bjp-l-digest Wednesday, November 26 1997 Volume 01 : Number 423
***************************************************************************
News, Opinion, Analysis and Publications Digest
Today's Topics
-------------
Red in the face
The Indian voter will choose Ram Rajya over Rome Rajya
SP men suspects in UP bomb attack
***************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 23:45:56 +0530
From: Krishnakant Udavant <kkant@bom2.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: Red in the face
Title: Red in the face
Author: Editorial
Publication: The Telegraph
Date: November 15, 1997
Indian communists have a tedious habit of rethinking positions which they
h ad adopted in the past. It is tedious because this never goes hand in
hand with a review of the fundamentals of their ideology. Only tactical
positio ns long dead and therefore irrelevant are reconsidered and then
regretted. The latest example of this kind of "revisionism" is the
statement made by M r Jyoti Basu, the chief minister of West Bengal, that
communists had made a mistake in criticizing Subhas Chandra Bose. In the
Forties, Indian communists had denounced Bose because he had sought the
intervention of the Allied powers in overthrowing British rule in India.
The conjunctur e of this criticism is worth recalling. When Adolf Hitler
attacked the Sovi et Union in 1941, the Communist Party of India, tied as
it was to the apron strings of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union,
declared World War II to be a "people's war". In India this meant that
communists, following the Anglo-Soviet alliance, became friends of the
British. They w re thus opposed not only to Bose but also to the Quit
India movement. This line was decided by Indian communists not on any
close understanding of th e prevailing political situation in the country
but on diktats from Moscow. Basu is willing to admit the mistake on Bose
but unwilling to acknowledge the complete subservience of communists to
Moscow. In substance, Indian com munists then had very little politics or
ideology save mouthing and valiant ly trying to implement what Joseph
Stalin ordered.
In the Forties in India, it mattered little what position the CPI adopted.
Its following and its impact was restricted to a very narrow circle; its
ma ss mobilization was restricted to certain rural areas of Andhra Pradesh
and West Bengal and among students. There is implicit in Basu's admission
the assumption that CPI's support to Bose could have made a difference to
the o utcome. Basu's admission has some contemporary reverberations. The
Communis t Party of India (Marxist), an offshoot of the CPI, has been
trying for some time to become a part of the national mainstream. This is
s uggested in its revaluation of the Indian national movement and its
reasses sment of the role of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Admission of the
error on Bose is a part of this process. Of course, it has regional
political implic ations as well. One of the partners of the Left Front is
the Forward Bloc, a party which swears by Bose. Basu is keen not to hurt
the sentiments of B ose's present day followers in West Bengal.
It is important to analyse why Indian communists are so prone to political
mistakes. Only the other day, Mr Basu described his party's decision not
to join the United Front government - the decision meant that Mr Basu
could n ot be the prime minister of India - as a "historic blunder". The
history o f Indian communism is replete with instances of such blunders.
One reason has already been indicated: the communist party's lack of
autonomy from Mos cow. Another reason is that the very ideology of
communism20 ndows to its adherents what is best described as "tunnel
vision". They are thus blind to the reality around them and obsessed with
one particular ide a. In the cause celebre regarding the offer of the
prime ministership to B asu, the CPI(M) remained obsessed with its
anti-Congressism and thus refuse d to be part of a government which would
receive the support of the Congres s. It thus isolated itself from what
was clearly a consensus within the Uni ted Front and the Congress. It
failed to act responsibly tow rds the nation. The communists had recorded
a similar failure during World War ][I when it had supported the British
war effort in India. Then and now the behaviour of communists has shown
their irrelevance to the needs of In dian politics. In this context,
admissions of mistakes are not only of very little consequence but also a
touch naive. Only the communists believe in the sincerity of their
confessions. Unsuccessful political groups can only feast on their
failures.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 16:39:31 -0800
From: Gaurang Desai <grd@corp.cirrus.com>
Subject: The Indian voter will choose Ram Rajya over Rome Rajya
Title : The Indian voter will choose Ram Rajya over Rome Rajya
Author : Kanchan Gupta
Publication : Rediff On The Net
Date : November 26, 1997
The Indian voter will choose Ram Rajya over Rome Rajya
When the Congress decided to go on the offensive over the Jain Commission
report, it did not realise that it would soon find itself trapped in a
no-win situation. Politicians have a short memory of events and issues.
