The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) spectacular triumph in Karnataka in last month’s Lok Sabha elections has triggered a political turmoil in the state.&nbsp;

With the state Assembly in session, the JD(S)-Congress government in Karnataka is facing its biggest challenge ever. Both have come to realise the futility of trying to keep its folks under check. The faction-ridden Congress and the Janata Dal (S) have become sitting ducks for an aggressive BJP planning to expand its turf all over South India.

In Karnataka and Telangana, the BJP is on the ascendant. The Karnataka victory has exceeded the BJP’s own expectations. Improvement upon its 2014 tally of 17 by winning 26 out of a total of 28 Lok Sabha seats, has galvanised the party.

In 2018, Karnataka was the first state to be projected as a laboratory of the Stop Modi campaign. As part of that strategy, although the BJP had emerged as the largest single party with 105 seats, the Congress and JD (S) joined hands, with the chief ministership going to the decidedly junior JD (S) with 42 seats. HD Kumar Swamy was made chief minister with great fanfare with all top anti-BJP opposition leaders in attendance at the swearing-in ceremony, in Bangalore.&nbsp;

Naturally, the BJP is now looking at Karnataka as the springboard of its southward march. It would be interesting to examine how the Karnataka poll outcome is changing the face of politics in South India.

While in most states, the BJP and the NDA have maintained its tally of 2014, the one state – other than West Bengal – which has proven political pundits wrong is Karnataka, where the party has effectively won all but two Lok Sabha seats. &nbsp;Of these two, one is a BJP-backed independent. &nbsp;&nbsp;

BJP has witnessed a whirlwind journey in the Kannada-speaking state in the last two decades. From winning four seats in 1989, the party started growing in Karnataka in the early 1090s. In 2008, the BJP formed a government on its own, but lost power in 2013. In the May 2018 state Assembly elections, the party missed the half-way mark by a few seats, but it was enough for two arch rivals, Congress and JD(S), to join hands showing scant respect for the people’s mandate.&nbsp;

The fight for Karnataka in 2019 was unique. The party organisation, which saw a low in the 2013 state Assembly elections, was energised in the last four years. By 2018, it was ready for battle. &nbsp;

The BJP, which had witnessed splits when senior leaders like BS Yeddyurappa and B Sreeramulu had left in 2011-2012, succeeded in reviving a strong organisation.&nbsp;

The return of leaders like Yeddyurappa and Sreeramulu to the party and integration with the team was a huge challenge. However, the task was undertaken efficiently right up to the grassroot level, without compromising on the core integrity of the organisation. The credit for this goes to the party’s national president Amit Shah and Karnataka general secretary incharge P Muralidhar Rao.

The measures envisioned by Amit Shah were meticulously implemented. This included creating and strengthening booth committees, adding new members and their training, deploying vistaraks and reaching out to the beneficiaries of Modi government’s policies.

All organisation-strengthening programmes were undertaken sincerely by karyakartas from top to bottom. The BJP plans to replicate this experience in Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala as part of its southward march.&nbsp;

The party also benefitted from the entry of new leaders and people from different organisations outside its immediate fold like the JD(S), Congress and some social outfits.&nbsp;

This was part of the expansion plan of the party, which is still underway. These include the defeat of veteran Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge by Umesh Jadhav, who joined BJP from Congress just before the election. Former Congress MLA, Raja Amresh Nayak, was another leader, who joined BJP and won from Raichur. Principally, it was the spirit of converting challenges to opportunities that helped the party in all these instances.

The formation of Congress-JD(S) alliance was touted as an invincible combination expected to win a majority of seats in Karnataka. But, the BJP diligently identified the fault lines of that flawed partnership and managed to exploit the gaps therein effectively. This was the primary reason for BJP’s unprecedented victories in opposition strongholds like Tumkur and Chitradurga.

Reaching the message of how the Congress-JD (U) alliance is failing inch-by-inch to every nook and corner was initiated. News of the internal squabbles in the partnership and its failure in function as a coherent government was communicated precisely and effectively.

In democratic polity, it is continuous and uninterrupted communication between the political leadership and the people that prevents democracy from becoming sterile and stagnant. Realising this, BJP leadership ensured continuity in its public connect.

There was a huge Modi appeal, but to convert it into political victories, both in the Assembly and Lok Sabha elections was the result of a structured organisational work, decisive strategies and innovation.&nbsp;

The last five years of the BJP in Karnataka is the best example of how continuous innovation and pathbreaking approaches can raise the quality of political functioning, creating energy and synergy.&nbsp;

Amit Shah played the most crucial role in driving the party in this direction. His leadership boosted the morale of state leadership, which toiled day and night under party president and popular leader B S Yeddyurappa. State prabhari Muralidhar Rao worked more than a full-timer, building trust and comradeship among state leaders.&nbsp;

The Karnataka experience has given BJP the confidence to expand into new territories. It will be interesting to watch how the saffron saga unfolds in South India.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-bjp-s-southern-springboard-2761672">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) spectacular triumph in Karnataka in last month’s Lok Sabha elections has triggered a political turmoil in the state. With the state Assembly in session, the JD(S)-Congress government in Karnataka is facing its biggest challenge ever.

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) spectacular triumph in Karnataka in last month’s Lok Sabha elections has triggered a political turmoil in the state. With the state Assembly in session, the JD(S)-Congress government in Karnataka is facing its biggest challenge ever. Both have come to realise the futility of trying to keep its folks under check. The faction-ridden Congress and the Janata Dal (S) have become sitting ducks for an aggressive BJP planning to expand its turf all over South India. In Karnataka and Telangana, the BJP is on the ascendant. The Karnataka victory has exceeded the BJP’s own expectations. Improvement upon its 2014 tally of 17 by winning 26 out of a total of 28 Lok Sabha seats, has galvanised the party. In 2018, Karnataka was the first state to be projected as a laboratory of the Stop Modi campaign. As part of that strategy, although the BJP had emerged as the largest single party with 105 seats, the Congress and JD (S) joined hands, with the chief ministership going to the decidedly junior JD (S) with 42 seats. HD Kumar Swamy was made chief minister with great fanfare with all top anti-BJP opposition leaders in attendance at the swearing-in ceremony, in Bangalore. Naturally, the BJP is now looking at Karnataka as the springboard of its southward march. It would be interesting to examine how the Karnataka poll outcome is changing the face of politics in South India. While in most states, the BJP and the NDA have maintained its tally of 2014, the one state – other than West Bengal – which has proven political pundits wrong is Karnataka, where the party has effectively won all but two Lok Sabha seats. Of these two, one is a BJP-backed independent. BJP has witnessed a whirlwind journey in the Kannada-speaking state in the last two decades. From winning four seats in 1989, the party started growing in Karnataka in the early 1090s. In 2008, the BJP formed a government on its own, but lost power in 2013. In the May 2018 state Assembly elections, the party missed the half-way mark by a few seats, but it was enough for two arch rivals, Congress and JD(S), to join hands showing scant respect for the people’s mandate. The fight for Karnataka in 2019 was unique. The party organisation, which saw a low in the 2013 state Assembly elections, was energised in the last four years. By 2018, it was ready for battle. The BJP, which had witnessed splits when senior leaders like BS Yeddyurappa and B Sreeramulu had left in 2011-2012, succeeded in reviving a strong organisation. The return of leaders like Yeddyurappa and Sreeramulu to the party and integration with the team was a huge challenge. However, the task was undertaken efficiently right up to the grassroot level, without compromising on the core integrity of the organisation. The credit for this goes to the party’s national president Amit Shah and Karnataka general secretary incharge P Muralidhar Rao. The measures envisioned by Amit Shah were meticulously implemented. This included creating and strengthening booth committees, adding new members and their training, deploying vistaraks and reaching out to the beneficiaries of Modi government’s policies. All organisation-strengthening programmes were undertaken sincerely by karyakartas from top to bottom. The BJP plans to replicate this experience in Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala as part of its southward march. The party also benefitted from the entry of new leaders and people from different organisations outside its immediate fold like the JD(S), Congress and some social outfits. This was part of the expansion plan of the party, which is still underway. These include the defeat of veteran Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge by Umesh Jadhav, who joined BJP from Congress just before the election. Former Congress MLA, Raja Amresh Nayak, was another leader, who joined BJP and won from Raichur. Principally, it was the spirit of converting challenges to opportunities that helped the party in all these instances. The formation of Congress-JD(S) alliance was touted as an invincible combination expected to win a majority of seats in Karnataka. But, the BJP diligently identified the fault lines of that flawed partnership and managed to exploit the gaps therein effectively. This was the primary reason for BJP’s unprecedented victories in opposition strongholds like Tumkur and Chitradurga. Reaching the message of how the Congress-JD (U) alliance is failing inch-by-inch to every nook and corner was initiated. News of the internal squabbles in the partnership and its failure in function as a coherent government was communicated precisely and effectively. In democratic polity, it is continuous and uninterrupted communication between the political leadership and the people that prevents democracy from becoming sterile and stagnant. Realising this, BJP leadership ensured continuity in its public connect. There was a huge Modi appeal, but to convert it into political victories, both in the Assembly and Lok Sabha elections was the result of a structured organisational work, decisive strategies and innovation. The last five years of the BJP in Karnataka is the best example of how continuous innovation and pathbreaking approaches can raise the quality of political functioning, creating energy and synergy. Amit Shah played the most crucial role in driving the party in this direction. His leadership boosted the morale of state leadership, which toiled day and night under party president and popular leader B S Yeddyurappa. State prabhari Muralidhar Rao worked more than a full-timer, building trust and comradeship among state leaders. The Karnataka experience has given BJP the confidence to expand into new territories. It will be interesting to watch how the saffron saga unfolds in South India. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

