Kumble’s perfect 10
THOSE who were at the Ferozeshah Kotla, Delhi, on Sunday may not have any idea of the value of the tickets and passes for the second and final cricket Test between India and Pakistan.

Courting Jaya’s support
POLITICAL rumours are the fastest selling item in Delhi. And hence there is an abundant supply. During much of last week the top of the best-sellers list belonged to the early demise of the Vajpayee government, maybe even before the budget session beginning on February 22.

The leader in King Hussein
HE was not merely a constitutional monarch. During the 46 years he ruled over the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, he emerged as one of the tallest leaders of West Asia. That was King Hussein, who breathed his last on Sunday at 63.

BUILDING ON THE BUS RIDE
by Inder Malhotra
THERE have been moments of high hopes — indeed of great euphoria — in India-Pakistan relations before which have usually ended in deep disappointment, to put it no more strongly than that. For example, when Jawaharlal Nehru and Ayub Khan signed the Indus Waters Treaty in 1961, it was seen as a major turning point in subcontinental history that was expected to lead to peace and harmony.

Populism prolongs subsidies
by Poonam I. Kaushish
THE competition in bankruptcy is hotting up among political parties of all hues and shades. Where sound economic sense has been surrendered to political gamesmanship competitive populism is the spirit of the moment.

BJP now falls back on coordination panel
by P. Raman
“IT SHOWS their (BJP’s) helplessness. Poor fellows... they are being attacked from all sides. I really pity them”. This was what Vishnu Hari Dalmia had commented to the media after coming out of his meeting with Home Minister L.K. Advani this week to discuss the possibility of a truce within the parivar.

Barnala sailing in two boats?
THE ruckus over the increase in the prices of essential commodities sold through the ration shops has an interesting side to it. It may be recalled that the Shiromani Akali Dal was at the forefront in demanding a rollback of wheat, rice and urea prices.

The day of the daughter-in-law
by Darshan Singh Maini
IN a Tribune essay called “The Indian Mother-in-law” some years ago, I had the temerity to take on that redoubtable creature who has been demonised in our country quips and wedding ditties. This classified personage, even when a lean bundle of bones, could set the world spinning round her fingers, and reduce her daughter-in-law to a thing — an appropriated booty or a bonded slave.

75 Years Ago

Namdharis at Tarn Taran
A Namdhari Diwan was held at Tarn Taran on Amawas. The Namdharis numbering about 5000 came from all parts of the country. The meetings of the Diwan were held at the Maidan near the Thakurdwara, and the audience consisted of Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and others on both days.

Kumble’s perfect 10

THOSE who were at the Ferozeshah Kotla, Delhi, on Sunday may not have any idea of the value of the tickets and passes for the second and final cricket Test between India and Pakistan. On a slightly misty and cold day an ever-smiling Anil Kumble gave them at least 10 reasons to preserve the tickets and passes as proof of having seen cricket history being made at Ferozeshah Kotla. Look at the factsheet. There are 14 bowlers at the international level, including Jassu Patel, Subhash Gupte and Kapil Dev from India, who have taken nine wickets in an innings. For 43 years Jim Laker of England was the only bowler in Test cricket to have taken all the 10 wickets in an innings. When Kumble had Wasim Akram caught by V.V.S. Laxman he became only the second bowler and the first Indian to have performed the rare feat of running through the side on his own. Of course, Laker may have scored a “perfect 10” twice in the same Test had Tony Locke not taken a solitary wicket in the game at Manchester against Australia. In response to a question the gentle leg-spinner said that “I would like to take the pitch home”. Which bowler wouldn’t want to after such an outstanding performance? Among the many images which would linger for a long time is the one of Pakistan captain Wasim Akram embracing Kumble for his outstanding performance. The pitch which Kumble wants to take home is the one which was dug up by Shiv Sena vandals opposed to resumption of cricketing ties between the neighbours on Indian soil.

There were indeed serious misgivings about the safety of the players because of the provocative statements of Mr Bal Thackeray against the Friendship Series between India and Pakistan. On hindsight it can be said that the Shiv Sena goons may not have succeeded in disrupting the series because of the elaborate security arrangements. By visiting Mumbai to persuade Mr Thackeray to withdraw the threat Union Home Minister L.K. Advani provided the Shiv Sena a “face-saver”. The series proved the prophets of doom wrong. The standing ovation which the Pakistani team received from the crowd in Chennai for the 12-run victory over India was the best advertisement for Test cricket. There were some outstanding performances by players from both the teams. In Chennai Sachin Tendulkar, Nayan Mongia, Shahid Afridi and Saqlain Mushtaq lifted Test cricket to great heights. Of course, the Delhi game would be remembered as Kumble’s Test. But it would be a folly to ignore the consistent performance of the new India opener S. Ramesh. He was unlucky to miss a well deserved century by only four runs at Ferozeshah Kotla in only the second Test of his career. Saqlain Mushtaq through his consistent performance in the two Tests — five-wicket hauls in four consecutive innings too must be a record — proved why he is counted among the best off-spinners in the game. At Chennai Pakistan beat India in a see-saw game by a narrow margin of 12 runs. After victory in Delhi the Indian supporters can now legitimately say “bara (12) ka jawab do sau bara (212)” — the number of runs by which India beat Pakistan to level the series.

