As we approach the halfway mark of the seven-phase 2019 elections, it is clear that this is the ugliest campaign in India’s 70-year-old electoral history. As a witness to three general elections and an activist observer or researcher in 12 others, one has never witnessed so much bad blood as this seventeenth general election.&nbsp;

This, of course, has not happened overnight. It has reached this stage because critical issues confronting the electoral system have not been addressed over the years. To ensure fair and free polls, the Election Commission of India (ECI) was given statutory status. In 1962, the idea of a ‘model code’, experimented for the first time in Kerala in 1960, was adopted. In 1979, certain restraints were introduced for the party in power. In 1991, Election Commissioner T N Seshan demonstrated what a proactive and independent ECI could do to ensure independence. There were more than a couple of parliamentary committees set up to propose electoral reforms. But with political parties becoming all-powerful, despite losing much of their sheen, electoral practices have continued to decline.&nbsp;

Take Indonesia. With a history of two decades of elections and 187 million voters, the country had a one-day national poll recently. Whereas in India, a voter has to wait for 43 days to know the winner, despite the EVMs. &nbsp;Never before has the ECI been seen to be as partisan as today and no efforts have been made to ensure that the electoral process regains credibility.&nbsp;

Instruments like the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) have outlived their utility. The irrelevance of ECI’s instruments is evident from a cursory reading of the code. Neither of the eight provisions dealing with the conduct of poll is being observed either by the candidates or the political parties in the fray. &nbsp;The first of the eight is on “general conduct” of polls. This includes a ban on “caste and communal feelings”, “criticism of candidates on the basis of unverified reports”, and “bribing of voters”. &nbsp;“No political party can use pictures of defence and military personnel”, in a poll campaign, is another MCC guideline, which has been thrown out of the window. &nbsp;

In 1979, MCC prohibited government advertisement of their ‘achievements’ and banned announcement of grants and schemes, so that the ruling party does not get an unfair advantage. The government or the ruling party “should not launch any welfare programmes, including ribbon cutting ceremonies”, said the code.&nbsp;

However, what is happening is exactly the opposite and the Supreme Court had to remind the ECI that it is not toothless. An analysis of nominations filed for assemblies and Parliament in the last few elections, according to the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), reveals that the percentage of rich, privileged and those with a criminal background, total to nearly one-third of the elected members. CMS studies on poll expenditure over the last three general elections, bring out three critical points. First, a significant per cent of voters is being paid money across the states, both in rural and urban India. Second, the expenditure being incurred by parties and candidates has been going up in such a way that only millionaires can now contest. &nbsp;Third, the campaigns are focused on lure rather than on issues and concerns. Neither is there evidence that political parties have become accountable or are taking their manifestos seriously.

Despite ECI’s hundreds of “expenditure observers,” the extent of unaccounted money confiscated is on rise with no effect on the overall poll expenditure. Only one Assembly member was ever disqualified in UP, a couple of years ago, for not submitting accounts, as required. &nbsp; 
 
There have been several parliamentary panels on poll funding in the last four decades, but their recommendations have remained only on paper. If anything, recent government measures are aimed at facilitating funding, including from foreign corporates, with no transparency. It is tempting to ask why we have not pursued a different kind of electoral campaign or evaluated the actual requirements of a contesting candidate. There is no reason why a candidate should not reach out to voters, present his or her credentials, address voters’ concerns and propose what he or she will do if elected.&nbsp;

Candidates mainly stress on the negative aspects of their rivals. Increasingly, many of them spend more time on their opponents, than on what they propose to do.&nbsp;Big changes are needed. Candidates can campaign together so that voters can make a better choice more transparently. There must be minimum joint public meetings in every constituency.

It will help bring down poll expenditure substantially. When competing candidates address voters together, they are likely to be more positive and cordial. After all, if two bitter rivals can come together in a poll alliance, why can’t opposing candidates campaign together? Unless political leaders and parties come forward to restore the sanctity of electoral practices, nothing is going to change. And unless that happens, it is difficult to expect good governance, deepen democracy and inclusive development.

It is time to relook the relevance of ECI’s code of conduct. This is not possible without the support, cooperation and participation of the news media. The judiciary needs to be consulted in repositioning the ECI. India needs an electoral shake-up as the republic enters the 75th year. &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-poll-code-nothing-really-model-about-it-2743200">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;

As we approach the halfway mark of the seven-phase 2019 elections, it is clear that this is the ugliest campaign in India’s 70-year-old electoral history. As a witness to three general elections and an activist observer or researcher in 12 others, one has never witnessed so much bad blood as this seventeenth general election.

As we approach the halfway mark of the seven-phase 2019 elections, it is clear that this is the ugliest campaign in India’s 70-year-old electoral history. As a witness to three general elections and an activist observer or researcher in 12 others, one has never witnessed so much bad blood as this seventeenth general election. This, of course, has not happened overnight. It has reached this stage because critical issues confronting the electoral system have not been addressed over the years. To ensure fair and free polls, the Election Commission of India (ECI) was given statutory status. In 1962, the idea of a ‘model code’, experimented for the first time in Kerala in 1960, was adopted. In 1979, certain restraints were introduced for the party in power. In 1991, Election Commissioner T N Seshan demonstrated what a proactive and independent ECI could do to ensure independence. There were more than a couple of parliamentary committees set up to propose electoral reforms. But with political parties becoming all-powerful, despite losing much of their sheen, electoral practices have continued to decline. Take Indonesia. With a history of two decades of elections and 187 million voters, the country had a one-day national poll recently. Whereas in India, a voter has to wait for 43 days to know the winner, despite the EVMs. Never before has the ECI been seen to be as partisan as today and no efforts have been made to ensure that the electoral process regains credibility. Instruments like the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) have outlived their utility. The irrelevance of ECI’s instruments is evident from a cursory reading of the code. Neither of the eight provisions dealing with the conduct of poll is being observed either by the candidates or the political parties in the fray. The first of the eight is on “general conduct” of polls. This includes a ban on “caste and communal feelings”, “criticism of candidates on the basis of unverified reports”, and “bribing of voters”. “No political party can use pictures of defence and military personnel”, in a poll campaign, is another MCC guideline, which has been thrown out of the window. In 1979, MCC prohibited government advertisement of their ‘achievements’ and banned announcement of grants and schemes, so that the ruling party does not get an unfair advantage. The government or the ruling party “should not launch any welfare programmes, including ribbon cutting ceremonies”, said the code. However, what is happening is exactly the opposite and the Supreme Court had to remind the ECI that it is not toothless. An analysis of nominations filed for assemblies and Parliament in the last few elections, according to the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), reveals that the percentage of rich, privileged and those with a criminal background, total to nearly one-third of the elected members. CMS studies on poll expenditure over the last three general elections, bring out three critical points. First, a significant per cent of voters is being paid money across the states, both in rural and urban India. Second, the expenditure being incurred by parties and candidates has been going up in such a way that only millionaires can now contest. Third, the campaigns are focused on lure rather than on issues and concerns. Neither is there evidence that political parties have become accountable or are taking their manifestos seriously. Despite ECI’s hundreds of “expenditure observers,” the extent of unaccounted money confiscated is on rise with no effect on the overall poll expenditure. Only one Assembly member was ever disqualified in UP, a couple of years ago, for not submitting accounts, as required. There have been several parliamentary panels on poll funding in the last four decades, but their recommendations have remained only on paper. If anything, recent government measures are aimed at facilitating funding, including from foreign corporates, with no transparency. It is tempting to ask why we have not pursued a different kind of electoral campaign or evaluated the actual requirements of a contesting candidate. There is no reason why a candidate should not reach out to voters, present his or her credentials, address voters’ concerns and propose what he or she will do if elected. Candidates mainly stress on the negative aspects of their rivals. Increasingly, many of them spend more time on their opponents, than on what they propose to do. Big changes are needed. Candidates can campaign together so that voters can make a better choice more transparently. There must be minimum joint public meetings in every constituency. It will help bring down poll expenditure substantially. When competing candidates address voters together, they are likely to be more positive and cordial. After all, if two bitter rivals can come together in a poll alliance, why can’t opposing candidates campaign together? Unless political leaders and parties come forward to restore the sanctity of electoral practices, nothing is going to change. And unless that happens, it is difficult to expect good governance, deepen democracy and inclusive development. It is time to relook the relevance of ECI’s code of conduct. This is not possible without the support, cooperation and participation of the news media. The judiciary needs to be consulted in repositioning the ECI. India needs an electoral shake-up as the republic enters the 75th year. (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.)

Political leaders and parties must come forward to restore the sanctity of electoral practices

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi files his nomination from Varanasi, earlier today PM Modi visited Kal Bhairav temple. Watch this video to know more.

General Election 2019: PM Modi files his nomination from Varanasi

In politics, a strong challenge is never received lightly and if it comes across as a fake call, then the person is not taken seriously thereafter.

Priyanka Gandhi by maintaining the suspense on her candidature from Varanasi’s Lok Sabha seat has made a serious error which she must avoid in future or her image would coalesce into a politician who is all thunder sans rain.&nbsp;

In past, politicians like Arjun Singh and Sharad Pawar suffered the same fate. After a point in time, none of them was taken seriously as contenders in Delhi. Similarly, it may boomerang in the long run for Priyanka Gandhi too.&nbsp;

She allowed Congress to gain space in media but ended up giving a handle to BJP in the last 4 phases of elections.

Henceforth, the attack on Congress would be brutal and direct. Priyanka Gandhi will be attacked for not having a stomach for a strong political fight.&nbsp;

What prompted Priyanka to keep people guessing remains a mystery but even Congress party president Rahul Gandhi did nothing to clear the fog. He participated in it by stating that he would like to keep the suspense on. It did not work. It fuelled the expectations which were not met, eventually, disappointing many.

The issue is as to what was the thinking behind keeping the suspense on? Did Congress develop cold feet in the end? Did &nbsp;Rahul Gandhi overrule her on the ground that she cannot give a fight to Narendra Modi and her loss would affect both party and her career? &nbsp;Lastly, why did it take Congress a month to realise that Modi is unbeatable in Varanasi? Was it not visible right at the start of the election campaign? Did a real possibility exist on the ground to defeat Modi? My take is that no such circumstances ever existed but even then Priyanka Gandhi Vadra sought suggestions from her constituents during her meeting in Amethi and Raebareli on fighting from Varanasi. 
 
Whatever may be the real reason, it is not available to media. In its absence, BJP will make Priyanka’s exit an electoral issue. BJP now can go to town shouting that Priyanka Vadra shied away from the big battle of Uttar Pradesh.

The discourse will be shifted from her charismatic appeal and being natural to her inability to stand up to a strong challenge. This will invite a focus on the top leadership of the Congress and fuel discourse that ‘family’ &nbsp;cannot look beyond safe seats. It will also make Gandhi's look less serious in public discussion. Priyanka in 2012 had once said, "Main Aaun Kya." She did not. It has happened again.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

In politics, a strong challenge is never received lightly and if it comes across as a fake call, then the person is not taken seriously thereafter. Priyanka Gandhi by maintaining the suspense on her candidature from Varanasi’s Lok Sabha seat has made a serious error which she must avoid in future or her image would coalesce into a politician who is all thunder sans rain.

In politics, a strong challenge is never received lightly and if it comes across as a fake call, then the person is not taken seriously thereafter. Priyanka Gandhi by maintaining the suspense on her candidature from Varanasi’s Lok Sabha seat has made a serious error which she must avoid in future or her image would coalesce into a politician who is all thunder sans rain. In past, politicians like Arjun Singh and Sharad Pawar suffered the same fate. After a point in time, none of them was taken seriously as contenders in Delhi. Similarly, it may boomerang in the long run for Priyanka Gandhi too. She allowed Congress to gain space in media but ended up giving a handle to BJP in the last 4 phases of elections. Henceforth, the attack on Congress would be brutal and direct. Priyanka Gandhi will be attacked for not having a stomach for a strong political fight. What prompted Priyanka to keep people guessing remains a mystery but even Congress party president Rahul Gandhi did nothing to clear the fog. He participated in it by stating that he would like to keep the suspense on. It did not work. It fuelled the expectations which were not met, eventually, disappointing many. The issue is as to what was the thinking behind keeping the suspense on? Did Congress develop cold feet in the end? Did Rahul Gandhi overrule her on the ground that she cannot give a fight to Narendra Modi and her loss would affect both party and her career? Lastly, why did it take Congress a month to realise that Modi is unbeatable in Varanasi? Was it not visible right at the start of the election campaign? Did a real possibility exist on the ground to defeat Modi? My take is that no such circumstances ever existed but even then Priyanka Gandhi Vadra sought suggestions from her constituents during her meeting in Amethi and Raebareli on fighting from Varanasi. Whatever may be the real reason, it is not available to media. In its absence, BJP will make Priyanka’s exit an electoral issue. BJP now can go to town shouting that Priyanka Vadra shied away from the big battle of Uttar Pradesh. The discourse will be shifted from her charismatic appeal and being natural to her inability to stand up to a strong challenge. This will invite a focus on the top leadership of the Congress and fuel discourse that ‘family’ cannot look beyond safe seats. It will also make Gandhi's look less serious in public discussion. Priyanka in 2012 had once said, "Main Aaun Kya." She did not. It has happened again. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Disappointing many, Priyanka Gandhi's suspense game gives BJP a political handle

India’s first Union cabinet under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru embraced the idea of lateral talent. Among the 15 members of the cabinet in 1947 was John Mathai, an economist who served as Railways Minister and then Finance Minister before leaving the government in 1950. &nbsp;

Over the years, inducting such lateral professional talent into the Union cabinet from outside party politics has grown rarer.&nbsp;

In welcome contrast, none of the nine professionals recently selected under the aegis of the UPSC to serve the government as joint secretaries, belong to a political party. All have specialised domain knowledge.&nbsp;

Amber Dubey, for example, was head of aerospace and defence at KPMG. He has been selected to join the civil aviation ministry where his experience of over 26 years in the aviation and defence domain will be useful as India reforms its aviation, space and defence technology sectors.&nbsp;

The selection of Dubey, an IIT Bombay and IIM Ahmedabad alumni, who has spent his entire career in the private sector, reflects the winds of change blowing over a critical area of Indian governance: technocratic talent. &nbsp;

The country is run at four levels. One, the Prime Minister-led Union cabinet and the Chief Minister-led state cabinets where specialised domain talent is slender. Two, the central and state bureaucracies which are largely filled with generalists, not specialists.&nbsp;

Three, local civic municipalities where again political affiliations often carry more weight than competence. Four, village panchayats and local bodies where caste and religion cast a long shadow.&nbsp;

In the United States, the cabinet is small (16 members) and mostly technocratic, drawn from the private sector, the professions and academia. The Narendra Modi cabinet is large (over 70 ministers and ministers of state) and apart from some honourable exceptions, does not exactly overflow with talent.&nbsp;

That is why the lateral selection of nine professionals as joint secretaries is a welcome development.&nbsp;

Consider the core competencies of some of the new lateral recruits: Dinesh Jagdale, CEO of Panama Renewable Energy Group, will join the renewable energy ministry. Kakoli Ghosh, who has deep knowledge of the multilateral farm sector, will join the agriculture ministry. Most of the others have been placed in ministries where their professional experience and knowledge will be put to good use.&nbsp;

These infusions are just the beginning. Indian bureaucracies, central and state, must absorb UPSC-selected lateral appointments of technocrats with ever-greater urgency.&nbsp;

In a technology-enabled world, specialisation is mandatory. IAS officers, however competent and dedicated, have two handicaps, First, they are generalists with little specialised domain expertise. Second, they are transferred so often across the country – for example, from animal husbandry to defence acquisitions – that focus is lost.&nbsp; 
 
The certainty of tenure among civil servants also engenders a sense of complacency. Over the years, the ministries of finance and defence, in particular, have developed a reputation for cronyism and corruption.&nbsp;

Leaks to the media in the Rafale fighter jet case and examples of department officers surreptitiously encouraging arms dealers (though they were explicitly banned in 2014) have damaged the national interest.&nbsp;

The introduction of fresh professional blood should act as a deterrent when the minister in charge of a particular portfolio has not been able to impose his or her will with sufficient authority on department officers.&nbsp;

If Prime Minister Narendra Modi does win a second term, it’s possible the BJP’s majority in Parliament will be significantly reduced. That is not a bad thing. Modi was used to running a compact state like Gujarat with a group of loyal and competent bureaucrats who dared not defy his authority or miss deadlines on projects.&nbsp;

The same modus operandi has not worked in the Byzantine culture of Delhi. Days after he took office as prime minister, Modi called more than 70 senior bureaucrats to meet him. As they stood in a line before him, he told them to work without fear or favour. They could come to him with any problems they had, he said.&nbsp;

The senior IAS officers, still standing in a parabolic line, nodded silently. But every one of them must have thought cynically to himself or herself that fear and favour were the time-honoured way bureaucracy worked. How would Modi break that habit? He hasn’t.&nbsp;

The series of legal setbacks in the 2G, Rafale and other cases has exposed the government’s poor selection of its law officers.&nbsp;

Equally lacklustre has been its communications strategy. Instead of being proactive over a range of contentious issues – from Rafale to electoral bonds – the government has been slow and reactive when perception damage has already been done.&nbsp;

In a 24x7 news cycle, every major government holds briefings in near real-time. The Chinese and American administrations respond to any issue concerning their government promptly and clearly. 
 
