The OPS, EPS, VKS drama in Chennai

This article appeared first on Rightlog.in on April 24, 2017 under the title: “3 conditions laid down by the OPS camp that are making the EPS camp jittery”

---

OPS, EPS, and VKS the main dramatis personae in the never-ending soap opera being played out in Tamil Nadu have been involved in so many twists, turns, and intrigue that most political commentators have found it difficult to stick their neck out and predict what might happen next in Tamil Nadu. What is however quite clear is, that in all of this the biggest casualties have been governance and democracy. Like someone said:

OPS, EPS, and VKS have ensured that in TN governance and democracy are presently on UPS”

Late J. Jayalalithaa who ran the party with an iron hand and brooked no opposition however is guilty of having hamstrung the party by not grooming a second rung leadership or at least naming a successor. VK Sasikala (VKS) has no credentials other than having been Jaya’s friend and personal assistant. O. Pannerselvam (OPS) owed his brief time as CM to Jaya’s largesse. He knew he was merely a placeholder, keeping the seat warm till Amma came back from her incarceration in Bengaluru. Although he initially emerged as a consensus candidate as CM soon after Jaya’s demise he was soon shunted out by the VKS faction who felt he wasn’t “pliant” enough for their liking particularly after VKS realized post her arrest that she wouldn’t be able to control OPS from her prison cell in Bengaluru.

The present incumbent Edapadi Palaniswami (EPS) who was installed by VKS after an unceremonious coup that led to OPS being shown the door was thought to be a loyalist of the Manargudi Mafia (as VKS and her extended family are known in TN) and to his credit he did stick to the script by accepting TTV Dinakaran as Deputy General Secretary of the AIADMK a post created specifically to ensure that VKS could remote control the party and the government from her “prison-office”.

However a series of events have led to the present impasse – First, the electoral poll panel repealed the RK Nagar assembly polls when it emerged that TTV Dinakaran allegedly tried to bribe the voters and influence the verdict. The second blow was the EC bribery case against Dinakaran followed immediately by an ED court framing charges against him in a financial irregularity case dating back to some 20 years. As soon as EPS realized that Dinakaran would be caught up in long protracted court cases he allegedly engineered a faction within the party to rebel against VKS and Dinakaran along with sending out feelers to the OPS faction in a possible attempt at a merger ostensibly because that would mean they would be able to regain the iconic “Two-leaf” election symbol of the AIADMK.

Several rounds of talks between the two factions has led to nothing more than a stalemate as both factions are reluctant to give up on their individual stands and if latest reports are to be believed have struck intractable notes in their talks and any forward movement will be possible only if one or both factions give-in or be ready to make a few concessions to the other.

 The OPS camp is clear that their leader has to be made the CM. Their arguments in favour of this include OPS having held that position twice before and his relatively better track record compared to EPS who has had a lackluster start to his CM-ship. If unverified reports from officials and “people-in-the-know” are to be believed EPS was reluctant to take any decisions on his own and often deferred to Dinakaran and consulted him before coming to any conclusion. Further, his refusal to take questions and his poorly constructed replies in the Assembly during this budget session has won him no supporters.

OPS also clearly owns the moral high ground as was evident from how people welcomed him with genuine warmth during campaigning for the now recalled RK Nagar by-election.

The OPS camp has also laid down 3 specific conditions all of which that have not gone down well with the EPS faction. These include:

1. Formal expulsion of Sasikala, Dinakaran and thirty other members of the extended Manargudi family from the party. Although the EPS camp did announce expulsion of VKS and Dinakaran from the party, the OPS camp is insisting on a formal party note that legalizes this expulsion
2. CBI probe into the death of former CM J. Jayalalitha specifically relating to the events leading up to her admission into Apollo and what transpired inside the hospital premises and the ICU.
3. Withdrawal of the affidavits submitted to the Election Commission declaring Sasikala and Dinakaran as party general secretary and deputy general secretary, respectively.

In addition to the above conditions unconfirmed reports have also hinted at the OPS camp wanting to take over the three key posts within the party and the government – Chief Minister, Party General Secretary and Presidium chairman with EPS getting the post of the Deputy Chief Minister. This has clearly miffed the EPS camp. An EPS faction insider had this to say about the OPS demand – “Have you heard anywhere about the party in government with 122 lawmakers merging with a party with eleven MLAs?” Clearly for the EPS camp this is also becoming an ego issue.

Then there is also the caste angle – OPS belongs to the influential “Thevar” community and EPS to the equally influential “Gounder” community. Both communities have for long been pillars of support for the AIADMK particularly in Southern and Western Tamil Nadu. Replacing a Gounder with a Thevar now may not go down well with the former community and could seriously impact the election fortunes of the AIADMK.

Finally if reports are to be believed VKS still has the support of at least 25 to 30 members within the AIADMK most of them family members and/or loyalists who are actively working to ensure that this attempt at a merger fails.