Congress politicians forgot that there already exist two other reports
related to the Nehru-Gandhi family assassinations. The first is the
Thakkar Commission?s report and the second is the Verma Commission?s
report.
The Thakkar Commission?s report accused R K Dhawan of being involved in
the conspiracy behind Indira Gandhi?s assassination, saying the needle of
suspicion pointed towards the man who is today one of the cheerleaders
demanding action against the DMK for being indicted by the Jain
Commission. The Verma Commission listed nine reasons why the Congress
itself is to blame for the death of its leader Rajiv Gandhi. According to
this report penned by the man who is today the Chief Justice of India,
?Congress partymen did not exhibit the kind of discipline and behaviour
which it was reasonable to expect from them in the interest of the
security of their party president when the high threat to him was known
generally to everyone. This was a lapse of the Congress party?'
When it demanded a discussion on the Jain Commission report, the Congress
had obviously not bargained for the fact that the other two reports would
also come up for mention. After all, the Narasimha Rao government, which
was very much a Congress government, had categorically asserted, which
commenting on the Verma Commission report, that the security cover for
Rajiv Gandhi was adequate. When they realised their folly, Congress
leaders changed tacks and demanded that there should be no discussion but
the DMK ministers must be dropped from the United Front government if it
wanted the Congress to continue with its support.
The Front has been quick to latch on to the Congress weakness, that it
wants to avoid a discussion at any cost. Hence, despite the best attempts
of Mulayam Singh Yadav and his Marxist mentor Harkishan Singh Surjeet to
squeeze the DMK out of the Front, the DMK continues to dig in, daring the
Congress to push for a no-confidence vote or withdraw support. Either way,
the Congress is bound to turn up the loser.
For, if the Congress withdraws support, then the Gujral government can
force a confidence vote. During the debate, all that the Congress wants to
suppress will come out into the open. On the other hand, if the Congress
moves a no-confidence motion, then, too, a full debate will take place
during which the Thakkar and Verma reports will be quoted along with
uncomfortable facts like the Bofors inquiry and the Ranganath Misra
Commission report on the 1984 riots. Either move may lead to the UF
government?s fall and a mid-term poll, but at the end of the day the
Congress will enter the electoral race with a severe handicap.
Already, the Congress finds itself accused of forcing a north-south divide
and inflaming anti-Tamil passions. The more the crisis lingers, the more
this charge will stick.
The question that arises is: Why did the Congress get into such a
situation? The answer lies in Sitaram Kesri?s weak leadership and the
overvaulting ambition of petty men like Arjun Singh. Kesri may be the
Congress president, but he has more foes than friends in the party. Having
manoeuvered himself into office, he has failed to establish authority over
his partymen and there are few in the Congress, including those who were
once considered to be close to him, who are willing to listen to their
leader. Congressmen know that by hitching their fortunes to Kesri?s
leadership, they will only lose the next round of elections.
At the same time, there is no other Congress leader who can carry the
entire party with him. Yes, there are pretenders like Arjun Singh, but
they do not command the support of more than a few MPs. Vijaya Bhaskara
Reddy may command the support of Congress MPs from Andhra Pradesh, but it
is doubtful whether he can lead a successful campaign in the Hindi
heartland. Sharad Pawar has lost whatever little support that he enjoyed
in Maharashtra; even on his own home turf in Baramati he could not get the
party to win the local elections. Jitendra Prasada, yet another pretender,
could not keep the party together in Uttar Pradesh. Rajesh Pilot never
mattered in Congress politics and is of little relevance today.
In this scenario, the Jain Commission?s report was seen as god?s gift to
the Congress, at least by those who believe they can reoccupy the treasury
benches by getting Sonia Gandhi to take over the party. All sorts of
stories have been doing the rounds this past fortnight. Somebody floated
the rumour that Sonia Gandhi was preparing to not only campaign for the
party but also to contest the next general election from Amethi.
Congressmen from the southern states, who have been in the forefront of
the campaign to dislodge the UF government because they are the best
placed among all the state Congress units, were quick to counter this
claim by spreading the story that Sonia Gandhi would contest from
Chikmagalur in Karnataka.
Meanwhile, a leading Delhi-based hotelier and businessmen, known for his
proximity to the Gandhi household, is believed to have already made a bid
for Sultanpur, hoping to ride to victory if Sonia Gandhi contests from
Amethi.