Even Pakistan’s information ministry reacts rapidly to events though in its case it is to add a positive spin to negative stories about, for example, Islamabad’s likely blacklisting by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for terror financing and money laundering.&nbsp;

The under-utilisation by the Indian government of an articulate and credible Information &amp; Broadcasting (I&amp;B) minister Rajyavardhan Rathore, an Olympian and a former soldier, in delivering daily media briefings underscores how unprofessionally the government has communicated its agenda to voters. They will now deliver their verdict. &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-lateral-hiring-in-govt-bridging-the-talent-deficit-2742935">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

India’s first Union cabinet under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru embraced the idea of lateral talent. Among the 15 members of the cabinet in 1947 was John Mathai, an economist who served as Railways Minister and then Finance Minister before leaving the government in 1950.

India’s first Union cabinet under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru embraced the idea of lateral talent. Among the 15 members of the cabinet in 1947 was John Mathai, an economist who served as Railways Minister and then Finance Minister before leaving the government in 1950. Over the years, inducting such lateral professional talent into the Union cabinet from outside party politics has grown rarer. In welcome contrast, none of the nine professionals recently selected under the aegis of the UPSC to serve the government as joint secretaries, belong to a political party. All have specialised domain knowledge. Amber Dubey, for example, was head of aerospace and defence at KPMG. He has been selected to join the civil aviation ministry where his experience of over 26 years in the aviation and defence domain will be useful as India reforms its aviation, space and defence technology sectors. The selection of Dubey, an IIT Bombay and IIM Ahmedabad alumni, who has spent his entire career in the private sector, reflects the winds of change blowing over a critical area of Indian governance: technocratic talent. The country is run at four levels. One, the Prime Minister-led Union cabinet and the Chief Minister-led state cabinets where specialised domain talent is slender. Two, the central and state bureaucracies which are largely filled with generalists, not specialists. Three, local civic municipalities where again political affiliations often carry more weight than competence. Four, village panchayats and local bodies where caste and religion cast a long shadow. In the United States, the cabinet is small (16 members) and mostly technocratic, drawn from the private sector, the professions and academia. The Narendra Modi cabinet is large (over 70 ministers and ministers of state) and apart from some honourable exceptions, does not exactly overflow with talent. That is why the lateral selection of nine professionals as joint secretaries is a welcome development. Consider the core competencies of some of the new lateral recruits: Dinesh Jagdale, CEO of Panama Renewable Energy Group, will join the renewable energy ministry. Kakoli Ghosh, who has deep knowledge of the multilateral farm sector, will join the agriculture ministry. Most of the others have been placed in ministries where their professional experience and knowledge will be put to good use. These infusions are just the beginning. Indian bureaucracies, central and state, must absorb UPSC-selected lateral appointments of technocrats with ever-greater urgency. In a technology-enabled world, specialisation is mandatory. IAS officers, however competent and dedicated, have two handicaps, First, they are generalists with little specialised domain expertise. Second, they are transferred so often across the country – for example, from animal husbandry to defence acquisitions – that focus is lost. The certainty of tenure among civil servants also engenders a sense of complacency. Over the years, the ministries of finance and defence, in particular, have developed a reputation for cronyism and corruption. Leaks to the media in the Rafale fighter jet case and examples of department officers surreptitiously encouraging arms dealers (though they were explicitly banned in 2014) have damaged the national interest. The introduction of fresh professional blood should act as a deterrent when the minister in charge of a particular portfolio has not been able to impose his or her will with sufficient authority on department officers. If Prime Minister Narendra Modi does win a second term, it’s possible the BJP’s majority in Parliament will be significantly reduced. That is not a bad thing. Modi was used to running a compact state like Gujarat with a group of loyal and competent bureaucrats who dared not defy his authority or miss deadlines on projects. The same modus operandi has not worked in the Byzantine culture of Delhi. Days after he took office as prime minister, Modi called more than 70 senior bureaucrats to meet him. As they stood in a line before him, he told them to work without fear or favour. They could come to him with any problems they had, he said. The senior IAS officers, still standing in a parabolic line, nodded silently. But every one of them must have thought cynically to himself or herself that fear and favour were the time-honoured way bureaucracy worked. How would Modi break that habit? He hasn’t. The series of legal setbacks in the 2G, Rafale and other cases has exposed the government’s poor selection of its law officers. Equally lacklustre has been its communications strategy. Instead of being proactive over a range of contentious issues – from Rafale to electoral bonds – the government has been slow and reactive when perception damage has already been done. In a 24x7 news cycle, every major government holds briefings in near real-time. The Chinese and American administrations respond to any issue concerning their government promptly and clearly. Even Pakistan’s information ministry reacts rapidly to events though in its case it is to add a positive spin to negative stories about, for example, Islamabad’s likely blacklisting by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for terror financing and money laundering. The under-utilisation by the Indian government of an articulate and credible Information & Broadcasting (I&B) minister Rajyavardhan Rathore, an Olympian and a former soldier, in delivering daily media briefings underscores how unprofessionally the government has communicated its agenda to voters. They will now deliver their verdict. (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.)

Inducting lateral professional skills into the cabinet by Narendra Modi government is a welcome step

It’s now official, finally. There will be no alliance between the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi. This is a setback for both the parties since they now have to take on the Bharatiya Janata Party individually. The BJP had swept all the seven seats on offer in 2014 and is sitting pretty now, given the division of its anti-votes.&nbsp; 
 
The failure to strike an alliance is a reflection of the larger problems that the opposition faces in formulating a coalition to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party at the national level. &nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
After various aborted attempts at a national-level alliance, there had been a realisation that the most pragmatic way to prevent the BJP from retaining power was to form state-level alliances.&nbsp;

Thus, the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party came together in Maharashtra, the Congress and the National Conference structured a deal in Jammu &amp; Kashmir, the JD (S) and the Congress maintained their partnership in Karnataka despite problems, the Congress struck a coalition with the DMK in Tamil Nadu, and the Samajwadi Party and the BSP, otherwise bitterly opposed to each other, aligned in Uttar Pradesh. It was expected that, along the same lines, the AAP and the Congress would join hands in Delhi. The idea was to somehow short-circuit Modi and his party and work out an arrangement post-poll results. &nbsp;

The manner in which the situation unfolded over the weeks in Delhi does no credit to either the Congress or the AAP. All through this time, conflicting signals were sent out, giving the impression that neither of them was approaching the challenge with maturity. But the AAP came out worse because it was seen as the more desperate party to reach an understanding. 
 
It was repeatedly snubbed by the Congress and yet it continued to send feelers. Once Sheila Dikshit became Delhi’s Congress, it became near certain that no deal would be made. Dikshit was vehemently opposed to an understanding with the AAP, given the history of conflict between her and AAP supremo and Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Her lobby made it known to the high command that the party would be better off fighting alone. There were two reasons for this stand. The first was that the Congress is expecting a surge in its popularity as compared to 2014 and wanted to cash in on it, without surrendering seats to an alliance partner. The second was that &nbsp;Dikshit and her people were worried about the adverse public reaction to an AAP-Congress partnership — after all, the AAP was born out of an anti-corruption movement directed against a Congress-led regime at the Centre. &nbsp;

Despite her stature, Dikshit’s opinion may well have been ignored, had the AAP not insisted on an understanding with the Congress for Haryana as part of the Delhi deal. The Congress was in no mood to accommodate Kejriwal’s party in the neighbouring state because it saw no political gain for itself since the AAP has only a scattered presence in Haryana.&nbsp;

The Congress also realised that Kejriwal was seeking to spread his wings by riding piggyback on the Congress and eventually weakening its presence in those regions. &nbsp;

It appears from media reports that Congress president Rahul Gandhi favoured an alliance with the AAP in Delhi, and his point man PC Chacko was burning the midnight oil to make this happen. But Chacko had come up against a resolute Dikshit — though, for the record, the former Chief Minister said she would abide by the high command’s final decision. &nbsp;

That said, the fact is that Congress has seen itself pushed out of coalition arrangements in a few key states. In Uttar Pradesh, which sends the highest number of MPs to the Lok Sabha, it was kept out of the SP-BSP-RLD combine. It has failed to stitch an alliance with regional players in Haryana. Its understanding with Chandrababu Naidu’s TDP in the Telangana state polls has collapsed, both in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

And it could not reach an agreement with the Left Front in West Bengal to take on an entrenched Trinamool Congress and a resurgent BJP. To add to its woes, the Congress has been pushed down the pecking order in the past years by the BJP even in states where it had been an important opposition — such as in Odisha and West Bengal, and even the North-East where it has not been able to work out deals with powerful regional outfits to take on the BJP and its allies who are part of the North-East Democratic Alliance. &nbsp;

With a three-way contest now certain in Delhi, the major contenders have decided to play it safe, more or less banking on tested candidates. While the AAP has projected most of its senior faces, the BJP has made only slight changes, such as including cricketer Gautam Gambhir as a candidate. The Congress too has relied on the old faces. If the BJP wins resoundingly, the AAP and the Congress will blame each other for their rout. If the BJP is contained, both will seek to corner the credit to themselves. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

It’s now official, finally. There will be no alliance between the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi. This is a setback for both the parties since they now have to take on the Bharatiya Janata Party individually.

It’s now official, finally. There will be no alliance between the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi. This is a setback for both the parties since they now have to take on the Bharatiya Janata Party individually. The BJP had swept all the seven seats on offer in 2014 and is sitting pretty now, given the division of its anti-votes. The failure to strike an alliance is a reflection of the larger problems that the opposition faces in formulating a coalition to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party at the national level. After various aborted attempts at a national-level alliance, there had been a realisation that the most pragmatic way to prevent the BJP from retaining power was to form state-level alliances. Thus, the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party came together in Maharashtra, the Congress and the National Conference structured a deal in Jammu & Kashmir, the JD (S) and the Congress maintained their partnership in Karnataka despite problems, the Congress struck a coalition with the DMK in Tamil Nadu, and the Samajwadi Party and the BSP, otherwise bitterly opposed to each other, aligned in Uttar Pradesh. It was expected that, along the same lines, the AAP and the Congress would join hands in Delhi. The idea was to somehow short-circuit Modi and his party and work out an arrangement post-poll results. The manner in which the situation unfolded over the weeks in Delhi does no credit to either the Congress or the AAP. All through this time, conflicting signals were sent out, giving the impression that neither of them was approaching the challenge with maturity. But the AAP came out worse because it was seen as the more desperate party to reach an understanding. It was repeatedly snubbed by the Congress and yet it continued to send feelers. Once Sheila Dikshit became Delhi’s Congress, it became near certain that no deal would be made. Dikshit was vehemently opposed to an understanding with the AAP, given the history of conflict between her and AAP supremo and Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Her lobby made it known to the high command that the party would be better off fighting alone. There were two reasons for this stand. The first was that the Congress is expecting a surge in its popularity as compared to 2014 and wanted to cash in on it, without surrendering seats to an alliance partner. The second was that Dikshit and her people were worried about the adverse public reaction to an AAP-Congress partnership — after all, the AAP was born out of an anti-corruption movement directed against a Congress-led regime at the Centre. Despite her stature, Dikshit’s opinion may well have been ignored, had the AAP not insisted on an understanding with the Congress for Haryana as part of the Delhi deal. The Congress was in no mood to accommodate Kejriwal’s party in the neighbouring state because it saw no political gain for itself since the AAP has only a scattered presence in Haryana. The Congress also realised that Kejriwal was seeking to spread his wings by riding piggyback on the Congress and eventually weakening its presence in those regions. It appears from media reports that Congress president Rahul Gandhi favoured an alliance with the AAP in Delhi, and his point man PC Chacko was burning the midnight oil to make this happen. But Chacko had come up against a resolute Dikshit — though, for the record, the former Chief Minister said she would abide by the high command’s final decision. That said, the fact is that Congress has seen itself pushed out of coalition arrangements in a few key states. In Uttar Pradesh, which sends the highest number of MPs to the Lok Sabha, it was kept out of the SP-BSP-RLD combine. It has failed to stitch an alliance with regional players in Haryana. Its understanding with Chandrababu Naidu’s TDP in the Telangana state polls has collapsed, both in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. And it could not reach an agreement with the Left Front in West Bengal to take on an entrenched Trinamool Congress and a resurgent BJP. To add to its woes, the Congress has been pushed down the pecking order in the past years by the BJP even in states where it had been an important opposition — such as in Odisha and West Bengal, and even the North-East where it has not been able to work out deals with powerful regional outfits to take on the BJP and its allies who are part of the North-East Democratic Alliance. With a three-way contest now certain in Delhi, the major contenders have decided to play it safe, more or less banking on tested candidates. While the AAP has projected most of its senior faces, the BJP has made only slight changes, such as including cricketer Gautam Gambhir as a candidate. The Congress too has relied on the old faces. If the BJP wins resoundingly, the AAP and the Congress will blame each other for their rout. If the BJP is contained, both will seek to corner the credit to themselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Alliance fallout: If BJP wins in Delhi, AAP and Congress will blame each other for their rout

Shah Rukh Khan released a rap urging his fans to cast their votes in the ongoing Lok Sabha elections. In March, the Prime Minister had appealed to several Bollywood celebrities to increase awareness among voters.

Shah Rukh Khan turns rapper, urges fans to vote

A trailblazer inside the boxing ring, Olympic bronze-medallist <a href="https://www.wionews.com/search?q=Vijender+Singh">Vijender Singh</a> says he will draw inspiration from Filipino legend Manny Pacquiao in his political innings which start with the Congress in the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/elections">ongoing general elections</a>.&nbsp;

The 33-year-old from the cradle of Indian boxing -- Bhiwani in Haryana -- was on Monday nominated from the South Delhi constituency by the Grand Old Party locking him in a three-way fight with BJP's sitting MP Ramesh Bidhuri and Aam Aadmi Party's Raghav Chadha.&nbsp;

Speaking to PTI on Tuesday, India's only male boxer with an Olympic medal and the first to claim a world championship medal sounded upbeat as he spoke about a decision which not many saw coming.&nbsp;

"I want to be India's Manny Pacquaio. It would be great if I can be as good as him because I am not giving up boxing. That's my first love, will always be. That's my identity and I am not going to give it up," said Vijender as he headed to file his nomination.&nbsp;

The last active sportsperson to fight an election in India was legendary cricketer Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, who lost from Gurgaon back in 1971 while competing for a regional party.&nbsp;

The man Vijender is looking up to is, however, another story. &nbsp;

Pacquiao is the only eight-division world champion in the history of boxing. He is also the first to win major world titles in four out of eight weight classes -- flyweight, featherweight, lightweight and welterweight. &nbsp;

The 40-year-old was elected to Philippines' House of Representatives, from the province of Sarangani, in 2010. He was re-elected in 2013 before winning the election to his country's Senate in June 2016. His term is till 2022. &nbsp;

All this while he remains an active boxer and defended his WBA welterweight title in January this year against American Adrien Broner. 
Vijender said his path is not going to be too different if he goes on to win on debut. &nbsp;

"Even if I make it to Parliament, I will identify myself as boxer Vijender Singh and will continue to juggle my responsibilities," he said. &nbsp;

Vijender's boxing career has been a stellar one, comprising a gold medal in the Asian Games, three medals at the Commonwealth Games, and multiple Asian Championship medals. He turned professional in 2015 and has been unbeaten so far. &nbsp;

He recently signed up with the legendary Bob Arum's Top Rank Promotions and is expected to make his debut on the American soil in the next few months.&nbsp;

Does he have a plan to manage two diverse careers in different continents on top of it?&nbsp;

"What plan? Rab aape hi karda hai sab kuch (God takes care of everything). He wants me to be a leader, he will make me one. I follow his wish," was his rather philosophical take. &nbsp;

Discussing politics, Vijender said the issues he will focus on are youth and, of course, sports.&nbsp;

"I am genuinely concerned about employment, which I think is a prominent issue for the youth. And being a sportsperson, I am also keen on working towards developing sports infrastructure. It's about time we had good infrastructure so that budding athletes can actually flourish," he said.&nbsp;

Asked why he opted for the Congress, a party which did not win a single seat in Delhi in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, Vijender said, "I relate to the ideology and the leadership."&nbsp;

"As is propagated by our leadership, I want to be a friend of the electorate. I don't wish to be the neta that visits once in five years. I am not going to do rallies or road shows. I am going to connect with the voters spontaneously." &nbsp;

Elaborating on his campaign strategy, Vijender said he will be relying heavily on social media. &nbsp;

"I am just going to post where I will be and at what time, on my social media pages. I leave it to people whether they want to join me or not. It is not going to be coordinated because I believe, they should see me as their friend or brother not an imposing neta," said the boxer whose Twitter following stands at 3.79 million.&nbsp;

Being embroiled in a drug scandal in 2013, when he was accused of buying heroin by Punjab Police, remains the only low point of his public life. He was eventually cleared of that as well after a dope test by the National Anti Doping Agency (NADA). &nbsp;

In the rough and tumble of the election campaign, where personal attacks are not unchartered territory, he could become a target but Vijender said it doesn't bother him. &nbsp;

"When have I not been attacked? It's routine for me. And as they say, dogs bark, let them. It didnt affect me earlier, it's not going to affect me now," he said.&nbsp;

"I just want to be someone who touches lives and it is not dependent on whether I win or lose," he added.&nbsp;

A trailblazer inside the boxing ring, Olympic bronze-medallist Vijender Singh says he will draw inspiration from Filipino legend Manny Pacquiao in his political innings which start with the Congress in the ongoing general elections.

