Poll bugle to be sounded in Karnataka

The cauldron in Karnataka is ready to boil over. Right from the time the state threw up a three way verdict in 2004, it was clear that the politics of the state was steering through a hairpin bend: that the popular mandate having turned only half way; would stop short, turn again and head off in the reverse direction. We remember what happened in Bihar in 2005. Bihar was poised to move decisively away from the politics of Laloo Yadav, but failed to accomplish this in a single manoeuvre. The electoral omens portend much the same for Karnataka this time.

The rise of the BJP in a state that has so far been conscientious in its choice of socialist and secular politics is remarkable. At a time when the BJP is facing meltdown in its heart of Uttar Pradesh, the fulfillment of the BJP's "ultimate ambition" of ruling a southern state could be a watershed for the party. Moreover, the BJP, which is making a case for coming back to power in 2009, will want to use a southern victory to generate nationwide momentum in its favour. Of course, the BJP is yet to strike its roots deep into the heart of the state, for it still lags way behind both the Congress and the JD(S) in civic and local body holdings, although in the last election cycle, the BJP more than doubled its tally while the Congress faced heavy losses.

Then there is the issue of "sympathy". It is obvious that the BJP should have known better than to take the Gowdas at their word. One would presume that the BJP which had been repeatedly let down by regional satraps like Mayawati in exactly the same manner, would have learnt its lesson. Further, one would guess that the BJP, which was clearly the rising sun on the political horizon of the state, would be wary to dilute their image by entering into a meek tie-up with the weary Gowdas. This owes partly to the stunning political act pulled off by Deve Gowda at the moment the Congress and JD(S) parted ways in January 2006. Along with Sonia Gandhi's "sacrifice" in May 2005 and Laloo Yadav's appointment of Rabri Devi as Chief Minister of Bihar, this ranks among the three most flawlessly executed acts in India's recent political history. The BJP snapped up any power it could get and the Gowdas got to carry on with their deception; for another 20 months.

If Deve Gowda and H D Kumaraswamy delivered stellar performances in the first act of the Karnataka drama, they failed miserably in the second. The unseemly manner in which the BJP was ditched is also one of the most politically unintelligent acts in recent history. Gowda and his scions have to carry the tag of "betrayers" into this election and well beyond. In a state that is self-righteous enough to pick separate politics at the national, state and regional levels, this might well be the proverbial albatross around their neck. Perhaps I am speaking too soon, but it is probably all over for the JD(S).

Having witnessed the seemingly irreversible fragmentation of Indian politics over the last decade, it is somewhat refreshing to see a major state being reclaimed by a bipolar polity. Since the BJP and JD(S) have failed to provide "stability", the Congress must fancy its chances. The tactic of delaying the election so as to ease the "sympathy factor" was a lame, pathetic effort that might well backfire. The remission of farmer loans is their best hope and going by the amount of vigorous energy the BJP was poured into "educating the farmers about the realities of the Congress' plan", it is evident that Chidambaram's generosity has struck a chord in rural India. The Congress has also reinstated SM Krishna at the helm of affairs and it is possible that his development friendly, urbane image will make an impact. SM Krishna is one of the people who knows how rough and unfair politics can be, as in the "backwards" election of 2004; in which non-performers like Laloo, Mulayam and Navin Patnaik came up trumps while those such as Chandrababu, SM Krishna and Modi were snubbed. SM Krishna also brings with him the aptitude for technology that is so uncharacteristic of the Congress and the silicon valley does look up to him. If people look beyond the Dharam Singh experience the Congress gave them, it is not inconceivable that the Congress might win a majority.

The BJP's strategy is rather simple. They will give tickets to all their sitting MLAs to cement the sympathy factor. The Congress will be playing catch up. And the JD(S) has a lot of explaining to do.

The last word: Karnataka has seen some really ugly politics over the last four years. It is all too easy to blame the "power hungry politicians" for everything. The baseline is that the confusion in Vidhan Soudha reflected the confusion in the mind of the voter. Ultimately the responsibility for the murky dealings and if it be so, the blame, lies with the people. One hopes that the Kannadigas have a clear vision for their state this time around.

Refusing to stand for Freedom?

Democracy is a rare phenomenon in Asia. It is indeed disturbing that so many people on this vast continent should be living with so little freedom. We the people of India are among the few Asians sophisticated enough to support a real, functioning democracy. While this distinction is a badge of honour, it is also our cross to bear.