As this intriguing game of chess is played out on the chequered political landscape of Tamil Nadu no clear answers are emerging. However for Sasikala and her extended Manargudi family these are desperate times. Knowing her amazing survival instincts what can be predicted with certainty however is that while she may well be on her last limb she is definitely not going down without a fight.

Why the abominable practice of Triple Talaq has to go

This article first appeared on April 18, 2017 at Rightlog.in and was published under the title: “Yogi Adityanath’s powerful message to supporters of Triple Talaq” The original article is available here: (Click to read)

The year was 1966, April 18 and Meherunissa Dalwai was 35 years old, pregnant with her second child when she marched along with her husband Hamid Dalwai and six other women down to the Mantralaya building in Mumbai (Bombay then) in a symbolic protest against the discriminatory practice of Tripe Talaq. 51 years later Meherunissa Dalwai is 86 years old and rues the fact that this practice is still prevalent in 21^st century India. What is worse is that it has morphed into an even more abominable “Instant-Triple-Talaq” that can be delivered via SMS, WhatsApp, and email. Meherunissa will be recreating this symbolic protest on April 18, 2017 urging PM Modi to put an end to this discriminatory practice that has rendered several Muslim women homeless and penniless.

In a blatantly insensitive comment akin to rubbing salt into open wounds AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board) general secretary Maulana Wali Rahmani reiterated that “instant Talaq may be wrong but valid” According to him not only was it valid, but conveying it via mobile phone was also valid.

UP CM Yogi Adityanath’s comment equating the silence of the majority with the few who practice Triple Talaq must be therefore viewed in this context – what he has said highlights not just the entrenched position of the AIMPLB but also calls into question the hypocrisy of those who want the courts to decide on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue but will not submit this abominable practice to the scrutiny of the law of the land.

The reality in India is that the situation for Muslim women is getting only grimmer not better. Reports of marital abuse, random Triple Talaq delivered via SMS and WhatsApp, instances of forced Halala (when reconciliation is attempted) and polygamy are beginning to appear more frequently as Muslim women break out of their veils and start questioning the legality of not just this practice but also the authority of a regressive body like the AIMPLB.

Yogi Adityanath’s statement about Triple Talaq is morally and ethically sound and he has thrown open this debate in a way few politicians current or past have made bold to do (with the exception of Arif Mohammed Khan who quit the Rajiv Gandhi government and the Congress in protest against the Shah Bano case).

PM Modi himself has been emboldened by this to come out in the open with his views on the subject, calling for an equitable and just law that protects the rights of the Muslim women as a citizen of India and not be treated as a member of a religious sect. It is heartening to see an elected government actually make the right noises in public and also in the courts unlike the Rajiv Gandhi Government of 1984 which used its mammoth majority to overturn a Supreme Court judgement in the infamous Shah Bano alimony case.

While the moral and ethical arguments are on solid ground what is the legal and constitutional position? Is a ban on Triple Talaq legally tenable? This is particularly important when we see how vested interests from within the Muslim community including politicians like Asaduddin Owaissi quote the law and the constitution to claim immunity.

Article 15 of the constitution is often quoted to buttress the argument – “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on the grounds of Religion, Race, caste, Sex, or place of birth”. However this article needs to be read along with Article 15(3) which states “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making special provision for women and Children” (bold for emphasis).

Article 25 states “Every individual is equally entitled to freedom of conscience” and the right to “profess, practice, and propagate religion of one’s choice” with the caveat however that the article does not restrict the government from making any law in order to “regulate economic, financial, political, or other secular activities” (bold for emphasis)

Most importantly Article-14 of the constitution which guarantees “Right to Equality” states “…equality before the law and equal protection against discrimination within the territory of India…” (bold for emphasis) and prohibits discrimination on the following grounds:

• Religion
• Race
• Caste
• Sex
• Place of birth

Article 14 therefore should override both articles 15 and 25. Further, when Article 15 is read along with 15(3) and Article 25 with its caveats; it is clear that the constitution provides the State with the authority to intervene and make the necessary changes to ensure equality and justice to all citizens of the country irrespective of their religion, or sex (as in this case).

Also the AIMPLB is neither a legal body nor does it have any authority under the law. It is merely a private non-governmental body established in 1973 with the sole purpose of “implementing and protecting Islamic sharia law in India” One of its stated objectives is to “adopt suitable strategies for protection and continued application of the Islamic code of Shariat” (bold for emphasis) – Is this the body that will be allowed to wield power and make laws in a democratic country?

The questions every right-meaning citizen of India must ask are these:

1. What is the need for a body as regressive as the AIMPLB in a modern, 21^st century India?
2. Why should one community alone not be subject to the laws of the country and should the laws not be applicable equally to all citizens irrespective of the religion they profess?
3. Why should Muslim women alone be denied what other women in India enjoy?
4. When Article-14 of the constitution guarantees equality to all why have successive governments shied away from implementing the law?
5. When more than 20 Islamic countries around the world have either banned or amended Triple Talaq why is it being supported in a modern, pluralistic, democratic, secular India?