A trailblazer inside the boxing ring, Olympic bronze-medallist Vijender Singh says he will draw inspiration from Filipino legend Manny Pacquiao in his political innings which start with the Congress in the ongoing general elections. The 33-year-old from the cradle of Indian boxing -- Bhiwani in Haryana -- was on Monday nominated from the South Delhi constituency by the Grand Old Party locking him in a three-way fight with BJP's sitting MP Ramesh Bidhuri and Aam Aadmi Party's Raghav Chadha. Speaking to PTI on Tuesday, India's only male boxer with an Olympic medal and the first to claim a world championship medal sounded upbeat as he spoke about a decision which not many saw coming. "I want to be India's Manny Pacquaio. It would be great if I can be as good as him because I am not giving up boxing. That's my first love, will always be. That's my identity and I am not going to give it up," said Vijender as he headed to file his nomination. The last active sportsperson to fight an election in India was legendary cricketer Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, who lost from Gurgaon back in 1971 while competing for a regional party. The man Vijender is looking up to is, however, another story. Pacquiao is the only eight-division world champion in the history of boxing. He is also the first to win major world titles in four out of eight weight classes -- flyweight, featherweight, lightweight and welterweight. The 40-year-old was elected to Philippines' House of Representatives, from the province of Sarangani, in 2010. He was re-elected in 2013 before winning the election to his country's Senate in June 2016. His term is till 2022. All this while he remains an active boxer and defended his WBA welterweight title in January this year against American Adrien Broner. Vijender said his path is not going to be too different if he goes on to win on debut. "Even if I make it to Parliament, I will identify myself as boxer Vijender Singh and will continue to juggle my responsibilities," he said. Vijender's boxing career has been a stellar one, comprising a gold medal in the Asian Games, three medals at the Commonwealth Games, and multiple Asian Championship medals. He turned professional in 2015 and has been unbeaten so far. He recently signed up with the legendary Bob Arum's Top Rank Promotions and is expected to make his debut on the American soil in the next few months. Does he have a plan to manage two diverse careers in different continents on top of it? "What plan? Rab aape hi karda hai sab kuch (God takes care of everything). He wants me to be a leader, he will make me one. I follow his wish," was his rather philosophical take. Discussing politics, Vijender said the issues he will focus on are youth and, of course, sports. "I am genuinely concerned about employment, which I think is a prominent issue for the youth. And being a sportsperson, I am also keen on working towards developing sports infrastructure. It's about time we had good infrastructure so that budding athletes can actually flourish," he said. Asked why he opted for the Congress, a party which did not win a single seat in Delhi in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, Vijender said, "I relate to the ideology and the leadership." "As is propagated by our leadership, I want to be a friend of the electorate. I don't wish to be the neta that visits once in five years. I am not going to do rallies or road shows. I am going to connect with the voters spontaneously." Elaborating on his campaign strategy, Vijender said he will be relying heavily on social media. "I am just going to post where I will be and at what time, on my social media pages. I leave it to people whether they want to join me or not. It is not going to be coordinated because I believe, they should see me as their friend or brother not an imposing neta," said the boxer whose Twitter following stands at 3.79 million. Being embroiled in a drug scandal in 2013, when he was accused of buying heroin by Punjab Police, remains the only low point of his public life. He was eventually cleared of that as well after a dope test by the National Anti Doping Agency (NADA). In the rough and tumble of the election campaign, where personal attacks are not unchartered territory, he could become a target but Vijender said it doesn't bother him. "When have I not been attacked? It's routine for me. And as they say, dogs bark, let them. It didnt affect me earlier, it's not going to affect me now," he said. "I just want to be someone who touches lives and it is not dependent on whether I win or lose," he added.

I am aspiring to be India's Manny Pacquaio: Vijender Singh

How Inclusive is India to 'Third Sex'. Do Transgender take part in Election? To know more, watch the video.

India Election Watch: The Story of India's Transgender Voters

The Indian politico-diplomatic policy contour, in relation to two major events slated for end April in the Chinese calendar, is indicative of a carefully nuanced posture that Delhi is adopting towards Beijing, even as the world’s largest democracy is in the middle of a major national election.

The Modi led NDA government is in caretaker mode and a new Prime Minister will assume office after May 23 but some import-laden Indian policies that are unfolding this week warrant scrutiny.

On April 23 (Tuesday), two Indian naval ships – the INS Kolkata, a guided-missile destroyer and INS Shakti the fleet tanker will be part of the International Fleet Review (IFR) that China is conducting off Qingdao as part of the 70th-anniversary celebrations of the PLA Navy. Chinese President Xi Jinping will review the 50 naval ships assembled from 13 nations (excluding the host) on Tuesday. Major foreign navies represented at the PLA(N) IFR &nbsp;include Russia, Japan and India and some ASEAN nations. It may be recalled that India had conducted an IFR in February 2016 that saw 100 ships from 50 navies anchored off Visakhapatnam and the assemblage included two PLA(N) frigates.

International fleet reviews are a demonstration of a nation’s politico-diplomatic and military credibility as also acceptability and China is engaged in a similar pursuit against the backdrop of regional anxiety and unease over the kind of military assertiveness that Beijing has demonstrated in recent years in relation to its territorial claims in the East Asia-western Pacific continuum.

But in contrast to this friendly overture apropos the Qingdao IFR, Delhi has decided that India will not be part of the second OBOR (one belt-one road) summit being held in Beijing later in the week (April 26). This summit meeting has been billed as the biggest diplomatic event for China in 2019 and is acknowledged as a hugely ambitious personal project of President Xi Jinping that has complex strategic implications linked to the ‘rise of China’.

Delhi had stayed away from the inaugural summit in 2017 due to the manner in which India’s sovereignty claims over POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) were ignored among other concerns. Yet given the manner in which the post-Doklam tension was sought to be assuaged at the informal Xi-Modi summit Wuhan, it was expected that India would review its non-participation at the second OBOR (aka Belt and Road Initiative) &nbsp;summit. &nbsp;&nbsp;

However, in what was seen as a major disappointment for Beijing, earlier in March, the Indian ambassador to China Vikram Misri explained the rationale for the Indian refusal to be part of the 2019 summit. Misri noted: &nbsp;"Above all, connectivity initiatives must be pursued in a manner that respects the sovereignty, equality and territorial integrity of nations".

He further added: "No country can participate in an initiative that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity. To be honest, we have made no secret of our views and our position on the BRI is clear and consistent and one that we have conveyed to the authorities concerned.”&nbsp; 
 
It is understood that most of the global community would be present at the second BRI &nbsp;summit, including nations with whom China currently has an uneasy or tense relationship including the USA and Japan and India’s determined ‘absence’ would be visible.

The inference that could be made is that by adopting two very different policy &nbsp;options in relation to the PLA (Navy) IFR on April 23 and the BRI summit on April 26, Delhi &nbsp;is signalling both malleability and resolve in what may be described as an ‘issue-based’ and carefully calibrated approach in its overall China policy.

In yet another development, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has set up a new division designated the Indo-Pacific and it is understood that this division will integrate policies pertaining to the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and deliberations related to the Quad. The latter refers to maritime/naval consultations between the USA, Japan, India and Australia.

The Indo-Pacific is both a geographic entity that links the two oceans – the Indian and the Pacific; and a nascent strategic construct mooted by the USA in some detail in October 2017. The Indian formulation in relation to the Indo-Pacific was outlined by PM Modi at the Shangri-La dialogue in mid-2018 which dwelt on the centrality of ASEAN in this maritime framework. China has its own reservations about this yoking of the two oceans and the strategic sub-text advanced by the USA and the Indian decision to formally create a new division dedicated to the Indo-Pacific will not go unnoticed.

Managing the bilateral with China will be a major challenge for the next Indian government and the policy contours of end April, as manifest in the IFR and the BRI summit, will remain important punctuation in this uneasy relationship between the two Asian giants.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The Indian politico-diplomatic policy contour, in relation to two major events slated for end April in the Chinese calendar, is indicative of a carefully nuanced posture that Delhi is adopting towards Beijing, even as the world’s largest democracy is in the middle of a major national election.

The Indian politico-diplomatic policy contour, in relation to two major events slated for end April in the Chinese calendar, is indicative of a carefully nuanced posture that Delhi is adopting towards Beijing, even as the world’s largest democracy is in the middle of a major national election. The Modi led NDA government is in caretaker mode and a new Prime Minister will assume office after May 23 but some import-laden Indian policies that are unfolding this week warrant scrutiny. On April 23 (Tuesday), two Indian naval ships – the INS Kolkata, a guided-missile destroyer and INS Shakti the fleet tanker will be part of the International Fleet Review (IFR) that China is conducting off Qingdao as part of the 70th-anniversary celebrations of the PLA Navy. Chinese President Xi Jinping will review the 50 naval ships assembled from 13 nations (excluding the host) on Tuesday. Major foreign navies represented at the PLA(N) IFR include Russia, Japan and India and some ASEAN nations. It may be recalled that India had conducted an IFR in February 2016 that saw 100 ships from 50 navies anchored off Visakhapatnam and the assemblage included two PLA(N) frigates. International fleet reviews are a demonstration of a nation’s politico-diplomatic and military credibility as also acceptability and China is engaged in a similar pursuit against the backdrop of regional anxiety and unease over the kind of military assertiveness that Beijing has demonstrated in recent years in relation to its territorial claims in the East Asia-western Pacific continuum. But in contrast to this friendly overture apropos the Qingdao IFR, Delhi has decided that India will not be part of the second OBOR (one belt-one road) summit being held in Beijing later in the week (April 26). This summit meeting has been billed as the biggest diplomatic event for China in 2019 and is acknowledged as a hugely ambitious personal project of President Xi Jinping that has complex strategic implications linked to the ‘rise of China’. Delhi had stayed away from the inaugural summit in 2017 due to the manner in which India’s sovereignty claims over POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) were ignored among other concerns. Yet given the manner in which the post-Doklam tension was sought to be assuaged at the informal Xi-Modi summit Wuhan, it was expected that India would review its non-participation at the second OBOR (aka Belt and Road Initiative) summit. However, in what was seen as a major disappointment for Beijing, earlier in March, the Indian ambassador to China Vikram Misri explained the rationale for the Indian refusal to be part of the 2019 summit. Misri noted: "Above all, connectivity initiatives must be pursued in a manner that respects the sovereignty, equality and territorial integrity of nations". He further added: "No country can participate in an initiative that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity. To be honest, we have made no secret of our views and our position on the BRI is clear and consistent and one that we have conveyed to the authorities concerned.” It is understood that most of the global community would be present at the second BRI summit, including nations with whom China currently has an uneasy or tense relationship including the USA and Japan and India’s determined ‘absence’ would be visible. The inference that could be made is that by adopting two very different policy options in relation to the PLA (Navy) IFR on April 23 and the BRI summit on April 26, Delhi is signalling both malleability and resolve in what may be described as an ‘issue-based’ and carefully calibrated approach in its overall China policy. In yet another development, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has set up a new division designated the Indo-Pacific and it is understood that this division will integrate policies pertaining to the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and deliberations related to the Quad. The latter refers to maritime/naval consultations between the USA, Japan, India and Australia. The Indo-Pacific is both a geographic entity that links the two oceans – the Indian and the Pacific; and a nascent strategic construct mooted by the USA in some detail in October 2017. The Indian formulation in relation to the Indo-Pacific was outlined by PM Modi at the Shangri-La dialogue in mid-2018 which dwelt on the centrality of ASEAN in this maritime framework. China has its own reservations about this yoking of the two oceans and the strategic sub-text advanced by the USA and the Indian decision to formally create a new division dedicated to the Indo-Pacific will not go unnoticed. Managing the bilateral with China will be a major challenge for the next Indian government and the policy contours of end April, as manifest in the IFR and the BRI summit, will remain important punctuation in this uneasy relationship between the two Asian giants. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Managing bilateral relations with China will be a major challenge for the next Indian government

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

We brings to you LIVE visuals from Mainpuri rally where Mulayam Singh Yadav and Mayawati can be seen sharing stage after 24 years. Watch full video to know more.

Watch: Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav and Mayawati at a rally in Mainpuri

Watch: Visuals from polling station in different places where people can be ssen casting their vote. Watch full video to know more.#LokSabhaElections2019, #IndiaVotes, #Election2019

Lok Sabha Election 2019: Voting in 95 constituencies in 2nd phase today

A unique story of patriotism & dedication came into light from Assam’s Karimganj. A 116-year-old man is all set for Lok Sabha elections 2019. Mahmud Ali never misses a chance to vote and even encourages his family to use their ‘right’ properly.

116-year-old man is all set for Lok Sabha elections 2019

These are elections times. This appears that unprecedented dirt-digging has been a key feature of this election.

The Rafale saga goes on unending. We have had the very credibility of EVMs being challenged and proved baseless. Still, the Honourable Supreme Court's interventions prescribed the safeguard of VVPAT being benchmarked. Not satisfied with this, some political stakeholders have asked for 50% verification of EVM votes through VVPAT. Does it betray an agenda? I believe it does.

Further, the content of the campaign indeed has also been not just divisive but also unchaste and acrimonious, with star campaigners being brought from across the border.

Each of these may have adverse consequences for the future government in power. Let us see how?

Structure of the election machinery

First, let us get the structure right. Constitutionally, the Election Commission of India is an independent and autonomous body vested with the superintendence and oversight of the elections. Elections are conducted through an instrumentality of state governments. Each state government has a Chief Electoral Officer. District Magistrates and Collectors are the returning officers of the designated constituency covered by their districts.

Further, the incumbency of compiling the electoral rolls is with the state electoral officers. The logistics for the elections are provided by the state government. The number of electors in each booth is the domain of the state government. How many voters shall vote in a particular booth is solely the domain of the state government. It could be anything between 500 to 1200, depending on the number of voters and resource and space availability, etc.&nbsp;

However, as a ballpark figure based on the time-motion study, each voter in the normal circumstance is accorded approximately 3 minutes for voting after s/he reports to the booth, and this does not include the time spent in long queues.

Effect of increasing VVPAT samples

If VVPAT is insisted on and the sample size is increased, each such VVPAT procedure increases the time required for a voter to approximately 7 minutes. This will delay and dilate the pace of voting. Given the unprecedented voting percentages in certain areas in the first phase, the insistence on increasing the VVPAT sample is an attempt to adversely affect the voting percentage. The political stakeholders can play mischief by intervening to delay the voting percentage in booths which do not have their strengths.

Unpleasant statements

Now let me share some of the statements made by stakeholders. At the outset, let us take the case of Mayawati's direct appeal to voters of a particular community. Indeed, it was not in good taste. Rightly, the Election Commission of India intervened and banned her from campaigning for 48 hours. This concurrently happened with the Chief Minister of UP Yogiji referring to the Muslim League with not-so-kind words. It was appropriate that he too was reprimanded and sanctioned by Election Commission of India with a ban for 72 hours.

Similarly, we had Maneka Gandhi, a Union Minister, giving the ABCD paradigm. my personal view is that there was nothing wrong in this. I don't hold any brief for Maneka Gandhi. But this is common in many democracies. Elected representatives always pander to their strengths. There are examples of this in many countries. After all, it is the voter who choses, and has the overriding right to an extension of support on public utilities from his elected representative.&nbsp;

Absolutely unacceptable

But what took the cake is the unparliamentary utterances of Azam Khan against his co-contestant, a woman. Such condemnable remarks should have attracted exemplary sanctions, But he too was sanctioned with a 72-hour ban.

On the issue of this sanction, his son has audaciously stated that Azam Khan and Mayawati are reprimanded because they are Muslim and Dalit respectively. I also hear that Navjot Singh Sidhu has again sought votes on communal lines from a particular community, which is also unpardonable should attract sanctions.

Bangladeshi campaigners

Another interesting episode comes to light. It has come to light that two Bangladeshi artists have been found campaigning for TMC candidates in West Bengal. This is fraught with dangerous consequences. Being an border state with huge flux of illegal immigration, human trafficking happening through its borders, this is an unacceptable situation in West Bengal.

Ironically, Mr Basu, the Additional Chief Electoral Officer in West Bengal, has informed that the Representation of People Act does not proscribe foreigners from campaigning in Indian elections.

Let us get it right, the draftsmen of the RP Act never envisaged that foreigners will be called into the campaign, and that they trusted the political parties with a benchmark of integrity. Further, from a legal perspective, the golden rule is that when specific legislation does not cover illegality, then the general criminal provisions relating to that offence shall cover that.

This is corroborated by the fact that several provisions of the Indian Penal Code have been dovetailed in the Election Manual, as may be confirmed from Election Commission's website.

Going by the spirit of this, the conditions of the visa, whatever be the category of visas of these artists, is that the visiting foreigners cannot interfere in matters of state and sovereignty in the host country. Participation in elections campaign is surely an act covered under this condition.