Courting Jaya’s support

POLITICAL rumours are the fastest selling item in Delhi. And hence there is an abundant supply. During much of last week the top of the best-sellers list belonged to the early demise of the Vajpayee government, maybe even before the budget session beginning on February 22. Speculation drew sustenance from three sources. Mrs Sonia Gandhi’s statement in Karnataka that the government was about to crumble and that she was poised to step in. Add to it the veiled threat of Ms Jayalalitha that she would take an “appropriate decision at the appropriate time” and the reports that the two ladies are in an advanced stage of negotiation on extending mutual support. Then there is the third lady, from Calcutta, who blasted the government on the foodgrain prices issue. The internal turmoil in the Sangh Parivar provided the backdrop. The rumour mills asserted that all this was too much of a coincidence and it was better to believe in the scary reports. The Prime Minister and his close advisers seemed to have done precisely that. They did not want to take a chance on so vital a matter as staying in power. Ms Mamata Banerji was placated with two railway projects in her state as partial acceptance of her Bengal package.

Around that time Defence Minister flew to Chennai, ostensibly to persuade the lady to sign the joint statement of the allies of the BJP, but in reality to promise instant succour in her court battles. All the corruption cases except one have been taken out of special courts and allotted to three sessions judges. This is what she has in effect sought in a petition before the Supreme Court and it is to be heard on February 15. By this decision the Centre has carried out its threat and pre-empted the Supreme Court from looking into the merits of its claim that it has powers in this regard. That is because, Ms Jayalalitha, the petitioner, will withdraw the case on Monday next. The implications are very serious. If the transfer goes unchallenged, the upshot will be a long delay in deciding the corruption charges. The special courts were set up only to speed up the proceedings. Two, the power to allot cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act will vest with the Centre, which does not seem to be the scope of the law. In the instant case, political authority is being misused to tilt the law in favour of an accused, even if she is a powerful person. More important, the Centre in concert with the accused is trying to shut out the higher judiciary from interpreting the PCA. It is dismaying that the Centre did not even inform, much less consult, the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court before ordering three judges of the court to hand over the case papers to lower courts.

The outcome may be the opposite of what the Centre hopes for. The High Court or the Supreme Court may stay the notification and even strike it down. The High Court had upheld the establishment of the three special courts and at that time the Centre said it had no objection. The Supreme Court had refused to stay the order and has asked the special courts to proceed with the hearing pending a final decision. The state government has bitterly opposed the move to abridge its powers and is certain to move the court. If the transfer of cases is found against the law, it would deal a severe blow to the prestige of the BJP-led coalition. The resultant loss of face will be as damaging as the failed attempt to invoke Article 356 in Bihar last September. The BJP-led coalition’s survival instinct is forcing it to take grave risks.

The leader in King Hussein

HE was not merely a constitutional monarch. During the 46 years he ruled over the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, he emerged as one of the tallest leaders of West Asia. That was King Hussein, who breathed his last on Sunday at 63. Lymphatic cancer claimed his life after a seven-month-long battle for survival. Even during his serious illness he played a distinct role in the signing of the Wye accord between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in Washington, giving new life to the West Asia peace process. This is not the only time when he showed such dynamism. There have been other occasions also when he provided proof of having this admirable quality in him. But to say that he had been crusading for peace throughout his life, as claimed by certain western leaders, is an exaggeration. He knew how to remain on the right side of the fence, or cultivate friendship with those on the centrestage of world politics. This skill helped him in remaining in the good books of the USA, which increased his clout on the home turf. Even during the Gulf war in 1990 when he found himself in the company of Saddam Hussein, after opposing the US-led allied attack on Iraq to punish it for its invasion of Kuwait, he discovered a way out of this disadvantageous position soon to make amends with the American leadership. He was helpless and could do little to alleviate the suffering of the Iraqi people dying of disease and hunger in thousands for no fault of theirs since the inhuman imposition of the UN sanctions at the behest of the USA and certain other western powers. Or perhaps he ignored this great human suffering simply because it did not fit in with his scheme of things for the region to which he belonged.

