 |
|
On
Record The Left should have
been kept out |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Profile Reflections Diversities
— Delhi Letter
|
On Record Excerpts: Q: How does
the party view the verdict of the Lok Sabha polls? A: We see it
with some satisfaction. I think we are all conscious of the fact that it
is only partial verdict for us and a verdict for many of our alliance
partners. The verdict is a combination. We have reversed the process
that plagued us in the last two general elections. The reversal of that
process can be speeded up now with the help of our alliance partners. We
will now be able to implement many of our imaginative programmes. But
there is a lot of hard work to do. This is just a window of opportunity.
We will do our best both in the government and in the party to regain
lost ground. Q: The election results came as surprise to many. A:
I was not surprised. We were working towards a reasonable and feasible
target at many levels. We were expecting that we may not get to the
single largest party status but we will certainly get to single largest
alliance status. We are very happy that we are the single largest
party. Q: The foreign origin issue seems to have come in the way of
Congress president Sonia Gandhi becoming the Prime Minister. A: No.
The foreign origin issue was a very minor one during the campaign. Our
assessment was that less than 15 per cent people across the country were
at all concerned with this issue and obviously these 15 per cent people
would have been largely hardcore BJP supporters. The verdict has settled
this issue completely and for all times. The decision of Congress
president not to become Prime Minister is just, as she said, something
from inside. This is obviously to do with her own vision of politics in
this country, her own view of the reasons that brought her into politics
after Rajiv Gandhi’s demise and her perception. Q: Ms Gandhi was
apparently interested in becoming Prime Minister initially but changed
her mind later. A: I don’t think so. She had not spoken her mind.
I think she was just going through the process of making up her mind.
There must have been a psychological moment when she went finally to see
the President at which she must have thought that she must now do it the
way she wants to do it otherwise events will take over. And I think that’s
when she made this decision. I think that’s the reason why she kept it
close to herself. A very important moral decision and she took it when
obviously the time was right for it. Q: At her first press
conference after the verdict, Mrs Gandhi did indicate the possibility of
becoming PM saying that leader of the largest constituent in the
coalition normally heads the government. A: She was talking
about what is normal. This is not normal, this is unique. Q: Many
in the Congress feel Ms Gandhi should have accepted the top post in the
best interest of the party. A: I think that feeling will continue.
But we are not the best judges because it is an internal thing. It is a
moral decision she has taken. She is the leader and therefore her
decision must really be, in a sense, better than our inputs and our
decisions. Time will tell the negative and the positive implications of
her not leading the government directly, but nevertheless leading the
party. We are quite confident that most of the apprehensions people have
will be set to rest. Q: How do you react to apprehensions about two
centres of power emerging in the party? A: No. Two power centres
can emerge if there are two equal people. I think that Ms Gandhi has not
only a towering presence in our party but after this remarkable
decision, she now has a towering presence in the country. You will see
this when opinion polls and assessments come of who is the tallest
leader in the country. You will see this in the coming weeks. Knowing Ms
Gandhi and her place in history and her place in the party and knowing
Dr Manmohan Singh, I don’t think there is even the remotest chance of
two power centres emerging. Q: You had said that Mr Atal Bihari
Vajpayee’s intervention could have paved the way for Ms Gandhi taking
over as Prime Minister. A: I didn’t say it as a definitive
statement. I said if the divisive atmosphere being created in this
country by some of his colleagues is to be factored in, then Mr Vajpayee
must speak. He must put it down. But I am afraid neither then, nor
after, has he spoken. What his colleagues were doing was reprehensible.
To get the right atmosphere, I think he owed it to the country to step
in. But he didn’t. And I deeply regret that. Q: Despite both Ms
Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi contesting from Uttar Pradesh, the party could
not perform well in UP. A: That’s not true. We have 12.5 per cent
vote today while we had 7 per cent vote in the last assembly elections.
We had a very aggressive opposition to face in UP. The SP is supporting
us at the Centre and we supported them when they formed a government in
UP. But in terms of field opposition, they were very aggressive. As a
result, we had a very tough campaign. In view of that, what we have
achieved is nothing less than remarkable. Q: The Congress seems to
have failed to regain the confidence of the minorities. A: It is
not true. If the Congress did not have support of minorities where would
it get the kind of vote it got in Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Gujarat,
Maharashtra and also UP. Minorities were coming out vigorously in UP.