Yogi Adityanath may have put forward a moral and ethical argument for the abolition of Triple Talaq – He is not only right morally and ethically but he is also fully justified in asking for the abolition both under the constitution and the rule of the land. It is time for the government and the Courts to make the right judgement and put the AIMPLB in its place.

The rise of the BJP in West Bengal

This article first appeared on April 16, 2017 at Rightlog.in and was published under the title: “Mamata used to be super-confident about her victory, not anymore” The original article is available here: (Click to read)

---

The Kanthi Dakshin by-poll result in West Bengal is significant in more ways than one. While the result itself followed the script in the sense that Mamata and the TMC won with a landslide and in fact with an increased vote-share percentage, the performance of the BJP and its candidate SourindraMohon Jana came as a surprise to political commentators and as a jolt to the TMC and more particularly the Congress and CPI (M).

The numbers tell the story – The TMC candidate and former minister Chandrima Bhattacharya won the seat with 95,369 votes. The BJP candidate, SourindraMohon Jana, came second with a whopping 52,843 votes, 32% vote-share and a 22% increase in vote-share (over the BJP vote-share the previous year). Both the Left and Congress were decimated with both candidates losing their deposits. The Congress candidate got only 2,270 votes, an all-time low. So did, the CPI (M) with just 17,423 votes.

In the 2016 election, the TMC got 93,353 votes, the BJP 15,223 and Left Front (the congress and the left fought the election jointly under an alliance) 59,469 votes in this constituency. In 2017, the Congress and the CPI-M fought on their own and against each other as well.

A dispassionate analysis of this by-poll brings out the following key points:

1. There has been no erosion in the TMC vote-share. In fact, the TMC has managed to increase its vote-share by 2% over last year
2. The BJP has increased its vote-share by a whopping 22% to leapfrog over the Congress and the left to become the second largest party and gain the mantle of the leading opposition to the hegemony of TMC in West Bengal
3. The left and the Congress have been reduced to fringe players with candidates of both parties losing their deposits.
4. The Congress without the Left has been reduced to a paltry 2,270 votes
5. Interestingly the BJP has not been able to make any dent in the TMC vote-share – the BJP has gained at the expense of the Left and the Congress – what has happened is a vote-transfer from the Left and the Congress to the BJP.
6. The Modi-factor which was in play in this assembly election has managed to decimate the Left and the Congress (both national parties) but has not managed to eat into the TMC and the Mamata-wave highlighting that in State elections while national leaders can swing votes, the need for a strong regional satrap is crucial.
7. Mamata and her brand of minority appeasement has led to the first stage of Hindu consolidation that has led to a swing away from the Left and the Congress and in favour of the BJP – an indication that the electorate believes that it is the BJP alone that would be able to safeguard the interests of the Hindu majority
8. The TMC has managed to retain almost the entire Muslim vote bank (estimated to be at 30% in West Bengal) and this en-bloc vote share along with the votes of those sections of the population that remains entrenched in the Leftist-liberal ideology has managed to keep the TMC unscathed for now.

In the Table below we provide a snapshot of how the West Bengal elections have played out over the period 2011 through 2017 (starting from when Mamata broke the Left stranglehold on West Bengal). It is interesting to note that both in 2011 and 2016 it is only the TMC and the BJP that have similar vote share percentages for both parameters measured: Average state-wide share of vote percentage (the first number shown in the table against that row) versus the vote-share percentage measured only in those seats/constituencies that the party has contested in (the second number shown in the table). This could reflect two things:

1. It is only the TMC and BJP that have been able to garner support across the state while the Left and the Congress are slowly getting squeezed out of large parts of West Bengal and have to rely on pockets
2. It could be a reflection of seat-sharing adjustments

Either way the writing is clearly on the wall for both the Left and the Congress in West Bengal.

Year	Poll	Vote Percentage (%)				Modi Factor
		BJP	TMC	CPI (M)	INC
2011*	Assembly	4.06%	38.93%	30.08%	9.09%	NA
		4.14%	50.15%	41.39%	42.67%
2014	Lok Sabha	16.93%	40%	22%	9%	High
2016*	Assembly	10.16%	44.91%	19.75%	12.25%	Medium
		10.28%	45.18%	38.4%	40.37%
2017	Assembly by-polls	32%	55%	10%	1.3%	High
2016	Kanthi Dakshin constituency Assembly polls	8.75%	53.7%	34.2%		Medium

Notes on Table:

1. *2011 and 2016 vote percentage data gives two numbers – The first number is the vote percentage obtained by a party across the state and the second number reflects the vote percentage obtained by a party in the seats contested by the party.
2. Data from Table is primarily obtained from the Election Commission data/report available online.
3. In 2016 Assembly elections, the BJP and the CPI-M were in alliance – this explains the apparent discrepancy in vote share percentage numbers and actually reflects the vote-share of each party in only the seats they contested
4. NA = Not applicable

---

Now coming to the BJP – what does this result signify? It shows that they have managed to capture the imagination of a section of the Hindu population who are disgusted with the kind of partisan politics being practiced by Mamata and the TMC and the silence of the Left and the Congress and have therefore shifted their allegiance from the Left and the Congress to the BJP. However, the BJP must look at why they have still not been able to make a dent into the TMC’s core constituency – the left Bhadralok (who have decisively switched allegiance to the TMC from the Left) and the Muslims.