It is true that his involvement with the Palestinian cause was much greater than that of any other Arab ruler. This was how he came to be hailed as an untiring fighter for peace. But his endeavours on this front too were not free from his personal interests. After the implanting of the state of Israel in 1948 in the womb of the land where the Jews have been hated the most, the one country the Palestinians could feel at home was Jordan. King Hussein welcomed them to Jordan in any number so long as it suited him. But as soon as he realised that their growing population could pose a threat to his survival as the ruler of his country, his whole attitude underwent a metamorphosis. The 1967 Arab-Israeli war came as a blessing in disguise for King Hussein, as Jordan’s West Bank area having the maximum concentration of Palestinians was captured by Jewish troops. Jordan suffered a big loss in terms of territory, but King Hussein gained with the demoralisation of the Palestinians. Yet he could not forget or forgive the “trouble-makers” and punished them in September, 1970, by launching a military crackdown on them. No Palestinian can ever forget that “Black September” day. Whenever there would be talk of re-establishing an independent Palestinian state, he would insist that it could be possible only in association with Jordan. If he decided to make peace with Israel, the light was, in fact, provided by slain Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat, known for the historic Camp David Treaty. Jordan’s 1994 agreement with Israel, ending the state of war between the two nations, was a product of his belief that his old ideas were not fit for being implemented under the changed circumstances. This convinced him to work for the Palestinian cause, which had the seeds of lasting peace in West Asia. All this enabled him to function as the most effective leader of the oil-rich region. King Hussein has left a big void which will take years to fill.

BUILDING ON THE BUS RIDE
Stakes are very high indeed
by Inder Malhotra

THERE have been moments of high hopes — indeed of great euphoria — in India-Pakistan relations before which have usually ended in deep disappointment, to put it no more strongly than that. For example, when Jawaharlal Nehru and Ayub Khan signed the Indus Waters Treaty in 1961, it was seen as a major turning point in subcontinental history that was expected to lead to peace and harmony.

Much earlier, in August, 1953, to be precise, the then Pakistani Prime Minister, Mohammed Ali Dogra, had come to Delhi, barely a fortnight after Sheikh Abdullah’s deposition and detention, addressing Nehru as “barre bhai” (elder brother) and asking him to find a way out of the Kashmir impasse. The two Prime Ministers had promptly agreed on replacing American Admiral Chester Himits as Plebiscite Administrator by a “representative of a nonaligned country” with a mandate to create conditions for ascertaining the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

Unfortunately, Dogra and his colleagues, with a nudge from Ayub, who was then the Pakistani Army’s Commander-in-Chief, opted for a military alliance with the USA, with its massive and malign implications, rather than for peace and harmony with India. What happened to the great expectations aroused by the Tashkent Declaration first and the Simla Agreement later is too recent to be forgotten.

My main point in recalling all this is to emphasise that all this must not be allowed to act as a dampener on the bright new opportunity that has opened up as a result of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s invitation to his Indian counterpart to travel to Lahore in the inaugural bus service, and Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee’s prompt acceptance of the unorthodox suggestion. Mr Sharif’s simultaneous promise to join Mr Vajpayee in the bus on its return journey, accompanied with the hope that the two would “solve half of the problems” between the two neighbours before their arrival in Delhi is clearly hyperbolic. But it in no way detracts from either the crucial importance or the potential efficacy of the grand gesture the two leaders have agreed to make.

Such gestures have a place in international diplomacy even in most discouraging circumstances. Witness, then Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s path-breaking visit to Jerusalem that ended the state of war between his country and Israel although Sadat was denounced for “betraying” the Arab cause and shot by one of his enraged countrymen, ironically a military officer taking part in the national day parade.

Having said this, one must be realistic enough to realise that the road to rapprochement still has huge boulders of obstruction on it. Within 48 hours of his extremely encouraging interview that led to the “bus-ride initiative” Mr Sharif found it necessary or expedient to make a wholly unhelpful speech on the occasion of “Solidarity with Kashmir Day”. It may be that he cannot possibly backtrack from the hype on Kashmir that has been built up in Pakistan since the start of the nineties. But the harsh tone of the Mian Sahib’s rhetoric, combined with his respected demand for the implementation of the U.N. resolution on Kashmir, cannot but encourage those in India who have already tried to queer the pitch as much in relation to the cricket match as with regard to the contemplated bus journey.

On this side of the fence the sudden spurt in the uncertainty about the very survival of the Vajpayee government — so stridently underscored by Mrs Sonia Gandhi immediately after Mr George Fernandes returned empty-handed from his placatory mission to Ms Jayalalitha in Chennai — is bound to create doubts in Pakistani minds. However, there are clear and rational answers to both difficulties.

If Mr Sharif’s signals are mixed, there is also a willingness on his part to approach all questions, including that of Kashmir, with an “open mind” even while the two sides stick to their known and traditional positions. There is also a possibility that the advantages of mutually beneficial trade, sports and cultural contacts have begun to sink in among the Pakistanis. If these are resumed in right earnest while talks on Kashmir (the item is now on the top of the agenda of the Foreign Secretaries) continue, results will be beneficial.