You can see it from the fact that Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav was extremely
worried and went around reaching the minorities in a very defensive
manner. We need to make ourselves a viable choice in states where we are
weak. Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, we lost but we are not weak and we will
become a viable choice. In UP, we are weak and need to become a viable
choice. We are outside government in the state and have an uneasy
relationship with our supporting partner. In Bihar, it is more
complicated as we are in the government and Mr Laloo Prasad Yadav is one
of our strong supporters in Delhi. We need to work on all these issues
and become a viable alternative. |
|
The Left should have been kept out SHOULD the Congress have accepted the cooperation offered by the Communist parties? Or should the leftists have been left out? Whatever may have been the numerical options or even political compulsions, the Congress and its allies should not depend upon the people who have fought against them in the states of West Bengal and Kerala. They should not rely upon those who have shown reluctance to be a part of the government. But the leftists claim that they want to support from outside. Should the Congress and its allies, who claim to have fought on principle, succumb to the temptation and act on interest? I think not. There are good reasons for the Congress to remain away from the communists. Forgetting the alphabetical proximity, the two have very little in common. The election manifestos of the two parties clearly show that there is no mutual admiration or respect. Ideologically they do not have much in common. And from a purely practical viewpoint, such a marriage of convenience is not likely to last for long. More than all this, it is not likely to promote the national interest. The last few months had shown an upward trend in the share market. It was symbolic of economic advancement. The money was flowing into the Indian companies. From the native and foreign investors. This held promise of health and hope for the national economy. And as the leftists showed their inclination to support the Congress, a picture of uncertainty appeared and there was an unprecedented fall. The investors had lost substantially. The facts were reported in the media. The picture was of concern in all quarters. Yet, the leftists refused to keep quiet. If at all, they only added fuel to the fire by suggesting that there was manipulation. Are the coming events not casting a dark shadow? Can such an ally be an asset to the Congress or the nation? Secondly, the performance of the Left leaves a lot to desire. There are two states in India where the Left has been in power. The states of West Bengal and Kerala. Let us see the situation in West Bengal first. An acquaintance of mine was once posted in this state. After a few years we had met and talked. He narrated his experience. He said, “The state had all the industry. It could grow. But the people showed no willingness to work. They seem to believe that the rest of the country owes them a living. So the units have shifted or are going to do so. The state is suffering.” Obviously, the policies and the style of functioning have been a red herring to the industrial advancement. Then the state of Kerala. It has all that a man may ask for. Fertile land. Flora and fauna. Cashew, coconut and coir. Forests. Rubber. Sea food. Spices.
Forty-two rivers irrigate its fields. The sea washes its shores. Sandalwood lends scent to its air. Its people have attained 100 per cent literacy. They have controlled the growth in numbers. And yet, the state is poor. Very often, the treasury is unable to pay. Sometimes the salaries of the civil servants are released only when the funds are received from the Beverages (a euphemism for liquor) Corporation. They get food from the North. Vegetables from Tamil Nadu. Flowers from Karnataka. Thus, the people are dependant and not independent. Why has such a situation arisen? The reason is that the people have not been made to develop a work culture. The director does not give any direction. The labour does not labour. The manager does not manage. The laws have been interpreted liberally and implemented solely to please the poor. But they are not asked to do anything to help themselves. The result is that these people are conscious of their rights. Not the duties. Many may not even be aware of the fact that there is a chapter on ‘Duties’ in the Constitution of India. If one looks at the two states from the heights in an aircraft, it is all green. On landing, one notices the bandh. The red flags. A large number of able-bodied men, walking together. Aimlessly. Shouting slogans. Wasting instead of working. And yet wanting everything. Truly red is an ominous colour. No doubt even blood is red. But the sight of it indicates intolerance. Even violence. Both are bad. For the individual as well as society. The red flag bears a hammer and sickle. And in political jargon, it is meant to represent the working class. The society has progressed. Machine has helped man. To increase production and to decrease labour. Today the man need not wield the hammer and sickle. The machine does it. Yet we continue to accept the old symbol. It continues to cloud our perception. The leftists continue to live in the past and resist