As for the TMC and Mamata – should they be worried about the rise of the BJP? The answer is a resounding “Yes” – Mamata being the shrewd politician she is, has already realized this as can be seen from her recent tweets on Ram-Navami.

However, she will continue to be hamstrung by her need to cater to her core Muslim constituency as can be seen by her silence on the brutal police crackdown on Hanuman Jayanti celebrations.

In the two years leading up to the Lok Sabha elections followed by the assembly elections we should expect greater Hindu consolidation around the BJP. If the next elections are a four-cornered fight with the Congress and the Left fighting the elections separately we should expect the Left and the Congress to be decimated and the contests being reduced to a straight fight between the TMC and the BJP.

However, for the BJP to be a greater force to reckon with in the future, vote-share percentages alone will not suffice particularly in our political system of “First past the post”. It would require:

1. A greater consolidation of Hindu votes around the BJP
2. Anti-incumbency against and disenchantment with appeasement politics of the TMC
3. Desire of the electorate to become part of the mainstream and align with a party that can represent the State’s interests at the state and centre and importantly be less confrontational in its attitude towards the dispensation at the centre.

While making predictions in politics is always fraught with danger what can be however said with certainty is that the 2019 Lok Sabha elections will truly be a watershed election more so than the 2014 elections. As someone said, “We truly are living in interesting times”

 

What is the need to equate Surya Namaskar with Namaaz?

This article first appeared in Rightlog.in under the title: “Dear Yogi ji, your secular statement was nice, but not required” on April 4, 2017 and can be read here: (Click to read)

---

The introduction of Yoga / Surya Namaskar into school curriculum has been talked about and even attempted earlier, even before the time of this present NDA regime. It has become controversial now primarily because the present dispensation in power is construed to be “Hindu Right-Wing” in its outlook. It is a different matter altogether that the present dispensation has done nothing that could be even remotely considered to be an overt push towards a “Hindu Right-Wing” agenda.

Recently, the CM of UP Yogi Adityanath in attempting to legitimize the introduction and practice of Surya Namaskar / Yoga suggested or rather made the equivalence that several postures of Surya Namaskar mirror those that are used in the Islamic practice of Namaaz.

The question we ask and debate is “Was this necessary and what is to be gained by making such a false equivalence?”

Svatmarama in his much celebrated work “Hatha Yoga Pradipika” says:

Loosely translated this Sanskrit couplet means

“My worshipful salutations to that Adi-Yogi, the Adinatha (Shiva) who was the first to teach the knowledge of the great science of Hatha Yoga – that yoga which when practiced (sincerely) by the (sincere) aspirant leads him/her up the staircase to the high pinnacles of Raja Yoga (Realization).”

From the above it is quite clear that there is absolutely no ambiguity with regard to either the antiquity or the origins of Yoga – It derives from the fountainhead of Sanaatana Dharma the Vedas themselves and its first exponent was Mahadeva himself and his first disciple his own wife Parvathi and has been passed on through generations with each generation having its own champion who kept the great tradition alive.

Recent well-meaning and perhaps naïve attempts by some Gurus to make Yoga universally acceptable by saying that it does not belong to Hindus and instead belongs to the world make the mistake of uprooting this ancient treasure house of knowledge from its roots – the roots of Yoga shall and must remain rooted to Hindustan, its branches and fruits can spread all over the world and everyone can partake of the gifts of these fruits – this is the essence and beauty of the Universality of Sanaatana Dharma.

Yoga belongs to every single person who is a Hindustani defined as a person who is born and brought up in this cultural milieu – here in Hindustan there are those that follow Sanaatana Dharma (the majority), those that follow Christianity, those that follow Islam, Jainism, Buddhism and so on – Yoga is bequeathed to each one and denied to none.

There is no need for anyone to be apologetic or make excuses in order that Yoga becomes more acceptable because each person born in Hindustan or India (whether they like it or not) is a Hindu. Both the words “Hindu” and “India” are purely geographical markers and are both derived from the same word “Sindhu” the former a Persian equivalent and the latter a Greek vulgarization of the Sindhu into first “Indus” and then “India”

It really should not matter to anyone be it from the political dispensation or from the religious arena if some from the minority community object to the introduction of Yoga and it is really not the business of these leaders to attempt a middle ground because there is no middle ground.

Yoga is inherently Hindu, there is no debating that but when everyone (again whether they like it or not) is Hindu if they have been born and brought up in this cultural and social milieu where is the question of forcing something that is “Hindu” on non-Hindus?”

Yogi Adityanath’s comment equating Surya Namaskar and Namaaz may have been well-intentioned but was unnecessary – it takes away from the inherent principle of Universality that is unique to Sanaatana Dharma and risks uprooting the fundamental basis of Yoga when no such attempt is called for given what we have outlined above.