There is thus a strong case to upgrade the India-Pakistan parleys from the bureaucratic to the political level though a lot of work will continue to be done by the officials. Mr Sharif is entirely right when he says that bureaucrats, if not exactly stuck in the mud, are sticklers for “every coma and fullstop”. Once the direct contact at the Prime Ministerial level is established, all future meetings between the PMs and other ministers should take place in India or Pakistan, not in distant countries on the edges of NAM, SAARC, Commonwealth and other such meetings.

Pakistan has its share of fundamentalists, some of them indistinguishable from the Taliban of Afghanistan. Tragically, the wild men in the Hindutva camp here are becoming worse than even the Taliban. The demand for “reconversion” of every single Christian in this country emanating from the “Dharam Sansad” of the VHP is nothing short of madness. Unless the votaries of such a demand are hounded out of the leading party in the ruling coalition, the government will lose its credibility at home and its capacity to negotiate abroad, especially with Pakistan even more than with nations which are Christian.

All these considerations apart, there is one overriding reason why India and Pakistan must take every necessary step to engage themselves in serious and sustained talks on across-the-board relationship between them. It is the overt nuclearisation of both countries. Both are now declared nuclear weapons powers and the USA having tried and failed to persuade them to roll back their nuclear programmes. The nuclear arsenals of both are there to stay.

Under these circumstances, it is necessary that both neighbouring countries demonstrate to the rest of the world that they mean to behave as responsible powers. It is even more necessary that they are able to convince each other that they mean no harm and that their modest stomic armouries are meant only for deterrence. This cannot happen without sincere, uninterrupted and uninterruptible dialogue between the two sides at the appropriate level.

So far some nuclear confidence-building measures have been discussed by the two Foreign Secretaries under the rubric “peace and security”. But this is entirely inadequate. There is an irony moreover that while the Indian Foreign Minister negotiates with the Americans (He has also not the British, the Chinese and the Japanese leaders) nuclear conversations with Pakistan are confined to Foreign Secretaries.

Mr Vajpayee (or whoever is the Prime Minister in the event of the BJP-led government falling anytime soon) should see to it that the two heads of government meet and give to the Indian-Pakistan dialogue the push and impetus it badly needs. They would do well to entrust the nuclear part of the dialogue, as also Kashmir, to their respective Foreign Ministers.

In Mr Sharif’s interview to an Indian editor the most heartening part was his plea that Delhi and Islamabad should sort out the nuclear and missile issue themselves rather than leave it to a third country — in this case the USA — to dictate to them.

Populism prolongs subsidies
by Poonam I. Kaushish

THE competition in bankruptcy is hotting up among political parties of all hues and shades. Where sound economic sense has been surrendered to political gamesmanship competitive populism is the spirit of the moment. Reckless promises are being made by all the parties with gay abandon in the belief that populist promises yield better electoral dividends than reasoned out issues and sustainable programmes.

The populism political parties indulge in would, indeed, be funny were it not for its future consequences for the country. None sees the danger of political disintegration and economic derailment. Everyone is busy indulging in oneupmanship. Populist bravado and mindlessness. Exposing the hollowness of their political commitment.

Leading the pack at present is none other than Prime Minister Vajpayee, for whom economic stability translates into no more than a cut in subsidies. The “able” leader measures his ability by economic jugglery of price hike and galloping inflation. Stated he: “There is no question of rolling back the cut in subsidies.” But he was forced to do so 24 hours later by his coalition partners and the Opposition, which shed its professed commitment to sound fiscal health. Andhra’s angry TDP Chief Minister Naidu and Shiv Sena terror Bal Thackeray, who have to face the voter in six months from now, threatened to withdraw their support unless there was an immediate roll back. So also Haryana Lok Dal chief Chautala.

The Congress, too, shelved its stand on fiscal prudence and, seeing it as another issue to hit the BJP with, joined the chorus. Never mind that it boasts of two former Finance Ministers, Mr Pranab Mukherjee and Dr Manmohan Singh. Both as the country’s finance-keepers had themselves gone in for a cut in subsidies. It is another matter that political expediency today demands the opposite. Ditto is the case with Mr Chidambaram of the TMC. The former Finance Minister had a running feud with the Left parties — the self-styled protectors of the deprived — over their refusal to accept a slash in food subsidy. He has also announced an agitation against his own unfinished agenda. Clearly, last week will go down in fiscal history as the “subsidy week” when the government opted for a price hike for curbing the inflationary pressure on the economy over the fiscal deficit front. In one fell stroke on January 28 last, the BJP government sharply increased the PDS prices of wheat and rice in order to cut the subsidy bill by a whopping Rs 2,500 crore. It also decided to modestly raise sugar prices. Another attack followed two days later. The subsidy on cooking gas was slashed by close to 30 per cent or Rs 700 crore in a full year. Or, a total of Rs 3,400 crore.