modernisation. They refuse to accept change. As a result we are living in poverty in the midst of plenty. It is true that even the working of all the other states is not perfect. Yes! But two wrongs never make a right. Still more, it is also correct that the dignity of the individual is important. Every man must have enough to meet his needs. It is necessary. But we can get nothing without doing something. To do nothing is the sure way to be nothing. Therefore, it is imperative for us to develop a work culture. It is necessary to perform our duty to the best of our ability. Secondly, we have to control the wage bill. We must realise that if the entire amount collected as tax is paid as salary, nothing shall be left for development or expansion. The claim that the leftist parties are working for the common good has not been proved to be true. The old concept has already changed beyond recognition in Russia and China. The Russian Union has broken. The China Wall has ceased to be a barrier. The Iron Gate has been opened. In India, we are still wedded to the old and archaic values. Despite the heavy wage bill our leftist brothers want more jobs. Are we trying to be more loyal to the king than the king himself? Numerically, the Congress is the single largest party. Along with the allies, it is the largest group. Many others have unequivocally promised support. In the game of numbers, it is not imperative for the Congress to seek support from the communists. Once the dice falls in favour of the Congress, the pigeons on the rooftops shall flock to its aid. The numbers shall never be a problem. Thus, the party should stand on principle. It should not accept alms from those who can embarrass. It should form the government without the unwilling partners. If it succeeds, very well. If not, the people know what to do. It is true that having alliances is the prerogative of the parties. Yet, it is clear that if progress is the objective, the leftists must be left out. Let them stay happy under the effect of their own opium. Let the malady be not afflicted upon the entire country. It cannot have a good or healthy effect. The writer is a former Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court. |
Profile Rampur is famous for its knives; the town has thriving knife producing industry and its market spreads the world over. Rampur is also known for the whims and fancies of its “Nawabs” and famous for “kebabs”. Doubtless, Mulayam Singh Yadav’s appeal to the Muslim electorate helped Jaya Prada to achieve what initially looked an impossible task and Mulayam’s lieutenant, Amar Singh, was believed to be the architect of Jaya Prada’s victory. On the eve of elections, both the Congress and the BJP vied with each other to get as many film celebrities on their side as possible but Jaya Prada choose Mulayam Singh’s party. She had switched over from Chandrababu Naidu’s Telugu Desam Party to what was primarily an Uttar Pradesh-based party. Unlike many of her colleagues in the fray from the filmdom, Jaya Prada is not new to politics; she was a member of the Rajya Sabha but was denied renomination by the TDP for another term. She has been sore since then, particularly with Naidu. She had worked closely with the late NTR (N T Rama Rao) and toured Andhra Pradesh with him during one of the worst famines. NTR was impressed by her dedication and invited her to join the TDP in 1994; two years later she made her way to the Rajya Sabha with his blessings . Jaya Prada went with Naidu after the passing away of NTR. During her stint in the Rajya Sabha, she charmed the House with her eloquence and bewitching smile. Her advantage was that, besides Hindi, she was equally fluent in Bangla, Tamil, Malayalam and Kannada. Telugu was, of course, her mother tongue. She is, possibly, the only actress who played important roles in as many as 220 films produced in six languages . She is a linguist by her own right , as if, representing the variegated culture of India. Always dignified, suave and soft spoken, she was missed in the Rajya Sabha for many days because her absence could not go unnoticed. Unlike other film stars, Jaya Prada does not hide her age; she is 42 but looks much younger than her age. Her strong forte is dance — she is apt in classical Kuchipudi — and well versed in music; she devotes her spare time to painting. “Bhoomi Kosam” was her first film produced in Telugu and since there was no looking back in her film career. Though Jaya Prada proved to be a versatile actress, her love was Telugu films is so visible. It’s rare to see an actress acquiring the rights of a Hindi film and remaking it in another language. Well, that’s what happened when Jaya Prada witnessed the preview of Madhur Bhandarkar’s film “SATTA” and decided to acquire its rights for Telugu instantaneously. She chose to be the central character while Raveena Tandon had enacted the main role in the original Hindi version. Jaya Prada’s classic features, a flawless peach complexion and incredible nose coupled with a quiet aristocratic demeanor made her a favourite star of the 1980s. Jaya Prada began acting at the age of 14 and was a star before she burst into Hindi films in the early 1980s about the same time as Sridevi, her “south films” compatriot. They actually co-starred together in half a dozen films where Jaya Prada often played the older sister to the younger Sridevi. Her breakthrough performance in Hindi Cinema came opposite Rishi Kapoor in “Sargam” (1979). Jaya Prada’s portrayal of a mute who is in love with dancing (and Rishi Kapoor) connected with the public and was a big hit. The film is a classic of the late 70s and early 80s Bollywood. During the 80s Jaya Prada had a successful film couple pairing with Jeetendra. They churned out a number of masala tear-jerkers that portrayed her in film after film as a tough, dutiful and all-enduring wife. These films endeared Jaya Prada to the traditional conservative section of filmgoers. It was an image that would serve her well when she started a new career as a politician. Jaya Prada, along with Sunil Dutt, Raj Babbar, Dharmendra, Vinod Khanna and Govinda, will be the centre of attraction in the new Lok Sabha. With her election, a new chapter opens in her eventful