How the Karnataka poll outcome is changing the face of politics in South India

One of the biggest surprises of the 2019 elections will be BJP’s expanding footprints in the country, in areas considered out of bounds for the party thus far.&nbsp;

In the last two terms as party chief, Amit Shah has worked assiduously on a strategy to take the BJP to every nook and corner of the country, expanding its electoral base. The 2019 elections are going to be a test of the success Amit Shah has achieved.&nbsp;

Reports from across the country clearly suggest that the BJP has succeeded in taking major strides in south and east India, areas so far known as a non-BJP territory.&nbsp;

It is the outcome of a series of strategic advances taken by the party president in the last five years that has transformed the BJP into a relevant fighting force in Odisha, West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Northeast states like Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal and Meghalaya.

The Northeast, including Assam, sends 25 MPs to the Lok Sabha and the BJP hopes to win up to 20 seats. In the 2014 Lok Sabha poll, a majority of the 14 Assam seats went to the BJP.&nbsp;

The party made a historic entry&nbsp;in Assam and Tripura by winning&nbsp;a two- thirds majority to form state&nbsp;governments.&nbsp;

In Arunachal Pradesh, the massive exodus from the Congress to the BJP, led to the formation of a BJP government in the state two years ago. Since then, the party has consolidated itself. As junior partner, BJP is part of the state governments in Manipur, Meghalaya and Nagaland.

The stunning victory of the party in Tripura in the 2017 assembly election, which ended three decades of CPM rule, created history, generating a groundswell of support for the BJP in the entire region.

Equally significant is the party’s gains in local bodies’ elections in West Bengal and Odisha in 2018 and 2017 respectively. The substantial gains have established it as the main challenger to Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress in Bengal and Naveen Patnaik’s Biju Janata Dal in Orissa.&nbsp;

The BJP has also gained by attracting top-ranking leaders like Mukul Roy in West Bengal from Trinamool and Jay Panda from BJD in Odisha. A large number of middle rung and local leaders of these parties have migrated into the BJP fold in these states.&nbsp;

Amit Shah’s three dream projects, Maha Sadasyada Abhiyan, Maha Sampark Abhiyan and Prashikshan Mahabhiyan – membership, contact, and training the cadre – has generated the desired atmospherics for BJP to expand.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The Trinamool Congress never expected organised opposition to its appeasement politics in Bengal. Mamata Banerjee built her political fortune by inducting erstwhile CPM goons, Bangladeshi infiltrators and the radicalised Madrasa gang.&nbsp;&nbsp;

The ‘Ma, Maati, Manush’ slogan in the initial stages of the Trinamool movement, generated great goodwill for the party in its bid to oust the three-decade-long Left Front misrule. Later, her politics slipped into the old CPM rut – money, muscle and Muslim clergy power.&nbsp;

By focussing on West Bengal for the last four years through meticulous planning, micro-management and strategy, the ground was being readied for the BJP’s emergence as a major contender. Amit Shah has made as many as two dozen trips to Bengal to organise and inspire the cadre in the last three years.

The BJP strategy in south India has varied from state to state. In Karnataka, the party always had a good base. It hopes to improve upon its tally of 18 in 2014. In Tamil Nadu, the BJP strategy was to cobble up a coalition of like-minded parties under the leadership of AIADMK. The coalition has worked well and is expected to put up a formidable challenge to the DMK front, winning half the seats in the state.&nbsp;

In Kerala, a combination of events has created favourable conditions for the BJP. The Sabarimala issue was mishandled by the Left Front government, proving a boon for the BJP. The party found its Ayodhya moment in the Sabarimala issue to penetrate the mass psyche.&nbsp;

It championed the believer’s cause effectively to transform itself into a party of the masses. The BJP president, by making a number of trips to Kerala and challenging Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's pro-atheist, anti-Hindu stand, has consolidated public sentiment in favour of the party.

The state BJP was clueless about its options till Amit Shah emerged on the scene, guiding the party to take an openly pro-devotee stand on the issue. His appeal electrified the cadre, making the BJP take to streets with a vengeance.&nbsp;

Over 50,000 cases were filed against BJP workers by the CPM government, but this has turned the tide against the CPM. It is this dip in the CPM support base that is likely to help BJP emerge as the new third force in Kerala.

Whether it makes electoral gains here or not, the party is a major political option for voters fed up with the alternative communal politics of the UDF and the LDF.

The BJP aims to gain as many as 80 seats in the new areas in 2019, so that any shortfall can be compensated. Thanks to Amit Shah’s vision, the BJP today is a pan-Indian force, not dependent only on the catchment areas to win seats.&nbsp;

These huge additions from the new areas, is bound to change politics for ever in India. Like the Congress of the 1960s, the BJP today is the party of power, in almost every state. And the credit for making it goes mainly to Amit Shah. Narendra Modi’s all India appeal and charisma has, of course, made the job easier.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-grand-amit-shah-outreach-2750515">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

One of the biggest surprises of the 2019 elections will be BJP’s expanding footprints in the country, in areas considered out of bounds for the party thus far. In the last two terms as party chief, Amit Shah has worked assiduously on a strategy to take the BJP to every nook and corner of the country, expanding its electoral base.