Home Ministry intervened and Bangladesh government as well 
 
The Ministry of Home Affairs should have immediately cancelled their visas and deported them, and such an action would have been legitimate and not have been prejudicial to the ongoing electoral process. Instead, the MHA sought a report from FRRO of the state, who is again an officer of the state government, whose ruling dispensation these two artists were supporting.

Let me clear any doubts here that the Foreigner Regional Registration Officer of the state is under the state police, except for Delhi, where there is a separate FRRO. The report will either not come or the content of the report can be easily foreseen. However, as per last the report has come that the Ministry of Home Affairs had, relying upon the report from the Bureau of Immigration, cancelled the visa and given a leave-India notice to these two artists.&nbsp;

Concurrently, it is reported that the Bangladeshi High Commission also did a more professional job by warning these artists and asking them to report their mission office is Kolkata for further deportation.

The denigrating election process in foreign lands 
 
On an earlier occasion too we have had such instances, not of the same content but all the same denigrating Indian elections processes and institutions. The so-called EVM efficacy test was conducted in UK is still fresh in public memory. But, may I also flag your memory that Salman Khurshid, before 2014 general elections, had made statements in the UK denigrating the overarching trend of the Election Commission and Supreme Court. But these are games in which political stakeholders play and although unacceptable, it is still expected.

Alleged petitions by occupational groups 
 
What has been more unprecedented in this election is the fake petitions floating on social media that several groups with professional and occupational affinity appealing not to vote for A or B party.

First, we had some 600 artists of Bollywood who signed an appeal not to vote for Narendra Modi. Later on, it was reported that some of the artists included in the list of signatories denied it. Later, another fake petition alleged to have been sent to the President of India by retired officers of the defence forces. The list again included names of former Army Chief, Air Force Chief, etc, who have publicly denied it. Yesterday, I received a message on Whatsapp that "A group of bureaucrats &amp; defence officers will make a representation to the President".&nbsp;

Fraught with dangerous consequences 
 
Such tendencies are fraught with danger for the security and economy of the country. It can be with the objective of derailing the economic strides, avenge Pulwama or tearing the social fabric to shreds.

The question to the readers is, who is behind all this? Who is vitiating the poll atmosphere? Is it an evil design to manipulate the electoral process, which has stood the test of time over all these years. The nation seeks answers.

(This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the <a href="https://zeenews.india.com/blogs/many-undesirable-dangerous-trends-in-2019-lok-sabha-elections-2196324.html">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

&nbsp;

These are elections times. This appears that unprecedented dirt-digging has been a key feature of this election. The Rafale saga goes on unending. We have had the very credibility of EVMs being challenged and proved baseless.

These are elections times. This appears that unprecedented dirt-digging has been a key feature of this election. The Rafale saga goes on unending. We have had the very credibility of EVMs being challenged and proved baseless. Still, the Honourable Supreme Court's interventions prescribed the safeguard of VVPAT being benchmarked. Not satisfied with this, some political stakeholders have asked for 50% verification of EVM votes through VVPAT. Does it betray an agenda? I believe it does. Further, the content of the campaign indeed has also been not just divisive but also unchaste and acrimonious, with star campaigners being brought from across the border. Each of these may have adverse consequences for the future government in power. Let us see how? Structure of the election machinery First, let us get the structure right. Constitutionally, the Election Commission of India is an independent and autonomous body vested with the superintendence and oversight of the elections. Elections are conducted through an instrumentality of state governments. Each state government has a Chief Electoral Officer. District Magistrates and Collectors are the returning officers of the designated constituency covered by their districts. Further, the incumbency of compiling the electoral rolls is with the state electoral officers. The logistics for the elections are provided by the state government. The number of electors in each booth is the domain of the state government. How many voters shall vote in a particular booth is solely the domain of the state government. It could be anything between 500 to 1200, depending on the number of voters and resource and space availability, etc. However, as a ballpark figure based on the time-motion study, each voter in the normal circumstance is accorded approximately 3 minutes for voting after s/he reports to the booth, and this does not include the time spent in long queues. Effect of increasing VVPAT samples If VVPAT is insisted on and the sample size is increased, each such VVPAT procedure increases the time required for a voter to approximately 7 minutes. This will delay and dilate the pace of voting. Given the unprecedented voting percentages in certain areas in the first phase, the insistence on increasing the VVPAT sample is an attempt to adversely affect the voting percentage. The political stakeholders can play mischief by intervening to delay the voting percentage in booths which do not have their strengths. Unpleasant statements Now let me share some of the statements made by stakeholders. At the outset, let us take the case of Mayawati's direct appeal to voters of a particular community. Indeed, it was not in good taste. Rightly, the Election Commission of India intervened and banned her from campaigning for 48 hours. This concurrently happened with the Chief Minister of UP Yogiji referring to the Muslim League with not-so-kind words. It was appropriate that he too was reprimanded and sanctioned by Election Commission of India with a ban for 72 hours. Similarly, we had Maneka Gandhi, a Union Minister, giving the ABCD paradigm. my personal view is that there was nothing wrong in this. I don't hold any brief for Maneka Gandhi. But this is common in many democracies. Elected representatives always pander to their strengths. There are examples of this in many countries. After all, it is the voter who choses, and has the overriding right to an extension of support on public utilities from his elected representative. Absolutely unacceptable But what took the cake is the unparliamentary utterances of Azam Khan against his co-contestant, a woman. Such condemnable remarks should have attracted exemplary sanctions, But he too was sanctioned with a 72-hour ban. On the issue of this sanction, his son has audaciously stated that Azam Khan and Mayawati are reprimanded because they are Muslim and Dalit respectively. I also hear that Navjot Singh Sidhu has again sought votes on communal lines from a particular community, which is also unpardonable should attract sanctions. Bangladeshi campaigners Another interesting episode comes to light. It has come to light that two Bangladeshi artists have been found campaigning for TMC candidates in West Bengal. This is fraught with dangerous consequences. Being an border state with huge flux of illegal immigration, human trafficking happening through its borders, this is an unacceptable situation in West Bengal. Ironically, Mr Basu, the Additional Chief Electoral Officer in West Bengal, has informed that the Representation of People Act does not proscribe foreigners from campaigning in Indian elections. Let us get it right, the draftsmen of the RP Act never envisaged that foreigners will be called into the campaign, and that they trusted the political parties with a benchmark of integrity. Further, from a legal perspective, the golden rule is that when specific legislation does not cover illegality, then the general criminal provisions relating to that offence shall cover that. This is corroborated by the fact that several provisions of the Indian Penal Code have been dovetailed in the Election Manual, as may be confirmed from Election Commission's website. Going by the spirit of this, the conditions of the visa, whatever be the category of visas of these artists, is that the visiting foreigners cannot interfere in matters of state and sovereignty in the host country. Participation in elections campaign is surely an act covered under this condition. Home Ministry intervened and Bangladesh government as well The Ministry of Home Affairs should have immediately cancelled their visas and deported them, and such an action would have been legitimate and not have been prejudicial to the ongoing electoral process. Instead, the MHA sought a report from FRRO of the state, who is again an officer of the state government, whose ruling dispensation these two artists were supporting. Let me clear any doubts here that the Foreigner Regional Registration Officer of the state is under the state police, except for Delhi, where there is a separate FRRO. The report will either not come or the content of the report can be easily foreseen. However, as per last the report has come that the Ministry of Home Affairs had, relying upon the report from the Bureau of Immigration, cancelled the visa and given a leave-India notice to these two artists. Concurrently, it is reported that the Bangladeshi High Commission also did a more professional job by warning these artists and asking them to report their mission office is Kolkata for further deportation. The denigrating election process in foreign lands On an earlier occasion too we have had such instances, not of the same content but all the same denigrating Indian elections processes and institutions. The so-called EVM efficacy test was conducted in UK is still fresh in public memory. But, may I also flag your memory that Salman Khurshid, before 2014 general elections, had made statements in the UK denigrating the overarching trend of the Election Commission and Supreme Court. But these are games in which political stakeholders play and although unacceptable, it is still expected. Alleged petitions by occupational groups What has been more unprecedented in this election is the fake petitions floating on social media that several groups with professional and occupational affinity appealing not to vote for A or B party. First, we had some 600 artists of Bollywood who signed an appeal not to vote for Narendra Modi. Later on, it was reported that some of the artists included in the list of signatories denied it. Later, another fake petition alleged to have been sent to the President of India by retired officers of the defence forces. The list again included names of former Army Chief, Air Force Chief, etc, who have publicly denied it. Yesterday, I received a message on Whatsapp that "A group of bureaucrats & defence officers will make a representation to the President". Fraught with dangerous consequences Such tendencies are fraught with danger for the security and economy of the country. It can be with the objective of derailing the economic strides, avenge Pulwama or tearing the social fabric to shreds. The question to the readers is, who is behind all this? Who is vitiating the poll atmosphere? Is it an evil design to manipulate the electoral process, which has stood the test of time over all these years. The nation seeks answers. (This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Many undesirable, dangerous trends in 2019 Lok Sabha elections

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide.&nbsp;

Modi instantly ensured that affected farmers got a higher compensation and that all the grain they produced was procured at the minimum support price (MSP).&nbsp;

Prime Minister Modi was flustered by the criticism that he personally did not visit the affected families, but Modi was clear in his thoughts: He was the PM and his job was to take decisions and get the machinery to act. Modi knew perception matters first, but actions last forever.

The NDA – despite the Congress blitzkrieg – has done plenty to alleviate the plight of farmers. It has prepared soil health cards for 170 million individual farm holdings to improve productivity, provided water through completing irrigation projects, ensured power for pumps and neem-coated fertilisers to prevent adulteration.&nbsp;

The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, an insurance scheme, now compensates the farmers for crops lost to natural calamities. He raised the MSP for grains and pulses.&nbsp;

Modinomics at work was at its best. Remember, when he had taken the oath, he had inherited an economy derisively scorned by both domestic and global investors.&nbsp;

India was a part of the ‘fragile five’ and there was the sword of Damocles of a credit rating downgrade to ‘Junk’ status. It was a precariously perched economy, akin to a poisoned chalice. But Modinomics has triggered a sturdy ballast to help India emerge as the world’s fifth largest (in GDP terms) and fastest growing economy.&nbsp;

So what has helped Modinomics’ work even as rivals stepped up their hate campaign? It was all about the nation and its economic growth. The most important trigger of Modinomics was the goods and services tax (GST) - the biggest indirect tax reform since Independence - which is now demolishing trade barriers, fuelling aggregate demand, compelling tax compliance, reworking logistics and manufacturing architecture.&nbsp;

It has done away with sub-scale operational outposts. What is in place is efficient, scalable and closer-to-consumer operational hubs, which are harmonising rates across states by demolishing trade barriers.&nbsp;

So who’s in trouble? Tax evading entities and unorganised brokers. The GST, in short, is giving a leg-up to aggregate demand by IBC regime for creating a transparent and legally-sound mechanism for resurrecting financially-distressed entities into viable, productive entities.&nbsp;

The World Bank says resolutions in &nbsp;Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) era is now taking 270 days, as compared to the pre-IBC era and its five-year period. In short, Modinomics is working.&nbsp;

Demonetisation - loudly criticised by the opposition - has been a brilliant force multiplier for the economy’s financialisation. It was like an assault on tax cheats, terror financiers and illicit carpetbaggers.&nbsp;

It helped the billion-plus nation to emerge out of its excessive reliance on a cash ecosystem that for generations, fuelled a dirty, dark, parallel economy, depriving India of legitimate taxes and posing tough challenges to law enforcement and security agencies.&nbsp;

It was Modinomics’ bold assault on tax cheats and cash hoarders, asking Indians to follow the rule of the law and not avoid taxes.&nbsp;

Indians realised increased tax means increased government expenditure on its people. The move also helped the mutual fund and insurance market, because a large chunk of cash in bank deposits moved through these intermediaries into the equity market.

Modinomics also did wonders when the government signed the Monetary Policy Framework Agreement with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the maximum tolerable consumer inflation rate that RBI should target to achieve price stability.&nbsp;

In one shot, Prime Minister Modi made the RBI responsible through the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) for containing consumer inflation at 4 per cent -- with a standard deviation of 2 per cent -- in the medium term.&nbsp;

Hence, Modinomics tackled the issue of high inflation impacting the poor and - at the same time - encouraged long-term capital investments by businesses.&nbsp;

Realising that the previous government messed up natural resources, getting embroiled in big buck corruption scams like the Coal and 2G scandal, Modi turned auctioning of natural resources into a crystal clear, competitive and price optimising allotment of natural resources like coal, minerals, spectrum and land.

This is growth and power for a billion-plus nation.

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-modinomics-has-played-big-role-in-india-s-growth-narrative-2739620">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp;

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide.

Narendra Modi’s first big challenge on becoming the prime minister was the big farmers’ crisis in March 2015. Unseasonal rains damaged crops in Punjab and Haryana and many committed suicide. Modi instantly ensured that affected farmers got a higher compensation and that all the grain they produced was procured at the minimum support price (MSP). Prime Minister Modi was flustered by the criticism that he personally did not visit the affected families, but Modi was clear in his thoughts: He was the PM and his job was to take decisions and get the machinery to act. Modi knew perception matters first, but actions last forever. The NDA – despite the Congress blitzkrieg – has done plenty to alleviate the plight of farmers. It has prepared soil health cards for 170 million individual farm holdings to improve productivity, provided water through completing irrigation projects, ensured power for pumps and neem-coated fertilisers to prevent adulteration. The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, an insurance scheme, now compensates the farmers for crops lost to natural calamities. He raised the MSP for grains and pulses. Modinomics at work was at its best. Remember, when he had taken the oath, he had inherited an economy derisively scorned by both domestic and global investors. India was a part of the ‘fragile five’ and there was the sword of Damocles of a credit rating downgrade to ‘Junk’ status. It was a precariously perched economy, akin to a poisoned chalice. But Modinomics has triggered a sturdy ballast to help India emerge as the world’s fifth largest (in GDP terms) and fastest growing economy. So what has helped Modinomics’ work even as rivals stepped up their hate campaign? It was all about the nation and its economic growth. The most important trigger of Modinomics was the goods and services tax (GST) - the biggest indirect tax reform since Independence - which is now demolishing trade barriers, fuelling aggregate demand, compelling tax compliance, reworking logistics and manufacturing architecture. It has done away with sub-scale operational outposts. What is in place is efficient, scalable and closer-to-consumer operational hubs, which are harmonising rates across states by demolishing trade barriers. So who’s in trouble? Tax evading entities and unorganised brokers. The GST, in short, is giving a leg-up to aggregate demand by IBC regime for creating a transparent and legally-sound mechanism for resurrecting financially-distressed entities into viable, productive entities. The World Bank says resolutions in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) era is now taking 270 days, as compared to the pre-IBC era and its five-year period. In short, Modinomics is working. Demonetisation - loudly criticised by the opposition - has been a brilliant force multiplier for the economy’s financialisation. It was like an assault on tax cheats, terror financiers and illicit carpetbaggers. It helped the billion-plus nation to emerge out of its excessive reliance on a cash ecosystem that for generations, fuelled a dirty, dark, parallel economy, depriving India of legitimate taxes and posing tough challenges to law enforcement and security agencies. It was Modinomics’ bold assault on tax cheats and cash hoarders, asking Indians to follow the rule of the law and not avoid taxes. Indians realised increased tax means increased government expenditure on its people. The move also helped the mutual fund and insurance market, because a large chunk of cash in bank deposits moved through these intermediaries into the equity market. Modinomics also did wonders when the government signed the Monetary Policy Framework Agreement with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on the maximum tolerable consumer inflation rate that RBI should target to achieve price stability. In one shot, Prime Minister Modi made the RBI responsible through the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) for containing consumer inflation at 4 per cent -- with a standard deviation of 2 per cent -- in the medium term. Hence, Modinomics tackled the issue of high inflation impacting the poor and - at the same time - encouraged long-term capital investments by businesses. Realising that the previous government messed up natural resources, getting embroiled in big buck corruption scams like the Coal and 2G scandal, Modi turned auctioning of natural resources into a crystal clear, competitive and price optimising allotment of natural resources like coal, minerals, spectrum and land. This is growth and power for a billion-plus nation. (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.)

Modinomics has played big role in India’s growth narrative

Hearing a petition challenging the validity of the electoral bond scheme, the Supreme Court on Friday directed all political parties to disclose details of donations received via electoral bond.

Supreme Court directs all parties to disclose details of donations received via electoral bondc

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all.

Today, it is very difficult to distinguish fringe from mainstream politics. Many would argue that the religious fringe has become the mainstream and the mainstream is on the periphery of political discourse, but the fact remains that politics in India is hell-bent on labelling the other in our society.