career. |
|
Reflections I was on my usual Sunday evening walk in New York when I walked past a church, which had the following thought for the day. It said:...Life is Change. Growth is Optional... Choose Wisely. This thought sunk deep within me to respect many changes, which I was experiencing. And I benefited enormously. I decided to share this in all opportunities I got with the hope that it may help many similarly. I decided to bring this in my speaking engagements wherever I thought it would be worthwhile. I was convinced that this was an all-encompassing thought, which if kept in sight, will enable most of the times, wiser choices which will constantly propel individual growth and progress. I used this recently during a presentation on the subject “Empowerment through Education” (at the University of Maryland). I began with this fundamental philosophy because for me this is the foundation of all education. Let me share with you as it flowed. Education is understanding the laws of nature! Reap as we shall sow ! The relationships of cause and effect! That time waits for no one! No pain, no gain! Nothing is forever! our present is due to our past and our future will be what we are make of our present! The law of good deeds/karma! We get what we deserve and not what one desires! ...etc I recall when I was working for the prisoners in Delhi I told the (insiders) detainees that the major difference between them and those not in the plenipotentiary ( usually called prisons and jails) was that they perhaps did not write the daily page of their life rightly. They may not have valued what they had. Or rejected the ethical opportunities which had come their way and chose instead the short cuts to make it big, in shorter time than nature permits. Or did not listen to their elders or the teachers, instead chose to question it all, out of ignorance. Or defy for the sake of defiance. Or they did not get any guidance at all and were left to fend for themselves. And preferred bad company to places of education. For those of us who consider ourselves, “educated” it may be interesting and equally worthwhile to understand fully the larger meaning of education. Is it the IQ i.e. Intelligence Quotient only? Or is it more? Howard Gardner’s 1983 book “Frames of Mind” refuted the narrow IQ view and extended the concept to include
special capacity, physical fluidity, musical capability, and interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. The operative word in his view of intelligence was that it is ‘multiple’. According to this renowned psychologist, IQ only contributes to 20 per cent to the factors that determine life’s success, which leaves 80 per cent to other forces. In the mid-1990s Daniel Goleman popularised the “Emotional Quotient ( EQ)”—- a degree of emotional intelligence, awareness of one’s own and other people’s feelings, such as empathy, compassion, motivation, and the ability to respond to pain or pleasure appropriately. His basic hypothesis was that for an effective use of IQ, EQ is a necessity. The millennium contribution came from Donah Zohar and Ian Marshall, who coined the “SQ” for “Spiritual Quotient” They argued that the SQ is the foundation of an effective use of IQ and the EQ. While logical thinking gives one the IQ and the associated habit-bound, pattern recognising emotive thinking gives one the EQ, the creative, insightful, rule making, rule-breaking thinking with which we reframe and transform our previous thinking gives one the SQ. So what all is empowered education. I summed it up: it is from Vikas to also Atam Vikas i.e. external development to also coopt internal progress, which we vote for our own selves and count within. And in this area of wisdom India is the richest. We have only to work within. And work daily, each one of us. We owe it ourselves and our
country. |
|
Diversities — Delhi
Letter
Going