One of the biggest surprises of the 2019 elections will be BJP’s expanding footprints in the country, in areas considered out of bounds for the party thus far. In the last two terms as party chief, Amit Shah has worked assiduously on a strategy to take the BJP to every nook and corner of the country, expanding its electoral base. The 2019 elections are going to be a test of the success Amit Shah has achieved. Reports from across the country clearly suggest that the BJP has succeeded in taking major strides in south and east India, areas so far known as a non-BJP territory. It is the outcome of a series of strategic advances taken by the party president in the last five years that has transformed the BJP into a relevant fighting force in Odisha, West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Northeast states like Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal and Meghalaya. The Northeast, including Assam, sends 25 MPs to the Lok Sabha and the BJP hopes to win up to 20 seats. In the 2014 Lok Sabha poll, a majority of the 14 Assam seats went to the BJP. The party made a historic entry in Assam and Tripura by winning a two- thirds majority to form state governments. In Arunachal Pradesh, the massive exodus from the Congress to the BJP, led to the formation of a BJP government in the state two years ago. Since then, the party has consolidated itself. As junior partner, BJP is part of the state governments in Manipur, Meghalaya and Nagaland. The stunning victory of the party in Tripura in the 2017 assembly election, which ended three decades of CPM rule, created history, generating a groundswell of support for the BJP in the entire region. Equally significant is the party’s gains in local bodies’ elections in West Bengal and Odisha in 2018 and 2017 respectively. The substantial gains have established it as the main challenger to Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress in Bengal and Naveen Patnaik’s Biju Janata Dal in Orissa. The BJP has also gained by attracting top-ranking leaders like Mukul Roy in West Bengal from Trinamool and Jay Panda from BJD in Odisha. A large number of middle rung and local leaders of these parties have migrated into the BJP fold in these states. Amit Shah’s three dream projects, Maha Sadasyada Abhiyan, Maha Sampark Abhiyan and Prashikshan Mahabhiyan – membership, contact, and training the cadre – has generated the desired atmospherics for BJP to expand. The Trinamool Congress never expected organised opposition to its appeasement politics in Bengal. Mamata Banerjee built her political fortune by inducting erstwhile CPM goons, Bangladeshi infiltrators and the radicalised Madrasa gang. The ‘Ma, Maati, Manush’ slogan in the initial stages of the Trinamool movement, generated great goodwill for the party in its bid to oust the three-decade-long Left Front misrule. Later, her politics slipped into the old CPM rut – money, muscle and Muslim clergy power. By focussing on West Bengal for the last four years through meticulous planning, micro-management and strategy, the ground was being readied for the BJP’s emergence as a major contender. Amit Shah has made as many as two dozen trips to Bengal to organise and inspire the cadre in the last three years. The BJP strategy in south India has varied from state to state. In Karnataka, the party always had a good base. It hopes to improve upon its tally of 18 in 2014. In Tamil Nadu, the BJP strategy was to cobble up a coalition of like-minded parties under the leadership of AIADMK. The coalition has worked well and is expected to put up a formidable challenge to the DMK front, winning half the seats in the state. In Kerala, a combination of events has created favourable conditions for the BJP. The Sabarimala issue was mishandled by the Left Front government, proving a boon for the BJP. The party found its Ayodhya moment in the Sabarimala issue to penetrate the mass psyche. It championed the believer’s cause effectively to transform itself into a party of the masses. The BJP president, by making a number of trips to Kerala and challenging Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's pro-atheist, anti-Hindu stand, has consolidated public sentiment in favour of the party. The state BJP was clueless about its options till Amit Shah emerged on the scene, guiding the party to take an openly pro-devotee stand on the issue. His appeal electrified the cadre, making the BJP take to streets with a vengeance. Over 50,000 cases were filed against BJP workers by the CPM government, but this has turned the tide against the CPM. It is this dip in the CPM support base that is likely to help BJP emerge as the new third force in Kerala. Whether it makes electoral gains here or not, the party is a major political option for voters fed up with the alternative communal politics of the UDF and the LDF. The BJP aims to gain as many as 80 seats in the new areas in 2019, so that any shortfall can be compensated. Thanks to Amit Shah’s vision, the BJP today is a pan-Indian force, not dependent only on the catchment areas to win seats. These huge additions from the new areas, is bound to change politics for ever in India. Like the Congress of the 1960s, the BJP today is the party of power, in almost every state. And the credit for making it goes mainly to Amit Shah. Narendra Modi’s all India appeal and charisma has, of course, made the job easier. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Grand Amit Shah outreach

The Lok Sabha election of 2019 has become presidential. The campaign theme of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the opposition are both Modi-centric. &nbsp;

The BJP’s election slogan is “phir ek bar Modi sarkar (Modi once again) ”.The opposition has reinforced this thrust by launching a unifocal attack on the Prime Minister’s persona, and by trying to posit the Mahagathbandhan (grand alliance) as an anti-Modi front. The grand alliance has so far come a cropper, damaging the opposition plank and derailing its credibility.&nbsp;

The election has been turned into a referendum on Modi; The absence of any towering pan-Indian personality in the opposition ranks has added to the sheen and glamour of the Teflon Modi imagery.&nbsp;

The NDA has come up as a cohesive election machinery. The opposition, conversely, is at each other’s throat in most states. Their antipathy for Modi has not helped them sink their differences.&nbsp;

The much-touted idea of Mahagathbandhan has fallen flat and Prime Minister Narendra Modi appears invincible as the second phase of polling comes to an end.&nbsp;

Some disgruntled party leaders like Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, who have been strategising with the Congress chief Rahul Gandhi, wanted one joint opposition candidate against the NDA in all the 543 constituencies.

The so-called grand alliance is solely focused on stopping Modi at all costs. The template for this is nearly like the 1971 Grand Alliance pitched against Indira Gandhi. The then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s famous campaign lines were, “I want to remove poverty; they want to remove me”.

Little under five decades later, a similar situation has emerged in the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha election — the only difference being that the protagonist of the new grand alliance now is Indira Gandhi’s grandson.&nbsp;

But it has failed to take off mainly because of the decline of the Congress as a central force and the reluctance of other opposition parties to accept Rahul Gandhi as their leader.&nbsp;

In the past one year, Rahul had approached nearly all regional leaders mooting this idea. After the big show of opposition unity in Bengaluru in June 2018, the impression had gained ground that the Congress was stooping to conquer.&nbsp;

The euphoria, however, was shortlived. Ego clashes in the opposition ranks came to the surface in West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra and three Congress-ruled states in the north.&nbsp;

For the Mahagathbandhan, each state presented a conflicting picture, as each party wanted to maximise their gain and expand at the expense of the Congress.&nbsp;

Senior opposition leaders like N Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra, Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal, Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav in UP were unwilling to play second fiddle to the Congress president.&nbsp;

In Andhra, the attempt failed because of the humiliating defeat of the Congress-TDP alliance in Telangana in the December Assembly elections.

Leaders like Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao in Telangana, Naveen Patnaik in Orissa and Jagmohan Reddy of YSR Congress in Andhra, were keener on a federal front, which is yet to take shape.&nbsp;

In Uttar Pradesh, which sends the largest contingent of MPs to the Lok Sabha, Mayawati and Akhilesh formed a tie-up without so much as accommodating the Congress. &nbsp;

This irritated the Congress and the party decided to stage a counteroffensive by projecting Priyanka Vadra and launching a desperate campaign in at least two dozen constituencies, putting up formidable candidates.

The Congress was able to work out respectable partnerships only in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar.&nbsp;

In Tamil Nadu and Bihar, it is the junior partner while in Maharashtra, it is at the mercy of Sharad Pawar’s NCP, which has a history of hobnobbing with the BJP.&nbsp;

The Congress and the CPM attempted a tie-up in West Bengal but failed. The same seems to be the case in Haryana, Punjab and Delhi, where its talks with the AAP are still hazy.&nbsp;

Rahul Gandhi’s decision to also contest from Wayanad in Kerala, a minority- dominated, backward constituency in Kerala, has spoiled his chemistry with the Left. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has accused him of fighting the Left, “after trying to stop Modi all these years”.&nbsp;

BSP supremo Mayawati is piqued with Rahul Gandhi for failing to accommodate BSP in MP and Chhattisgarh in the December 2018 Assembly election. &nbsp;

The break down of negotiations with BSP on seat sharing in these states, sealed any chance of adjustment in UP in the Lok Sabha poll.&nbsp;

In the end, there are at least a dozen contestants against Narendra Modi’s candidates in almost all the 543 Lok Sabha constituencies. Talk about post-poll adjustments are unconvincing. Voters want to know the alternative to Modi.&nbsp;

The Congress strategy from the beginning was flawed. In their personal attacks, they only helped to project a larger than life image for the prime minister. Every time the opposition spoke of stopping Modi without offering a convincing governance agenda, it has looked power hungry. &nbsp;

This has helped invest Modi with the “underdog image”, gaining voters’ sympathy. &nbsp;

National security and the Balakot air strikes proved the defining moments. Modi stood for taking India forward, protecting it from Pak-sponsored terror and forces hostile to India. &nbsp;

As against this, the Congress manifesto, which offered repeal of AFSPA, the sedition law and expressed a pro-separatist stand on Jammu and Kashmir, has convinced the voter that Modi stood for a strong and united India.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-there-is-no-alternative-to-narendra-modi-2741055">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

The Lok Sabha election of 2019 has become presidential. The campaign theme of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the opposition are both Modi-centric. The BJP’s election slogan is “phir ek bar Modi sarkar (Modi once again) ”.