Muslims have become the new beating boy of Indian politics. Not only they have been dehumanised in the political discourse but anything to do with minority has become a bad word. It has become okay for the political class to arouse sentiments of the majority community of imagined threat posed by the Muslims of India.&nbsp;

They have been labelled as a community which got better treatment from the government whereas the majority was left to eat the crumbs. BJP-RSS have had a field day in elections whereby every senior politician has used to describe Muslims as a community which has affected the health of the country.&nbsp;

Rahul Gandhi contesting from Wayanad too was reflected from the same perspective. Yogi Adityanath has been consistently using religious idioms to describe those who are with BJP and those against it.&nbsp;

The worst is that the debate on ‘Muslim Exceptionalism’ is constructed on imagined benefits which have been secretly passed on to the Muslim community post-independence at the expense of Hindus.&nbsp;

RSS is playing with fire. Instead of integrating the Muslims in the national mainstream it is politically alienating them. Fact is barring a couple of pockets in India, Muslims have opted for Hindus to lead them politically.&nbsp;

I would say that those who chose to stay behind have never supported a Muslim leader who had a national stature.&nbsp;I call it a Jinnah complex, lest they get accused of cession again. India today is standing at the cusp of creating a huge divide between majority and minority which will stay with us. It cannot be wished away.&nbsp;

Their identity cannot be wished away. Their existence cannot be wished away. They do not need charity nor anyone needs to feel sorry for them. What is required is a political approach which allows them to be part of the system for which they are meant - which is Indian Muslims. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all.

Union Minister Maneka Gandhi’s statement that if Muslims do not vote for them then they would find it difficult to get her recommendation for jobs did not raise an eyebrow at all. Today, it is very difficult to distinguish fringe from mainstream politics. Many would argue that the religious fringe has become the mainstream and the mainstream is on the periphery of political discourse, but the fact remains that politics in India is hell-bent on labelling the other in our society. Muslims have become the new beating boy of Indian politics. Not only they have been dehumanised in the political discourse but anything to do with minority has become a bad word. It has become okay for the political class to arouse sentiments of the majority community of imagined threat posed by the Muslims of India. They have been labelled as a community which got better treatment from the government whereas the majority was left to eat the crumbs. BJP-RSS have had a field day in elections whereby every senior politician has used to describe Muslims as a community which has affected the health of the country. Rahul Gandhi contesting from Wayanad too was reflected from the same perspective. Yogi Adityanath has been consistently using religious idioms to describe those who are with BJP and those against it. The worst is that the debate on ‘Muslim Exceptionalism’ is constructed on imagined benefits which have been secretly passed on to the Muslim community post-independence at the expense of Hindus. RSS is playing with fire. Instead of integrating the Muslims in the national mainstream it is politically alienating them. Fact is barring a couple of pockets in India, Muslims have opted for Hindus to lead them politically. I would say that those who chose to stay behind have never supported a Muslim leader who had a national stature. I call it a Jinnah complex, lest they get accused of cession again. India today is standing at the cusp of creating a huge divide between majority and minority which will stay with us. It cannot be wished away. Their identity cannot be wished away. Their existence cannot be wished away. They do not need charity nor anyone needs to feel sorry for them. What is required is a political approach which allows them to be part of the system for which they are meant - which is Indian Muslims. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Political marginalisation of Muslims in Indian politics

Polling in Thursday's assembly and Lok Sabha elections in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/lok-sabha-polls-2019-tdp-worker-killed-as-clashes-mark-polling-in-andhra-pradesh-209528">Andhra Pradesh</a>, that went past midnight, stood at 76.69 per cent, with police confirming the deaths of two people in poll-related incidents.

The figure is 1.27 per cent less than the total votes polled in the 2014 elections.

But Election Commission authorities here expect the percentage to increase by at least one per cent as the final tabulation of votes polled in all 175 Assembly segments was still continuing.

There are 3,93,45,717 voters in the state.

Polling continued past midnight Thursday in over 200 polling stations because of technical glitches in EVMs during the day.

"We are awaiting final reports from Returning Officers from all constituencies.

At last count early Friday morning, the polling percentage was 76.69. That could almost be the final figure. If at all, there could be a one per cent increase," a senior official in the EC here said.

The EC authorities initially expected the polling to cross 80 per cent as a large number of voters had queued up in all polling stations.

Police Friday confirmed that two persons were killed in election-related violence in the state, contrary to conflicting claims of the ruling TDP and opposition YSR Congress.

The TDP and the YSRC issued statements claiming that two each of their workers were killed by rivals on Thursday.

The Director General of Police issued a statement saying there were 'only two deaths' related to the elections as against six in 2014.

While one TDP worker was killed in a group clash in Tadipatri constituency in Anantapuramu district, a YSRC worker's father died accidentally, caught in a clash between TDP and YSRC activists in Tamballapalle in Chittoor district.

"The 68-year-old man was at the scene of the clash, trying to prevent his son from being a participant. He suffered a stone-hit near his eye and succumbed on the way to the hospital," Chittoor district Superintendent of&nbsp;

Police Vikrant Patil told PTI over the phone.

On Thursday, YSRC claimed one of its workers was killed by TDP men in Tadipatri but it turned out that the man only went into a coma after sustaining injuries.

TDP president Chandrababu Naidu's son Nara Lokesh tweeted Friday that two of his party workers were "hacked to death".

He did not, however, specify where the second incident occurred.

Police confirmed only the Tadipatri incident.

Polling in Thursday's assembly and Lok Sabha elections in Andhra Pradesh, that went past midnight, stood at 76.69 per cent, with police confirming the deaths of two people in poll-related incidents.

Polling in Thursday's assembly and Lok Sabha elections in Andhra Pradesh, that went past midnight, stood at 76.69 per cent, with police confirming the deaths of two people in poll-related incidents. The figure is 1.27 per cent less than the total votes polled in the 2014 elections. But Election Commission authorities here expect the percentage to increase by at least one per cent as the final tabulation of votes polled in all 175 Assembly segments was still continuing. There are 3,93,45,717 voters in the state. Polling continued past midnight Thursday in over 200 polling stations because of technical glitches in EVMs during the day. "We are awaiting final reports from Returning Officers from all constituencies. At last count early Friday morning, the polling percentage was 76.69. That could almost be the final figure. If at all, there could be a one per cent increase," a senior official in the EC here said. The EC authorities initially expected the polling to cross 80 per cent as a large number of voters had queued up in all polling stations. Police Friday confirmed that two persons were killed in election-related violence in the state, contrary to conflicting claims of the ruling TDP and opposition YSR Congress. The TDP and the YSRC issued statements claiming that two each of their workers were killed by rivals on Thursday. The Director General of Police issued a statement saying there were 'only two deaths' related to the elections as against six in 2014. While one TDP worker was killed in a group clash in Tadipatri constituency in Anantapuramu district, a YSRC worker's father died accidentally, caught in a clash between TDP and YSRC activists in Tamballapalle in Chittoor district. "The 68-year-old man was at the scene of the clash, trying to prevent his son from being a participant. He suffered a stone-hit near his eye and succumbed on the way to the hospital," Chittoor district Superintendent of Police Vikrant Patil told PTI over the phone. On Thursday, YSRC claimed one of its workers was killed by TDP men in Tadipatri but it turned out that the man only went into a coma after sustaining injuries. TDP president Chandrababu Naidu's son Nara Lokesh tweeted Friday that two of his party workers were "hacked to death". He did not, however, specify where the second incident occurred. Police confirmed only the Tadipatri incident.

Andhra Pradesh polling put at 76.69%: Police confirm two deaths

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage. It may not sound like a big deal today — but it is.&nbsp;

Take, for example, the case of the US, which took 144 years, and the UK, which took 100 years to confer political equality on women. By the time women got unconditional suffrage in the latter in 1928, Dr Muthulaxmi Reddy, a 41-year-old doctor, had already become the first female member of the Madras Legislative Council of colonial India.

Unfortunately, equal voting rights and elections have not translated into better outcomes for women in the field of political and socioeconomic participation. After seven decades, we remain a highly patriarchal society. Social and cultural stereotypes, educational and economic backwardness, safety and security issues lead to women facing uncertainty inside and outside the four walls of their home.&nbsp;

India suffers from one of the worst sex ratios in South Asia — 940 women for every 1,000 men. We rank poorly in World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index — 108 out of 149 countries. Even within that index, we rank 142 out of 149 countries on economic opportunity and participation. This deficit also translates into gender-skewed voter lists. For instance, the ratio was as low as 800 to 1,000 males when I joined the Election Commission in 2006.&nbsp;

To enable greater participation of women as voters, the Commission undertook the onerous task of searching for ‘missing women’ from the voter lists. Gender was included as a principal element in the review of the health of electoral rolls. It was found that some of the common issues post registration included concerns about security at the booths (for instance, encountering anti-social elements), family pressures, sanitation facilities, etc.&nbsp;

Subsequent voter education campaigns included targeted communication to family elders for curing stereotypes. Separate queues for women, female staff at the booths, female police force and all-women polling stations in some areas contributed to jump in female turnout. For instance, in 2012 UP elections, a simple but innovative idea of allowing two women in the queue to enter the polling station for every man proved to be a game-changer. &nbsp; 
 
The EC’s National and State level election icons helped bring women out. Celebrated figures such as folk singers Malini Awasthi in UP and Sharda Sinha in Bihar, inspired millions of women to go to the polling booths. Due to such efforts, women voters outnumbered men in the 2010 Bihar elections (54.85 per cent against 50.77 per cent) and 2012 UP elections (60.28 per cent against 58.68 per cent).

Due to the EC’s Systematic Voter Education for Electoral Participation (SVEEP) aimed at educating the masses and focusing on women, there was a 10 per cent point jump in women’s turnout - from 55.82 per cent in 2009 to 65.63 per cent in 2014! The icing on the cake- women outnumbered men in 16 states despite the adverse gender ratio. The gender voting gap shrank to mere 1.46 per cent.&nbsp; 
 
&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 1" data-caption="Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House." data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="71bddf57-a0ec-4c95-859f-d51a06ff2af6" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture1_1.png" />
Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House. 
 
While the Commission has lead the way in making elections inclusive, the sorry state of women’s participation in the legislatures is abysmal 12.15 per cent in the Lok Sabha (Fig 2) and even more abysmal in most state legislatures. (Fig 3) 
 
<img alt="Figure 2" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="398f67b2-2eae-4af4-91be-ef91292bcf85" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture2.png" />

&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 3" data-caption="Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters)" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="7feb5eb3-f59c-4b6a-b11a-db003937a56e" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture3.png" />
Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters) 
 
This is shameful as compared to some neighbouring conservative Muslim countries, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which have high female political representation. This has become a reality due to affirmative legislation on women’s representation. Nepal has led the way with its latest progressive constitution and has recorded dramatic increase of women at all levels of government, not just the national legislature. (Fig 4)
<img alt="Figure 4" data-caption="Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="5c90b5e6-2225-4490-ac29-aade0717e14a" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture4_0.png" />
Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data 
 
The unwillingness of Indian political leadership (which is dominated by males) to provide women fair representation in its legislatures is paradoxical. Women were allowed 33 per cent in local bodies in 1993, which was later made 50 per cent in 2009. A number of states have introduced 50 per cent reservations in corporations and municipalities. But the upper levels of government are still to pass their respective reservation bills that have been debated ad nauseam.&nbsp; 
 
Unfortunately, political parties are reluctant to even give enough tickets to women. Hardly one-tenth of total candidates are female — the excuse of low ‘winnability’ of female candidates is a myth. Anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge of our electoral history is aware of the simple fact that their “strike rate” has always been as much as two to four times higher! (Fig 5) 
&nbsp;
<img alt="Figure 5" data-caption="&lt;br /&gt;
Factly.com, ECI" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="f908e97a-c09e-496d-aabc-2f478aa097f8" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Picture5.png" />
Factly.com, ECI 
 
In this context, it is a welcome transformation that some parties are now competing to give tickets to women, with Trinamool Congress giving 41 per cent tickets to women, and Biju Janata Dal giving 33 per cent. The gender participation within all parties is abysmal and this is certainly a good start. But a lot more needs to be done. The women’s reservation bills at both state and National level are overdue. &nbsp;

Though our elections are considered a gold standard, the agenda of women’s political representation remains unfinished. The society must ensure that women don’t only choose their representatives, but become one. A comprehensive reform agenda must be a priority for the 17th Lok Sabha. Women’s representation in legislatures throughout the country needs to be written down into law and not left to the discretion of political parties. It is time the political parties follow the example of inclusive elections set by the Election Commission by making parliament inclusive. The time for walking the talk is now.

 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage.

The socioeconomic prospects of a country are best measured by the social and political status enjoyed by its women. In that context, India became a trailblazer by granting women the equal right to vote from day one along with men through Universal Adult Suffrage. It may not sound like a big deal today — but it is. Take, for example, the case of the US, which took 144 years, and the UK, which took 100 years to confer political equality on women. By the time women got unconditional suffrage in the latter in 1928, Dr Muthulaxmi Reddy, a 41-year-old doctor, had already become the first female member of the Madras Legislative Council of colonial India. Unfortunately, equal voting rights and elections have not translated into better outcomes for women in the field of political and socioeconomic participation. After seven decades, we remain a highly patriarchal society. Social and cultural stereotypes, educational and economic backwardness, safety and security issues lead to women facing uncertainty inside and outside the four walls of their home. India suffers from one of the worst sex ratios in South Asia — 940 women for every 1,000 men. We rank poorly in World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index — 108 out of 149 countries. Even within that index, we rank 142 out of 149 countries on economic opportunity and participation. This deficit also translates into gender-skewed voter lists. For instance, the ratio was as low as 800 to 1,000 males when I joined the Election Commission in 2006. To enable greater participation of women as voters, the Commission undertook the onerous task of searching for ‘missing women’ from the voter lists. Gender was included as a principal element in the review of the health of electoral rolls. It was found that some of the common issues post registration included concerns about security at the booths (for instance, encountering anti-social elements), family pressures, sanitation facilities, etc. Subsequent voter education campaigns included targeted communication to family elders for curing stereotypes. Separate queues for women, female staff at the booths, female police force and all-women polling stations in some areas contributed to jump in female turnout. For instance, in 2012 UP elections, a simple but innovative idea of allowing two women in the queue to enter the polling station for every man proved to be a game-changer. The EC’s National and State level election icons helped bring women out. Celebrated figures such as folk singers Malini Awasthi in UP and Sharda Sinha in Bihar, inspired millions of women to go to the polling booths. Due to such efforts, women voters outnumbered men in the 2010 Bihar elections (54.85 per cent against 50.77 per cent) and 2012 UP elections (60.28 per cent against 58.68 per cent). Due to the EC’s Systematic Voter Education for Electoral Participation (SVEEP) aimed at educating the masses and focusing on women, there was a 10 per cent point jump in women’s turnout - from 55.82 per cent in 2009 to 65.63 per cent in 2014! The icing on the cake- women outnumbered men in 16 states despite the adverse gender ratio. The gender voting gap shrank to mere 1.46 per cent. Fig 1. Graph Source- Quraishi, SY. 2019. The Great March of Democracy, Seven Decades of India’s Elections. Penguin Random House. While the Commission has lead the way in making elections inclusive, the sorry state of women’s participation in the legislatures is abysmal 12.15 per cent in the Lok Sabha (Fig 2) and even more abysmal in most state legislatures. (Fig 3) Fig (2 and 3)Source- Trivedi Centre for Political Data (Image Courtesy:Citizen Matters) This is shameful as compared to some neighbouring conservative Muslim countries, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which have high female political representation. This has become a reality due to affirmative legislation on women’s representation. Nepal has led the way with its latest progressive constitution and has recorded dramatic increase of women at all levels of government, not just the national legislature. (Fig 4) Fig 4. Source- World Bank Data The unwillingness of Indian political leadership (which is dominated by males) to provide women fair representation in its legislatures is paradoxical. Women were allowed 33 per cent in local bodies in 1993, which was later made 50 per cent in 2009. A number of states have introduced 50 per cent reservations in corporations and municipalities. But the upper levels of government are still to pass their respective reservation bills that have been debated ad nauseam. Unfortunately, political parties are reluctant to even give enough tickets to women. Hardly one-tenth of total candidates are female — the excuse of low ‘winnability’ of female candidates is a myth. Anyone with the slightest bit of knowledge of our electoral history is aware of the simple fact that their “strike rate” has always been as much as two to four times higher! (Fig 5) Factly.com, ECI In this context, it is a welcome transformation that some parties are now competing to give tickets to women, with Trinamool Congress giving 41 per cent tickets to women, and Biju Janata Dal giving 33 per cent. The gender participation within all parties is abysmal and this is certainly a good start. But a lot more needs to be done. The women’s reservation bills at both state and National level are overdue. Though our elections are considered a gold standard, the agenda of women’s political representation remains unfinished. The society must ensure that women don’t only choose their representatives, but become one. A comprehensive reform agenda must be a priority for the 17th Lok Sabha. Women’s representation in legislatures throughout the country needs to be written down into law and not left to the discretion of political parties. It is time the political parties follow the example of inclusive elections set by the Election Commission by making parliament inclusive. The time for walking the talk is now. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Women shouldn't just choose their political representatives, they should become one

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day.&nbsp;

The sampling methodology may go wrong or converting vote shares based on sample surveys into seats can get tricky. Last but not the least, media organisations carrying out opinion poll results in league with pollster organisations can add a bit of spice to suit their own priorities.

After discounting for all this, I do believe that in the general elections that are now underway, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has reached a point where it will certainly not get a majority of its own like it did in 2014, and may also not be entirely home even with its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) partners.