Said a Union Minister: The Vajpayee government has made a mockery of coalition governance. As also of the fundamental democratic principle of “no taxation without representation. Heavens would not have fallen if the partial cut in subsidies had been withheld till the budget was presented”.

Mr Vajpayee’s task has become all the more difficult when some of his own partymen are seen to be washing their hands off la affaire subsidy. The rise in the prices of consumer items in the public distribution system, and of the LPG, had been described as inevitable by the Finance Secretary to contain the fiscal deficit. These measures would bring down the deficit by 0.25 per cent.

There is no denying the fact that Mr Vajpayee has to rein in the revenue and fiscal deficit. Nor is there any quarrel with the argument that the erosion of the financial position of the country could not be allowed to continue indefinitely. The burgeoning fiscal deficit causes rising inflation. Also, the combination of growth in consumption, subsidy and rupee depreciation had compelled an early action.

Nevertheless, it does not mean that the only way to stop such erosion is by soaking the consumer. In effect, the consumer is being made to pay for the folly and reckless populism of the Vajpayee government. Agreed, it is sound economics to make the consumer pay for what he is buying. However, it would have been better if the price revision had taken care of curbing the lavish and wasteful expenditure by the ministers, as also by the government as a whole.

True, it can be argued that politicians are obliged to be seen as populist. It would be foolish to wish away political intervention or political interference. But the point that needs to be stressed is that political jurisprudence in the economic sphere should not cross the prudence limits, where it starts hurting the economy as a whole.

Care should be taken to draw a distinction between welfarism and populism. Welfarism takes into account the needs of different sections of society as part of a large development framework. Populism, on the other hand, is guided not so much by social concerns as by vote-banks. It essentially implies granting certain concessions which have no economic rationale and are not part of the larger economic planning, as enunciated by the government. — INFA

The day of the daughter-in-law
by Darshan Singh Maini

IN a Tribune essay called “The Indian Mother-in-law” some years ago, I had the temerity to take on that redoubtable creature who has been demonised in our country quips and wedding ditties. This classified personage, even when a lean bundle of bones, could set the world spinning round her fingers, and reduce her daughter-in-law to a thing — an appropriated booty or a bonded slave. But as I hinted in that piece, I could already see the sun setting on her empire with the arrival of “the new woman” in India. The young graduate, street-smart, computer-happy and office-going bahu was a phenomenon beyond her ken or control. And this daughter of the neo-rich, mamma-spoilt and prone to repartees, came of the age of reason just around the time of the “globalisation” of our markets and our corporate consciousness. No wonder, that anachronism who had enjoyed an unlimited franchise since Manu, in particular, found herself suddenly out in the cold.

It’s, then for the sociologists to examine the dynamics of this “sea-change” in bourgeois homes, but I’m content to say that the balance of power has grievously and irretrievably changed, and that the adversary roles are now reversed in most cases. If there’s some “poetic justice” in it, one may concede the point in terms of a historical perspective. And, of course I’m in general sympathy with the feminist polemics or argument, for man has, from the beginning of time, quite brutally established his sway by subverting the very consciousness of woman, and used a dubious theology to justify his tyranny. But there’s now another tragedy in the making — the wanton assaults on the dignity and identity of a mother-in-law whose only fault may be her status — the perceived “foe”. It may even be styled as the tragedy of communication, for there are two “languages” locked up in a clash. Often, there is a metaphorical “block”. It’s, therefore, a painful sight to see some of these helpless elderly women reduced to tears, or “in corners thrown”, to recall Adam’s words in Shakespeare’s As You Like It. And believe me, I have seen this happen in many a home around, and in many a tale of woe reaching my unhappy ears.

However, this is not to say that the good species of the Indian bahu has vanished. Why, even in these homes that form the subject of our story, you may come across some very sweet, adoring and caring young women. Their new-found freedom or their university degrees have, in some cases, even deepened the saas-bahu relationship. A new level of understanding has become possible through a discovery of mutualities, and, of course, through an exercise in magnanimities of the heart.

Which brings me to the two young bahus who have walked into the orbit of our life on slippers of silver and dream, as it were. One of these happens to be from our own vast clan, the daughter-in-law of a highly-placed cousin in New Delhi. The only daughter of a very affluent, modern family. She has not only brought a touch of gold to her new home, but also extended her sweetness to all those close to her in-laws. No wonder, this charming young company executive who sports an appropriate name — Charu — has, in a couple of visits to us, “bowled” us over with her joie-de-vivre, and with her innocent “aggression”. It brings tears to my old, aching eyes when I remember how on the very first occasion, she curled up into my arms and lap, an ailing man in need of warmth and hope. Thereafter begins “a fairy story”, and I let the things rest there lest I go off the target.