The Lok Sabha election of 2019 has become presidential. The campaign theme of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the opposition are both Modi-centric. The BJP’s election slogan is “phir ek bar Modi sarkar (Modi once again) ”.The opposition has reinforced this thrust by launching a unifocal attack on the Prime Minister’s persona, and by trying to posit the Mahagathbandhan (grand alliance) as an anti-Modi front. The grand alliance has so far come a cropper, damaging the opposition plank and derailing its credibility. The election has been turned into a referendum on Modi; The absence of any towering pan-Indian personality in the opposition ranks has added to the sheen and glamour of the Teflon Modi imagery. The NDA has come up as a cohesive election machinery. The opposition, conversely, is at each other’s throat in most states. Their antipathy for Modi has not helped them sink their differences. The much-touted idea of Mahagathbandhan has fallen flat and Prime Minister Narendra Modi appears invincible as the second phase of polling comes to an end. Some disgruntled party leaders like Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, who have been strategising with the Congress chief Rahul Gandhi, wanted one joint opposition candidate against the NDA in all the 543 constituencies. The so-called grand alliance is solely focused on stopping Modi at all costs. The template for this is nearly like the 1971 Grand Alliance pitched against Indira Gandhi. The then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s famous campaign lines were, “I want to remove poverty; they want to remove me”. Little under five decades later, a similar situation has emerged in the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha election — the only difference being that the protagonist of the new grand alliance now is Indira Gandhi’s grandson. But it has failed to take off mainly because of the decline of the Congress as a central force and the reluctance of other opposition parties to accept Rahul Gandhi as their leader. In the past one year, Rahul had approached nearly all regional leaders mooting this idea. After the big show of opposition unity in Bengaluru in June 2018, the impression had gained ground that the Congress was stooping to conquer. The euphoria, however, was shortlived. Ego clashes in the opposition ranks came to the surface in West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra and three Congress-ruled states in the north. For the Mahagathbandhan, each state presented a conflicting picture, as each party wanted to maximise their gain and expand at the expense of the Congress. Senior opposition leaders like N Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra, Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal, Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav in UP were unwilling to play second fiddle to the Congress president. In Andhra, the attempt failed because of the humiliating defeat of the Congress-TDP alliance in Telangana in the December Assembly elections. Leaders like Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao in Telangana, Naveen Patnaik in Orissa and Jagmohan Reddy of YSR Congress in Andhra, were keener on a federal front, which is yet to take shape. In Uttar Pradesh, which sends the largest contingent of MPs to the Lok Sabha, Mayawati and Akhilesh formed a tie-up without so much as accommodating the Congress. This irritated the Congress and the party decided to stage a counteroffensive by projecting Priyanka Vadra and launching a desperate campaign in at least two dozen constituencies, putting up formidable candidates. The Congress was able to work out respectable partnerships only in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar. In Tamil Nadu and Bihar, it is the junior partner while in Maharashtra, it is at the mercy of Sharad Pawar’s NCP, which has a history of hobnobbing with the BJP. The Congress and the CPM attempted a tie-up in West Bengal but failed. The same seems to be the case in Haryana, Punjab and Delhi, where its talks with the AAP are still hazy. Rahul Gandhi’s decision to also contest from Wayanad in Kerala, a minority- dominated, backward constituency in Kerala, has spoiled his chemistry with the Left. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan has accused him of fighting the Left, “after trying to stop Modi all these years”. BSP supremo Mayawati is piqued with Rahul Gandhi for failing to accommodate BSP in MP and Chhattisgarh in the December 2018 Assembly election. The break down of negotiations with BSP on seat sharing in these states, sealed any chance of adjustment in UP in the Lok Sabha poll. In the end, there are at least a dozen contestants against Narendra Modi’s candidates in almost all the 543 Lok Sabha constituencies. Talk about post-poll adjustments are unconvincing. Voters want to know the alternative to Modi. The Congress strategy from the beginning was flawed. In their personal attacks, they only helped to project a larger than life image for the prime minister. Every time the opposition spoke of stopping Modi without offering a convincing governance agenda, it has looked power hungry. This has helped invest Modi with the “underdog image”, gaining voters’ sympathy. National security and the Balakot air strikes proved the defining moments. Modi stood for taking India forward, protecting it from Pak-sponsored terror and forces hostile to India. As against this, the Congress manifesto, which offered repeal of AFSPA, the sedition law and expressed a pro-separatist stand on Jammu and Kashmir, has convinced the voter that Modi stood for a strong and united India. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: Narendra Modi stands tall and imposing during polls

The Balakot air attack on February 26 by the Indian Air Force on Pakistan-based terror camps, which killed terrorists and destroyed their training facilities, has now become a watershed in the fight against terror. It required political leadership, military preparedness, combative skill and planning along with superior air strike capability. &nbsp;These aspects will be analysed for long. As it took place on the crucial 2019 election eve, its political impact is of more immediate significance.&nbsp;

There are clear indications that the air strike has ignited the spirit of nationalism throughout the country. The image of Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the national icon has been reinforced. That the world has rallied around India and Pakistan was demonstrably isolated has proved the big diplomatic strides India has taken with Modi-Sushma Swaraj in the last five years.&nbsp;

What are the big takeaways of the strike in the political, diplomatic and defence front? It has fired up the national psyche and thus changed the political narrative. &nbsp;For four decades India was seen as a helpless victim of Islamic terror, sponsored, promoted, guided and defended by Pakistan. No other country in the world has suffered for so long and so heavy as India. Indian response till Narendra Modi took office was one of pleading to the world for sympathies and cajoling Pakistan, if not propitiating it with endless comprehensive peace talks and track two diplomacy. Former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh described Pakistan as a victim of terror. After 26/11 terror attack on Mumbai, the Indian security establishment had suggested an appropriate retaliatory response against Pakistan. But the UPA leadership had taken a pusillanimous approach. They characterised it as an attempt to derail the peace process. Every terror attack on India was described as such. Modi changed it all. He knew that Pakistan was waging a proxy war on India and using terror outfits as strategic assets. Now Modi is determined to end terror attacks on India permanently.&nbsp;

Modi was not looking for easy options. He has evolved a new security doctrine. This is going to be the most decisive aspect of the 2019 election. Let’s see how Modi has scripted the new narrative. First through his persistent initiatives convinced the world community that terrorism in any form, anywhere, against any country by any outfit is a threat to humanity. The world recognised that Pakistan was the main source of terror export and that it was on an asymmetric war with India.

After the Pulwama terror attack on February 14 in which 41 CRPF soldiers were killed, the whole world in one voice condemned it and stood with India in its right to retaliate. For the first time, the US publicly acknowledged India’s right to revenge. So far Pakistan used to blackmail India with its nuclear arsenal which it threatened to use against India if it reacted. With the Air Force strike, Modi called the neighbour’s nuclear bluff.&nbsp;

All this was hailed and supported by the world leaders. Even China had to tone down its support to Pakistan and cautioned it against escalation. The UN Security Council members except China on their own moved to act against Pakistan harbouring terror outfits and wanted to declare Masood Azhar a wanted terrorist. Internally India acted withdrawing MFN status to Pakistan, imposing high duty on imports from there and banning Jamaat-e-Islami and removing security cover to separatist leaders.&nbsp;

The nation cheered all this. India’s unprecedented diplomatic outreach paid off. The External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj was honoured at OIC, much to Pakistan’s dismay, wherein a sterling performance she swayed the hosts presenting Indian position. She could persuade China to take a neutral stand and be counted on fight against terror. On the election eve, by speaking the language that found echoed in Pakistan the anti-Modi Opposition lost the plot. As Modi is being hailed as the best guarantee for preserving national unity and integrity the Opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi are talking as if they have no stake in national security. After initially supporting the Air Force strike, within hours they started questioning the veracity and proof. After denying bullet-proof jackets to Indian Army and advanced combat aircraft to Air Force for ten years, the UPA’s attack on Rafale sounded ill-timed and motivated. The fact Opposition criticism of Modi is being cited by Pakistan leaders to defend themselves have spoiled their case in India.&nbsp;

Modi has an enviable record of achievements in the last five years. His welfare schemes have brought an entirely new constituency of vote base for BJP. Only on development plank, he can vow the voters. But this round after the air strike the electoral narrative has entirely changed. In whose hands India is safe? Whom Pakistan and terrorists fear the most? Whom Pakistan and Imran Khan would like to see defeated in Indian polls? Who can take India forward and rally the world behind? These are the questions being debated after Balakot.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-heart-of-darkness-pierced-2731781">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

&nbsp;

The Balakot air attack on February 26 by the Indian Air Force on Pakistan-based terror camps, which killed terrorists and destroyed their training facilities, has now become a watershed in the fight against terror.

