-terror agency and Cabinet Minister Kapil Sibal assured the nation that the government was moving its feet. It turns out that those feet were made of solid lead.

Stung to the quick by public outrage over the Mumbai terror attacks, the Congress has had to remove the most notorious of its lazy figureheads. Senior Gandhi family loyalist Shivraj Patil, having disgraced the Home Ministry for four long years, has had to put in his papers. The same fate has befallen Vilasrao Desmukh, who between hopping socialite parties in South Mumbai and pushing for his son's movie career, has never taken affairs of state very seriously.

There are two questions here, one obvious and the other more subtle. The obvious question is why the underperformers in question had not been previously removed. Does it take scores of terrorist attacks, culminating in a 60 hour showdown in the financial capital of the country to remove a Union Minister who, time and again, has been rated as the worst government functionary, a man who has neither administrative ability, political acumen nor mass support.

The weakness of the UPA government actually follows from a political culture created way back in 2004. After the rousing victory of the Congress and its allies, the winners took the extraordinary step of excluding the enthusiastic new leaders from the administration. Those such as Ambika Soni, Jaipal Reddy and even Kapil Sibal were either excluded from the ministry altogether or pushed into unimportant positions. Young leaders such as Milind Deora, Jyotiraditya Scindia, Sachin Pilot and Jitin Prasad were also kept away, for fear that they would steal the thunder from the Congress' highly unintelligent heir apparent: Rahul baba. Instead the group of people who were summoned to New Delhi to govern the country were mostly die hard Gandhi loyalists, leaders of a bygone era. The plan was to make the country slide backwards into 1980.

The second, more subtle question is what actually impelled the government to act to remove its senior functionaries. Was it public pressure or media pressure? There is an uncomfortable class war issue underlying the Mumbai episode that needs to be addressed. After the 26/11 attacks, those in the elite media realized that their own lives were under threat as well and that their support for the human rights of terrorists had not earned them sympathy of radical Jihadis. Much to their horror, they figured out that terrorists understood the power of symbolism and henceforth would be more likely to attack "high value targets" instead of taking the cheaper human lives on footpaths and temples. Notice that the media, the fourth estate of democracy, is actually the least democratic of all. Ironically enough, it always seems to be the most democratic of them all...the true voice of the people. Therein lies the danger.

The Mumbai Eye Opener-II : India Attacked

India has been attacked and India needs to respond. The Indian government must take action before the whole world loses respect for us. Minister Pranab Mukherjee started proceedings by declaring that "all options are on the table". In this article, we take stock of all the possibilities that lie before the Indian state.

First and foremost, we must mention that there are two options that are so dangerous that they are altogether unthinkable. One of them is nuclear war. The other is doing nothing at all.

Fortunately for us, the ruling UPA government is scrambling to keep some of its dignity alive as Lok Sabha elections loom on the horizon. And the BJP is, as always, advocating a tough stance on terror. Finally, it does appear that we can have some consensus on the issue. But, as I wrote in part I below, unless Indian Muslims come out of denial/complain mode and Hindus start putting country above caste, very little can be achieved.

1. External measures/options: (a) Conventional war with Pakistan: Although this might seem like a very satisfying option after all that "they" have done to our beloved cities, it is not very clear what such a conflict would achieve. What would be the war aims of India going into a conflict like this? Would it be similar to America's war aims in Iraq? And most importantly, how would the military ensure that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is neutralized at the very outset? With a pacifist President in the White House and the US military facing a difficult challenge in Afghanistan, it is almost impossible to see how India could carry world opinion on its side.

(b) A war of "limited aims": The much more viable option is for India to mount missile strikes on specific locations in Pakistan which are marked out as terrorist camps/hideouts. How much this can achieve depends, to a large extent, on the diplomacy that accompanies such a move. Right now, world opinion is on India's side. It is up to Indian diplomats to translate this into some support for real measures.

The biggest imperative is to get the United States on India's side. If India can ensure NATO support for anti-terrorist activities in Pakistan, India will have won most of the battle. The US has actually already come around to the idea that the epicentre of Jihad in Pakistan must be hit in order to make progress in the war on terror. The US military has already made several strikes in Pakistan and has openly declared that it does not consider it necessary to mention its intentions to the Pakistani authorities before striking inside Pakistani territory. The way ahead for India is to draw up a meticulous list of terrorist locations inside Pakistan and occupied Kashmir and furnish the list to the Americans.

Things will not move ahead from that point unless India itself undergoes a revelation. Terrorism is not a local problem limited to Pakistan; it is an all embracing global nightmare come true. This means that India must commit substantial forces to the US effort in Afghanistan and perhaps even to Iraq. Contributing troops to Afghanistan serves a dual purpose; one, it takes Indo-US relations to a whole new level and two; once Indian troops arrive in Afghanistan, America will lose almost all hope of getting any real cooperation from Pakistan in its war against the Taliban. This will drive Washington further to place its bets on India rather than Pakistan.

Unlike what one might imagine at first, targeted missile attacks on specific locations in Pakistan need not lead to war directly. As long as these attacks are carried out with clear intent and prior information in NATO diplomatic circles, Pakistan may not have face to declare war. In fact, such attacks will probably cause public anger in Pakistan to boil over and overthrow the fledgling government of Zardari, causing General Kiyani to take over the country.

The overthrow of Pakistan's "democratic" government is important for India. Zardari's government has legitimacy but no authority. And, contrary to what the West might think, offering moral support to Zardari's government will not make him any stronger inside Pakistan. The real reason Musharraf lost power was not because his authority had been illegitimate in the first place, but because the General came to be seen as a darling of the West and even, to some extent, a favourite of India. Therefore, in the current situation, Zardari's government basically provides covering fire to terrorists who rule the streets of Pakistan. The newly elected President may not be a terrorist, but his protestations about the sovereignty of Pakistan do get in the way of India's war on terror. In truth, Pakistan is a failed state and a problem for the world. A nation without an effective government aka "a failed state" has no legitimate claim to national sovereignty.

As such, the sooner Pakistan finds itself back under military rule, the better. Not only is it better to talk to the real rulers of Pakistan rather than some strawmen with no real authority, but it is also a lot easier to mobilize world opinion against a dictator.

2) Internal measures:

The building of effective public opinion

With 26/11, the debate on terrorism is over. It is time for us to draw conclusions. India has faced terrorism since the early 90's. The attacks have only multiplied in frequency, intensity and audacity. The media and the middle classes must make up their minds now. This will require a sea change in attitude of the people towards the so called debate on terrorism.

First, the liberal media must stop making excuses for Islamic terrorism. This is in sharply contrary to their current stance, in which anything goes, any view is aired, no matter how anti-national or inflammatory. No sooner is India struck by a terrorist attack, the media lunges forward with the standard "excuses": Babri Masjid, Gujarat riots and almost anything that can be used to lash out at the favourite whipping boy: the BJP and Sangh Parivaar. Blaming the BJP and the larger Sangh Parivaar for a conspiracy of global proportions is truly preposterous and belittles the intelligence of the public.