One TV news channel that is visibly, loudly and consistently supportive of the BJP sees the NDA tally at 279, just four ahead of the half-way mark. An average of all opinion polls this week gives the NDA 277 seats in the Lok Sabha.&nbsp;

There are as many as 167 "marginal" seats where close contests will decide winners in the 543-member Lok Sabha.

It is time to ask some what-if questions. My guess is that in a scenario where the NDA is short of a clear majority, three leaders from the south will become important: Naveen Patnaik of the Biju Janata Dal from Odisha, Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy from the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh.&nbsp;

(If the Tropic of Cancer is seen as the dividing line between northern and southern India, Odisha, which is to the southeast, certainly falls in the south. It is also definitely south of the Vindhya mountain range, the traditional threshold to separate the south from the north.)

KCR, as the Telangana Chief Minister is called, is officially part of the 'Mahagatbandhan' (grand alliance) against Modi and will be needed by the BJP only if there is a significant late swing against it. With Telangana still in its honeymoon phase after he led a decades-old movement to carve the state out of the undivided Andhra Pradesh, he is perhaps the strongest ruling CM in India today, not counting Pawan Chamling of Sikkim. KCR's pro-farmer programmes are considered a role model for the rest of India.

Patnaik has been maintaining a studied equidistance from the BJP and the Congress and has had a phenomenal run in his state, having won four terms in a row to be the Odisha Chief Minister since the year 2000. His development efforts are part of the national folklore.

Jagan Reddy, only 46 years old, is yet to taste power but is seen as the front-runner in an anti-incumbency mood against Andhra CM N Chandrababu Naidu's Telugu Desam Party (TDP). He announced last week he had no ill-will against the Congress, from which his party broke off, even as he maintains that he favours anyone who grants special status to Andhra under an arrangement made when Telangana was carved out.

Jagan is perhaps the easiest for the BJP to woo since Naidu is already on the side of the anti-Modi alliance. KCR can be wooed in a desperate scenario. But Patnaik may be a harder nut to crack. It all depends on the exact break-up of the Lok Sabha that gets formed in the summer heat. Watch out in the coming days nice things to be said about these three gentlemen. They may be kingmakers, and they may even edge close to each other where the eventual verdict swings away from the current predictions.

(This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the <a href="https://zeenews.india.com/blogs/after-2019-lok-sabha-elections-the-kingmakers-are-likely-to-be-from-the-south-2194704.html">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day.

I am cynical/practical/experienced enough to know that pre-election opinion polls can go quite wrong for at least three reasons. Voters may not truly reveal their minds and/or change their minds close to polling day. The sampling methodology may go wrong or converting vote shares based on sample surveys into seats can get tricky. Last but not the least, media organisations carrying out opinion poll results in league with pollster organisations can add a bit of spice to suit their own priorities. After discounting for all this, I do believe that in the general elections that are now underway, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has reached a point where it will certainly not get a majority of its own like it did in 2014, and may also not be entirely home even with its National Democratic Alliance (NDA) partners. One TV news channel that is visibly, loudly and consistently supportive of the BJP sees the NDA tally at 279, just four ahead of the half-way mark. An average of all opinion polls this week gives the NDA 277 seats in the Lok Sabha. There are as many as 167 "marginal" seats where close contests will decide winners in the 543-member Lok Sabha. It is time to ask some what-if questions. My guess is that in a scenario where the NDA is short of a clear majority, three leaders from the south will become important: Naveen Patnaik of the Biju Janata Dal from Odisha, Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy from the YSR Congress in Andhra Pradesh. (If the Tropic of Cancer is seen as the dividing line between northern and southern India, Odisha, which is to the southeast, certainly falls in the south. It is also definitely south of the Vindhya mountain range, the traditional threshold to separate the south from the north.) KCR, as the Telangana Chief Minister is called, is officially part of the 'Mahagatbandhan' (grand alliance) against Modi and will be needed by the BJP only if there is a significant late swing against it. With Telangana still in its honeymoon phase after he led a decades-old movement to carve the state out of the undivided Andhra Pradesh, he is perhaps the strongest ruling CM in India today, not counting Pawan Chamling of Sikkim. KCR's pro-farmer programmes are considered a role model for the rest of India. Patnaik has been maintaining a studied equidistance from the BJP and the Congress and has had a phenomenal run in his state, having won four terms in a row to be the Odisha Chief Minister since the year 2000. His development efforts are part of the national folklore. Jagan Reddy, only 46 years old, is yet to taste power but is seen as the front-runner in an anti-incumbency mood against Andhra CM N Chandrababu Naidu's Telugu Desam Party (TDP). He announced last week he had no ill-will against the Congress, from which his party broke off, even as he maintains that he favours anyone who grants special status to Andhra under an arrangement made when Telangana was carved out. Jagan is perhaps the easiest for the BJP to woo since Naidu is already on the side of the anti-Modi alliance. KCR can be wooed in a desperate scenario. But Patnaik may be a harder nut to crack. It all depends on the exact break-up of the Lok Sabha that gets formed in the summer heat. Watch out in the coming days nice things to be said about these three gentlemen. They may be kingmakers, and they may even edge close to each other where the eventual verdict swings away from the current predictions. (This article was originally published on Zee News. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

After 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the kingmakers are likely to be from the south

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP.

The key interlocutor of opposition - Mamata Banerjee is considered to be the prime reason behind Congress president Rahul Gandhi not being declared the prime ministerial candidate of the united opposition despite approvals from several leaders. The friction between Banerjee and Gandhi scion is quite evident, she recently called Rahul a 'kid' while responding to his attack on the Trinamool Congress (TMC).

Didi doesn't mince a word while attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well. She is one of the most vocal members of the opposition who claims West Bengal will lead in throwing Narendra Modi government out and forming the new government at the Centre. She ran pillar and post to unite all like-minded parties against BJP.

Mayawati too has emerged as a strong Congress-opposer. When Congress approached SP and BSP for forging an alliance in Uttar Pradesh, unhappy with the seat-sharing ratio suggested by Congress, Mayawati outrightly rejected the offer.

There were still some chances of understanding between the SP-BSP-RJD alliance and the Congress when the latter said it was ready to leave &nbsp;7 Lok Sabha seats vacant for the alliance, however, this couldn't happen due to Mayawati's defiance.&nbsp;

In a joint rally on Sunday, Mayawati trained her guns towards Congress and said the party was dividing votes on the basis of caste and religion. &nbsp;She cautioned voters against any such attempt and asked them to give all their votes to the SP, BSP and RJD alliance.

Other opposition members are worried that this three-cornered contest will divide the votes in UP and help the BJP. UP is a politically crucial state which has the highest number of Lok Sabha seats in the country - 80. In such a scenario, Mayawati's decision to not tie-up with Congress could prove costly to the alliance.

Meanwhile, on the national front - setting aside three decades of rivalry - even Chandrababu Naidu dropped his 'non-Congress Third Front' plank and approached Congress president Rahul Gandhi. He stressed on the need for opposition unity to save the nation. DMK chief M K Stalin too endorsed Gandhi as the Prime Ministerial candidate of the 'Mahagathbandhan', but Didi remained&nbsp;adamant.

Going by her and ignoring Congress, which did exceptionally well in the recently-concluded Assembly elections under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, isn't mature.&nbsp;

For 'Mahagathbandhan', leadership has become a divisive issue. The opposition parties need to reach a broader understanding and declare the grouping's PM face. Political analysts say that not having a credible face pitted against PM Narendra Modi would impact voters' decision during the polling. Electorates are curious and have the right to know who will lead the country if 'Mahagathbandhan' comes to&nbsp;power. &nbsp;

The resistance&nbsp;of Mamata and Mayawati is a big setback to the entire calculation for forming an anti-BJP coalition and the prospects of 'Mahagathbandhan' - both on state and national level.&nbsp;

Alliances need sacrifices, however, they have shown reluctance to have an understanding with Congress - the main opposition party. Mamata and Mayawati have no desire to become Gandhi’s minority partners. They want to be in the driver's seat themselves.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp;

&nbsp;

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP.

In the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2019, two women had a powerful influence on matters related to opposition's strategy to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP. The key interlocutor of opposition - Mamata Banerjee is considered to be the prime reason behind Congress president Rahul Gandhi not being declared the prime ministerial candidate of the united opposition despite approvals from several leaders. The friction between Banerjee and Gandhi scion is quite evident, she recently called Rahul a 'kid' while responding to his attack on the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Didi doesn't mince a word while attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well. She is one of the most vocal members of the opposition who claims West Bengal will lead in throwing Narendra Modi government out and forming the new government at the Centre. She ran pillar and post to unite all like-minded parties against BJP. Mayawati too has emerged as a strong Congress-opposer. When Congress approached SP and BSP for forging an alliance in Uttar Pradesh, unhappy with the seat-sharing ratio suggested by Congress, Mayawati outrightly rejected the offer. There were still some chances of understanding between the SP-BSP-RJD alliance and the Congress when the latter said it was ready to leave 7 Lok Sabha seats vacant for the alliance, however, this couldn't happen due to Mayawati's defiance. In a joint rally on Sunday, Mayawati trained her guns towards Congress and said the party was dividing votes on the basis of caste and religion. She cautioned voters against any such attempt and asked them to give all their votes to the SP, BSP and RJD alliance. Other opposition members are worried that this three-cornered contest will divide the votes in UP and help the BJP. UP is a politically crucial state which has the highest number of Lok Sabha seats in the country - 80. In such a scenario, Mayawati's decision to not tie-up with Congress could prove costly to the alliance. Meanwhile, on the national front - setting aside three decades of rivalry - even Chandrababu Naidu dropped his 'non-Congress Third Front' plank and approached Congress president Rahul Gandhi. He stressed on the need for opposition unity to save the nation. DMK chief M K Stalin too endorsed Gandhi as the Prime Ministerial candidate of the 'Mahagathbandhan', but Didi remained adamant. Going by her and ignoring Congress, which did exceptionally well in the recently-concluded Assembly elections under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, isn't mature. For 'Mahagathbandhan', leadership has become a divisive issue. The opposition parties need to reach a broader understanding and declare the grouping's PM face. Political analysts say that not having a credible face pitted against PM Narendra Modi would impact voters' decision during the polling. Electorates are curious and have the right to know who will lead the country if 'Mahagathbandhan' comes to power. The resistance of Mamata and Mayawati is a big setback to the entire calculation for forming an anti-BJP coalition and the prospects of 'Mahagathbandhan' - both on state and national level. Alliances need sacrifices, however, they have shown reluctance to have an understanding with Congress - the main opposition party. Mamata and Mayawati have no desire to become Gandhi’s minority partners. They want to be in the driver's seat themselves. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: Mamata Banerjee's dominance, Mayawati's reluctance is advantage BJP

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’.&nbsp;

Now with the social media, no channel is needed. Suddenly, everyone has a view and a platform to express it. So the debate has got high on rhetoric and low on content. There are frequent references to phrases like ‘draconian law’, ‘licence to kill’, ‘free hand to Army to rape and murder’, and much more.&nbsp;

Are we talking about our Indian Army, the simple soldiers who risk their lives day after day for country and countrymen? Or are we talking about characters from a James Bond movie? Why have the debates got so shrill? Partly because it is fashionable to talk about human rights (in that case, one needs to make a case about the human rights of soldiers as well, but I will leave it for a subsequent day). &nbsp;

The rights part have got discussed threadbare and the legal mores analysed to the hilt. Knowledgeable in their fields as they might be, these experts have no idea of how to operate in these tricky situations, where there is risk to life and limb.

The Indian Army, on the other hand, barely comes out openly in support of its stand on the AFSPA and has always been reluctant to put forward its views in public. The result is the public has got a one-sided and distorted picture. &nbsp;

Recently, this subject gathered additional momentum as a major political party suggested changes in their position on the AFSPA in their election manifesto. Once again, there was a flurry of activities, speeches and debates. Given the poll climes, there was the obvious political tilt, as can be expected. &nbsp;

But the Indian public deserves better. The purpose of this piece is to put forward the facts simply, correctly and directly, so that we can aspire for more informed debates.

Let us first understand what AFSPA is. It was first promulgated in its present form in 1958 in North East India when the army was called in to control the Naga insurgents, as the Naga National Council had declared independence.&nbsp;

Normally, a district magistrate hands over any given situation to the army by actually signing a form. But in remote, high altitude and thickly forested mountains, there is no habitation, let alone any representative of the civil administration. Hence the army officer in charge is empowered to take a few actions himself, such as searching a bunker or hideout without warrant, destroying illegal equipment, explosives and armament in situ, arrest anti-national elements without warrant (but hand them over to the police within 24 hours), and lastly stop anyone from doing anything that may be illegal and against the interests of the state, to the extent of opening fire, if needed. &nbsp;

Additionally, if an army man commits a wrong while operating under AFSPA, he can be prosecuted in a court of law, for which an approval of the central government is needed. &nbsp;

Later, when AFSPA was made applicable to Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, two more provisions were added, namely authority to search a vehicle without warrant and to search an individual.&nbsp;

These checks have become commonplace in our lives these days. We open the boot of our cars and get body searched very readily by a security guard at a movie hall or a mall. Hardly ‘draconian’ or ‘licence to kill’! Here, we seem to understand that these checks are required for our own security and safety.&nbsp;

Let us also appreciate that the Army is the instrument of last resort. It is called in when the civil administration, the police and the central armed police forces have not been able to bring any given situation under full control. 
 
When the Army is called in, it should be empowered or enabled to operate effectively. If Army is also not effective in controlling the situation, who else will the country turn to?&nbsp;

Hence, to operate effectively in a disturbing situation, in the absence of policing powers, the Army needs an enabler in the form of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.&nbsp;

The Act, as well as the deployment of the army, is temporary. As soon as the situation normalises, both will go and the army will be most happy to return to its primary duties. When conditions improve, and situation permits, the govt revokes AFSPA in consultation with the army and other stakeholders.&nbsp;

In the past, on the recommendations of the army, AFSPA has been revoked from Mizoram in 1987, Punjab in 1997 and Tripura in 2015.&nbsp;

Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger. It gives terrorists the latitude to operate from their safe sanctuaries. The failed model of Imphal is a case in point.&nbsp;

Revoking or diluting AFSPA should only be done in light of the security situation, after giving due consideration to views of all stakeholders. It will be highly dangerous if extraneous pressures come to dictate such sensitive decisions.&nbsp;

If it is so done, the situation is likely to worsen and slip back by a few years. And then Army will be called in again, and so the cycle will go on.

&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The ZeeNews. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-not-a-james-bond-movie-2738011">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;

&nbsp;

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’.

Over the last few years, we have been witnessing a debate on the subject of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA). Sadly, it is becoming more strident as media channels have multiplied, as have activists and ‘experts’. Now with the social media, no channel is needed. Suddenly, everyone has a view and a platform to express it. So the debate has got high on rhetoric and low on content. There are frequent references to phrases like ‘draconian law’, ‘licence to kill’, ‘free hand to Army to rape and murder’, and much more. Are we talking about our Indian Army, the simple soldiers who risk their lives day after day for country and countrymen? Or are we talking about characters from a James Bond movie? Why have the debates got so shrill? Partly because it is fashionable to talk about human rights (in that case, one needs to make a case about the human rights of soldiers as well, but I will leave it for a subsequent day). The rights part have got discussed threadbare and the legal mores analysed to the hilt. Knowledgeable in their fields as they might be, these experts have no idea of how to operate in these tricky situations, where there is risk to life and limb. The Indian Army, on the other hand, barely comes out openly in support of its stand on the AFSPA and has always been reluctant to put forward its views in public. The result is the public has got a one-sided and distorted picture. Recently, this subject gathered additional momentum as a major political party suggested changes in their position on the AFSPA in their election manifesto. Once again, there was a flurry of activities, speeches and debates. Given the poll climes, there was the obvious political tilt, as can be expected. But the Indian public deserves better. The purpose of this piece is to put forward the facts simply, correctly and directly, so that we can aspire for more informed debates. Let us first understand what AFSPA is. It was first promulgated in its present form in 1958 in North East India when the army was called in to control the Naga insurgents, as the Naga National Council had declared independence. Normally, a district magistrate hands over any given situation to the army by actually signing a form. But in remote, high altitude and thickly forested mountains, there is no habitation, let alone any representative of the civil administration. Hence the army officer in charge is empowered to take a few actions himself, such as searching a bunker or hideout without warrant, destroying illegal equipment, explosives and armament in situ, arrest anti-national elements without warrant (but hand them over to the police within 24 hours), and lastly stop anyone from doing anything that may be illegal and against the interests of the state, to the extent of opening fire, if needed. Additionally, if an army man commits a wrong while operating under AFSPA, he can be prosecuted in a court of law, for which an approval of the central government is needed. Later, when AFSPA was made applicable to Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, two more provisions were added, namely authority to search a vehicle without warrant and to search an individual. These checks have become commonplace in our lives these days. We open the boot of our cars and get body searched very readily by a security guard at a movie hall or a mall. Hardly ‘draconian’ or ‘licence to kill’! Here, we seem to understand that these checks are required for our own security and safety. Let us also appreciate that the Army is the instrument of last resort. It is called in when the civil administration, the police and the central armed police forces have not been able to bring any given situation under full control. When the Army is called in, it should be empowered or enabled to operate effectively. If Army is also not effective in controlling the situation, who else will the country turn to? Hence, to operate effectively in a disturbing situation, in the absence of policing powers, the Army needs an enabler in the form of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The Act, as well as the deployment of the army, is temporary. As soon as the situation normalises, both will go and the army will be most happy to return to its primary duties. When conditions improve, and situation permits, the govt revokes AFSPA in consultation with the army and other stakeholders. In the past, on the recommendations of the army, AFSPA has been revoked from Mizoram in 1987, Punjab in 1997 and Tripura in 2015. Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger. It gives terrorists the latitude to operate from their safe sanctuaries. The failed model of Imphal is a case in point. Revoking or diluting AFSPA should only be done in light of the security situation, after giving due consideration to views of all stakeholders. It will be highly dangerous if extraneous pressures come to dictate such sensitive decisions. If it is so done, the situation is likely to worsen and slip back by a few years. And then Army will be called in again, and so the cycle will go on. (This article was originally published on The ZeeNews. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Selective revocation of AFSPA is fraught with immense danger

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister.