The Balakot air attack on February 26 by the Indian Air Force on Pakistan-based terror camps, which killed terrorists and destroyed their training facilities, has now become a watershed in the fight against terror. It required political leadership, military preparedness, combative skill and planning along with superior air strike capability. These aspects will be analysed for long. As it took place on the crucial 2019 election eve, its political impact is of more immediate significance. There are clear indications that the air strike has ignited the spirit of nationalism throughout the country. The image of Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the national icon has been reinforced. That the world has rallied around India and Pakistan was demonstrably isolated has proved the big diplomatic strides India has taken with Modi-Sushma Swaraj in the last five years. What are the big takeaways of the strike in the political, diplomatic and defence front? It has fired up the national psyche and thus changed the political narrative. For four decades India was seen as a helpless victim of Islamic terror, sponsored, promoted, guided and defended by Pakistan. No other country in the world has suffered for so long and so heavy as India. Indian response till Narendra Modi took office was one of pleading to the world for sympathies and cajoling Pakistan, if not propitiating it with endless comprehensive peace talks and track two diplomacy. Former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh described Pakistan as a victim of terror. After 26/11 terror attack on Mumbai, the Indian security establishment had suggested an appropriate retaliatory response against Pakistan. But the UPA leadership had taken a pusillanimous approach. They characterised it as an attempt to derail the peace process. Every terror attack on India was described as such. Modi changed it all. He knew that Pakistan was waging a proxy war on India and using terror outfits as strategic assets. Now Modi is determined to end terror attacks on India permanently. Modi was not looking for easy options. He has evolved a new security doctrine. This is going to be the most decisive aspect of the 2019 election. Let’s see how Modi has scripted the new narrative. First through his persistent initiatives convinced the world community that terrorism in any form, anywhere, against any country by any outfit is a threat to humanity. The world recognised that Pakistan was the main source of terror export and that it was on an asymmetric war with India. After the Pulwama terror attack on February 14 in which 41 CRPF soldiers were killed, the whole world in one voice condemned it and stood with India in its right to retaliate. For the first time, the US publicly acknowledged India’s right to revenge. So far Pakistan used to blackmail India with its nuclear arsenal which it threatened to use against India if it reacted. With the Air Force strike, Modi called the neighbour’s nuclear bluff. All this was hailed and supported by the world leaders. Even China had to tone down its support to Pakistan and cautioned it against escalation. The UN Security Council members except China on their own moved to act against Pakistan harbouring terror outfits and wanted to declare Masood Azhar a wanted terrorist. Internally India acted withdrawing MFN status to Pakistan, imposing high duty on imports from there and banning Jamaat-e-Islami and removing security cover to separatist leaders. The nation cheered all this. India’s unprecedented diplomatic outreach paid off. The External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj was honoured at OIC, much to Pakistan’s dismay, wherein a sterling performance she swayed the hosts presenting Indian position. She could persuade China to take a neutral stand and be counted on fight against terror. On the election eve, by speaking the language that found echoed in Pakistan the anti-Modi Opposition lost the plot. As Modi is being hailed as the best guarantee for preserving national unity and integrity the Opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi are talking as if they have no stake in national security. After initially supporting the Air Force strike, within hours they started questioning the veracity and proof. After denying bullet-proof jackets to Indian Army and advanced combat aircraft to Air Force for ten years, the UPA’s attack on Rafale sounded ill-timed and motivated. The fact Opposition criticism of Modi is being cited by Pakistan leaders to defend themselves have spoiled their case in India. Modi has an enviable record of achievements in the last five years. His welfare schemes have brought an entirely new constituency of vote base for BJP. Only on development plank, he can vow the voters. But this round after the air strike the electoral narrative has entirely changed. In whose hands India is safe? Whom Pakistan and terrorists fear the most? Whom Pakistan and Imran Khan would like to see defeated in Indian polls? Who can take India forward and rally the world behind? These are the questions being debated after Balakot. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

With Balakot air strike, Narendra Modi government has evolved new security doctrine

The Congress in general — and Rahul Gandhi in particular — is trying to keep the Rafale deal as a major poll plank in the absence of a topic that can create a narrative against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The Congress has not been able to dig up any scam. No evidence of any kickbacks has been brought in the public domain by the Congress chief, though he persistently and quite unabashedly keeps abusing the PM. The CAG, the Supreme Court, and the French government have pronounced that there was no wrongdoing and that the deal is in India’s benefit.

The deal is worth only Rs 58,000 crore. But, Rahul keeps saying that due to the PM, Anil Ambani benefitted to the tune of Rs 30,000 crore, which is absurd on the face of it. The Congress has to answer why it delayed the deal for 10 years when the Air Force was in dire need of medium combat aircraft since 2004. Modi did a great service to the nation by reducing the number of aircraft from 126 to 36 as it would have become obsolete by the time the entire 126 would be delivered. By reducing the number to just two squadrons Modi saved a large amount of foreign exchange. If the idea was to make shady deals as Rahul Gandhi had alleged, then, the government would have gone ahead with a larger order package.

For about a year, Rahul was making unsubstantiated allegations. The Rafale deal is a project of the UPA. Between 2012 and 2014, there was a 100 per cent escalation in its price. Then, in the new deal, the government has asked for technology upgradation, additional features and transfer of technology. If the Modi government wanted, it could have scrapped the deal and gone for a new global tender. Rafale was selected in January 2012 when Dr Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister. Reliance came into the picture the same year, under UPA. In February 2012, Reliance Industries and France’s Dassault Aviation signed a pact for partnering in the defence and homeland security sector in India. The accord came less than two weeks after Dassault’s Rafale warplanes emerged as the preferred bidder in a $15 billion-contest to supply India with 126 fighter jets.

The partnership provided Dassault with a substantial opportunity to fulfil its offset obligations under the contract. Dassault wanted RIL to be the main partner. Under the offset clause, a foreign supplier must award contracts worth a chunk of the deal value to Indian companies in return.

The opposition’s furore over Rafale seems to be an attempt to starve the Indian Air Force of combat aircrafts of international standards. A demand for a Joint Parliamentary Committee will put the entire procurement and ‘Make in India’ programme in cold storage for years. As for Reliance not having past experience, it was again the French company which found it useful.

If having Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries on board was okay in February 2012, then how does getting Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence in the deal become cronyism and scam in 2016? Is it only because it happened under Modi? About the price, Rahul Gandhi is quoting the price of 2008 in 2018. Can he get even a razor for the same price today as it was in 2008? In a joint venture, the partner has to invest money and Rafale will only be transferring technology. How can Reliance make money here? Rather, they have to put in money. The French government has said that choosing the Indian partner was the job of Dassault Aviation. The French company has said they chose the Indian partner. How can Rahul blame Modi for this? He is either being vicious or ill-informed or has, as usual, got only half-baked information.

Each time Rahul was providing different figures as the Reliance’s gain and the prices at which the deal was signed by the UPA and the NDA. In the first place, the UPA never signed any deal with Dassault (Aviation). It was only negotiating, and different prices were quoted. The price finally agreed by the UPA was Rs 737 crore per aircraft, and with additional fittings and capabilities the price agreed was Rs 2,000 crore per piece. The deal was, however, never signed. The deal signed by the NDA is for Rs 670 crore per aircraft, and with additional capacity it comes to Rs 1,600 crore per aircraft. The NDA has ordered for 36 aircraft whereas UPA was planning to buy 126.

The Indian Air Force in 2001 projected a desperate need for 126 Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) and the process of selecting the same concluded in 2007 under the UPA. The two aircraft shortlisted were Rafale and Eurofighter, which was number two. When the Modi government came to power, Eurofighter was hopeful of getting the deal as it felt the one selected by the UPA could be replaced. They lobbied hard with support from the British government.