There is a rot that runs through the Indian media. This rot is an elitist craving to be seen as neutral and detached from the situation on the ground, from the emotions of the unwashed masses. This rot is a deep desire to be seen as internationalists even as the nation comes under threat. For the liberal media, this is an itch that needs to be scratched. Their contempt for the Indian nation is apparent at many levels; from their deliberate inability to pronouce Indian names correctly to their lack of desire to speak up as Indians first in any situation. From watching them, you would get the chilling impression that they want to believe in age old Western stereotypes about India.

Strengthening police and paramilitary forces

The Indian police is woefully underequipped understaffed and yes, underpaid. The low profile, the low respect and the low pay of Indian law enforcement agencies accounts for much of the corruption and low morale among the forces. The average Indian policeman is the most unenviable person in the whole world; he has a gruelling daily beat, career growth simply does not exist for him, he does not have good weapons and he has to shoulder the blame for everything.

Take, for instance, the case of inspector Mohan Chand Sharma, who bravely laid down his life in the line of duty while fighting terrorists in Delhi. The media paid him cursory respect and then got down immediately to bad mouthing the Delhi police and calling the Batla house encounter a case of police atrocity. Few saw the irony when the same mediapersons made much of criticizing Narendrabhai Modi for shedding crocodile tears over the death of ATS Chief Hemant Karkare. Presumably, the media had wiped away its own crocodile tears over Inspector Sharma a few days ago.

The solution is widely expand the powers of the police with regard to terrorism. The solution is to provide them with top of the line equipment, both lethal and non lethal weapons and access to world class intelligence. The imperative is to build trust in our police and law enforcement agencies. Certainly, there is perhaps no Indian who has never paid out a petty Rs. 20 bribe to a policeman, but there is also no Indian whose life has not been made safer by the sacrifice of a brave policeman.

Special Protection Groups for each major city

Every Indian state capital (including the states in the perilous North East) and other major cities deemed terror targets need to be protected by their own special forces, which have been specially trained to fight terrorism. This would entail a loss of several civil liberties. But India has a nuclear armed failed state on its western border and a monster waiting on its northern frontiers. Indians must trade away some civil liberties if they are to live through this geopolitical nightmare.

Sealing the Eastern and North Eastern borders

The border with Bangladesh is another of India's major concerns. To make matters worse, the Indian side of Bengal is ruled by parties whose anti-national leanings are all too well known and whose operatives are more than glad to flood India with enemies. Even so, the Border Security Force and the Indian Army which answer to India and not to the CPI(M) should be given the capability to effectively seal the porous frontier. At the same time, Assam faces a major demographic invasion and unless the invasion is stopped and the anti-nationals are repatriated to their undemocratic Islamic homeland, India cannot breathe easy.

The Mumbai Eye Opener-I

The terrorist attacks of November 26 are, above all, a scathing indictment of the Indian people, our attitude and our state. They are a slap on the face of everything that India stands for and everything, that we, as the citizens of of the same democratic nation must accept blame for. If the flames on the Mumbai skyline will not open our eyes, what will? It is time to deliberate on where we stand as a nation, ask the toughest questions and accept that many of those questions will have dark answers. In this first part, the Oracle speaks about the role of the people in the aftermath of this tragedy; in a later part, we will discuss what the state should do in response.

The attacks of 26/11 are distinct from any other terrorist attack in recent history; they are an attack not on the people per se, but on the glittering symbols of Indian success and pride.

1. Stop blaming the politicians: One of the knee jerk responses that the Indian people have come up with in wake of the tragedy and one that the usually partisan English language media has declared as "safe and civilized" is an all out anger against politicians. Our politicians are a reflection of our own people. The politicians don't think about the big issues because we don't.

Politicians are not trying to divide us, it is we the people who are divided. Politicians have their finger on the pulse of the people; they know the fissures in society that exist and they act accordingly. Take for instance the events of the last few months: The despicable Gujjar-Meena conflict kicked off again in the summer in Rajasthan, leading to mindless violence. Overnight, India had some new politicians and political formations: Col. Bhaisla, the two new factions of the Gujjar Mahasabha and so on, while other diminuitive characters such as Kirori Lal Meena assumed immense importance overnight. None of this would have ever come about if the Gujjars and Meenas had seen themselves as anything more than Gujjars and Meenas respectively. In Rajasthan, the Congress fears to name Ashok Gehlot as the formal CM candidate: why? Because the Jats do not like Gehlot!

On the flip side, take note of the recent row in Mumbai over the "influx" of "North Indians" (quotes intended to emphasize the dubious use of words such as "North Indian" and "influx"). This is not the first time this row has been raised and each time it has failed to evoke a real public response. That is the main reason the Shiv Sena, despite having covert sympathies with the Marathi Manoos line, by and large, kept out of the recent agitation. The anti-North Indian stance cannot be translated into votes, because the people of Mumbai, by and large, reject this proposition. Politicians cannot divide the people if they do not choose to be.

Or, consider the time when Ram Vilas Paswan, buoyed by a windfall in Bihar in early 2005, decided to approach the election that November with the issue of having a Muslim CM. His efforts came a cropper, because the people of Bihar are not sufficiently divided on communal lines to warm up to his cause. Similarly, when the BJP carried out a viciously divisive campaign in the interiors of Uttar Pradesh in 2007, they were roundly thrashed because the "Ram Lahar" that the party had ridden to power in the 90's was nowhere to be seen. Instead the sands had shifted and people wanted to be divided with Brahmin and Dalit on one side and Muslims and Yadavs on the other. It is noteworthy that in the same election, the incumbent Mulayam Singh suffered only a marginal drop in vote share, while the opposition BJP lost comprehensively. And again, when Sonia Gandhi tried to revive the KHAM (Kshatriya-Harijan-Adivasi-Muslim) in Gujarat in December 2002, the Congress was wiped out.

Lesson Number One: It is the people who are polarized and it is people who must take the blame.

2. Tough questions to ask:

Why did it take an attack of this magnitude to wake up the nation to the reality of terror?

Calling the Mumbai attack India's 9/11 is the most shameful indictment of India that is ever possible. The 9/11 attack on the USA has two distinct aspects (a) It was the first ever major terrorist attack on US soil (the WTC had been attacked before, but the magnitude was never big enough) (b) It pushed the American public to take vigorous steps to ensure that something like that would never happen again. The Mumbai terror attack does not fit under part (a) and whether it can be filed under part(b) remains to be seen.

The question is why the people of India did not read the threat when the streets of Jaipur, or Ahmedabad and even Delhi were bespattered with blood? Why did the threat have to be spelt out in fire on the Mumbai night sky? Despite the serial bomb blasts in Jaipur, caste was the number one issue in the Rajasthan polls until December, not terrorism.

Are we a nation that thinks only about the small issues?

The question of existence as a nation dwarfs the issues of daily life, the so called "Bijli-Pani-Sadak". It is true that India has a lot of poverty and that life is difficult for many Indians, but are we so caught up with these petty struggles that we cannot spare a moment to think about the nation? Two generations ago, the people of India lived in even greater poverty and despair; yet they had the zeal in them that got this country free. Today, when Indians can see for themselves that India can become a world power in this very generation, do we not have the courage, the strength to think beyond the bread and butter issues?

Do we need to rethink secularism?