Consolidation of the Hindu Vote across India

This article first appeared in roghtlog.in under the title: “It is going to be a Hindu Vs Hindu fight after 70 years”. The original article is available at: (click here)

---

The recent election results in 5 states, where the BJP managed to come to power in 4 and the Congress in 1 could well be an indicator of voter fatigue with regional parties and their appeal on narrow regional, caste, and parochial lines and a precursor to the emergence of a pan Indian Virat Hindu/liberal Hindu identity.

The standard formula of regional parties and even the Congress, perfected over several years has been to divide the Hindu vote on the basis of caste fault lines and consolidate the minority vote-bank by playing up the narrative of Hindu/majority domination.

This twin strategy of “divide the majority” and “appease the minority” has worked successfully for the better part of seven decades since independence. Essentially, this formula worked by pushing an egregious form of secularism where the minorities (read Muslims) where handed out sops in the form of grants, permission to establish and run madrassas, cash handouts etc. to ensure they would vote en-bloc during elections, while the Hindu votes were fragmented and scattered along caste lines – in this formula development was never on the agenda, the goal was only to grab power. The Muslims remained poor and indebted to the doles being handed out and the Hindus disgruntled and divided.

However, the first signs of fissures in this strategy have started appearing and it looks like they will only widen further. In this article we examine three key reasons for this paradigm shift in Indian polity and the emergence of a pan-Indian Hindu identity and ethos:

1. Consolidation of the Hindu vote: This has been happening steadily over the last decade and it is only now that it has started to reach the “tipping point” where the numbers are starting to matter. The Hindus have started to realize that if they do not bury their differences and get together they would have very little say in the politics of emerging India. The recent results in UP were a clear case of Hindu consolidation in response to blatant Muslim appeasement by the BSP and SP. The BSP fielded 99 Muslim candidates and the SP 59 hoping to woo the Muslim vote-bank monolith. The fact that the BJP won a landslide despite not fielding a single Muslim candidate even in some constituencies where Muslims form 30% of the population (which is more than the overall UP average of 20%) is a clear indicator of Hindu consolidation that blurred even the caste fault lines. The BJPs victory in Deoband with a 65% Muslim majority cannot be attributed to anything other than complete Hindu consolidation and fragmentation of the Muslim vote across SP and BSP. The 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots, emergence of a strong Islamist ideology in Muzaffarnagar and nearby Deoband, and the forced exodus of Hindus from Muslim-majority Kairana have all contributed to Hindu consolidation. It is important to realize that this is not restricted to UP alone and is in fact a pan-India trend. Mamata Bannerji’s brand of communal politics that even sought to brush aside the Dhulagarh riots where Muslim mobs targeted Hindu homes and business establishments has led to Hindu consolidation across the East of India as is evident from the recent election results in Manipur, Assam, and Arunachal Pradesh. Even in West Bengal, the BJP’s vote percentage has steadily risen and one should expect it to reach tipping point soon if Mamata continues her brand of appeasement politics. We are seeing the same emerging in Kerala as well where for long the communists and Congress have shared the spoils between them but are now facing an emerging and strong Hindu backlash after years of minority appeasement and favoritism.
2. Blurring of Caste lines amongst Hindus: Rapid urbanization, the steady flattening of economic disparities, social welfare schemes and empowerment that have ensured representation of the so called lower castes across the political spectrum has seen a steady rise in the economic, cultural, social, and political status of the once deprived classes. This has also coincided with a realization even amongst these social classes that their interests are best served by aligning themselves with the majority and also with parties that promise even-handed development for all as opposed to doles and handouts on narrow, sectarian lines. Further, the realization has dawned that the Hindus affected in Dulagarh, Kairana, Muzaffarnagar and in several other places have been those belonging to the lowest strata of society and not a single so called secular party has come to their rescue or even made perfunctory noises of support.
3. Disaffection amongst sections of Muslim population: Sections of the Muslims have clearly decided that it is time for them to shun the appeasement politics practiced by the so called secular parties who while handing out doles have ensured that the Muslim population of India remains the most backward in terms of education, economic, and social development. Three clear trends are emerging here:
   1. Sections of the educated Muslims who have seen through the “secular” argument are leading the integration of the community into the mainstream.
   2. Those who are alarmed at the radicalization of Muslim youth influenced by Jihadi rhetoric and ISIS ideology are also lending voice to the change that is taking place.
   3. The Muslim women, for long subjugated by their menfolk and mullahs are emerging out of their veils asking for justice, equality, and abolishment of regressive practices like triple Talaq.

There are clear indications that in UP large sections of Muslim women did indeed vote for the BJP defying diktats from people within their own community.

These three trends clearly point towards an alignment of the Hindu community in India along two distinct lines – those who are “right-of-center” and those who are “center-right” the latter could be termed the “liberal-right” who were formerly aligned with the “secular-left” but have made the shift in recent times.