Last week, things flared up in Tibet yet again. As the Chinese military machine crushed the revolt on the streets of Lhasa, journalists searched the faces of China’s political leadership for some trace of guilt or regret. Even as we write these words, preparations are underway for a diabolical celebration of tyranny in Beijing. This vile event stirs up comparisons with the Berlin Olympics of 1936, which Hitler held to be a step towards building the political authority of his ‘Thousand Year Reich’. In the recent past, a similar uprising for democracy in Burma was brutally suppressed by the ruling military junta. In both instances, the world asked to know what India would do about this. In both instances, India chose to tell the world: “Not yet”.

But we have to start somewhere. A few weeks ago, I wrote about how India failed to come clean on Kosovo, which would have been a relatively low risk foreign policy undertaking. The situation in Burma, or Tibet, or, for that matter, in Pakistan and Nepal is incredibly more complex and a minor mistake could precipitate a major crisis. Becoming a superpower starts with attitude. One way to start is by becoming a regional power. And in order to do so, we must create what is called a “sphere of influence”.

The Chinese have a huge head start. They have made the best of their neighbourhood, which, to say the least, is tailor-made in their favour. Their foreign policy has been consistent, ruthless and eminently supple in its tactics. The Chinese have a plan for India; the joint military exercises with India are not merely incidental. The Chinese are pressing for a relationship with India that will be essentially the same as that which the US has with Canada. They see China as the axis of the world, with a docile India following at their heels.

Prime Minister Singh also has a basic idea. The humble scholar that he is, he is using the paradigm of the academic world: he believes that if we focus solely on self-improvement, India will automatically be accorded the status that suits our calibre. Most certainly, there is some merit to this. There is something about America that makes people want to crawl through sewers and drainpipes in order to get there and India should indeed strive to achieve that ‘something’. Unfortunately however, India does not have the many geographical advantages that the United States enjoys. In the first half of the previous century, the nations of Europe knocked each other senseless in two great wars. Both times, the US, which was placed securely across the Atlantic, was able to tilt the balance and emerge as the real winner. However, India is located at the epicentre of the next potential world conflict. With no allies in its immediate neighbourhood, the future of free people depends on us. So, in order to stand up for freedom, what does India need to do and understand?

1) “Splendid Isolation”: This is the policy successfully pursued by the US till the First World War. Away from the endless political intrigue and backstabbing in Europe, the Americans developed themselves rapidly in the Free World. When War broke out in 1914, the US was reluctant to abandon its policy of “splendid isolation”. Public opinion was provoked by the sinking of the Lucitania by a German U-boat, which killed 125 Americans. Government circles were unnerved by apprehensions over the now infamous “Zimmermann Telegram”, a secret German missive asking the German Embassy in Mexico to persuade the Mexican Government to attack the United States at an opportune moment that fell into British hands. It is too late for India to adopt this policy. For one, the epicentre of conflict is located in Asia and isolation is too regressive an idea in this era of globalization.

2) Nuclear Power: The keyword in ‘superpower’ is ‘power’. The meaning of the latter has evolved and today it could stand for both ‘military power’ and ‘economic power’ (The wildly optimistic notion of ‘knowledge superpower’, as conceived by Vajpayee, approved by Dr. Kalam and well liked by Dr. Singh would be suited only to a much more sophisticated world). That India will have a bright economic future is self evident. However, in order to successfully hold the Chinese feet to the fire, India will need to build up a significant stockpile of nuclear weapons. Defence is one of the issues on which Dr. Singh’s government has performed remarkably, if somewhat surprisingly, well. Of late, the Prime Minister declared the creation of a separate division of the army in Arunachal Pradesh. Besides, India has also started building a missile shield and recently acquired the ability to fire nuclear missiles from sea, while India’s first nuclear submarine, the so called “Advanced Technology Vessel”, will take to the waters soon. It is also fortunate that the DRDO has finally scrapped its decades’ old vainglorious venture to build every missile from scratch and opt openly for foreign collaboration without trying to “reinvent the wheel”. At the same time, India has an unambiguous “no first use” policy with respect to nuclear weapons, as every civilized nation should.

A lot of words on this web log have already been devoted to the India-US nuclear deal. Both India and China are starved of energy resources; unless India can enter the nuclear club as a full time member, we will always be one step behind. If only the Prime Minister had looked beyond party lines to start with, India would have been on the fast track to energy security. India can take firm positions on the Middle East only if we no longer need to deal with rogue nations such as Iran. Advani, who could well be the next Prime Minister, has already said that India needs to amend only one of its laws to render itself immune to the Hyde Act. This week, US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is perhaps as liberal as an American politician can possibly get, told Dr. Singh that she was hopeful of the deal going through as well. As I have said before, the Indo-US nuclear/military/civilian cooperation is an imperative.