The purpose of this question is to countenance the practice of "political secularism" that is stifling the country. Secularism, by definition, means that the state does not adopt the practice of any religion in public life, an ideal that is eminently laudable, a jewel of democracy. But can religion be used as an excuse for deviating from national interest?

It is interesting to reflect on the true underpinnings of the idea of secularism. Religion gives laws for people to live by and different religions give different laws; and yet the secular state stands apart from religion and enacts laws that are based on common sense and humanism rather than superstition. Secularism, therefore, does not mean "equal respect for all religions"; rather it means "equal contempt for all religions".

So, why is it that in India we have different standards for different religions? Why does the Indian state allow certain religions and Islam in particular to have special status? Why does India not have a common civil code? Does the Indian constitution still, consciously or unconsciously, promote Dr. Iqbals' "two nation theory"? Should the modern Indian state pander to the caprices of a desert religion that has not moved forward in thirteen hundred years? Should the Indian state, for instance, tolerate barbaric practices such as "triple talaq", discriminatory inheritance laws and even disgraces such as polygamy all in the name of respecting religion? Does it not make the Muslims feel like they are a law unto themselves and suggest to them that their fraternal bond with Muslims from Pakistan to Sudan is actually stronger than their roots in India?

In order to purge India of its weaknesses, we the people must confront our failings first. Our state, our police, our judiciary reflect badly on us. We have become all too used to paying our respects to martyrs and singing patriotic songs in their honour and of course, blaming the politicians for everything. People have the power to change even as they sit in their homes or go about their daily business; the change lies in the attitude, the desire to succeed and the aptitude for enterprise. For many, Narendrabhai Modi of Gujarat is a symbol of communal hatred, yet the same hawk of Hindutva turned comprehensively to development and economic growth in 2007. This change was brought about by the attitude of the people of Gujarat, who wanted progress in the long run, not riots.

But we need more change. We need to change attitude. The Mumbai terror attack has shown us that if we are divided, or too absorbed in just getting by our daily routine, we will soon have no nation left. We need to demand more of life, more of our democracy and more of ourselves. Do you have a friend, a relative, an uncle perhaps who ever said something that belittled a person based merely on his/her caste/religion/gender? Have you confronted him/her with the accusation that his/her remarks are anti-national? Have you ever been too absorbed in sounding like the nice guy? When someone makes a remark like "every religion teaches peace"; have you demanded that he/she prove his assertion? Let us never believe anything without proof, without reason or rationale. It would give us the moral courage and moral authority to see through the barbarism of crazy violent "religious activities" and the smokescreen of political correctness.

Stop thinking, start dreaming?

"How do you think the world would be different under Barack Obama?" was a question that Prannoy Roy recently posed while interviewing the formidable Henry Kissinger. In many ways it is a telling statement. As he spoke, Prannoy's face was radiant as that of a little child on a Christmas morning. The choice of words was also interesting: "the world under Barack Obama".

Prannoy's servility to Obama is symptomatic of what his media brethren have been doing across the world. For several months now, the media in most countries of the world have been drilling into the national psyche of their respective countries that Obama is some kind of messiah who is about to heal the world. Now avid reporting of an event so important as the US Presidential Election is understandable; but as the media began bleating for Obama, pleading with people as far as Agra to carry Obama-Biden stickers, the sense was more of nausea. The rest of the world does not vote in the Presidential election, neither should it; and hence it is important that the world media maintain a respectful distance from the process, refusing to take sides and dealing with the candidates strictly as they would deal with foreign leaders/heads of state.

Instead, the media from the rest of the world and the Indian media for the first time, barged into our living rooms, drumming into our people how important it was to "support" Obama. Now, what exactly does it mean for an Indian to "support" Obama? The US election is not a game of cricket (literally and figuratively!) that people can just choose to support a team. It is a democratic exercise meant exclusively for Americans. Instead, the media streamed in from various reaches of the American empire, pleading and begging for Obama. The independent foreign policy that was so zealously upheld through the last four years of nuclear diplomacy was undermined by the ready media campaign to sell to the Indian people the idea of being a US client state.

Barack Obama is perhaps the first politician who has been judged entirely by his campaign and not his actions. Now it is true that Obama represents a turnaround in the racial history of the US and his rise from a backwater to Harvard to the White House is a glowing tribute to the somewhat sullied notion of the American Dream. Yet, Obama is still a symbol, a man ushered in by the American people as an act of despair, a man who is as far removed from George Bush as could be. In the last two years, whiny Americans went from blaming everything, from the Shia Sunni conflict in Iraq to Hurricane Katrina on the policies of President Bush. What they failed to understand is that the US President does not act in isolation and there are events beyond his control. The Iraq war is a perfect example of American smugness; the American people were all for the war as long as it meant the US Marines pummelling an obviously much weaker nation to pieces. The war became unpopular only when fighting broke out in the alleys of Tikrit and Baghdad, killing Americans in large numbers. Instead of perceiving this as a challenge to their honour, most Americans advocated a speedy exit from the rough zone. It shows an allegiance not to the sense of purpose, neither to honour and diginity, but to convenience.

There has never been a perfect war. Things in the Iraq war went out of control for some time, and all that while, the worst inconvenience that Americans faced as their nation fought a war was high petrol prices! If Americans want to hold on to their numero uno status, they have to stop behaving like the fairy tale princess who felt the one pea through twenty mattresses and twenty feather beds.

It is particularly telling that the event that ultimately tipped the scales decisively in favour of Obama was the economic crash of October 2008. It just had to be Bush's fault. The fact that the endless, thoughtless spending by the American people, the tendency to buy everything... from houses to cars to clothes.... on easy credit rather than honest money has made middle class Americans as complicit in the crash as the executives on Wall Street, was wilfully ignored. Naturally, no candidate had the courage to tell the voting public that they had only themselves to blame for their miseries. For most of the population that was not otherwise obsessed with religion and the Bible, it was much easier to eject the Republicans and dope themselves with a dose of Obama. When you have whittled away your own riches and indeed those of your fathers owing to your whims, self deception is always the answer; just as the gambler who has just ruined himself will often take to drink.

In truth, Obama is still unknown and unproven, more like the new credit card everyone is excited about. "Live now, pay later" was a life philosophy that got Americans into a mess in which they lost their homes, their jobs and possibly their crown as the No.1 nation in the world. "Vote now, think later" is a policy that they might live to regret. As serious, professedly prestigious critical publications such as the New York Times, the Washington Post and the International Herald Tribune debate among themselves which of the world's problems Obama will solve first, one can only beg the American public for a wee bit of sanity.

There are many wonderful things about Obama; he is as brilliant as can be, a powerful speaker and a plucky man who began as the less fancied candidate and then trumped the Clinton machine. His world view is also more inclusive than that of President Bush and his election can be taken as a net gain for racial equality across the world. If it were a perfect world, everyone should have voted for him.

But there are savages, in the Middle East and elsewhere, who see Obama's more civilized approach as an exploitable opportunity. It is up to Americans to make sure that their new President remembers that he is a partisan, a representative of America and its interests, rather than a man whose coming fulfils a prophecy. If Obama assumes office believing that he will be on the cover of every history textbook ever written, chances are he will leave the world worse than it is.

