MODI SPELLS FEAR AMONG POWER ELITE:(from Pioneer) At the time of writing, the UPA Government is still to find a sitting or retired judge with some credibility who is willing to undertake the enquiry into the so-called Snoopgate. Whispers from increasingly deserted corridors of power suggest that the Government’s lawyer — crusaders have honed in on a long-retired High Court judge from Uttar Pradesh who was subsequently an applicant for a Congress ticket.Whether or not a legal luminary is ultimately found before May 16 to set in motion a political vendetta is not the main issue. What should concern Indians who are understandably proud of the country’s democratic traditions is that a possible change of Government should be preceded by a scorched earth approach. Certainly, this is the impression being conveyed by Cabinet Minister Kapil Sibal, a man who many say excels more in TV studios than he does at the hustings.A change in Government is not unique: It happened in 1977, 1980, 1989, 1991, 1996, 1998 and 2004. The people of India have unendingly demonstrated that political power at the Centre is not the monopoly of any party or family. But this is not to say that transition has always been smooth and without rancour.In 1977, the election results came as a massive shock to then Prime Minister late Indira Gandhi and her durbar which had imposed the 21-month Emergency. Confronted with defeat, Indira, according to a contemporary account by journalist Kuldip Nayar, explored the possibility of calling in the Army to prevent her opponents from assuming power.In 1989, Rajiv Gandhi attempted nothing so precipitate. In fact, his conduct after the defeat was exemplary. However, prior to the election the Congress establishment undertook a series of dirty tricks to undermine late Vishwanath Pratap Singh who had emerged as the rallying point of anti-Congress forces. The most brazen attempt to discredit VP Singh was the establishment of a fraudulent bank account in the offshore tax haven of St Kitts in the name of Ajeya Singh (son of VP Singh). A couple of dubious foreigners were roped in to pretend that they had business dealings with Ajeya. The conspiracy involved members of India’s diplomatic missions abroad and a few compliant editors of Indian newspapers.Another feature of the Congress’ manipulative politics was the blatant misuse of the Government-owned media. It needs to be remembered that until 1996-97, the Government had a monopoly of the electronic media. Unlike today, the people of India didn’t know what channel surfing meant: It was Doordarshan and Doordarshan only. Consequently, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry operated as the Propaganda Ministry for the Congress and was headed by politicians such as Vidya Charan Shukla and KK Tewary. Both became bywords for intolerance, arbitrariness and, in the case of Tewary, unabashed buffoonery. The latest spat involving the CEO of Prasar Bharati and the I&B Minister Manish Tewari suggests that a more competitive media environment hasn’t changed the mindset of Congress functionaries: The Propaganda Ministry template has proved hard to discard.This inability to make a distinction between State power and a political party is at the root of the desperation and nervousness that is being witnessed among the Ministers of the Government. In the past week, at least three English-speaking Cabinet Ministers of the Congress — Sibal, Salman Khurshid and Anand Sharma, with P Chidambaram making a guest appearance — have taken to the airwaves to stress the intellectual inadequacies of Narendra Modi. What is significant about their interventions is not so much the sharp language but the underlying sneer in their tone. It is almost that they are astonished at the country falling in love with a leader who doesn’t share their cultural assumptions.However, behind the sneering condescension lurks a more profound fear: That Modi is different. In the past, the Congress adapted to its move to the Opposition benches with a belief that nothing will change and that the party will be back in power before too long. This time, the nervousness is more intense and is centred on the belief that Modi will do to them what they tried to do to him for the last ten years, and failed. A similar fear existed in 1977 following the bitterness of the Emergency but this time there is an additional fear, that neither Sonia Gandhi nor Rahul Gandhi are street fighters like Indira was.There is fear that the whimsical misuse of power by the privileged first family will become public knowledge. There is fear that the business affairs of Robert Vadra will become public knowledge. There is fear that many of the decisions taken by the Government will be traced back to a non-Constitutional source located in 10 Janpath. There is fear that the elaborate patronage network set by the Congress to keep its backers in good humour will not merely be exposed but completely dismantled.Losing political power is one thing. When this defeat is accompanied by a corresponding loss of livelihood, uncertainty turns to panic. What we are witnessing are the dying convulsions of an old order. If there is an endorsement of Modi at the polls, it will be based on the expectation that he will put an end to political cronyism and the misuse of power. Those who have voted for Modi expect him to put an end to a rotten political culture. India is awaiting a more mature and superior democracy. With Dr Parul Priya Kapahi
Posted on: Mon, 05 May 2014 00:57:10 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015