The second person, a Sindhi woman of great grace with a law degree from Bombay, has lately charmed her way into our hearts, and we have known from close quarters how blessed are those whose sons wed such women. A couple of months ago, her in-laws from Chennai spent a glorious holiday under their son’s roof in “the City Beautiful”, and all their songs and stories centred round their adoring bahu. And now, we understand, other relations, touched by tales of such beauty, are keen to come to see Corbusier’s art and God’s gift to the family.

And I bless both of them — the sweet absentee and the woman we are pleased to call our adopted bahu. Her daily visits in the company of her little daughter, a packet of joyful energy and mischief, have become a redemptive symbol for us.

BJP now falls back on coordination panel

by P. Raman

“IT SHOWS their (BJP’s) helplessness. Poor fellows... they are being attacked from all sides. I really pity them”. This was what Vishnu Hari Dalmia had commented to the media after coming out of his meeting with Home Minister L.K. Advani this week to discuss the possibility of a truce within the parivar. Advani had apparently failed to pacify the VHP team. After this, the VHP leaders had aptly diagnosed Atal Behari Vajpayee’s problems as emanating from running with the hare and hunting with the hound.

The contradiction is further confounded by frequently mistaking the hare with the hound and hound with hare. Not only are the estranged members of the RSS parivar, whose official nomenclature has now been changed to the “ideological fraternity”, affected. Equally sharp has been the reaction to the coordination committee’s four-point truce from some of the BJP’s regional allies. The committee’s deliberations this week and the controversies that have prompted them to call such a meeting mark a new stage in the BJP coalition’s functioning.

Earlier, the allies have been insisting on calling such meetings. Now the BJP itself has been compelled to use the forum to sort out the uncontrollably growing discord within the 10-month-old coalition. This itself is a manifestation of the changing equations within the alliance and the pulls and pressures by each constituent. Possibly, this has been something quite normal in the process of all such alliances in India since the late 1960s. Most of them have not been coalitions of ideas but power groups. The urge to pull down a common adversary and lust for power are the main motivating factors. The first factor can be stronger and enduring if it is driven by emotional or ideological factors like the fight against corruption and authoritarianism.

In the case of the present coalition, the BJP allies have no single common enemy. Each ally has its own adversary. While the Congress is the target for some, for others it is parties like the Left, DMK and the Janata Dal. Their perception of what constitutes the best policy frame and programme also differs according to the local sentiments. Initially, as was with the earlier experiments, all such contradictions worked to the advantage of the Prime Minister. Now the process of disillusionment is setting in.

Under such circumstances, every Prime Minister of minority governments used to boast of his abilities at management of contradictions between different parties and within each party for his own political survival. Not only V.P. Singh. If Narasimha Rao could get away with it, it has been due to other contributory factors like the support of the business and foreign establishment. Now this support is not confined to the BJP alone.

In the beginning, the BJP allies had displayed so much fraternity that every one went out of the way to display unity and proclaim loyalty to the Prime Minister. A phone call from his office was enough to change the mind of the allies in the far-away state capitals. Jaswant Singh had elated ego as a flying visit could make Jayalalitha smile. Now neither he nor George Fernandes can move her. Mamata and Jayalalitha have even been demanding the ouster of senior ministers like Advani for various lapses. Vajpayee’s eloquent pleadings have lost effect on leaders of the hardcore allies and RSS outfits like the VHP.

This marks another significant stage in the metamorphosis of the BJP coalition. Unlike earlier coalitions, including the one during Janata Party rule, the present arrangement has been essentially based on the supremacy and perceived personal halo of Vajpayee. The BJP had considered the Prime Ministerial pre-eminence as the secret of the success of other similar experiments in the country. But it has overlooked the fact that in democracy, such predomination of an individual essentially flows from his or her authoritarian control of the establishment. Idolisation of an individual is the beginning of the decay of internal democracy.

In a multi-centered establishment like RSS, excessive emphasis on the infallibility and supremacy of an individual, however, great the person might be, will not go unchallenged. Vajpayee had at the recent meeting of the BJP’s National Executive invoked the Cabinet’s supremacy to assert that neither the BJP organisation nor other RSS outfits had any right to question his decisions. Those present at the meeting conceded the point but all other RSS organisations have subsequently made it clear that they would go ahead with their respective programmes — Swadeshi as well as Hindutva — irrespective of the Prime Minister’s decisions. Thus the strained relationship with recalcitrant allies and RSS outfits reveal the limitation of cultivated leadership to cure coalitional ills.