(The Oracle expects to come back to Obama, this time discussing more specifically, his position on India and Kashmir.)

The path to power- I : A fiery new dawn for India

(Evaluating India's military and technological prowess today and in the days to come)


This week India became the fourth nation to plant its colours on the moon, behind the United States, Russia and Japan. On this momentous occasion, the Oracle starts a round up of the nation's defences, prospects and prowess.

1. First, with Chandrayaan: With the success of Chandrayaan-I, India has shown that it is capable of "getting it right the first time", which, indeed is a rare feat, even for the handful of nations that have access to the moon.

Although India reaching for the moon by itself can be compared to reinventing the wheel, one should not ignore that the mission has important scientific objectives, such as mapping the lunar poles and searching for Helium-3. By carrying instruments from NASA, ESA and the Bulgarian Space Agency along with instruments of its own, ISRO has shown that the spirit of national pride can be carried alongside the quest for scientific delights. In contrast, China's space programme has the sole objective of intimidating possible adversaries, a menacing aspect that debauches the spirit of science. The ISRO should be proud of having achieved this major distinction, which has underscored the moral superiority of democracy. Of course, the fact that the jealous Chinese questioned the success of the mission using familiar "reality control" techniques has been one of the most satisfying aspects of Chandrayaan.

2) Other space projects: With the success of Chandrayaan, the ISRO has suddenly found itself to be much fancied by the media and the youth. With the launch of Astrosat next year, India will have the largest fleet of civilian satellites. Next year, the ISRO also plans to launch "Bhuvan", India's very own version of Google Earth, except that Bhuvan is reported to have much greater capabilities, such as resolution as high as 10m (compared to 200m from Google Earth and 50m from Wikimapia) and the listing of mineral components at various layers of the earth. Now that ISRO has raised expectations, it will be hard to satisfy zealous young Indians unless the Government generously expands ISRO's budget.

And then there are other projects that are still on the drawing board: the building of the astronaut training centre at Devanhalli near Bangalore, the construction of the solar probe Aditya and shaping Chandrayaan-II. The ISRO needs to tread carefully with Chandrayaan-II, since the lunar rover for the mission is due to be supplied by the Russians, who have, of late proved to be capricious and unreliable allies.

3) Aerospace command: The long standing need for a separate Aerospace Command has been scuttled for far too long. Ironically, it is not an enemy, nor a lcak of money, nor a lack of planning that has kept us from accomplishing this. The issue comes down to petty rivalries between the three existing arms of the military. The other two wings of the military suspect that the Air Force will exert the most influence over the Aerospace command. It is pathetic that such a small issue can make such a difference to national security.

Despite having a huge civilian satellite system, and indeed the world's largest, India's military surveillance and intelligence gathering capabilities are not significant, although the existing CARTOSAT-2A is believed to have some military uses. With the launch of Bhuvan next year, ISRO is expected to take another step towards building a remote navigation system that parallels the GPS used by NATO countries. So far, Indian efforts to build such a system jointly with the Russia, named the GLONASS, seem to be headed down a dead alley. The Russians have missed every single deadline on launching GLONASS satellites and the wait has been frustrating for India. Moreover, it is not advisable for India to have a remote navigation system jointly with Russia, since it compromises national security to the same extent as joining the GPS club with NATO would.

An aerospace command would bring projects such as remote navigation, spy satellites, etc. right to the fore. The competition has just been taken to a new level, since China has now demonstrated that it is capable of knocking satellites out of orbit. Stung by the Chinese leap, the US scrambled to put together its own system, which it finally test fired in Fenbruary this year. Currently, only the US, China and Russia possess an anti satellite weapon. India is behind. Although there have been efforts by all civilized nations to impose a moratorium on miltarization of space, given the human nature, militarization of space is an inevitability. India cannot ignore this reality.

4) The Air Force: Of late, the concerns about the state of the Air Force have become so severe that they have spilled out of the domain of geeky news gatherers into the consciousness of the general public. Although India's Air Force is sizeable and easily one of the most powerful in the world, the Air Force suffers from a lack of modern machines and from bureaucratic lethargy. There have been delays in ordering new planes when needed, although the government seems to have finally moved its rear end on this issue (but the Congress has still outperformed the BJP; the BJP could not even make sure the entire military budget was spent in 2002-2003).

India has made noises about acquiring more Russian aircraft, some of the Swedish Gripens and even the still somewhat mythical "Eurofighter" that is under construction. At the core of the problem is that India's plane manufacture capabilities are still nascent, a pity considering the fact that even the motley Swedes have the technology to make the versatile Gripen fighter.

Of late, however, India's technological establishment has seen a rise in prestige, which is, of course, contingent upon some success. The HAL Tejas Light Combat Aircraft is almost ready to be commissioned, since both the technology demonstrators seem to have performed successfully. The HAL Light Combat Helicopter is also due to be delivered in March 2009, a delay of three months from the target date of Dec, 2008. India is also rumoured to be close to completing the "Medium Combat Fighter" that will significantly increase India's strike capabilities.

Notwithstanding these gains, there remain even larger concerns over the availability and manufacture of the "less glorious" but essential units of the Air Force, such as training aircraft and heavy carriers. Currently, Lockheed Martin is building six C-130 Hercules planes to be delivered to India, as part of a $596 million deal. Once again, the key requirement of self sufficiency has not been met.

5) The Missile Programme: India's missile programme has registered some success in recent years, thus redeeming to the DRDO to some extent. After the embarrassing initial failure of Agni-III, the DRDO has successfully retested this missile, an act that has caused some heartburn in China. Nevertheless, the missile has not been inducted into the military as yet and hence most of the Chinese mainland is still out of reach for India. However, the stratagem of focussing on larger payload and lesser range has been a partial success, since India's potential enemies are located around its own borders, while the Chinese have had to strain themselves with building missiles that can fly all the way to the United States. This is in line with India's initial aim of establishing itself in Asia and then planning for worldwide power projection.

It is for this moment that India must prepare. Although government officials are yet to confirm its existence, India has been working on an ICBM for a while now, since 1991, according to some reports. The ICBMs Surya-I (and II) are expected to use India's GSLV rockets and Surya-I should be on display in a couple of years. The truly magnificient Surya-II, with its truly massive payload that will make it the most devastating in the world, is not due for a few years.

For now, India has to be satisfied with its Inter Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBM). A nuclear arsenal is almost a white elephant unless a country possesses the requisite delivery system. India cannot rely on planes to deliver its nuclear bombs. The Agni missile is fully capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, but the missile itself must undergo more tests before it can be pronounced fully reliable.

No assessment of India's military capabilites is complete without the mention of the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile. The missile has helped India's reputation grow manifold. Apart from this, India has readied the nuclear capable K-15 Sagarika submarine launched ballistic missile that is expected to be fitted onto the nuclear submarines (ATVs) when they enter service at the end of the next year.