At the launch ceremony, speaker after speaker spoke about national unity and how BJP was committed to the idea of national renewal, tough security response and enhanced prestige abroad. This theme was visible after 2014 but very few understood the intent of BJP that it wanted to contest 2019 Lok Sabha elections on it.&nbsp;

If it would not have been the failure of BJP in Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, BJP would not have introduced direct subsidy to distressed farmers and neither state BJP governments would have waived electricity bills and loans taken by the farmer nor taken such a populist turn.

This particular event brought both BJP and Congress together barring the issue of nationalism. Both parties have committed themselves to a large welfare architecture which is going to trouble middle class even more. Both have become very loud in their commitment towards popular politics. For the PM to say Antyodaya is the philosophy reflects strong pro-poor sentiments. NYAY is also one such arrow from the quiver of populist politics. The only difference is that Congress manifesto is restrained when it comes to national security and nationalism-based politics and that of BJP is very aggressive and does not refrain from taking on strong regional sentiments of North East and Kashmir. It helps BJP in rest of India.

BJP’s manifesto looks more in tune with the India of 1970 under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. A famous leader who taught a lesson to Pakistan but held the promise of keeping the nation together. She ran the country with an iron hand and the party was subservient to her. Her strength bordered on being dictatorial and ran a left-leaning economy. Congress, on the other hand, barring the model of a strong leader is also committing itself to running a left-leaning economy which would be high on welfare schemes.

Both BJP and Congress of today are a strong departure from the turn India took in 1991. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh were reformers and committed to economic liberalisation. All three Prime Ministers fought the populist narrative that business is a bad word and capitalism cannot do good for the poor. Even if they failed in parts, they did not create a subsidy monster.

It was Sonia Gandhi who forced Manmohan Singh’s hand after 2008 that Congress started to reflect party sensibilities of the 1970s. Even Modi who started with a promise of reform and minimum governance gave in to the populism which continues to wreak Indian politics. Till today, there exists no consensus on land acquisition bill which continues to lie in cold storage after suit boot kee sarkar jibe.

The only differentiator which BJP has with Congress is on national security and aggressive politics against internal insurgencies and Pakistan. It is for this reason, BJP has made nationalism a pivotal issue against Congress.

Not only it blunts the charge of Congress that RSS never participated in the freedom struggle, but it also helps BJP bridge the caste politics. It is for this reason that Ram Temple, Article 370, 35 A, Pakistan and internal insurgencies have all come together as one issue.&nbsp;

Both manifestos claim that they have presented a competing vision of India but remain similar when it comes to promoting statism. The lines have also blurred on Hinduism. Both parties compete for the same space. BJP’s vision is hard nationalism laced with Hindutva married to a welfare state whereas Congress vision is that of soft Hindutva married to a vigorous welfare state. We will know only on May 23 as to which brand sold well.

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister.

BJP’s manifesto was nationalism unplugged. The manifesto reflected the core agenda of RSS, which has been promoting cultural nationalism since its inception. The coming of age could only happen during Narendra Modi’s tenure as he allowed the vision to be incorporated and propagated unapologetically during his tenure as the Prime Minister. At the launch ceremony, speaker after speaker spoke about national unity and how BJP was committed to the idea of national renewal, tough security response and enhanced prestige abroad. This theme was visible after 2014 but very few understood the intent of BJP that it wanted to contest 2019 Lok Sabha elections on it. If it would not have been the failure of BJP in Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, BJP would not have introduced direct subsidy to distressed farmers and neither state BJP governments would have waived electricity bills and loans taken by the farmer nor taken such a populist turn. This particular event brought both BJP and Congress together barring the issue of nationalism. Both parties have committed themselves to a large welfare architecture which is going to trouble middle class even more. Both have become very loud in their commitment towards popular politics. For the PM to say Antyodaya is the philosophy reflects strong pro-poor sentiments. NYAY is also one such arrow from the quiver of populist politics. The only difference is that Congress manifesto is restrained when it comes to national security and nationalism-based politics and that of BJP is very aggressive and does not refrain from taking on strong regional sentiments of North East and Kashmir. It helps BJP in rest of India. BJP’s manifesto looks more in tune with the India of 1970 under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. A famous leader who taught a lesson to Pakistan but held the promise of keeping the nation together. She ran the country with an iron hand and the party was subservient to her. Her strength bordered on being dictatorial and ran a left-leaning economy. Congress, on the other hand, barring the model of a strong leader is also committing itself to running a left-leaning economy which would be high on welfare schemes. Both BJP and Congress of today are a strong departure from the turn India took in 1991. Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh were reformers and committed to economic liberalisation. All three Prime Ministers fought the populist narrative that business is a bad word and capitalism cannot do good for the poor. Even if they failed in parts, they did not create a subsidy monster. It was Sonia Gandhi who forced Manmohan Singh’s hand after 2008 that Congress started to reflect party sensibilities of the 1970s. Even Modi who started with a promise of reform and minimum governance gave in to the populism which continues to wreak Indian politics. Till today, there exists no consensus on land acquisition bill which continues to lie in cold storage after suit boot kee sarkar jibe. The only differentiator which BJP has with Congress is on national security and aggressive politics against internal insurgencies and Pakistan. It is for this reason, BJP has made nationalism a pivotal issue against Congress. Not only it blunts the charge of Congress that RSS never participated in the freedom struggle, but it also helps BJP bridge the caste politics. It is for this reason that Ram Temple, Article 370, 35 A, Pakistan and internal insurgencies have all come together as one issue. Both manifestos claim that they have presented a competing vision of India but remain similar when it comes to promoting statism. The lines have also blurred on Hinduism. Both parties compete for the same space. BJP’s vision is hard nationalism laced with Hindutva married to a welfare state whereas Congress vision is that of soft Hindutva married to a vigorous welfare state. We will know only on May 23 as to which brand sold well. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Lok Sabha polls 2019: High on populism, both BJP and Congress manifestos compete for same space

Equity benchmarks Sensex and Nifty were hit by volatility and registered losses on Monday as investors turned cautious ahead of the start of corporate earnings season and polling for the general elections.

The BSE gauge Sensex ended lower by 161.70 points at 38,700.53, while the NSE Nifty lost 61.45 points to settle the day at 11,604.50.

Losses mainly in financial, metal and energy stocks dragged the Sensex into the red.

Oil stocks came under pressure due to constant rise in global crude oil prices.

International benchmark Brent was trading at 70.81 per barrel, up 0.67 per cent.

Among the Sensex constituents, Yes Bank emerged as the biggest laggard with 2.66 per cent drop in share price. Other top losers were Bajaj Finance, Vedanta, Tata Motors, Reliance Industries and SBI -- dropping as much as 2.57 per cent.

On the other hand, Infosys, Mahindra and Mahindra, ONGC, TCS, PowerGrid and NTPC closed with significant gains on the Sensex chart.

Of the 30 Sensex shares, 20 witnessed losses and 10 saw gains.

The 30-share gauge opened higher at 38,993.60 against the previous close of 38,862.23. Intra-day, it hit a high of 39,041.25 and a low of 38,520.96, swinging over 520 points. The BSE benchmark finally settled at 38,700.53, losing 161.70 points or 0.42 per cent.

Similarly, the 50-share NSE Nifty started off on a positive note at 11,704.35 against the Friday's close of 11,665.95. The index traded in the range of 11,549.10 and 11,710.30 during the day. It swung over 161 points during the session. The NSE barometer finally closed at 11,604.50, up 61.45&nbsp; 
points or 0.53 per cent.

Market analysts believe that the upcoming corporate results season along with beginning of polling for general elections will drive trading sentiments over the next few weeks as investors will be keenly watching such developments.

The country's top two software exporters TCS and Infosys will announce their quarterly earnings on Friday.

Lok Sabha elections will begin on April 11 and will be held over seven phases followed by counting of votes on May 23.

Asian markets closed mixed on Monday, helped by better-than-expected US jobs data and signs of progress in US-China trade talks.

South Korea's KOSPI gained nearly 1 per cent and Hong Kong's Hang Seng index rose 0.41 per cent. While Japan's Nikkei slipped 0.21 per cent and China's Shanghai Composite index edged lower by 0.05 per cent.

In Europe, major market indices were trading mostly lower on Monday.

Meanwhile, the Indian rupee has started feeling the heat of rising crude prices and was trading 44 paise lower at 69.67 to the US dollar.

Besides, the strengthening US dollar on account of a rebound in payrolls data further impacted the rupee sentiment.

On Friday, the BSE Sensex had logged 177.51 points or 0.49 per cent gains to close at 38,862.23; while the broader NSE Nifty rose 67.95 points, or 0.59 per cent, to 11,665.95.

During the week, the Sensex saw 182.32 points or 0.48 per cent rise; and the Nifty gained 42.05 points, or 0.36 per cent.&nbsp;

Equity benchmarks Sensex and Nifty were hit by volatility and registered losses on Monday as investors turned cautious ahead of the start of corporate earnings season and polling for the general elections.

Equity benchmarks Sensex and Nifty were hit by volatility and registered losses on Monday as investors turned cautious ahead of the start of corporate earnings season and polling for the general elections. The BSE gauge Sensex ended lower by 161.70 points at 38,700.53, while the NSE Nifty lost 61.45 points to settle the day at 11,604.50. Losses mainly in financial, metal and energy stocks dragged the Sensex into the red. Oil stocks came under pressure due to constant rise in global crude oil prices. International benchmark Brent was trading at 70.81 per barrel, up 0.67 per cent. Among the Sensex constituents, Yes Bank emerged as the biggest laggard with 2.66 per cent drop in share price. Other top losers were Bajaj Finance, Vedanta, Tata Motors, Reliance Industries and SBI -- dropping as much as 2.57 per cent. On the other hand, Infosys, Mahindra and Mahindra, ONGC, TCS, PowerGrid and NTPC closed with significant gains on the Sensex chart. Of the 30 Sensex shares, 20 witnessed losses and 10 saw gains. The 30-share gauge opened higher at 38,993.60 against the previous close of 38,862.23. Intra-day, it hit a high of 39,041.25 and a low of 38,520.96, swinging over 520 points. The BSE benchmark finally settled at 38,700.53, losing 161.70 points or 0.42 per cent. Similarly, the 50-share NSE Nifty started off on a positive note at 11,704.35 against the Friday's close of 11,665.95. The index traded in the range of 11,549.10 and 11,710.30 during the day. It swung over 161 points during the session. The NSE barometer finally closed at 11,604.50, up 61.45 points or 0.53 per cent. Market analysts believe that the upcoming corporate results season along with beginning of polling for general elections will drive trading sentiments over the next few weeks as investors will be keenly watching such developments. The country's top two software exporters TCS and Infosys will announce their quarterly earnings on Friday. Lok Sabha elections will begin on April 11 and will be held over seven phases followed by counting of votes on May 23. Asian markets closed mixed on Monday, helped by better-than-expected US jobs data and signs of progress in US-China trade talks. South Korea's KOSPI gained nearly 1 per cent and Hong Kong's Hang Seng index rose 0.41 per cent. While Japan's Nikkei slipped 0.21 per cent and China's Shanghai Composite index edged lower by 0.05 per cent. In Europe, major market indices were trading mostly lower on Monday. Meanwhile, the Indian rupee has started feeling the heat of rising crude prices and was trading 44 paise lower at 69.67 to the US dollar. Besides, the strengthening US dollar on account of a rebound in payrolls data further impacted the rupee sentiment. On Friday, the BSE Sensex had logged 177.51 points or 0.49 per cent gains to close at 38,862.23; while the broader NSE Nifty rose 67.95 points, or 0.59 per cent, to 11,665.95. During the week, the Sensex saw 182.32 points or 0.48 per cent rise; and the Nifty gained 42.05 points, or 0.36 per cent.

Sensex, Nifty end lower in volatile trade; financial, metal stocks weigh

The Election Commission is unlikely to take before Monday a final decision on whether to restrain the release of a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/pm-modi-biopic-strong-willed-vivek-oberoi-says-undeterred-by-moves-of-opponents-208276">biopic on Prime Minister Narendra Modi </a>till the Lok Sabha polls are over, as the Supreme Court is slated to hear the issue that day.

The EC has been made a party in a plea filed by a Congress worker who wants the top court to delay the film's release claiming it "disturbs" level-playing field for candidates in the Lok Sabha polls.

Sources said, now any decision will be taken after evaluating the developments in the top court.

However, there is a strong view in the EC that it should not restrain the release of the biopic -- "PM Narendra Modi" -- and should leave it to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to take a call on the issue, sources said.

Opposition parties including the Congress have alleged the film will give undue advantage to the BJP in electioneering and its release should be delayed until the elections are over.

The seven-phased Lok Sabha polls begin on April 11 and end on May 19.&nbsp;

The model code of conduct, which among other things, calls for an even playing field for all parties and candidates, came into force on March 10 when the elections were announced.

"PM Narendra Modi" is now scheduled to be released on April 11, the day the first phase of polling takes place.

A functionary pointed? to at least two Supreme Court rulings about movies.

In one of the rulings, the SC had directed the West Bengal government to ensure satirical film 'Bhobishyoter Bhoot' is screened without obstruction. The movie was critical of the then state chief minister.

"We also have to see the latest Delhi High court ruling which said the biopic screening should be decided by the EC," he said, adding that the model code is silent on films and thus it remains a "grey area".

He said the EC has to keep the court verdicts in mind.

The Commission had earlier sent a notice to the makers of the film following a meeting with a Congress delegation, which sought a ban on its release ahead of the Lok Sabha polls.

On Monday, the Bombay High Court disposed a plea against the release of the biopic. The court had said that the Election Commission will deal with the issue.&nbsp;

The Election Commission is unlikely to take before Monday a final decision on whether to restrain the release of a biopic on Prime Minister Narendra Modi till the Lok Sabha polls are over, as the Supreme Court is slated to hear the issue that day.

The Election Commission is unlikely to take before Monday a final decision on whether to restrain the release of a biopic on Prime Minister Narendra Modi till the Lok Sabha polls are over, as the Supreme Court is slated to hear the issue that day. The EC has been made a party in a plea filed by a Congress worker who wants the top court to delay the film's release claiming it "disturbs" level-playing field for candidates in the Lok Sabha polls. Sources said, now any decision will be taken after evaluating the developments in the top court. However, there is a strong view in the EC that it should not restrain the release of the biopic -- "PM Narendra Modi" -- and should leave it to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to take a call on the issue, sources said. Opposition parties including the Congress have alleged the film will give undue advantage to the BJP in electioneering and its release should be delayed until the elections are over. The seven-phased Lok Sabha polls begin on April 11 and end on May 19. The model code of conduct, which among other things, calls for an even playing field for all parties and candidates, came into force on March 10 when the elections were announced. "PM Narendra Modi" is now scheduled to be released on April 11, the day the first phase of polling takes place. A functionary pointed? to at least two Supreme Court rulings about movies. In one of the rulings, the SC had directed the West Bengal government to ensure satirical film 'Bhobishyoter Bhoot' is screened without obstruction. The movie was critical of the then state chief minister. "We also have to see the latest Delhi High court ruling which said the biopic screening should be decided by the EC," he said, adding that the model code is silent on films and thus it remains a "grey area". He said the EC has to keep the court verdicts in mind. The Commission had earlier sent a notice to the makers of the film following a meeting with a Congress delegation, which sought a ban on its release ahead of the Lok Sabha polls. On Monday, the Bombay High Court disposed a plea against the release of the biopic. The court had said that the Election Commission will deal with the issue.