The UPA had selected a middleman, who was to get a 10 per cent cut. The deal finally was not signed also perhaps because of this. Although the IAF was desperate, then Defence Minister AK Antony refused to sign any paper. Then, it was said that the UPA had no money; it was decided to postpone the purchase until the next government assumed power. The NDA has entered into a government-to-government deal, so there is neither any middleman nor commission agent.

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-rafale-and-rahul-s-fiction-2722971">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

The Congress in general — and Rahul Gandhi in particular — is trying to keep the Rafale deal as a major poll plank in the absence of a topic that can create a narrative against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The Congress in general — and Rahul Gandhi in particular — is trying to keep the Rafale deal as a major poll plank in the absence of a topic that can create a narrative against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The Congress has not been able to dig up any scam. No evidence of any kickbacks has been brought in the public domain by the Congress chief, though he persistently and quite unabashedly keeps abusing the PM. The CAG, the Supreme Court, and the French government have pronounced that there was no wrongdoing and that the deal is in India’s benefit. The deal is worth only Rs 58,000 crore. But, Rahul keeps saying that due to the PM, Anil Ambani benefitted to the tune of Rs 30,000 crore, which is absurd on the face of it. The Congress has to answer why it delayed the deal for 10 years when the Air Force was in dire need of medium combat aircraft since 2004. Modi did a great service to the nation by reducing the number of aircraft from 126 to 36 as it would have become obsolete by the time the entire 126 would be delivered. By reducing the number to just two squadrons Modi saved a large amount of foreign exchange. If the idea was to make shady deals as Rahul Gandhi had alleged, then, the government would have gone ahead with a larger order package. For about a year, Rahul was making unsubstantiated allegations. The Rafale deal is a project of the UPA. Between 2012 and 2014, there was a 100 per cent escalation in its price. Then, in the new deal, the government has asked for technology upgradation, additional features and transfer of technology. If the Modi government wanted, it could have scrapped the deal and gone for a new global tender. Rafale was selected in January 2012 when Dr Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister. Reliance came into the picture the same year, under UPA. In February 2012, Reliance Industries and France’s Dassault Aviation signed a pact for partnering in the defence and homeland security sector in India. The accord came less than two weeks after Dassault’s Rafale warplanes emerged as the preferred bidder in a $15 billion-contest to supply India with 126 fighter jets. The partnership provided Dassault with a substantial opportunity to fulfil its offset obligations under the contract. Dassault wanted RIL to be the main partner. Under the offset clause, a foreign supplier must award contracts worth a chunk of the deal value to Indian companies in return. The opposition’s furore over Rafale seems to be an attempt to starve the Indian Air Force of combat aircrafts of international standards. A demand for a Joint Parliamentary Committee will put the entire procurement and ‘Make in India’ programme in cold storage for years. As for Reliance not having past experience, it was again the French company which found it useful. If having Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries on board was okay in February 2012, then how does getting Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence in the deal become cronyism and scam in 2016? Is it only because it happened under Modi? About the price, Rahul Gandhi is quoting the price of 2008 in 2018. Can he get even a razor for the same price today as it was in 2008? In a joint venture, the partner has to invest money and Rafale will only be transferring technology. How can Reliance make money here? Rather, they have to put in money. The French government has said that choosing the Indian partner was the job of Dassault Aviation. The French company has said they chose the Indian partner. How can Rahul blame Modi for this? He is either being vicious or ill-informed or has, as usual, got only half-baked information. Each time Rahul was providing different figures as the Reliance’s gain and the prices at which the deal was signed by the UPA and the NDA. In the first place, the UPA never signed any deal with Dassault (Aviation). It was only negotiating, and different prices were quoted. The price finally agreed by the UPA was Rs 737 crore per aircraft, and with additional fittings and capabilities the price agreed was Rs 2,000 crore per piece. The deal was, however, never signed. The deal signed by the NDA is for Rs 670 crore per aircraft, and with additional capacity it comes to Rs 1,600 crore per aircraft. The NDA has ordered for 36 aircraft whereas UPA was planning to buy 126. The Indian Air Force in 2001 projected a desperate need for 126 Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) and the process of selecting the same concluded in 2007 under the UPA. The two aircraft shortlisted were Rafale and Eurofighter, which was number two. When the Modi government came to power, Eurofighter was hopeful of getting the deal as it felt the one selected by the UPA could be replaced. They lobbied hard with support from the British government. The UPA had selected a middleman, who was to get a 10 per cent cut. The deal finally was not signed also perhaps because of this. Although the IAF was desperate, then Defence Minister AK Antony refused to sign any paper. Then, it was said that the UPA had no money; it was decided to postpone the purchase until the next government assumed power. The NDA has entered into a government-to-government deal, so there is neither any middleman nor commission agent. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Rahul Gandhi’s fiction: Congress trying to keep Rafael a major poll plank

Reservation has always been a game changer in Indian politics. The BJP was the only political party, which never tried to play it to its advantage. Thus far.&nbsp;

Prime Minister Narendra Modi by amending the Constitution to reserve ten per cent in education and jobs for the economically weaker sections has redefined reservation politics and introduced new poll chemistry that will influence the election outcome in 2019 in a big way. &nbsp;

For the first time, the party has a consolidated and committed vote bank. This segment, though largely inclined towards the BJP, has often been successfully weaned away by the Congress and regional outfits like the BSP, AIADMK, TRS, CPM, Trinamul, BJD and TDP.&nbsp;

The new Modi initiative has made it impossible for non-BJP parties to poach on this segment. Like demonetisation and the SC-ST Act 2018, it has made Modi the messiah of the poor, reinforcing the Prime Minister’s agenda of sab ka saath sab ka vikas.&nbsp;

Sadly, general apathy for the forward category people and the antipathy of a major section of intelligentsia and political class to the BJP, has prompted the media to underplay the move.&nbsp;

Opposition parties like the Congress, CPM, Samajwadi Party and BSP were so stunned that they grudgingly supported the Bill. It was passed within 48 hours of its introduction and made history when it became an Act, with presidential assent, within four days.&nbsp;

For the so-called general category, not covered under the 50 per cent reservation like the SC, ST and OBC, a long-standing demand had been fulfilled.&nbsp;

Supreme Court rulings had made it difficult for states and parties to think beyond 50 per cent. Hence, most reservation politics were working models tinkering with the 50 benchmark and including new categories within the existing quota.&nbsp;

The Congress, TDP and TRS repeatedly tried to tinker with OBC reservation by including the converted SC, ST, Christians and Muslims, Jats and Marathas in the SC, ST and OBC quota.&nbsp;

They also had tried to give five and seven per cent reservation for Muslims beyond the fifty per cent ceiling. These were struck down by courts.&nbsp;

So far only Tamil Nadu and Kerala have managed to cross the fifty per cent ceiling to accommodate the minorities.&nbsp;

Why the Modi amendment becomes a game changer is because it is going to alter the political narrative. It is bold because it has amended the Constitution and changed the ceiling itself.&nbsp;

It is innovative because it goes beyond castes and religions and includes the most egalitarian and welfarist idiom of economic backwardness, by replacing class instead of caste.&nbsp;

For the first time in India, the so-called upper castes consisting of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Banias, Kayasth, Jat, Marathas and Patels will get reservation and matter as a major political factor.&nbsp;

In states like in Gujarat, Kshatriyas are included in the OBC category. The Modi initiative will take the fizz out of the Jat, Maratha and Patel reservation politics, which Ajit Singh in UP and Hardik Patel in Gujarat were playing.&nbsp;

In North Indian states like UP, Himachal, Uttarakhand, MP, Rajasthan, Haryana and Chhattisgarh, the upper caste population is over 30 per cent and this is bound to gravitate towards the BJP.&nbsp;

So far BJP has been accused of playing into SC/ST and OBC politics because of their exaggerated numerical predominance. Empirical studies have shown that these numbers are often manipulated and exaggerated in favour of minorities, the OBC and the SC/ST.&nbsp;

In the recent state polls in MP, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, the BJP lost because of wide perceptional resentment among the upper castes. In UP, for instance, in the context of the SP-BSP tie-up, the BJP is likely to benefit from a consolidation of its traditional base.&nbsp;

The new reservation policy will also help the BJP in a big way in the South. Here reservations have long been a very sensitive issue and the upper class found themselves in a hopeless condition.&nbsp;

Modi’s reformist move will give them fresh hope. For instance, in Kerala, the Nair community, which constitute 18 per cent of the population, has been actively campaigning for economic reservation for over six decades.&nbsp;

The Nair Service Society (NSS), which runs hundreds of educational institutions, have made representations to successive governments for this.&nbsp;

The UPA in 2004 had set up the Sinhu Committee to study the feasibility of reservations for Nairs. The Commission had submitted its report in 2009, but the UPA did not do anything further.

