Modi’s Pogrom-II It would be euphemistic, probably politically myopic, to describe the current events within the Bharatiya Janata Party as “churning”, “pruning of dead wood” or a “change of guard.” That there is no turmoil, and only some token resistance to the virtual elimination of several senior members from the power-equation confirms that Narendra Modi is determined to remove all those who do not fall in line (his line): as Rajnath Singh and Arun Jaitley have done. The snubbing of Jaswant Singh is part of the demolition drive that takes in LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Kalraj Mishra, Lalji Tandon, Nitin Gadkari, Yashwant Sinha, Harin Pathak, ~ and to no small extent Sushma Swaraj too. That successful chief ministers Shivraj Singh Chauhan and Raman Singh have dared not stray beyond their “turf” is further sign of the authoritarianism that many had feared would become the hallmark of Modi’s “monarchy”. Another angle to the story could come from the brief flirtation with the Sri Rama Sene in Karnataka; only immediate and strong public reaction thwarted: the “secularism” of Modi & Co that is not even gossamer thin. It is true that Advani and MM Joshi did not quite share the secular image of Jaswant or Yashwant, but having spent long years in public life they had come to terms with being accommodative ~ which neither the Modi squad nor the RSS find tolerable. “Winnability” is one theory advanced. But the underlying appeal to one community cannot be ignored. And the token induction of a Muslim “intellectual” does not change the picture. There is a wee bit more to the Jaswant Singh tale. After Vasundhara Raje re-captured Rajasthan with Modi’s aid a few months ago it was expected that she would use her revived clout to settle old scores, scores that go beyond contemporary politics. Though Jaswant had made his Barmer intentions clear when signalling the end of his Darjeeling interlude, no attempt was made to come to an “adjustment” before the seat was allotted to a Congress “defector” of whom Raje approved. Thus personal pique obliterated an outstanding track record in Parliament, in government, in international affairs too. All swept away by the Modi “wave”. Jaitley’s sanctimonious homily fools few, how much of it was influenced by Sushma’s “sadness” (nothing more) is what merits attention. In reality, the party need not be terribly worried by the possible extent to which Jaswant Singh may take his protest: his several accomplishments have not really translated into mass political sway. And Modi is too brazen to be bothered even if Barmer does not vote Vasundhara’s way. Courtesy UPA-II, like it or not, the “TINA” pendulum could be swinging the other, NaMo, way. (But Jaswants support for Gorkhaland, obviously result of his army background, was narrow favouritism and catered to secessoinistic whims. Moreover, his book containing praise of Jinnah couldnt be understood by me, probably due to an atrocious translation into Bengali~ ASG) ‘What Is To Be Done?’ With the Third Front as yet a non-starter and the outlook for all parties rather fogbound, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) has skirted the thorny issue of being party to the formation of the next government. The striking feature of the party’s manifesto is that the CPI-M seeks to take the wind out of the Trinamul sails on a raft of issues that had marked the latter’s campaign plank in the West Bengal Assembly elections. It might be tempting to aver that Marxists have echoed the sentiments of Mamata Banerjee. Not quite, and there is little doubt that the CPI-M has eventually deferred to the matrix set by the hardliners and even the partners of the Left Front. There appears to have been a paradigm shift on two major issues ~ land acquisition and FDI in the retail segment. Truth to tell, there is little or no difference between CPI-M and Trinamul in the pivotal clause of the Land Acquisition Act, chiefly that there must be “full and prior informed consent from all affected persons”. In trying to make the proposed legislation palatable in the context of Singur and Nandigram, it will not be easy for the CPI-M to dispel the impression that its amended perception, geared to the elections, is an afterthought. Implicitly, the party has disapproved of Buddhadeb Bhattacherjee’s high-voltage industrialisation. That disapproval of opening up the economy is evident also in the contention on FDI in retail, a policy that the CPI-M once shared with UPA-II in the face of the stout opposition of the Forward Bloc. Indeed, the coalition boat at the Centre has floundered on the rock of FDI, with Trinamul snapping ties with the UPA over the issue. Once again, the CPI-M has echoed the sentiments of Trinamul and the Left partners, underlining the risk of multi-brand retail. The Bengal Left is now categorical on the fact that the policy must be reversed. Notable no less is the mutual objection to contract farming. Both the CPI-M and Trinamul are on the same page on the need for higher devolution of central funds, the imperative to seek the state’s consent in matters of bifurcation, withdrawal of the proposal to increase the FDI cap on insurance from 26 to 49 per sent, and reservation of women in legislatures. Exactly seven years after the fury in Nandigram and with the SEZ applications of Wipro and Infosys still pending, both parties are unanimous on one of the fundamental parameters ~ the SEZ Act needs to be amended to ensure the strict implementation of labour laws. Politics can be quirky ~ the CPI-M doesn’t appear to be the Trinamul’s main rival in the Lok Sabha elections. Both parties are groping for an answer to Vladimir Lenin’s What Is To Be Done? (But Buddhadeb Bhatterjee has publicly stated his opinion that the CPIM/LF requires to support the Congress, only to thwart the communal forces (read BJP). That CPIM had nurtured Rezzak Molla who took pride in having taken a Haz pilgrimage. And in driving out Taslima from Kolkata wasnt yielding to narrow communalism, as they want us to believe!! ~ ASG)
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 19:34:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015