In the first stage of the present coalition, the emphasis has been on cultivating the individual bosses of the respective ally. Paying special respects, bestowing leaders like Jayalalitha with distinguished seats at meetings, providing posts and perks to the kith and kin of top bosses of the regional parties and such other perfect relations had worked wonders. However, this sort of personnel management also led to complications in the internal relationship in some of the supporting parties. In fact, an important ingredient of the BJP leadership’s deft use of the theory of contradiction management has been to win over the friendly factions within each allied party and discredit rivals. This was done with a high degree of sophistication and professionalism.

The cascading effect of all this has been disastrous. While the excessive resort to the use of contradictions between the BJP allies and their local rivals invariably made the former to compete with the latter on anti-government campaigns, the pampering of chosen leaders within each constituent tended to aggravate the internal tussles among them. As a result, most allied parties were forced to put up more fight against the BJP policies and within themselves. From the very beginning, the BJP has been cultivating the Badal-Barnala faction in the Akali Dal as an antidote to the less-friendly Tohra. At one stage, the sons of Badal and Farooq Abdullah of the National Conference have been treated with special honours in the Delhi durbar.

No doubt, the Akali factionalism is much older and its roots deeper. But the BJP patronage to certain sections had contributed to the tussle, especially on issues like Udham Singh Nagar district and the appointment of ministers. In any case, a showdown between the rival factions will also have consequences on the BJP Government. In the case of the Samata Party, its approach to the BJP coalition and latter’s ‘manipulations’ have caused deep fissures in the Bihar party. After picking up both the top men from the Samata Party, the BJP has been keeping them happy by assigning them crucial tasks. However, an influential section with the Samata Party alleges that the continued “tailism” by the top two had caused immense loss to the party in terms of mass support.

Over a dozen senior state leaders like Abdul Ghafoor and Hari Kewal Prasad argue that the leadership had failed to launch agitations on issues like the increase in the prices of rice, wheat, sugar and cooking gas. As a result, Laloo Prasad’s party and the various Communist outfits have been able to make more inroads among the people by depicting the Samata leaders as “BJP bhakts”. For the twosome, it is alleged, ministership is more important than people’s problems. Their failure to adequately protest against the minority-bashing by the VHP and Bajrang Dal had led to further erosion of the support base. The party’s National Executive will meet again on February 18 after its failure to resolve the crisis this week.

The strategy of selective pampering had its echo. Even a one-leader outfit like the Trinamool Congress, Mamata Banerjee, feels that an effort was made to woo Ajit Panja with ministership. After the successful application of a similar strategy in Tamil Nadu, where the BJP had weaned away most of the electoral allies of AIADMK, Mamata Banerjee has every reason to suspect such a coup d’etat against her. The move had considerably weakened Jayalalitha’s bargaining power vis-a-vis the BJP.

The developments after the BJP setback in the recent assembly elections seem to have emboldened many allies to chart out an independent course. They find it necessary for their own political survival. If they failed to protest against unpopular decisions like increase in prices of rice, wheat, sugar and gas, their local rivals will take advantage of the people’s wrath. Similar has been their dilemma over the assaults on Christians. The four-point code sought to be imposed by Vajpayee at this week’s coordination committee was aimed at tackling these two issues.

As part of the truce, he has agreed to keep off the other RSS outfits. Given the parivar’s hold over the BJP, this is not going to be an easy task for the Prime Minister. Already, there are signs of protest within the party over the decision. The other point in the code — that the allies should not hereafter air their differences in public — was flouted within 24 hours by the BJP’s old ally, Shiv Sena, which had publicly threatened to frustrate the Prime Minister’s bus ride to Pakistan.

On her part, Jayalalitha has bluntly refused to sign the code drawn up at the Prime Minister’s house. Mamata had even boycotted the meeting after threatening to launch agitations against the price increases. However, as of now, none of the allied parties is in a mood to walk out of the arrangement. After all the fretting and fuming, Mamata and Jayalalitha will find it more profitable to keep up the arrangement even while preparing ground for strengthening their support base. This is likely to continue until things get worse.

Barnala sailing in two boats?

THE ruckus over the increase in the prices of essential commodities sold through the ration shops has an interesting side to it.

It may be recalled that the Shiromani Akali Dal was at the forefront in demanding a rollback of wheat, rice and urea prices. It turned out that the proposal to decrease subsidy was mooted among others by senior Akali Dal leader Surjit Singh Barnala, the Minister for Food and Fertilisers.

Explaining the rationale behind the price hike, Mr Barnala recently admitted that sustaining the earlier subsidy on foodgrains, sugar and urea had become unfeasible and the government had no other option but to increase prices.

Defending the government’s decision to increase the price of urea, Mr Barnala said even after the latest hike the product was one of the cheapest in India.