(To be continued... focussing on the Army and the Navy in the next part)

Nitish, Laloo and Paswan start a childish game in Bihar

The recent events in Bihar and Maharashtra have started a kangaroo game in both states as have exposed the compulsions of national parties. Pictured above are Nitish Kumar, Lalu Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan, with Sushil Modi cut off on the left, which is a metaphor for how the BJP has been feeling in Bihar. The recent slanging match between the regional leaders of Bihar and Maharashtra have resulted in a crisis of credibility in both states. The Oracle looks at how each of the major players in Bihar has maintained ship in the political storm.

1. The JD(U): To his credit, the Bihar Chief Minister has tried his best to keep his stand consistent. As in the recent crisis with alliance partner BJP, the Kosi barrage disaster, the Chief Minister has proved to be a deft political player in the furore over Raj Thackeray's actions. In the three years he has been in power, Nitish Kumar has consistently worked to maintain the separate identity of the JD(U) within the NDA and has easily shrugged off the "communal forces" tag. He has actually kept the BJP at arm's length from getting a real say in government. His excellent relations with the Dy. CM Sushil Modi have helped him pull off political moves that are manifestly to the BJP's disadvantage. During the Kosi Barrage disaster, when the Bihar government faced serious allegations of negligence, Nitish Kumar kept a straight face, warded off Lalu and Paswan's criticism and maintained that all he wanted to address was the issues of the people rather than the mudslinging of mean minded political enemies.

The approach has worked for him this time as well. The Chief Minister stoutly refused to share a dias with the Shiv Sena's Uddhav Thackeray at the NDA "Sankalp rally" in Sonepat (as did Uddhav); and asked his five Bihar MPs to quit. He did not pressure his ally BJP to follow suit and refused to give much reaction to Laloo Yadav's demand that the Chief Minister himself, along with his MLAs, quit the Bihar Assembly in order to put up a united face. Even when Laloo followed this up with a personal attack on the Chief Minister, calling him a "kursi chipku", Nitish Kumar calmly suggested that the Railway Minister should resign if he indeed felt so strongly about the situation in Mumbai. The RJD supremo refused to make his own MPs quit and did not quit himself. In the end, Laloo Yadav's attack was too personal, too hypocritical to make an impact and it fizzled out. Nitish Kumar wins again.

2. The BJP: The BJP is the second largest party in the state, a fact that almost everyone, and most often the BJP High Command, seems to forget. Granted that the BJP was in an unenviable situation on the Raj Thackeray issue, but there was no reason for the party to take itself out of the picture. There was no reason for the BJP not to make itself heard as a voice of sanity and national unity. Perhaps the BJP did not lose points by keeping mum, but it does not augur well for the organization.

The principal offender here is Dy. CM Sushil Modi. Time and again, he has faced charges from party workers in Bihar that he has allowed the JD(U) too much leeway. There was a time when the BJP was seen as an "aggressive ally", one that could wean away your support base by joining hands with you. Then the party adopted "coalition dharma" and everything changed. The BJP, which holds fort in large swathes of rural Vidharbha, Marathwada allows the Shiv Sena to walk all over it, even though the latter is essentially limited to Mumbai and Konkan. In Bihar, the BJP has chosen to be submissive once again. It was Arun Jaitley who had strung together the alliance of independents that led to the Bihar Governor Buta Singh dissolving the Bihar Assembly. Even Laloo Yadav charged, shortly after, that these independents were about to join the BJP (of course, independents are forbidden by anti-defection laws from joining political parties, but since when does the RJD care about laws?). When it came to the election however, the independents were subsumed largely into JD(U), further shrinking the BJP's space in the state. The man who smiles and waves as these things happen is Sushil Modi. There is little anyone can do to prevent Sushil Modi from doing to the Bihar BJP what Lalji Tandon did to the party in Uttar Pradesh during Mayawati's tenure.

In summary, the BJP has missed a major opportunity to flaunt its "India-first" credentials. The party had a chance to pressurize both JD(U) and Shiv Sena into a solution that would effectively have isolated Raj Thackeray, or better still, tossed him into the Congress-RJD court. Instead, the party isolated itself, mentioned that it was neutral towards regional interests and waited for the fires to die down.

3) The RJD : Following his rejection by the people, Bihar's mascot of backwardness has sought to reinvent himself as star Railway Minister. Laloo Yadav is a lucky man. After a 15 year term in Bihar, he has had a life extension as Cabinet Minister. But even the best of times come to an end. Even if the UPA returns somehow, Laloo Yadav will have nowhere near the strength he had in the outgoing Lok Sabha.

Laloo Yadav knows this and he is desperate. "Bihari pride" has been an issue he has always wanted to harness, but has never been able to quite turn into votes. Some years ago, Yadav showed up defiantly at the India Today Conclave where Bihar was to receive the dubious distinction of being the most backward state and delivered a scathing speech wherein he blamed the backwardness of Bihar not on himself but on the rest of the country! He has even tried to play up a chance remark of Atalji : "Main Atal hoon magar Bihari nahin hoon". However, the ploy has never really worked for him, perhaps because people tend to take pride only in development and not in backwardness.

On the Raj Thackeray issue, Laloo has been upstaged by Nitish. The Bihar Chief Minister has stayed consistent and pulled out his MPs to build up pressure on the Centre. The onus is now on Laloo to make sure that the Congress and the NCP, his friends in the UPA who run the show in Maharashtra act against Raj Thackeray and indeed, in the interests of the country.

The students who attacked railway property in Barh were venting their ire against the Railway Minister who couldn't protect the interests of Biharis. It does not augur well for the RJD. Laloo Yadav tried to be too dramatic and failed.

4. The LJP: Ram Vilas Paswan has been looking for a perch in politics ever since he was rejected by all kinds of people in Bihar. His demand for a Muslim CM in the last election was far too obviously opportunistic to win him many votes. With Laloo Yadav forced to shift base to Delhi from Patna, there was little left for Paswan to do. It would be far too embarrassing to return to the NDA fold and sour relations with Laloo do not help. Therefore, Paswan's objective here is to mend fences with Laloo and, by sharing the spotlight with JD(U), RJD and BJP, give the impression that his party is on an equal footing with the bigger three. With Mayawati determined to seize a chunk of his core voters in the next election, there is little else for Paswan to do.

Even though Paswan had embarked on a strident "oust Laloo" campaign in 2005, he will now rely on the Congress to make sure he has a share in the UPA camp in Bihar in 2009. Fortunately, the UPA is on very slippery ground in Bihar and needs every last vote, so he will probably be offered some kind of arrangement. For now, the LJP wants to hang around Laloo Yadav, agreeing with him as much as possible.

Indian liberals find their holy grail: Hindu terrorist discovered?

July 26, 2008: Islamic Jihadis bomb a hospital in Ahmedabad.

August 31, 2008: Islamic Jihadis take seven people hostage in Jammu, including four children aged between 2 and 9.

Sept 27, 2008: Islamic Jihadis hand over a live bomb to a nine year old boy, killing him.

As Islamic Jihad proceeded to break one humanitarian barrier after another, Indian liberals were feeling the heat. As people lay in the streets of Delhi, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, Agartala and Guwahati, writhing in agony, the tide seemed to be turning against them. The liberals needed a game changer; and they got one.