3) Bold Posturing: Again, this has to do with creating a “sphere of influence”. In the conflict ridden world, New Delhi must do more than issue “calls for peace”. It has also to do with the fact that India has an image of being a “soft state”, a reputation that has, in part, to do with Gandhi’s legacy. The Chinese should have been severely upbraided for protesting against the Prime Minister’s recent visit to Arunachal Pradesh. India needs to display the kind of courage that has not been on show since Indira Gandhi acted decisively to create the state of Bangladesh. In order to do so, India needs to talk tough to China over the border dispute, spell out its stand on the Middle East, adopt a zero tolerance policy towards terrorism and aggressively court key allies even at the risk of making powerful enemies. Ever since India was born as a nation state, India has been stuck with the Nehruvian doctrine of pacifism. Though a great patriot and a great statesman, Pt. Nehru failed to see that the world’s largest democracy had the obvious potential to become one of the foremost nations on earth. This, along with his Gandhian convictions, led him to develop India as a permanent third world country, and he molded its foreign policy to be meek and conciliatory, ever so wary to displease anyone. In order to change the course of history, India must pull out of the so called “Non Aligned Movement”, if only to stress the point that India can be an axis by itself, closer to the centre of the world.

4) On the Security Council: That the largest free nation in the world has no permanent seat at the UN Security Council is a travesty to say the least. India was not at the table when the map of the world was last redrawn in 1945. This historical injustice can only be undone by wresting the diplomatic initiative from the old players. The Indo-US nuclear deal, which overturned four decades of US nuclear policy on its head, could have been a first step in this direction. Beyond the obvious issue of uranium supply, a window could have opened for India to gain legitimacy as a major nuclear power. It would have been a sign of the times, a sign that the rules have to change to accommodate India. However, gaining a permanent seat at the UNSC is uniquely difficult; while India’s enemies will not want India to gain in eminence, our allies, most of who already have permanent seats, will want India to remain forever dependent on their veto power for important foreign policy initiatives.

5) Calculated Warfare: This one is perhaps antithetical; for there never has, nor can be, a “perfect war effort” (although, in my opinion the “near perfect” ones would be Bismarck’s wars of 1870, Frederick's Battle of Leuthen and the Nazi capture of France). Continuing from where I left off on the subject of making powerful enemies, I daresay that it is perhaps impossible to reach the zenith of power without conflict. Every world power has to go through a rite of passage: and it is inconceivable that India can become a superpower without one. The Greeks passed theirs against the Persians at the legendary battle of Thermoplayae; the Romans, in their turn, had to contend with the fierce Gauls and the desperate warriors of Cathage. In order to build themselves into a great nation, the British had to face a crisis of existence time and again: from the times of the Spanish Armada to the Napoleonic Wars all the way upto World War II. The United States reached its height only after the mighty Soviet Union was felled. The same rules apply to India and China, and perhaps, only one of them will survive as a great power; what form the battle takes in this modern world remains to be seen.

Why is the US desperate to have the nuclear deal?

The proffered Indo-US nuclear agreement is, by definition, so extraordinary, that it is possible to overlook some of its deeper features. These “deeper features” pertain to the diplomatic approach that the US has taken with respect to this deal; first, Ambassador Mulford rode from door to door in New Delhi, parleying not only with the political parties but also with individual leaders, lobbying for support. Then a clump of influential Senators, led by the distinguished Joseph Biden made for India, where they set June-July as a deadline for approving the long overdue Nuclear Deal. As if that were not enough, almost immediately, Secretary of Defence Bob Gates declared that September would do just as well. And finally, sensing Prime Minister Singh’s predicament over his Communist colleagues, the US declared that it was ready to sign the agreement with a “minority government” in India. If you choose to add the fact that the Indian government prevailed upon President Bush to include a “non hindrance clause” in the text of the agreement and that the Nuclear Deal passed Congress 359-68 and Senate by 85-14 “with the kind of support reserved for Mothers’ Day resolutions”, it becomes apparent that the diplomatic high-handedness so characteristic of the US has been starkly absent.