Asked whether his defence of the government decision meant he was opposed to the stand taken by his political party, Mr Barnala retorted that his role as a member of the Shiromani Akali Dal and as a Central Minister were two different things. Political stance was an entirely different ball game and these things could not be explained publicly. But as a minister, Mr Barnala maintained that the move was in the right direction.

Closer through cricket?

Sentiments about Indo-Pakistan relations have never been so good especially after Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and his Pakistan counterpart, Mr Nawaz Sharif, struck a good rapport on bilateral relations. The prevailing mood among the common man of the two countries was discernible at — of all places — the Press Club of India.

Scribes from Pakistan, who had come to cover the cricket series between the two countries, visited the club on several occasions and exchange notes with Indian journalists. Among the topics of discussion was how to better relations between the two countries.

A Pakistani scribe said it was “unfortunate” that the two developing countries had to spend millions of dollars on their “defence requirements” following the Kashmir dispute. “Why can’t we resolve our problem and emerge as two great friends?”, he wondered. His Indian counterparts went a step ahead and suggested why should the two countries not merge?

Imagine a common cricket team consisting of Indian and Pakistani greats. It would definitely be the best in the world. Is Balasaheb Thackeray listening?

Pak-feting BJP style

After the late Gen Zia-ul-Haq of Pakistan started to break the ice on the cricket field, it seems the Indian Government is also reciprocating - albeit a good decade later.

The visiting Pakistan cricket team while playing in Delhi had a busy schedule both on and off the field. Apart from customary appearance at the Ferozeshah Kotla, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee hosted a tea ceremony in honour of the team. Not to be left behind, Union Home Minister Lal Krishan Advani held a dinner for the team. With a former career diplomat managing the Pakistan team in India, it seems Mr Shahryar Khan had more on his plate that he could take.

Punishing ‘errant’ scribes

The recent attack on Christians in India have been a cause of concern but then the international media has been taking it to a ridiculous extent.

Recently a US-based wire agency put out a story from Lucknow quoting a Christian leader about the atrocities being committed against their community in the state. The story naturally got worldwide publicity. The government was naturally not amused and it was left to the Union Information and Broadcasting Minister, Mr Pramod Mahajan, who has also donned the role of a government spokesman, to set the record right.

Deviating from a routine briefing on the outcome of a Union Cabinet meeting, Mr Mahajan referred to the agency story and said it was absurd and false. He pointed out that the Christian leader, who was quoted by the agency, had gone on record saying he had never given any interview to any agency and the comments attributed to him were concocted.

An embarrassed representative of the agency, who was present at the briefing, agreed with the minister’s remarks and said the report was indeed “irresponsible”. He said the agency had sacked the journalist who filed the distorted story and he was sorry on behalf of his agency.

Mr Mahajan said it was a good precedent and hoped other newspapers and agency would mete out similar treatment to irresponsible scribes.

More car sales, more theft

The present downslide in the economy notwithstanding, India has always been perceived as a high-growth economy with an enormous potential for consumer items.

The car market is a case in point. The virtual monopoly of the Ambassador being broken by more swanky models like Santro and Matiz, has also had a strong multiplier effect on the accessories’ market.

Recently, a new anti-auto theft device was launched in the capital with inbuilt computer chips and pager devices. The US-based company sees India as a “big” market with high growth rates and plans to set up base in North India, where the sale of automobiles is the maximum. Does the corollary also mean that theft in this region is the maximum. A sheepish company executive admitted it was.

(Contributed by T. V. Lakshminarayan, K.V. Prasad, Gaurav Choudhary and P.N. Andley.)

75 YEARS AGO

Namdharis at Tarn Taran

A Namdhari Diwan was held at Tarn Taran on Amawas. The Namdharis numbering about 5000 came from all parts of the country. The meetings of the Diwan were held at the Maidan near the Thakurdwara, and the audience consisted of Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and others on both days.

At the very first meeting the Communique of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, prohibiting the holding of meetings and lectures in the Parkarma of the Darbar Sahib without the previous permission of the Local Committee, was condemned and declared intended to place a ban on the Namdharis, and a resolution was therefore, passed to assert their longstanding right by sending a jatha to hold a Diwan as usual in the Parkarma.

The Jathas of all districts wanted to undertake the service, each wishing to be the first, but the Shahidi Dal Executive came to the decision that lots be cast. The Jatha of the Sialkot District was despatched after receiving specific instructions and taking the solemn pledge of remaining non-violent in word and deed under all circumstances.

Then after about 4 hours, another Jatha followed, under the same conditions, to relieve the first one. The Diwan in the Parkarma came to a close at about 7 p.m. without any untoward incident. In the evening, a meeting was held at the Maidan and speeches were delivered by Bhai Nidhan Singh Alim and Sant Mangal Singh on the present situation.