Now the NSS general secretary G. Sukumaran Nair has written a letter profusely thanking the Prime Minister for “doing what nobody else had shown the courage”.&nbsp;

“When the Sinhu Commission submitted their report to the former UPA Government, we had expected favourable action from them. But they had put aside that report. After that, we had submitted our prayers and resolutions for your favourable consideration also. We reiterate our sincere and heartfelt gratitude for making the economic reservation of the forward community a reality with your strong determination”, wrote the NSS leader.&nbsp;

NSS, which follows a policy of equi-distance between all parties, though traditionally a majority of Nairs and upper castes have been LDF supporters, is now inching towards the BJP.&nbsp;

In about ten Lok Sabha seats in Kerala, the NSS holds the key. The NSS, which is at the forefront of the agitation against the Supreme Court order on Sabarimala Temple tradition, has been moving away from the LDF, whose stance has angered the Hindu community.&nbsp;

Similarly, Lingayats in Karnataka, Reddys and Kammas in Andhra and Telangana and upper castes in Tamil Nadu who were in the AIADMK camp, will take a second look at the BJP after this.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-a-game-changer-for-2019-2708370">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Reservation has always been a game changer in Indian politics. The BJP was the only political party, which never tried to play it to its advantage. Thus far. Prime Minister Narendra Modi by amending the Constitution to reserve ten per cent in education and jobs for the economically weaker sections has redefined reservation politics and introduced new poll chemistry that will influence the election outcome in 2019 in a big way.

Reservation has always been a game changer in Indian politics. The BJP was the only political party, which never tried to play it to its advantage. Thus far. Prime Minister Narendra Modi by amending the Constitution to reserve ten per cent in education and jobs for the economically weaker sections has redefined reservation politics and introduced new poll chemistry that will influence the election outcome in 2019 in a big way. For the first time, the party has a consolidated and committed vote bank. This segment, though largely inclined towards the BJP, has often been successfully weaned away by the Congress and regional outfits like the BSP, AIADMK, TRS, CPM, Trinamul, BJD and TDP. The new Modi initiative has made it impossible for non-BJP parties to poach on this segment. Like demonetisation and the SC-ST Act 2018, it has made Modi the messiah of the poor, reinforcing the Prime Minister’s agenda of sab ka saath sab ka vikas. Sadly, general apathy for the forward category people and the antipathy of a major section of intelligentsia and political class to the BJP, has prompted the media to underplay the move. Opposition parties like the Congress, CPM, Samajwadi Party and BSP were so stunned that they grudgingly supported the Bill. It was passed within 48 hours of its introduction and made history when it became an Act, with presidential assent, within four days. For the so-called general category, not covered under the 50 per cent reservation like the SC, ST and OBC, a long-standing demand had been fulfilled. Supreme Court rulings had made it difficult for states and parties to think beyond 50 per cent. Hence, most reservation politics were working models tinkering with the 50 benchmark and including new categories within the existing quota. The Congress, TDP and TRS repeatedly tried to tinker with OBC reservation by including the converted SC, ST, Christians and Muslims, Jats and Marathas in the SC, ST and OBC quota. They also had tried to give five and seven per cent reservation for Muslims beyond the fifty per cent ceiling. These were struck down by courts. So far only Tamil Nadu and Kerala have managed to cross the fifty per cent ceiling to accommodate the minorities. Why the Modi amendment becomes a game changer is because it is going to alter the political narrative. It is bold because it has amended the Constitution and changed the ceiling itself. It is innovative because it goes beyond castes and religions and includes the most egalitarian and welfarist idiom of economic backwardness, by replacing class instead of caste. For the first time in India, the so-called upper castes consisting of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Banias, Kayasth, Jat, Marathas and Patels will get reservation and matter as a major political factor. In states like in Gujarat, Kshatriyas are included in the OBC category. The Modi initiative will take the fizz out of the Jat, Maratha and Patel reservation politics, which Ajit Singh in UP and Hardik Patel in Gujarat were playing. In North Indian states like UP, Himachal, Uttarakhand, MP, Rajasthan, Haryana and Chhattisgarh, the upper caste population is over 30 per cent and this is bound to gravitate towards the BJP. So far BJP has been accused of playing into SC/ST and OBC politics because of their exaggerated numerical predominance. Empirical studies have shown that these numbers are often manipulated and exaggerated in favour of minorities, the OBC and the SC/ST. In the recent state polls in MP, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, the BJP lost because of wide perceptional resentment among the upper castes. In UP, for instance, in the context of the SP-BSP tie-up, the BJP is likely to benefit from a consolidation of its traditional base. The new reservation policy will also help the BJP in a big way in the South. Here reservations have long been a very sensitive issue and the upper class found themselves in a hopeless condition. Modi’s reformist move will give them fresh hope. For instance, in Kerala, the Nair community, which constitute 18 per cent of the population, has been actively campaigning for economic reservation for over six decades. The Nair Service Society (NSS), which runs hundreds of educational institutions, have made representations to successive governments for this. The UPA in 2004 had set up the Sinhu Committee to study the feasibility of reservations for Nairs. The Commission had submitted its report in 2009, but the UPA did not do anything further. Now the NSS general secretary G. Sukumaran Nair has written a letter profusely thanking the Prime Minister for “doing what nobody else had shown the courage”. “When the Sinhu Commission submitted their report to the former UPA Government, we had expected favourable action from them. But they had put aside that report. After that, we had submitted our prayers and resolutions for your favourable consideration also. We reiterate our sincere and heartfelt gratitude for making the economic reservation of the forward community a reality with your strong determination”, wrote the NSS leader. NSS, which follows a policy of equi-distance between all parties, though traditionally a majority of Nairs and upper castes have been LDF supporters, is now inching towards the BJP. In about ten Lok Sabha seats in Kerala, the NSS holds the key. The NSS, which is at the forefront of the agitation against the Supreme Court order on Sabarimala Temple tradition, has been moving away from the LDF, whose stance has angered the Hindu community. Similarly, Lingayats in Karnataka, Reddys and Kammas in Andhra and Telangana and upper castes in Tamil Nadu who were in the AIADMK camp, will take a second look at the BJP after this. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

10% quota for economically weak: A game changer for 2019

With the Supreme Court constituting a five-member bench under the Chief Justice of India Justice Ranjan Gogoi, it is expected that a decision on the Ram Janmabhoomi temple construction is very much in sight. The NDA government has already requested the apex court for a day-to-day hearing of the pending appeals against the Allahabad High Court judgement, on a three-way split of the disputed land.

In recent months, the temple movement has stepped up pressure on the central government for an early solution. This is bound to create ripples on the political front as the 2019 Lok Sabha polls are round the corner.

The Centre enacting the 10 per cent reservation for the economically backward sections of society has consolidated the BJP base among the segments so far deprived of the benefit of reservation. This is bound to have an impact on the Ram Janmabhoomi movement also since it has taken care of the grievance of a large chunk of the BJP support base who are at the forefront of the Ayodhya agitation. &nbsp;

After over a quarter of a century of the demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya’s holy site, a historic and dramatic resolution looks possible if the stakeholders agree to a suggestion mooted by the Shia Waqf Board, the real title-holder of the premise, to relocate the mosque to a nearby Muslim area which would facilitate the building of a magnificent Ram Temple. This was announced in August 2017, by the Shia Waqf Board. The apex court may take cognisance of this.

The Hindus welcomed the offer in the court. But a section of Muslims under the hardline Sunni Board and the Babri Masjid Action Committee has reacted adversely.

The offer of the Muslim community, even if it is coming from only a faction, is the result of the inclusive policy of the Narendra Modi government. Muslims feel safe enough and part of the mainstream for the first time since Independence. This is also the first time since the dispute went to court that the title-holder party or, for that matter, anybody from the Muslim community, has proposed a shifting of the mosque from the disputed land. This in itself is ground-breaking, thus opening a new chapter in Hindu-Muslim relations. This can become the starting point for a negotiated settlement.