The latter betrays a reality that can only grow on the American people and on the rest of the world. The US has already made more enemies than it can possibly afford to fight. As if that were not enough, the Chinese have a dagger pointed at the heart of America and Putin (or if you must mention it, through his new puppet President Dmitri Medvedev) has revived the Cold War in spirit, if not in form. The European Union, with the exception of the UK, has largely been put off by the strong arm tactics of the Bush Administration. John Howard’s Conservatives have crumbled in Australia and, of late, the Far Left has made inroads into the German Bundestag, thereby undermining Chancellor Merkel, who has been a steadfast supporter of the US policies. Last week, the Socialists carried Spain yet again and, in England the Labour Party faces a tough election pretty soon. Things are not looking up for the United States. A more liberal President in Washington will make things a little, but not significantly, easier. As such, India is the pretty much the only major nation where America’s ratings have continued to soar. Little wonder then, that the Americans have been very tolerant of India’s mood swings.

It is also evident that President Bush is desperate to leave a legacy. On the domestic as well as on most international fronts, Bush has driven himself and his Republican Party into doom. With their noses to the ground, it is hardly surprising that the President and his men want to achieve an agreement that would shape US foreign policy for many decades to come.

So, is the nuclear deal dead? Most certainly. You cannot expect the opposition BJP to do more than is politically expedient. When Manmohan Singh finally appealed to Atalji for support a couple of weeks ago, it was already too late. The Prime Minister has pursued a policy of confrontation with the Opposition and now it is too late to mend fences. Even after the Chinese cleared the decks for the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (or more precisely, the 印度共产党（马克思主义）) to support the nuclear deal, it was obvious that the inexorable comrades would be unable to overcome their phobia for the US. The Prime Minister should have known better than to assume he could persuade them eventually. We remember how Manmohan Singh inaugurated the era of economic reforms in India. What Manmohan Singh does not remember, or perhaps, never cared to find out, was how much hard work Narasimha Rao put in with BJP leaders prior to that. A foreign policy initiative of this magnitude should always involve the Opposition. Perhaps Dr. Singh will notice that the latest delegation from the Bush Administration was led by Senators Biden and Kerry, both Democrats. We have always known that Prime Minister Singh, who delights in his Rajya Sabha membership, is not a real politician. We know that Dr. Singh is smart enough to know this as well as we do. And that is why I think I see in him a very cheap man who is clinging on to a job at the cost of self respect.

The deal is dead, but this is not the end of the world. Both India and the US have missed an opportunity. There are good failures and there are bad failures. The nuclear deal fell through because India got entangled in the trappings of democracy; therefore, this failure is of the former kind. In America as well as in India, there is a sense of the inevitable that looks beyond the day to day business of diplomacy. As long as we remember that the cure for all ills of democracy is more democracy, there will be life beyond a single disappointment.

Celebrating Woman power in politics

The current politics of India shows just how far we have progressed towards achieving a gender equal society. Let’s face it: Our female politicians are far from being paragons of virtue or models of perseverance; in fact, more often than not they could be the latest in a dynastic line of succession or a mere proxy for others. Or they could be arrogant or corrupt, rabble rousers or “Ammas” and “Behenjis” and “Didis”. In other words, they are just like men. The Oracle sees this as evidence of real emancipation, whereby the women who make it big are not just those who can make leaders of substance, but also the regular scum.

Those are harsh words indeed, particularly for a post that professes to “celebrate” Women’s Day. They bear testament to my perverted political conscience, perhaps to my cynical mind; only the ever scheming, fork tongued people; those who can fight deep and dirty with a straight face, qualify as real politicians. Without them there would be no plots and subplots that excite me in the first place: if for nothing else, I would pick democracy over monarchy just for this.

Oh PC! How predictable you are!

We love your budget, dear PC, but if you ever get a chance to do this again, make sure you use some imagination. For instance, you could exchange that demure shawl for a bright red coat (no pun intended), perhaps even wear a flowing white beard and punctuate your speech with the words “Ho! Ho! Ho!”. Or perhaps you could bring the budget papers in a cloth bag slung over your shoulder and crawl into Parliament through a chimney or something? We all love a friendly finance minister but we also love new ideas; you could borrow some from your mate in the Railway Ministry: if you want to bring freshness to your regime, befriend the environment and give a fillip to cottage industry by replacing plastic cups with earthen ‘kulhars’; or befriend the poor by giving jobs to railway coolies. Do not turn the Finance Ministry into Missionaries of Charity.