This trend will clearly mean that regional parties will have little say in the emerging India. Parties like AAP which base their survival on a narrow BJP-hate strategy will also be brushed aside as was evident in their rout in Goa and Punjab. The only other party that can offer resistance to the BJP is the Congress party. This is because despite their recent flop shows and consistent failures, the Congress is the only other party that can be called a party with a truly pan-Indian presence besides the BJP. However, for the Congress to be relevant they have to reinvent themselves and change their outlook towards the Hindu majority and shun their minority appeasement and work towards the politics of inclusion and true equality.

If this happens we will be looking at a true 2-party “Virat Hindu” “Liberal Hindu” polity that will usher in the much needed balance in the politics of new India.

Supreme Court has offered the Muslim Community a face-saving solution in its Ram Mandir “suggestion”

This article first appeared online in Rightlog.in under the same title on March 23, 2017. The original article is available here: (Click to read)

Supreme Court’s call for an amicable, negotiated settlement to the Ram Temple-Babri Masjid dispute is reasonable.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 suggested that the parties to the contentious Ram Janmabhoomi / Ram Mandir dispute attempt to find an amicable solution out of court through the process of dialogue and consensus in the spirit of “Give-a-bit” and Take-a-bit”.

The Supreme Court bench headed by Justice JS Khehar was responding to BJP MP Subramanian Swamy’s plea urging the Court to agree to an early and day-to-day hearing on the matter in order to find a speedy resolution to the issue.

The court observed that “These are issues of religion and sentiments, where all the parties can sit together and arrive at a consensual decision to end the dispute. All of you may sit together and hold a cordial meeting…” Further, CJI Khehar even offered to play the role of a mediator in order to find an amicable solution if the parties involved in the dispute wanted him to.

 

 The historical trail and the twists and turns that have marked the Ram Janmabhoomi / Ram mandir issue are well known and have been covered, reported, and analyzed extensively over the years and is neither the mandate nor the focus of this article.

This article only looks at the Supreme Court’s “suggestion” and attempts to answer the following questions:

1. Why did the Supreme Court choose to appeal to the parties concerned to work towards an amicable solution outside the purview of the court and law?
2. Is the court justified in making such a suggestion, or should it instead have simply gone ahead and pronounced the verdict?
3. Is it in the best interest of the parties concerned and also the in the best interests of our country to take this route rather than a cantankerous, and bitter legal feud?

The first question as to why the Supreme Court made the suggestion to the parties concerned to look for an amicable solution outside the courts was partially answered by the court itself when it observed that matters of faith, religion, and sentiment are best settled in the spirit of give and take.

Also, it bears mention here that the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in 2010 had ruled for a three-way division of the disputed area, between the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara, and the party for Ram Lalla in effect handing over two-thirds of the land to the Hindus and one-third to the Muslims.

The Supreme Court may well be offering the Muslims a face-saving solution that can be mutually arrived at on the basis of this Allahabad verdict, instead of a Court directive that reinforces the same and potentially causes loss of face.

The Government of India and the Hindu representatives have welcomed the move with open arms but the Muslim representatives including the Babri Masjid Action Committee have rejected the offer while continuing to maintain that this is purely a matter of title and has no religious bearing – in the process completely ignoring the spirit in which the Supreme Court has made this suggestion.

Secondly, insisting that there is no religious validity to the claim made by the Hindus belittles the religious sentiments of millions of Hindus for whom Ram and his Janmabhoomi are matters of deep and abiding faith. Thirdly, it goes against the court’s own advice of “Give-a-bit” and Take-a-bit” – Is not the Allahabad High Court verdict of 2010, itself an expression of this very principle?

The second question of whether the Supreme Court should have made such a suggestion as some commentators have opined is really a non-question. The suggestion by the Supreme Court is a time-bound one, not an open-ended advice. The court has asked Mr. Subramanian Swamy to consult with the parties and inform them about the decision on March 31 after which the next steps will be initiated.

The court is simply providing a window for all parties to bury their differences and come together to arrive at a solution that will satisfy all parties concerned without potentially endangering the socio-cultural fabric of a plural society that is India.

Finally, without a doubt a mutual decision arrived at through consensus and in the true spirit of give and take is the best situation for not just the parties involved but for the whole nation itself. It is also in the best interest of the Muslim community also to free themselves from the overbearing influence of the mullahs and their self-serving agenda which is definitely not in the interest of the Muslim community who can no longer continue to stay away from mainstream India. It is for the Muslim community itself to indulge in soul-searching and introspection – would they or their own leaders be so open and considerate if they were in the majority and Hindus were a minority? For an answer, they simply have to look no further than our neighboring countries – Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The suggestion by the Supreme Court is therefore an opportunity for the communities to come together and once again establish the plurality and the concept of unity- in-diversity unique to our country. The ball as they say is in the Muslim’s court and one hopes that they don’t miss this opportunity.