Somewhat ironically, it was the Madhya Pradesh police, one of the several "communal police forces" in the country that gave them their deliverance. The boyish looking "Sadhvi" Pragya Singh was everything they wanted; a Hindu religious leader, an extremist with connections to the BJP. The extra icing on the cake was that she brought an Army man Lt. Col. Purohit in tow; since the liberal crowd has never taken too kindly to the Indian Army either, there was little reason not to celebrate. The outcome: the Malegaon attack, in which the Sadhvi was apparently involved, has now been reported on more than any other terrorist attack in India's history.

Since the national debate has now been pushed towards the issue of "Hindu terrorism", the Oracle has no choice but to say a word or two. Of course, I would much rather discuss building an advanced anti-meteorite defence system, because, quite frankly, an Indian stands a far greater chance of being killed by a meteorite than by a "Hindu terrorist".

The Sadhvi may be guilty, and it is quite likely she is. The larger question is whether the thesis : "Not every Muslim is a terrorist, but every terrorist in a Muslim" has been disproved. Mathematically, yes! Statistically, no! With the Sadhvi's arrest, the possibility of a randomly chosen Indian terrorist being a Muslim has just fallen from 100% to 99.9% and, in all fairness, this little change should not be alowed to reflect on state policy. If anything, her arrest proves that Hindus in India are just beginning to lose faith in the protection of the state; which is all the more reason that Islamic terrorism needs to be dealt with convincingly. Since we in India spend a lot of time trying to understand the Muslim grievance, perhaps it is time we spared a thought for the Hindus.

It is harsh to say so, but the so called "Muslim grievance" seems to be a global phenomenon. Some Muslims, clerics in particular, seem to have taken it upon themselves to stay offended as a profession. The business of finding grievances seems to live rather well even on the most humble of provocations: such as a Muslim cabbie in New York being "offended" by a passenger carrying alcohol. The provocation could be a cartoon published in an innocuous Danish newspaper; a transgression in distant Denmark is used as an opportunity to typecast white persons, Western nations, Christians, Jews and indeed any other non believer as part of the same vast conspiracy against Islam. And then the logic is turned on its head to complain about Muslims not being greeted in the streets with a big smile the day after 9/11. The same sense of fairness that is used to demand more civil rights for the people of Kashmir (by ending special powers of the armed forces) is then debauched to justify ethnic cleansing of the valley by purging it of 500,000 pandits; a call for tolerance accompanied by a demand for holocaust, all rolled into one in the guise of Islam.

Even so, India has to face this monster of "Muslim grievance". This fire breathing monster runs riot in our streets, killing and maiming people every day. As pointed out in the previous paragraph, the monster has a global face and thus it is too much to expect of India to come up with a solution all on its own. India can do its part by making the nation as democratic as possible, but it is nevertheless important to keep the nation together. The Constitution won't stand if there is no nation left. The need of the hour is, therefore, to build respect for the law. A good way to start would be an act of Parliament that actually outlaws terrorist activities expressly.

The political consequences of the arrest of the Sadhvi are actually rather small. The people of India are too preoccupied with mourning their dead to actually wonder about the spectre of "Hindu terrorism" or what perils a handful of youth calling themselves "Abhinav Bharat" may bring to bear. The theme that will play out in rallies across the country is that of the very real threat of Islamic Jihad. The theme that will play out in the media is rather different. One could well say that the debate over terrorism has now been pegged back in favour of Islamic Jihad for at least a generation. In talk show after talk show and debate after debate, you will hear the cheerleaders of terrorism say: "A Hindu terrorist has also been captured. So anyone who thinks that Islamic Jihad is a problem should back off!". Unfortunately, more often than not, the way these debates go are reflected in the laws Parliament makes, which means that our fight against Jihad has suffered a setback.

Of course, no matter how disproportionate it is to the magnitude of Islamic terrorism, any signs of extremism in the Hindu majority are worrying signs for a nation that is looking to take off. It could get out of hand if the problems are not addressed. The correct approach to take would be to treat Islamic Jihad as a sordid disease such as malaria or smallpox that needs to be eliminated. Any effort to brand Islamic terrorism as India's fault is approximately on the same level as the medieval belief that leprosy is a form of divine retribution. Those such as Teesta Seetalvad, Arundhati Roy, Shabana Azmi or Shabnam Hashmi who preach this dangerous superstition should be treated as enemies of the people and of the democratic state.

BJP adopts revolving door policy: Can they make it?

For a while now, I have been itching to write about the upcoming elections in the Hindi heartland; but have suffered because the two major parties have offered nothing to write about. From the manner in which the BJP and the Congress have been conducting themselves, you could hardly say that a major round of elections is just a few weeks away. Even when the Election Commission announced poll dates, the reality of the upcoming trials did not seem to register with either high command in New Delhi. However, the malaise in both political formations finally shows signs of abating; and some progress is being made.

The BJP, for its part, has finally managed to get off the mark and announced some candidates, mostly in Chhattisgarh and furnished the media with some vague pointers as to the overall nature of the party's preparations, expectations and candidates for the polls. The Oracle analyzes the BJP's state as follows:

1) The muted BJP campaign is in stark contrast to the euphoria of 2003. The party has realized that there is a difference between the campaigning as the incumbent and campaigning as the opposition. In 2003, Vasundhara Raje and Uma Bharati braved the heat and dust of the road in a brutal summer. This time, the BJP leaders have mostly stayed indoors; realizing that it was the Congress' turn to slog on the streets. The Congress, of course, was closeted in the even more comfortable environs of New Delhi and made no such effort. Besides, the BJP has been "lucky" in the sense that the Central Government has been pushed to the wall over rising prices and terrorism. A lot of the focus has been taken off the performance of its own state government. Going by the nature of the Indian electorate, incumbency is always a heavy cross to bear, even if the government has performed well; and the jury is still out on whether the BJP rule has resulted in a net gain for the states.

2) The BJP has also paid more attention to the views of its local units in the states in which it is the incumbent. This is also a departure from 2003, when Vasundhara Raje was handpicked by Mahajan to secure Rajasthan for the party while Uma Bharati was persuaded to go down to Bhopal and take charge. Once again, we see the BJP adopting a different tactic when it is the Opposition: in Delhi, the party has thrust V K Malhotra's candidature upon the organization, when the most deserving man for the job would have been the hard working and understated Dr. Harshvardhan.

In the heartland states, the party high command has also stayed away from the direct campaigning and left the state units to figure out their agenda on their own. In particular, the post of prabhari, to be occupied a calculating man sent by the BJP from New Delhi to micromanage the campaign, is conspicuous by its absence in all 3 heartland states.

3) A lot of media attention has been drawn to the BJP's new revolving door policy; the so called "Gujarat model". Assured of the still enduring appeal of its Chief Ministers, the party has commissioned internal surveys to obtain assessments of all MLAs from their constituents. The party promises to drop a third of its sitting MLAs to negate anti-incumbency at the grassroots level. By keeping these assessments secret, the BJP has managed to keep the MLAs on their toes and members of local party units enthused about their prospects of earning a party ticket. By announcing candidates only at the last moment, they have staved off the possibility of denied ticket seekers or unseated MLAs surfacing as rebel candidates, a phenomenon that hurts an incumbent party a lot more than it hurts the opposition.