The Shia offer has three major aspects: First, technically, only the Shia community has a legal right on the property. The demolished Babri Masjid, though there was no namaz held there for many decades, was a Shia shrine, historically built on a temple that existed till the 14th Century. Second, this is the first time any Muslim individual or outfit is making an offer to relocate the mosque. Third, the starting point for any dialogue has to be the admission of the Hindu claim that the site in discussion is the Ram Janmabhoomi and sacred to Hindus. No solution can come unless these basic premises are brought on the table.

There is yet another important aspect to the Shia Waqf Board suggestion. It has identified, and without mincing words declared, that the hardline sections in the Babri Action Committee are not interested in an amicable solution and are trying to vitiate the social fabric. “It is under the dominant control of hardliners, fanatics and non-believers in peaceful co-existence, who have absolutely no stakes in the case”, it said. Though the Sunni Waqf Board has also petitioned the Supreme Court as a party in the dispute, they have no locus standi as far as the title deed is concerned. The Allahabad HC in its 2011 judgement declared as such. The Allahabad HC had suggested a three-way division of the site with one portion going to the Shia Waqf Board, while accepting the historic Hindu belief that the place in question is Ram Janmabhoomi. The two other parts were given to the Hindu organisation.

The appeal against the high court verdict has been pending in the Supreme Court ever since. In early 2017, responding to a review petition by Dr Subramanian Swamy, the apex court had asked the involved parties to find a solution through mutual consent. Ever since both Hindu and Muslim leaders have been constantly exchanging notes with Swamy and VHP leader Champat Rai taking the initiative.

At least 200 rounds of negotiations have taken place between the two sides since the issue became hot in the late 80s. A very serious attempt at negotiated settlement was held when Chandrashekhar was Prime Minister in the early 90s. Then historians, archaeologists and scholars from both sides involved themselves in quoting chapter and verse to prove their side. Dr BB Lal, Dr SP Gupta, Dr BR Grover, and many such luminaries then played a role in verifying the historicity of the Hindu claim. Historians like Dr Irfan Habib argued for the other side. In the end, archaeology, history and faith proved the Hindu claim to be much stronger. But the Babri Committee was unrelenting.

What the Shia Board has now done in August 2017 was to call the bluff of this Committee. Mahant Nritya Gopal Das of the Janmabhoomi Nyas had expressed guarded satisfaction over the Shia Board proposal. Subramanian Swamy and the VHP are more exuberant with the development. The Shia Board had suggested a two-judge committee with members of the opposing sides and experts work on the nitty-gritty of the negotiated settlement. Now that the apex court has taken up a fast track process this will help.

With the BJP in power in Uttar Pradesh and at the Centre, the hope of paving the way for the grand temple in Ayodhya is on the ascent. It may not be possible to satisfy all the segments and spectrum of opinion at any stage. The moot point is will the apex court settle it before 2019 polls?

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-laying-a-strong-foundation-2707231">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

With the Supreme Court constituting a five-member bench under the Chief Justice of India Justice Ranjan Gogoi, it is expected that a decision on the Ram Janmabhoomi temple construction is very much in sight.

With the Supreme Court constituting a five-member bench under the Chief Justice of India Justice Ranjan Gogoi, it is expected that a decision on the Ram Janmabhoomi temple construction is very much in sight. The NDA government has already requested the apex court for a day-to-day hearing of the pending appeals against the Allahabad High Court judgement, on a three-way split of the disputed land. In recent months, the temple movement has stepped up pressure on the central government for an early solution. This is bound to create ripples on the political front as the 2019 Lok Sabha polls are round the corner. The Centre enacting the 10 per cent reservation for the economically backward sections of society has consolidated the BJP base among the segments so far deprived of the benefit of reservation. This is bound to have an impact on the Ram Janmabhoomi movement also since it has taken care of the grievance of a large chunk of the BJP support base who are at the forefront of the Ayodhya agitation. After over a quarter of a century of the demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya’s holy site, a historic and dramatic resolution looks possible if the stakeholders agree to a suggestion mooted by the Shia Waqf Board, the real title-holder of the premise, to relocate the mosque to a nearby Muslim area which would facilitate the building of a magnificent Ram Temple. This was announced in August 2017, by the Shia Waqf Board. The apex court may take cognisance of this. The Hindus welcomed the offer in the court. But a section of Muslims under the hardline Sunni Board and the Babri Masjid Action Committee has reacted adversely. The offer of the Muslim community, even if it is coming from only a faction, is the result of the inclusive policy of the Narendra Modi government. Muslims feel safe enough and part of the mainstream for the first time since Independence. This is also the first time since the dispute went to court that the title-holder party or, for that matter, anybody from the Muslim community, has proposed a shifting of the mosque from the disputed land. This in itself is ground-breaking, thus opening a new chapter in Hindu-Muslim relations. This can become the starting point for a negotiated settlement. The Shia offer has three major aspects: First, technically, only the Shia community has a legal right on the property. The demolished Babri Masjid, though there was no namaz held there for many decades, was a Shia shrine, historically built on a temple that existed till the 14th Century. Second, this is the first time any Muslim individual or outfit is making an offer to relocate the mosque. Third, the starting point for any dialogue has to be the admission of the Hindu claim that the site in discussion is the Ram Janmabhoomi and sacred to Hindus. No solution can come unless these basic premises are brought on the table. There is yet another important aspect to the Shia Waqf Board suggestion. It has identified, and without mincing words declared, that the hardline sections in the Babri Action Committee are not interested in an amicable solution and are trying to vitiate the social fabric. “It is under the dominant control of hardliners, fanatics and non-believers in peaceful co-existence, who have absolutely no stakes in the case”, it said. Though the Sunni Waqf Board has also petitioned the Supreme Court as a party in the dispute, they have no locus standi as far as the title deed is concerned. The Allahabad HC in its 2011 judgement declared as such. The Allahabad HC had suggested a three-way division of the site with one portion going to the Shia Waqf Board, while accepting the historic Hindu belief that the place in question is Ram Janmabhoomi. The two other parts were given to the Hindu organisation. The appeal against the high court verdict has been pending in the Supreme Court ever since. In early 2017, responding to a review petition by Dr Subramanian Swamy, the apex court had asked the involved parties to find a solution through mutual consent. Ever since both Hindu and Muslim leaders have been constantly exchanging notes with Swamy and VHP leader Champat Rai taking the initiative. At least 200 rounds of negotiations have taken place between the two sides since the issue became hot in the late 80s. A very serious attempt at negotiated settlement was held when Chandrashekhar was Prime Minister in the early 90s. Then historians, archaeologists and scholars from both sides involved themselves in quoting chapter and verse to prove their side. Dr BB Lal, Dr SP Gupta, Dr BR Grover, and many such luminaries then played a role in verifying the historicity of the Hindu claim. Historians like Dr Irfan Habib argued for the other side. In the end, archaeology, history and faith proved the Hindu claim to be much stronger. But the Babri Committee was unrelenting. What the Shia Board has now done in August 2017 was to call the bluff of this Committee. Mahant Nritya Gopal Das of the Janmabhoomi Nyas had expressed guarded satisfaction over the Shia Board proposal. Subramanian Swamy and the VHP are more exuberant with the development. The Shia Board had suggested a two-judge committee with members of the opposing sides and experts work on the nitty-gritty of the negotiated settlement. Now that the apex court has taken up a fast track process this will help. With the BJP in power in Uttar Pradesh and at the Centre, the hope of paving the way for the grand temple in Ayodhya is on the ascent. It may not be possible to satisfy all the segments and spectrum of opinion at any stage. The moot point is will the apex court settle it before 2019 polls? (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Ayodhya dispute: Laying a strong foundation

Author

Zee News Rajasthan

Editor

R Balashankar

Home

Live Tv

Latest

World

India

Business

Entertainment

Sports

Opinions

Videos

Photos

Gravitas

Lifestyle

Science

Tech

Rajasthan News in Hindi: In-depth coverage of Rajasthan Crime, Political News, Education, Rajasthan Weather Update and Latest Rajasthan News on Zee News Rajasthan.