Only one man can resurrect the almost-dead Congress Party

 

Image Courtesy: India Opines

The humongous UP debacle was Rahul Gandhi’s 14th straight defeat. There has not been a single election in which he has singlehandedly led the Congress party to victory. The recent victory in Punjab was a complete captain’s show and the credit goes only to Captain Amarinder Singh, one of the few surviving regional satraps of the Congress party.

A track record such as this would have confined any other leader to the archives of political history, but not Rahul Gandhi who has hidden behind the protection offered by his lineage and continued to lead the congress party to defeat after defeat. Today the congress party has been reduced to the fringes of Indian politics solely because of Rahul’s lackadaisical approach and sheer lack of charisma. The only other major state (besides Punjab now) where the Congress is in power is Karnataka but that also looks like slipping into the hands of the BJP soon going by the present trends and the mood of the people of Karnataka.

Rahul’s brand of “shoot and scoot” politics, his penchant for taking long vacations in foreign locales, and his disappearing acts after every defeat are not the qualities of a leader who can succeed, leave alone survive in the hustle and bustle of Indian politics. He is also up against arguably the most popular leader ever, comparable to the heady days of “India is Indira” whose work ethic, political nous, oratorical skills, and people-connect is incomparable – Narendra Modi versus Rahul Gandhi is a mismatch like no other. If the Congress continues with its suicidal policy of pitting Rahul against Narendra Modi then they must resign themselves to a long hiatus in the wilderness of Indian politics.

To contrast how leaders behave one needs to look no further than Rahul’s newest ally Akhilesh Yadav who is the latest political leader to burn his fingers after allying with the Rahul Gandhi led Congress. He suffered a massive defeat too but he addressed a press conference, accepted defeat graciously, refused to blame the Congress (though he was well within his rights to), and was there to console his party members and share in their collective defeat.

Rahul Gandhi as usual made his now patented disappearing act only to emerge after a few days to make the most inane comments, embarrassing himself and his party.

I am reminded of a small news item dating back to the time of J. Jayalalitha’s death. While condoling her death, M.K. Stalin made a remark that captures the essence of what it means to be a politician of repute. To paraphrase what he said “We may have had our differences and we have been bitter rivals, but we are going to miss her fighting spirit and her never say die attitude. Who will we fight against now? Will we ever face an opponent of her caliber again?”

Measured against this, Rahul Gandhi fails miserably to live up to the most fundamental requirement of a politician. Why the Congress party is continuing to stick with Rahul is a mystery best known to the party or rather the coterie that has benefited the most from hanging on to the coat tails and aprons of the Nehru parivar members. However, if it is the fear of what might happen to the party in the absence of someone from the Nehru parivar leading it then it is a misplaced fear because sticking with a reluctant and clearly out of depth leader is doing greater harm to the grand old party. Young leaders with the credentials and the stomach for a fight are being neglected and it won’t be long before there is a revolt from within.

This has already started happening – Himanta Biswa Sarma who was humiliated by Rahul Gandhi made the switch to BJP and has already delivered two states to them – Assam and now Manipur where BJP had absolutely zero presence till recently. Milind Deora in Mumbai and Sandeep Dixit in Delhi have already expressed their reservations with regard to how the congress is being led and have called for introspection and change but the coterie is once again closing shop to protect the reluctant heir who will surely sound the death knell of the oldest political party of India.

Rahul Gandhi needs to listen to the right people who are telling him to go follow his dreams, whatever they be elsewhere, because he is simply not cutout for politics particularly of the Indian type that requires dedication, hard work, the stomach for a fight, and a never-say-die attitude all qualities anathema to Rahul Gandhi. He however chooses to listen to advisers like Digvijay Singh who is the one person Rahul must never listen to.

In conclusion, democracy cannot and must not function in a vacuum with one party having a free run. The nip and thrust of politics and democracy requires a credible opposition that can live up to its role of being a watchdog of democracy. It is for this reason if not for anything else that the Congress needs a dose of oxygen that can revive it and the revival for sure is not going to happen through Rahul Gandhi. Neither is it going to happen if the party waits for Rahul or his family to make that call because that call will never come because the family believes that the Congress is their personal company and they can do what they please with it.

What the country needs today is a Rahul-mukt Congress even more urgently than a Congress-mukt Bharat. And only Rahul can resurrect Congress by leaving it.

---

This article originally appeared March 16, 2017, on Rightlog.in under the same title. Link to that article is here: (Click here)

Image courtesy: http://indiaopines.com/oll-number-2-rahul-gandhi-absent-maam/

Disclaimer: Copyright of images belongs to the original creator/publisher.

A Keralite pastor and his obnoxious statements against women

This article first appeared in Rightlog.in under the title “A Keralite pastor made ludicrous sexist statements, strangely the mainstream media doesn’t care”. The link to the article is here (Click to read)

---

A short video-clip recently made the rounds of social media before it was noticed by a few media houses and then made some news – In an era where everything is news this particular news item barely registered a “blip” on the National Media’s electrograph.

This short video-clip is of a pastor in Kerala addressing his “flock” and making the most outrageous, abusive, and misogynistic rant against women in recent memory.