Moreover, the BJP understands that Uma Bharti's BJSP has been waiting in the wings to snap up rebel BJP MLAs. The party has tried to contend with this situation by offering unseated MLAs tickets at the local level, or even berths in the "Zila Sarkars". Whether the party manages to keep from ripping at the seams once all candidates are announced remains to be seen.

4) Even with the best of strategies, the BJP will have a hard time defending three major states at once. For now, the party is putting up a brave face and even a hint of a swagger. This is partly due to the fact that major media organizations have not carried out their own opinion polls. For now, all projections in the media seem to come from anecdotal evidence. The BJP, for its part claims to have carried out its own meticulous surveys; itemized its strengths and weaknesses and analyzed its chances of victory. Though one could hasten to dismiss the BJP's talk of its own surveys as mere propaganda, we must remember that it was the BJP's own projections that came closest to the real picture the last time these states went to elections.

The BJP's biggest friend seems to be the utter disarray in the Congress camp. The Congress has been in two minds about its leadership in both Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. In Rajasthan, conflict continues between party chief C.P. Joshi and Ashok Gehlot. Although Gehlot seems to enjoy an advantage over Joshi, probably due to the former's proximity to Sonia Gandhi, he does not quite seem to be in control of the campaign. Also, in an election where anti-incumbency is the Congress' main plank, it does not make a lot of sense to bring back a leader that has already been set aside by the people. The people of Rajasthan unseated Gehlot five years ago; it is more likely that they would want to see a new leader as the agent of change, rather than a throwback to the past. A wildcard such as Sachin Pilot could have done a lot more to energize the party workers and the electorate. The Congress party's apathetic and ambiguous stand on the Gujjar issue that rocked the state a few months ago also hasn't helped. In fact, Bhaisla has all but called upon his supporters to vote for the Rani. Besides, Vasundhara Raje does seem to be capable of holding on to her grassroots appeal and still manages to hold huge rallies at a moment's notice.

In Madhya Pradesh, the Congress is, once again at a loss for leaders. And disunity does not help. When Sonia Gandhi rallied her party workers in Kamal Nath's constituency earlier this year, she repeatedly called on them to make common cause with each other. At one point there was a broad consensus that Suresh Pachauri should be projected as CM. But as Pachauri locked horns with the Chief Minister in a prestige contest ... and then lost a bypoll in the summer, he seemed to have shed some of his sheen.

The game in Chhattisgarh is being played out much more subtly. In the early years of BJP rule, the party's star had begun to fade rapidly. But in the last two years it seemed to be making large gains, even wresting seats from the Congress and BSP in tribal areas of the interior. In Chhattisgarh, the two parties have often found themselves in the same boat; defending against the ever present threat of Naxal violence. Even though tribals account for close to 50% of the state's population, the BJP has installed a non tribal Raman Singh as CM and the surprise is that this has not become a huge issue. This is made even more strange by the fact that the BJP swept the tribal regions in 2003, taking as many as 25 of 34 reserved constituencies; which therefore account for about half its tally of 51. As the election draws near, the BJP has been reminded of the influence of the disgraced Judeo in the crucial Jashpur region and the party has offered a ticket to Judeo's son Yudhvir Singh. Sonia Gandhi has also deployed one of her favourites, the wily Ajit Jogi to retake the state. This time, however, the contest is entirely bipolar, with leaders such as Vidhya Charan Shukla having faded into oblivion.


A lot of heat remains to be generated in this round of state elections. Of late the country has had too much talk of nuclear deals, uranium, inflation, credit crisis and too little of genuine electoral politics. The Oracle's heart yearns for the flavour of the older brand of non elitist, scorched earth campaigning. As the Hindi heartland steps up to vote, can we see some more of this?

Raj Thackeray breaks the sanity barrier

The other day Laloo Yadav observed: "Raj Thackeray to full mental case ban gaye hain" (Raj Thackeray has a mental health condition) . One can't agree more. Now, politics watchers in India are a hardened lot; we have seen so much of nonsense and rabble rousing, even the worst kind of violence, that one does not expect to be taken completely by surprise. Remember when George Fernandes said cynically in Parliament, referring to the Gujarat riots: "Is this the first time in India that a daughter has been raped in front of her mother"? Even so, Raj Thackeray's achievement of pulling out a riot out of nowhere is truly remarkable.

As Raj's version of the Sena threw Mumbai into disarray, several points came to fore. On the question of whether people of Bihar, or any other part of the country, have an inalienable right to live and work in Mumbai, and on whether the people of Maharashtra enjoy reciprocal rights anywhere else in India, there is only one reasonable side in the debate. We will not go into this; rather we shall try to understand what hit Mumbai and why it did.

1) Raj Thackeray's lack of a support base is rather appalling. As I have observed so many times before on this blog, regional identities in India are on the wane; an appeal to regionalism just doesn't work any more. The dream of a common glorious future, apart from the hardships we face, and even the terrorism we suffer as a nation have brought the people together. When Balasaheb founded the Shiv Sena in 1966, there was still room for a middle class Marathi Manoos that wanted to live a sheltered life and enjoy the benefits of being in proximity to India's premier city. There are no sleepy classes in India any more. The mobilized masses of today have little patience for narrow minded struggles over linguistic and regional identity; most are energized by global dreams. As such, Raj's gambit is a mere throwback to the past; he himself is only a shadow of his illustrious uncle and as such, he is doomed to failure.

2) Given that Raj's party is a fringe player in Maharashtra politics, one may well ask how he manages to hold the entire state to ransom. In this both the Congress and the Shiv Sena are at fault. When Raj Thackeray broke away from the Shiv Sena, the Congress was understandably delighted. Raj's dissociation from what some may call his "ancestral party" and his very public spat with cousin Uddhav; coming on the heels of other high profile desertions from the Sena (from Bhaskar Jadhav to Sanjay Nirupam and even Narayan Rane) was supposed to bring the Shiv Sena to its knees.

That didn't happen. The Congress tried harder. When Raj Thackeray first embarked on his militant campaign to oust North Indians from Mumbai, the Congress kept mum. They expected that his foul mouthed utterances would wean away chunks of Sena support in Mumbai and the rest of the state. Each time Raj broke another law, the Congress stepped back a little more. And Raj's confidence kept growing.

Now that Raj has broken the sanity barrier, the Congress led government has finally put its act together and set the wheels of justice in motion. The Congress had tried to maintain a lackasaidal attitude this time around as well. When MNS goons attacked Bihari students in Mumbai, the Chief Minister cheekily told the media that the Railway should have asked for protection in advance if it had needed any. Should Mumbai be attacked tomorrow by terrorists, one wonders whether the Chief Minister will say "If the public needed any protection, they should have asked for it".

3) The Shiv Sena's role in this entire episode has been quite mysterious. Although the Left Parties have tried to play fast and loose with facts and accused the Sena itself and by extension, even the BJP, of being in cahoots with the MNS (one wonders how the Left feels about about the political culture of its own allies like RJD and BSP) the Sena has, in fact, stayed away from the MNS' campaign. In fact the only reaction from the Sena has been an article in Saamna by Balasaheb who has accused Raj of not being the "real" defender of the Marathi Manoos; fairly routine... no fireworks there.