through the likes and dislikes of Dr Manmohan Singh, one is tempted to believe that we could be fortunate to be going back to the Gandhian era. For he likes simple vegetarian fare with not more than two dishes at each meal, dresses up in a white cotton kurta pyjama , talks in a down-to-earth manner and has led a totally non-controversial and uncomplicated lifestyle . On the two occasions I have met Dr Manmohan Singh at Khushwant Singh ‘s home, I was taken aback to see how gently he spoke and how humbly. In fact, I can still recall that just after one of those get-togethers (It was almost three years back, in honour of Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s joining the World Bank) as soon as Manmohan Singh left, one of the guests Rita Devi Bhim Singh, gave a further insight into his personality. She told me that the hospitals and hospices for the terminally ill that she runs in her home state of Assam “survive because of two Sikh gentlemen — Khushwant Singh and Manmohan Singh. If they had not been supportive and helped out at every stage I wouldn’t have been able to run these hospitals.” Mohinder Singh revealed another aspect of the new Prime Minister Manmohan Singh being the chairperson of the Bhai Vir Singh Sadan and also of the National Institute of Punjabi Studies was entitled to an official room in the Sadan building which he gave up saying the Chairman’s room be used by Sikh scholars. Whenever he would come for meetings he would sit in Mohinder Singh’s room. In fact, these scholars helped in locating and cataloguing relics of Sikh Gurus and based on these, the Institute published eight books under the Punjab heritage series. And let me go beyond the cliché that there’s always a woman behind every successful man for Manmohan Singh’s spouse Gursharan is said to be a remarkable woman. She comes across as a strong woman with a definite personality and yet has never tried to be in the limelight. When he was contesting in 1998, it was heartening to hear the group of student volunteers recount how Mrs Gursharan Singh would cook for them and then even serve them herself, assisted by her daughters. Theirs is a very close-knit family, intact with the traditional values. And here let me also add that students of St Stephen’s College who have been taught by Singh’s eldest daughter Upinder and her husband Vijay Tankha (she teaches History and he Philosophy at St Stephen’s College) talk very highly of the couple and recount that on weekends the couple with their two little sons would head for the parents home for a family get-together. Though I have never been inside his official bungalow — 19 Safdarjung Road — but driving past it one always got the impression that the lawns didn’t look too well maintained and none of the fancy and gaudy exteriors that several government bungalows of New Delhi boast of . That automatically boiled down to the fact that none of the sarkari maalis” was working overtime and there was no misuse of PWD men and money. It’s a relief to have such a honest man at the helm of affairs.
Wrong timing? Almost lost in the
latest political turmoil was the photo exhibition of well- known photo-journalist Manish Swarup. This week-long exhibition at the Triveni Kala Sangam had some rare captures of not just our political men but also shots from war-ravaged locales. The same can be said about the two musical evenings I attended last week — one hosted by the IIC and the Austrian Embassy where two musicians performed — Karin Leitner on the flute and Jorgos Panetsos on the guitar. And the other was the tenth anniversary show performance of the Capital City Minstrels, at the Habitat Centre auditorium. The choir conducted by Giti Chandra had some very unexpected faces of Delhi’s-who’s who —police officer Maxwell Pereira and Rajiv Gandhi’s friend Suman Dubey .
Missing his lawns One of the central ministers in the NDA set-up, Shahnawaz Hussain (who lost in the elections) was famous for letting friends host weddings and parties on the lawns of his official bungalow. Of course , even here there’d be a stumbling shock. Just a few months ago when a well-known Delhi personality approached Hussain for the use of his bungalow lawns for the reception of his son , Hussain happily agreed but on the day he was taken aback when he saw booze bottles getting unloaded for the reception .‘No way’ led to utter confusion, to be somehow saved by another common friend who hurriedly shifted the venue to his home. And if you were to ask what did the minister sahib get for agreeing for the party hungama to be unleashed on his lawns — his pictures to be splashed on Page Three of the dailies. |
To satisfy the necessities of life is not evil. To keep the body in good health is a duty, for otherwise we shall not be able to trim the lamp of wisdom, and keep our mind strong and clear. — The Buddha It may be that I shall find it good to get outside my body — to cast it off like a disused garment. But I shall not cease to work! I shall inspire men everywhere until the world shall know that it is one with God! —
Swami Vivekananda Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. — Jesus Christ There is but one true Lord in the world; there is no other. — Guru Nanak All Your names, Devas, are worthy of our homage, worthy of our praise and worthy of our worship. — The Vedas |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | National Capital | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
A former Minister of State
for External Affairs, Mr Salman Khurshid, 51, has emerged as a
strategist of the Congress. Associated with important AICC committees in
the years that the Congress was in the opposition at the Centre, Mr
Khurshid was a member of the party’s core Election Campaign Group for
the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. This group devised ways to take on the BJP’s
"feel-good" blitzkrieg. Known for his articulation, Mr
Khurshid was a party spokesman and chief of the Congress in Uttar
Pradesh. A lawyer and Educationist, Mr Khurshid says in a wide ranging
interview he was never in doubt about the Congress and its allies doing
well in the general elections this time.
A