Some years ago, when the Congress happened to find that they were actually ahead of the BJP, they had to climb onto the Left’s shoulder to rise to the seat of power. The latter were largely relieved to become relevant in Parliament once again and glad to offer support. What with the Soviet Union crashing to the ground and Communism getting stamped out across the world, the frustrated comrades put the bitter taste of their sixty year long fruitless struggle in India behind them and believed that they had scored a point over all their bogeymen, from Narendrabhai Modi to Mukesh Ambani, all the way up to President Bush! As such, the markets and industry greeted the news of the 2004 election with a deafening stock market crash. Even so, people took heart when the Communists ate crow and agreed to Dr. Singh as Prime Minister (of all people). With the “Dream Team” of Manmohan and Chidambaram in saddle, there was reason to hope. If the stock market drop of 900 points is anything to go by, India Inc. has just told Mr. Chidambaram how it feels about the Budget.

I am no economist, but I do understand some basic rules of give and take. For instance, now that Government Banks can no longer collect their debts, their profit margins will suffer, thereby impeding their competitive edge against the private sector. Incidentally, the same Congress accused the BJP of trying to deliberately hold down public sector companies and unfairly advantage the private sector. Or, now that there is a tax on small capital gains, the small investors will be dissuaded from trying their luck in entrepreneurship, leaving the field to big players in Corporate India. Handouts from the Government also hurt the nation in a deeper, more insidious manner: they are the real reason behind the politics of quotas and reservations. These handouts foster a political culture that makes people believe that they are entitled to free stuff from their government without deserving it; hence the mad scramble for SC/ST/OBC status, which in turn sustains and deepens the caste divides in society.

Furthermore, the budget is so obvious an electoral gimmick that it is somewhat banal to even mention that. When was the last time a ruling government announced sops in the last year of its rule and won an election based on it? These last minute populist tactics have never worked before and there is no reason to believe otherwise this time round. There are reasons why sops do not work: one; because people see right through the gambit and two; because it costs the opposition nothing to promise even more.

A “feel good” budget will not allow the ruling party to tide over its failings. If the Congress wants to find favour with the urban middle class (which shifted to the party in 2004) once again, the Government will have to produce concrete results over a sustained period. The day to day concerns over price rise and hike in fuel costs will wear out the effects of a one time friendly budget. The National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREG) scheme remains on paper. The promise of “reforms with a human face” has remained a political refrain. Therefore, on economic issues, the Congress will be hard put to distinguish themselves from the BJP. Furthermore, they will have to explain the actions of the Left, which is widely viewed as negative baggage. The aura that Sonia Gandhi had acquired after her “sacrifice” is now just as useless as the “foreign origin” issue. And Rahul Gandhi is much too unintelligent to be molded into a mass leader. Although Dr. Singh is held in high regard by most people, it is impossible to build an election effort around this Prime Minister. If the BJP could not do that with Atal Behari Vajpayee, can the uninspiring Manmohan Singh perform any better?

Election-2004 was about India’s apprehensions about becoming a true capitalist democracy. Four years hence, India is looking towards the future with confidence; working towards success with a sense of destiny. There is no paranoia to exploit as in 2004. What is the Congress supposed to do now: promise the voter that they will stick to the policies of the erstwhile BJP Government? Or will they promise to re-enact POTA? Perhaps they should go back to the drawing board with the caste map of India on it. Perhaps they should stick to basics such as Muslim appeasement, the promise of smaller states and Rahul Gandhi’s descent.

I must say that I have nothing against the farmers of Vidarbha who have been relieved of debt. Perhaps if the Union Agriculture Minister, who hails from the same state, had some time to spare from his BCCI commitments, he could have moved his rear end and done something so that the farmers would not have been living in desperate poverty in the first place. If Dr. Singh had not spent his time in office blaming his friends in the CPI(M) (why did he take their support at all?) and bemoaning the loss of his nuclear deal, the farmers would have had the water and electricity they needed … as they do in Modi’s Gujarat. A word for Chidambaram: perhaps you could reschedule the budget so that it is announced at midnight on December 24 every year, so that people could wake up on Christmas morning to open their gifts. Or, if you really want to give debt relief, why don’t you write off the millions that Pratibha Patil’s family owes to the Government? A note to Dr. Singh as well: If you must give sops, give those that are politically profitable: for instance, you could have the law minister announce that the Centre will “write off” all the criminal records as well (just like the debt records!); this would give you lots of volunteers for the next election, particularly in states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh where your party is on a sticky wicket. See what I am saying about new ideas?