What is surprising here is the restraint with which the Sena has attacked Raj Thackeray, especially if one compares it to the violent condemnation with which the party has treated other renegades. "Lakhobha" (Chhagan Bhujbal) and "Narya" (Narayan Rane) are still swear words in Shiv Sena rhetoric. At one time, Balasaheb used to greet dissenters with a defiant "Jao, chale jao!" (go, get lost!) When Bhaskar Jadhav deserted right before the 2004 Assembly Elections, the normally suave Uddhav called on his party workers : "Nestanabood kara" (destroy him!). In contrast Raj Thackeray has faced little vitriol from his party. Despite his departure, Raj refuses to criticize Balasaheb directly to this day and reserves his venom for cousin Uddhav. Neither does the Sena supremo respond in his familiar tone of voice. Is it because a section of the party itself, and even a part of their leader, is sympathetic to Raj and his Marathi rhetoric? One will never know unless the Sena says something.

At the time of Raj's last tirade, the Sena actually gave protection to some North Indian settlements in Mumbai. Apparently this has not happened this time around. Also, one wonders why the Sena, which is considerably stronger than Raj's ragtag army does not come out in the streets against the MNS. That the Sena refuses to engage Raj's men physically on the streets out of sheer respect for the law, is too much more than what one would logically expect from Shivsainiks.

4) Raj's activities have also sparked off a race in Bihar. The backward state is critically dependent on money sent home by manual labourers working in metros outside; its youth lives only to compete in nationwide examinations. The RJD and JDU are trying to outrun each other in condemning Raj Thackeray. Both are plagued by difficulties. While the RJD and its Congress allies have to accept blame for the loose handling of Raj Thackeray, the JDU and BJP will suffer from the perception that Raj is still very much toeing a core Shiv Sena line, albeit much more emphatically. Who will suffer the most is yet to be seen, but one would normally expect equal damage.

A final point that needs to be touched upon is the strange sentiment that seems to be sweeping Bihar that is not altogether different from Raj's. Although Laloo is the Railway minister and the former Chief Minister is wont to running things as though they were his personal fiefdom, the Indian Railway does not belong to Bihar or to Laloo in any sense. The mobs that torched trains at Barh station did seem to project a sense that Bihar has somehow more entitled to having its way with the Railways. Obviously the immediate guilt does not lie with them and they were responding to an extreme provocation. Rather, it is just another item in an aggravated behavioural pattern that has been observed in Bihar since 2004. Of course, such a sentiment is nothing new; the Railway in India is almost a state in itself and the sentiment of "our minister, our railway" has made its rounds around the country.


Mumbai did not become India's premier city in a day. The people of the city have steely resolve that has seen them through calamity and terror. And they have the people of India behind them. As I said before, we the people of India have been through a lot together. We have put a flag on the moon. Regional squabbles just do not register in our pschye any more. The Indian dream has begun; with the whiff of achievement, a thousand squabbles are forgotten.

Tamil Nadu seized by political storm

As blood flows freely in Sri Lanka, the Indian government finds itself in a struggle of political interests and Tamil Nadu finds itself in a tizzy. In this particular crisis, it is particularly difficult for the Indian government to separate emotion from calculation and pragmatism from pride. The Oracle examines all of these complex questions, almost exclusively from the point of view of Indian interests and finds that there are hardly any good choices to made.

First, India needs to understand the emotion of her Tamil constituents. For all other Indians, the Tamils are family and hence India should prioritize the Indian Tamils' point of view in determining state policy towards the LTTE situation in Sri Lanka. First the Tamils of Sri Lanka do have a very good case against their government; they have long been oppressed, denied civil rights and even citizenship. The Ceylon Citizenship Act of 1948 expressly prevented people of Indian and Pakistani origin from obtaining Sri Lankan citizenship. In fact, until 2002, people of Indian origin in Sri Lanka were not recognized as equal citizens even on paper. As such, the Tamil grievance towards the Sri Lankan government has a firm basis in fact. Not all militancy is equal; there is still such a thing as desperate people being forced to arms for self defence in a lawless land with a repressive government. The government of Sri Lanka should not be allowed to take advantage of the sweeping global sentiment against "terrorism" and masquerade its unjust, racist self as a legitimate government seeking to weed out enemies of peace; not when they denied civil rights on the basis of race a mere six years ago.

Revolutions tend to take on a life of their own. Although the LTTE was born out of legitimate grievances, it has spun itself into a hateful, murderous militant organization that holds down Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka with a iron hand. The LTTE turned against the IPKF many years ago and even went on to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi. The LTTE deals with dissenters such as Col. Karuna with a heavy hand and has a taste for extreme violence, blood and gore.

As such, the task of the Indian government is three fold:

a) To explain to the Tamils of India that the LTTE is a violent organization that has no respect for human rights and can only bring further poverty, despair and death to the Sri Lankan Tamils.

b) To make it clear to the Sri Lankan government that India will take any action necessary to ensure that Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka live are afforded with the fullest extent of civil, human and democratic rights once the LTTE has been wiped out.

c) To scare away the Chinese, who are looking at Sri Lanka to be another bead in the "string of pearls" they want India to wear. As such, India needs to step up its military presence in the region even further. As the United States increasingly looks to Colombo as the primary strategic station in South Asia, instead of Karachi in unstable Pakistan, India's task should not be too hard. Nevertheless, with the Chinese paying for a massive port in Sri Lanka, India needs to beware of the Chinese beachhead in the Indian Ocean.

President Rajapakse of Sri Lanka is a wily man; even as the United States, India and China eye his country for strategic goals, he is able to work with the major powers to his own advantage. Under the now universal bogey of fighting terrorism, he is flushing out the LTTE to make space for himself. He has repeatedly refused to mention what peace he would offer to Indian Tamils once the war is over. The war itself has been conducted with the bloody ruthlessness of an expansionist monarch, rather than with the cautious approach of a legitimate government that is conscious of human rights. The aims of his war have been, almost entirely territorial, rather than the enforcement of justice and law.

For India, this situation is simply unacceptable. Unless India is capable of mustering its huge military forces for power projection in its own backyard, India will remain a second class power. Unfortunately, India has sent no messages at all to this effect.

So much for the international situation. The flip side of this issue is in Tamil Nadu, where both the AIADMK and DMK are vying to project themselves as friends of Lankan Tamils. However, both sides lack the conviction to take concrete steps. When the DMK ministers and MPs at the Centre resigned, Jayalalitha dared Karunanidhi to step down from power in Chennai. This was an inane remark, since policy in India is decided at the national and not at the state government level. Similarly, Karunanidhi "expressed satisfaction" over the Centre's efforts to change the situation in Sri Lanka based on a mere statement made by Pranab Mukherjee to Parliament, when, in fact, the UPA Government had done nothing to make itself heard either in Colombo or in Kilinochchi. The country can have a sigh of relief over the fact that both sides are just lame ducks. It means that neither has the conviction, or even the lung power, to raise the bogey of "Tamil Nationalism", whatever that means. It shows that regionalism in India is a dying ideology, one that cannot win many followers even when the provocation is extremely strong. In all this confusion, blood and gore, that is the only piece of good news.