The argument could be made that the best way to deal with such rants is to ignore them. However, this argument would be valid and would have been par for the course if the same yardstick was applied by our leftist media to deal with such rants made by people/leaders belonging to the “Right” and/or Hindu-dharma.

The complete lack of outrage bar a few murmurs, the sanitized coverage, and the ganging-up of the left cabal to suppress this news item, make it imperative that their hypocrisy is called out loud and clear and the pastor is named and shamed for his misogyny.

For the record, here is a sampling of some gems uttered by Father Sharlom:

“…women who wear jeans/pants and banian (sic) should be tied-up, weighed down with a stone and flung into the sea…”
“…women who wear chudidar tops without a veil covering their upper body, with a slit on the sides, and tight leggings tempt boys and men into wrongdoing and all the good that is taught at church is lost…”
“I know a case where a girl had been made pregnant by her own brother and the brother told me he couldn’t control himself seeing his sister wearing shorts and T-shirt.”
“It is because they wear such dresses that they don’t get married, don’t get jobs…”

There are more such gems in the video available on YouTube

 

He even quotes the bible as an authority to support his views.

One only has to take a deep breath and consider for a moment the outrage and noise something like this would have created if these comments were made by a Hindu saint, sadhu, or political leader – debates on primetime news, actors talking about intolerance and wanting to run away from the country, lyricists distinguishing between literates and illiterates and political leaders across the board baying for blood and calling for arrests.

The present biased coverage and silence is not new and has been in practice for a long time but what makes the situation alarming is the ganging-up and collective passive-aggression being practiced by the leftists deeply entrenched and in positions of power within large media houses.

Over the years these have been the people who have for long, driven “their” version of the National agenda down the throats of unsuspecting people across the nation. Now, with the rise of social media, right-of-center publications, and the coming to power of the BJP these elements are feeling threatened and what we are witnessing is a backlash from these entrenched elements.

However their bias, selective-silence, artificial outrage, and hypocrisy is dangerous and threatens to tear the very social fabric of our country.

Dear Gurmehar Kaur, being a Martyr’s daughter doesn’t make you the custodian of morality

This article first appeared on the site: Rightlog.in under the same title. The link to the article on the site is here: (Click here)

---

A lot has been said about the Gurmehar Kaur incident. People have taken positions based on their ideological leaning agreeing or disagreeing, supporting or dissing her stand. The left-biased media has been indulging in its agenda of obfuscation and muddying of the waters to ensure that the “right” point-of view is either not heard or is drowned in the cacophony of their “righteous outrage”. In all of this the concept of balance has been completely forgotten.

The question no one is asking, the real elephant in the room is this: Does being a martyr’s daughter/spouse/son bestow special favors on someone?

Every time someone, has chosen to point out the error in what Gurmehar Kaur has said with regard to her father’s death – “that it was war that killed him and not Pakistan”, the leftist-secular cabal that dominates media houses today and who are increasingly feeling threatened by the rise of the Social Media, is quick to jump in and abuse the person with a contrarian view – obviously and quite clearly, Freedom of speech for these people is a one-way street – they can walk all over it but will not allow anyone with a different view point to even step onto it.

The fact that Gurmehar ’s father was not martyred in Kargil and instead fell to terrorist bullets while fighting a Pak incursion is now a moot point and of little consequence.

What is however relevant is the fact that both the Kargil war and the particular incursion that snuffed out her father’s life were both Pak sponsored acts of war, unilateral moves of aggression – therefore when she says that Pak did not kill her father but war did, she makes the false equivalence that both India and Pakistan are responsible for the prevailing situation on our border when nothing can be further from the truth. Even this nuanced argument is either not being made or is being deliberately brushed aside in order to push an agenda. Mr. Kiren Rijiju was quite right when he posed the question “Who is poisoning this girl’s mind?” Indeed…

The Question whether being a martyr’s daughter, son, or spouse confers someone with immunity and that they should be treated leniently, really is a stupid question. The fact is everyone bar none is equal before the constitution and the laws of the land.

Would it be justified for example, for Americans to ask that the Navy war veteran who shot an Indian in Kansas a few days ago be treated with kid gloves just because he had paid his dues to the country?

The last point is that Gurmehar Kaur chose the platform and mode of protest herself and she is well within her rights to do so. However, if you choose to go public on Social Media and then expect that everyone who agrees with you is good and anyone with a different point of view is evil then you are either naïve or plain stupid and it is more likely the latter. She also chose to stand with two people who are clearly anti-national and secessionist in both their outlook and publicly stated views – Shehla Rashid and Umar Khalid – there is no disputing this fact. These two are free only because in this country although secession and a stated desire to break the country into pieces is a crime under the constitution and law, the people who implement the law are lenient and prefer to allow these elements a long rope.

If taking a differing stand and voicing an opinion is wrong and right-wing fundamentalism then I and all who do so are guilty of it, but then so be it. The need for a strong, coherent, and intellectual right-wing movement is even more relevant in these turbulent times…