Sonia Gandhi, of course, has maintained her enigmatic silence. But there
are occasions when silence is more eloquent than spoken words. This is one
such occasion. She could have issued a statement, putting an end to all
speculation, She could have distanced herself from Congress shenanigans
that have brought governance to a standstill and paralysed the entire
official machinery. She could have rebuked the Congress for making a
mockery of parliamentary traditions. Instead, she has allowed her name to
become the focal point of a campaign that threatens to destablise the
Indian polity as never before.
It is not Sonia loyalists like Arjun Singh (who is not even an MP, having
lost from his pocket borough in the last election) who are to blame for
the fact that Parliament has not been allowed to function for a single day
since it met for the winter session, because of which crucial decisions
and legislative work has been put on hold. It is Sonia Gandhi herself who
is to blame for this because she is very much a part of the present game
of destabilisation. From behind the walls of 10 Janpath, where she lives
at the Indian taxpayer?s expense, the Italian widow of Rajiv Gandhi is
trying to manipulate Indian politics to her favour.
This is the plain and simple truth. Sitaram Kesri knows it. But he also
knows that he is all alone today. Therefore, he declares that only Sonia
Gandhi can save the Congress and thus save the country! Well, the Congress
is no longer India because India?s interests are no longer the Congress's
interests. By taking over the Congress, directly or indirectly, Sonia
Gandhi may ?save? the party, but in such an eventuality, India needs to
save itself from the Congress.
If the Congress forces a mid-term election on the issue of the Jain
Commission?s report (which reads like a Congress party document and not an
impartial judicial review) then Indian voters will have to make a simple
choice: They can either have Ram Rajya or Rome Rajya.
Anybody who has been following the course of Indian electoral trends since
1989, will predict that the voter will unhesitatingly chose Ram Rajya over
Rome Rajya.
As I said in the beginning, the Congress is caught in a no-win situation.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 16:55:44 -0800
From: Gaurang Desai <grd@corp.cirrus.com>
Subject: SP men suspects in UP bomb attack
Title : SP men suspects in UP bomb attack
Author : Amit Sharma
Publication : Indian Express
Date : Nov. 26, 1997
LUCKNOW, Nov 26: The police suspect involvement of a Samajwadi Party (SP)
MP and an MLA in Monday evening's bomb attack on a police van carrying
undertrials in Gorakhpur. The attack, which left 20 people -- including
undertrials and policemen -- seriously injured, has added another gory
chapter to the history of political violence in eastern Uttar Pradesh.
A blood-stained vehicle believed to have been used by the assailants has
been recovered from the residence of the suspect Gorakhpur MP, Shubhawati
Devi, and her brother-in-law Chandresh Paswan, who is a legislator of the
same party from Bansgaon.
The police have rounded up nearly 20 people, including Paswan's father.
One of the arrested, Shakeel, has reportedly confessed that he was among
the attackers.
The police believe the attack was aimed at two undertrials Rakesh Yadav
and Brahma Yadav, accused in the killing of Shubhawati's husband Om
Prakash Paswan, who himself was an SP legislator and a historysheeter.
Both of them, however, were not in the van which was attacked.
According to a senior police official, "The attackers believed that both
the accused were in the police van, but they had already reached the jail
by that time."
IGP, Gorakhpur zone, U K Bansal informed that the assailants had fled on
"a red Tata Mobile, which was recovered from the residence of Shubhawati
Devi in Raji Samera village". The officer said the accused were in the
process of removing blood stains from the vehicle at the time, and "one of
them was hurt in the cross-firing between the police and them".
The police believe Chandresh plotted the attack on the van for killing the
Yadav duo, but the plan backfired as the two were not in the vehicle.
Om Prakash was killed in March last year when a bomb was thrown at a
public meeting he was addressing in a village near Bansgaon, in Gorakhpur
district. He had several cases registered against him at the time.
Brahma Yadav and Rakesh Yadav were arrested from Patna for the attack, and
confessed to the crime. Rakesh, incidentally, also has political
connections, having contested as an Independent during last October's
Assembly polls against Chandresh, and lost.
The police believe Om Prakash's murder had been a fallout of caste
violence in eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar areas.
------------------------------
End of bjp-l-digest V1 #423
***************************