Election Commission decision on Modi biopic unlikely before Monday

India Election Watch: Latest election news

Sonia Gandhi hits out at Modi government

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years.&nbsp;

Foreign policy has been one of the most talked about aspects of Modi’s tenure. There is no denying the fact that this government has appeared determined to go beyond established foreign policy norms. &nbsp;

The first sign of this was the Modi government’s announcement of its “Neighbourhood First” policy. So, while the Prime Minister visited all other South Asian countries, India settled its long-standing border problem with Bangladesh and ties with Sri Lanka and Nepal marked an encouraging upward trajectory.&nbsp;

The relationship between Bhutan and Afghanistan also touched new heights.&nbsp;

Though India faced a tough time in dealing with Maldives during the tenure of President Mohammed Waheed Hassan, Modi’s calibrated efforts have helped New Delhi in reconnecting historical ties with Male after the coming of the President Ibrahim Solih last year.&nbsp;

As about Pakistan, the Modi government initially adopted the conventional method of fostering working ties. Thus, he invited Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his government’s swearing-in ceremony in New Delhi in 2014, and later dropped by Lahore for Sharif’s birthday.&nbsp;

Pakistan, however, reciprocated with terrorist attacks against India. But unlike in the past, India under Modi showed the determination to hit back Pakistan proportionately.&nbsp;

It was in this context text that India carried out surgical strikes inside Pakistan territory along the border after the Uri terrorist attack. Later, the IAF went deep inside Pakistan hitting a LeT training ground at Balakot in response to the deadly Pulwama attack.&nbsp;

Terming its air strikes as “non-military pre-emptive” action, the Indian government succeeded in garnering global support. Even China could not openly support Pakistan against India’s action.&nbsp;

India’s successive military and air strikes have called Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. They have shifted India’s Pakistan policy in two ways: first, New Delhi can in future exercise similar options against Pakistan if Islamabad fails to reign-in terrorist organisations operating from its soil against India.&nbsp;

Second, the world community increasingly shares India’s concerns about Pakistan having emerged as the epicentre of terrorism. This is why efforts led by the US have been intensified to designate Hafiz Saeed as a global terrorist.&nbsp;

At a time when ASEAN countries want India to play an active role in the region, the Modi government has brought about a new energy in India’s orientation towards Southeast Asian countries.&nbsp;

India’s Middle East policy under Modi has also undergone a defining shift, with New Delhi finally removing the veil over its ties with Israel. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit that country.&nbsp;

At the same time, he has left no stone unturned in strengthening ties with the other countries of the region. The success of Modi’s Middle East policy can be gauged from the fact that India was invited to address the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). &nbsp;

The Modi government has been successful in dealing with all the major powers –the US, Russia, China, France, Japan and others.&nbsp;

Displaying astute pragmatism, the Prime Minister has shown his determination to elevate ties with the US by signing several important agreements, including the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) and the Communications, Compatibility, Security Agreement (COMCASA). This has helped in removing long-standing obstacles in realising the potential of defence ties with the US.&nbsp;

Signing the S-400 missile agreement with Russia simultaneously, underscored the Modi government’s effort to maintain India’s strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US and to effectively checkmate Islamabad’s desire to foster defence ties with Moscow.&nbsp;

With regard to China, while the Modi government continued to promote friendly ties, its strong response to Beijing on the Doklam issue showed India’s readiness to rise to the occasion, when needed. &nbsp; India under Modi has come out of its timid approach to assert its rightful place in international politics.

 
(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-modi-years-represent-a-paradigm-shift-in-foreign-policy-2736395">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years.

At a time when BJP under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has completed its five-year term, it is time to evaluate the government’s performance in the last five years. Foreign policy has been one of the most talked about aspects of Modi’s tenure. There is no denying the fact that this government has appeared determined to go beyond established foreign policy norms. The first sign of this was the Modi government’s announcement of its “Neighbourhood First” policy. So, while the Prime Minister visited all other South Asian countries, India settled its long-standing border problem with Bangladesh and ties with Sri Lanka and Nepal marked an encouraging upward trajectory. The relationship between Bhutan and Afghanistan also touched new heights. Though India faced a tough time in dealing with Maldives during the tenure of President Mohammed Waheed Hassan, Modi’s calibrated efforts have helped New Delhi in reconnecting historical ties with Male after the coming of the President Ibrahim Solih last year. As about Pakistan, the Modi government initially adopted the conventional method of fostering working ties. Thus, he invited Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for his government’s swearing-in ceremony in New Delhi in 2014, and later dropped by Lahore for Sharif’s birthday. Pakistan, however, reciprocated with terrorist attacks against India. But unlike in the past, India under Modi showed the determination to hit back Pakistan proportionately. It was in this context text that India carried out surgical strikes inside Pakistan territory along the border after the Uri terrorist attack. Later, the IAF went deep inside Pakistan hitting a LeT training ground at Balakot in response to the deadly Pulwama attack. Terming its air strikes as “non-military pre-emptive” action, the Indian government succeeded in garnering global support. Even China could not openly support Pakistan against India’s action. India’s successive military and air strikes have called Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. They have shifted India’s Pakistan policy in two ways: first, New Delhi can in future exercise similar options against Pakistan if Islamabad fails to reign-in terrorist organisations operating from its soil against India. Second, the world community increasingly shares India’s concerns about Pakistan having emerged as the epicentre of terrorism. This is why efforts led by the US have been intensified to designate Hafiz Saeed as a global terrorist. At a time when ASEAN countries want India to play an active role in the region, the Modi government has brought about a new energy in India’s orientation towards Southeast Asian countries. India’s Middle East policy under Modi has also undergone a defining shift, with New Delhi finally removing the veil over its ties with Israel. Modi became the first Indian Prime Minister to visit that country. At the same time, he has left no stone unturned in strengthening ties with the other countries of the region. The success of Modi’s Middle East policy can be gauged from the fact that India was invited to address the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The Modi government has been successful in dealing with all the major powers –the US, Russia, China, France, Japan and others. Displaying astute pragmatism, the Prime Minister has shown his determination to elevate ties with the US by signing several important agreements, including the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) and the Communications, Compatibility, Security Agreement (COMCASA). This has helped in removing long-standing obstacles in realising the potential of defence ties with the US. Signing the S-400 missile agreement with Russia simultaneously, underscored the Modi government’s effort to maintain India’s strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US and to effectively checkmate Islamabad’s desire to foster defence ties with Moscow. With regard to China, while the Modi government continued to promote friendly ties, its strong response to Beijing on the Doklam issue showed India’s readiness to rise to the occasion, when needed. India under Modi has come out of its timid approach to assert its rightful place in international politics. (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.)

Narendra Modi government has been successful in dealing with major world powers

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march. &nbsp;

This is particularly pronounced in politically crucial UP. &nbsp;

Political pundits want to know why Congress has changed its strategy from consolidating secular and democratic forces, to going alone in key states. &nbsp;

Even its earlier plans to prevent the consolidation of Hindu votes in favour of Prime Minister Narendra Modi by adopting soft Hindutva, has been ignored. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Unlike Sonia Gandhi’s strategy that led to the defeat of Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2004, Rahul Gandhi has chosen to rebuild the mortgaged and depleted Congress 'haveli’, instead of dealing with the real situation on the ground.&nbsp;

At a time, when the grand old party faces a real political threat, it is surprising that it was still not ready to concede ground to like-minded allies.

Even in Jammu and Kashmir, where the party has no base, it has refused to part with two seats in the Kashmir Valley to ally National Conference or the PDP. Both these parties left two seats in the Jammu region to the Congress, making the contest a cliff hanger for the BJP. &nbsp;

Instead, the Congress has fielded candidates from the north and south Kashmir seats. &nbsp; &nbsp;

In stitching alliances, the NDA has taken the lead, cobbling together 40 parties. It has succeeded in bringing in estranged partners like Shiv Sena and Asom Gana Parishad, who were critical of Modi over the years. &nbsp;

Alliances need sacrifices and BJP has shown the way by sacrificing its ministers and sitting MPs to concede seats to its allies. &nbsp;

In the words of analyst Anurag Modi, the common village voter is hardly influenced by TV debates. His voice may not be heard by those sitting at the highest pedestals, but his time comes when India votes. &nbsp;

Congress’s main challenge is to avoid the fragmentation of this vote. This can only be possible if Rahul Gandhi ignores sycophants around him and toes his mother’s tried and tested line.

Rahul Gandhi’s experiment fits in with the resolution adopted at the September 1998 Congress session at the scenic Pachmarhi hills in Madhya Pradesh. &nbsp;

The party decided to reclaim its lost ground by going to the polls alone, with the exception of few states like Tamil Nadu.

Leaders, more sycophantic than visionary, told Sonia Gandhi in 1998 that the NDA will disappear and meet a fate similar to the Janata Party in 1979, which had ousted the Congress under powerful Indira Gandhi for just two years. &nbsp;

It would appear that Rahul Gandhi has reached similar conclusions about the secular and regional parties thriving at the expense of the Congress. &nbsp;

A senior Congress leader bluntly confided to this writer that while BJP is a political rival, regional secular parties were enemies. “They have eaten into our vote base, making us non-existent in West Bengal, Bihar, UP and Tamil Nadu,” he said. &nbsp;

Sonia learned that going alone will harm the party. In the 1999 Lok Sabha elections, fighting solo under Sonia Gandhi, the Congress lost more ground, depleting its numbers further. &nbsp;

Thereafter, the party lost state after state in the assembly elections. Following the 2002 Gujarat riots, CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet approached Sonia and asked her to review the Pachmarhi resolution.&nbsp;

In a brainstorming session at Shimla in July 2003, the party adopted an open-minded approach on pre-poll and post-poll alliances, which, it said will be implemented at the national level.

Soon after the Karnataka assembly elections last year in May, a revival of the 2004 Congress spirit to lead liberal and democratic forces, resurfaced.&nbsp;

It was, in fact, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati who immediately dialled Sonia after the Karnataka election results indicated a fractured mandate. &nbsp;

She reportedly brought the Congress and Janata Dal (S) chief, HD Devegowda, together to keep the BJP at bay in the southern state. She called up Devegowda and convinced him to take Congress support.&nbsp;

Naturally, questions are being asked as to why Rahul didn’t restructure or rebuild the organisation in the last five years.

After its worst defeat in 2014, it was a godsend scenario for the current Congress president to initiate reforms and delegate powers to district committees to choose candidates and be accountable. He had ample time to get the organisation come out of the grip of family loyalists.

The result is that Congress remains in tatters, as Rahul has done nothing except make noises about “structural reforms”. &nbsp;

He first told workers in UP that the party would not be revived in the state unless it contests on its own and then justified an alliance with the Samajwadi Party in the last assembly election. &nbsp;

Even though Congress continues to be a central column for any secular alliance, there is need to have clarity on alliances.

Many opposition leaders asked the Congress to emulate a Bihar-type grand alliance at the national level by sacrificing ego.&nbsp;

Tactically, they asked the party to focus on west India, including Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and leave eastern India, basically UP and Bihar, to regional parties to limit seats of the BJP-led NDA. &nbsp;

But in the words of Rasheed Kidwai, a veteran writer on Congress affairs, the party’s 2019 story is bad and muddled. &nbsp;

In addition to Rahul Gandhi’s inexperience, the grand old party lacks self-belief and its ability to communicate and connect, even though it has produced a really sound manifesto. But then Indian elections are not contested on manifestos alone.&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-ignoring-key-election-allies-what-is-congress-gameplan-for-ls-poll-2019-2736401">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march.

The reluctance to concede ground to allies and its choice of candidates are sufficient indications that Congress is experimenting with the 2019 general elections to revive its organisational structure, rather than halt BJP’s march. This is particularly pronounced in politically crucial UP. Political pundits want to know why Congress has changed its strategy from consolidating secular and democratic forces, to going alone in key states. Even its earlier plans to prevent the consolidation of Hindu votes in favour of Prime Minister Narendra Modi by adopting soft Hindutva, has been ignored. Unlike Sonia Gandhi’s strategy that led to the defeat of Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2004, Rahul Gandhi has chosen to rebuild the mortgaged and depleted Congress 'haveli’, instead of dealing with the real situation on the ground. At a time, when the grand old party faces a real political threat, it is surprising that it was still not ready to concede ground to like-minded allies. Even in Jammu and Kashmir, where the party has no base, it has refused to part with two seats in the Kashmir Valley to ally National Conference or the PDP. Both these parties left two seats in the Jammu region to the Congress, making the contest a cliff hanger for the BJP. Instead, the Congress has fielded candidates from the north and south Kashmir seats. In stitching alliances, the NDA has taken the lead, cobbling together 40 parties. It has succeeded in bringing in estranged partners like Shiv Sena and Asom Gana Parishad, who were critical of Modi over the years. Alliances need sacrifices and BJP has shown the way by sacrificing its ministers and sitting MPs to concede seats to its allies. In the words of analyst Anurag Modi, the common village voter is hardly influenced by TV debates. His voice may not be heard by those sitting at the highest pedestals, but his time comes when India votes. Congress’s main challenge is to avoid the fragmentation of this vote. This can only be possible if Rahul Gandhi ignores sycophants around him and toes his mother’s tried and tested line. Rahul Gandhi’s experiment fits in with the resolution adopted at the September 1998 Congress session at the scenic Pachmarhi hills in Madhya Pradesh. The party decided to reclaim its lost ground by going to the polls alone, with the exception of few states like Tamil Nadu. Leaders, more sycophantic than visionary, told Sonia Gandhi in 1998 that the NDA will disappear and meet a fate similar to the Janata Party in 1979, which had ousted the Congress under powerful Indira Gandhi for just two years. It would appear that Rahul Gandhi has reached similar conclusions about the secular and regional parties thriving at the expense of the Congress. A senior Congress leader bluntly confided to this writer that while BJP is a political rival, regional secular parties were enemies. “They have eaten into our vote base, making us non-existent in West Bengal, Bihar, UP and Tamil Nadu,” he said. Sonia learned that going alone will harm the party. In the 1999 Lok Sabha elections, fighting solo under Sonia Gandhi, the Congress lost more ground, depleting its numbers further. Thereafter, the party lost state after state in the assembly elections. Following the 2002 Gujarat riots, CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet approached Sonia and asked her to review the Pachmarhi resolution. In a brainstorming session at Shimla in July 2003, the party adopted an open-minded approach on pre-poll and post-poll alliances, which, it said will be implemented at the national level. Soon after the Karnataka assembly elections last year in May, a revival of the 2004 Congress spirit to lead liberal and democratic forces, resurfaced. It was, in fact, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) supremo Mayawati who immediately dialled Sonia after the Karnataka election results indicated a fractured mandate. She reportedly brought the Congress and Janata Dal (S) chief, HD Devegowda, together to keep the BJP at bay in the southern state. She called up Devegowda and convinced him to take Congress support. Naturally, questions are being asked as to why Rahul didn’t restructure or rebuild the organisation in the last five years. After its worst defeat in 2014, it was a godsend scenario for the current Congress president to initiate reforms and delegate powers to district committees to choose candidates and be accountable. He had ample time to get the organisation come out of the grip of family loyalists. The result is that Congress remains in tatters, as Rahul has done nothing except make noises about “structural reforms”. He first told workers in UP that the party would not be revived in the state unless it contests on its own and then justified an alliance with the Samajwadi Party in the last assembly election. Even though Congress continues to be a central column for any secular alliance, there is need to have clarity on alliances. Many opposition leaders asked the Congress to emulate a Bihar-type grand alliance at the national level by sacrificing ego. Tactically, they asked the party to focus on west India, including Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh and leave eastern India, basically UP and Bihar, to regional parties to limit seats of the BJP-led NDA. But in the words of Rasheed Kidwai, a veteran writer on Congress affairs, the party’s 2019 story is bad and muddled. In addition to Rahul Gandhi’s inexperience, the grand old party lacks self-belief and its ability to communicate and connect, even though it has produced a really sound manifesto. But then Indian elections are not contested on manifestos alone. (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.)

Ignoring key election allies: Congress lacks ability to communicate and connect

WhatsApp introduces new privacy settings for groups, before Lok Sabha Elections in India

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. &nbsp;

In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader. &nbsp;

It is the crowning glory. What takes the cake, rather the crown, is the mukut or tiara itself. Innumerable images, even of Dalit leaders, who have spent lifetimes fighting for equality and constitutional freedoms are on camera juggling uneasily with gold-plated tiaras on their heads. &nbsp;

An accessory befitting a local theatre group enacting Ramayana scenes is now seen occupying pride of place. For upper caste political leaders, the mukut seems just right. &nbsp;

The mukut-dhaaris wear it with a sense of entitlement completely at odds with our democratic polity. The King-like mystique or Goddess-like aura is recreated time and again, reinforcing the image of rulers with their ‘right to rule’ persona. No questions asked. &nbsp;

Now is the time when swords create images. Throughout the Hindi heartland, the talwar or sword held aloft is a metaphor of martial strength sanctified by our caste hierarchies. Leaders are filmed drawing the sword, often shakily, from its scabbard. Undoubtedly, it is a mighty act.&nbsp;

 
Unsheathing the power of the sword, bringing die-hard bravery to the fore and reaffirming their right to fight for democratic rights with such ancient weaponry. &nbsp;

Images of women leaders, conservatively draped in saris, now with a naked sword in hand gets its share of coverage. It is an image of empowerment in this age of gender fluidity, with the clarion calls for Bharat Mata ki Jai in the background. &nbsp;

Next is the imagery of togetherness and leadership. On a dais or a stage way above the ground level, a mass of men and women come together signifying their unity and uniformity. &nbsp;

Seen from a distance, this critical mass of leadership is often indistinguishable. The images captured have flashes of white and red, green and saffron, the dominant colours signifying India. &nbsp;

The leaders’ attire, body language and speeches do make them distinct for a while, as they speak from the rostrum. Speech over, they merge together again. Today’s leadership is about numbers; the more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be. Politics and perceptions share shadowy borders. &nbsp;

When there are people, people everywhere, there’s new powerful imagery. Janata or the crowds are packed together. Like a wheat-field packed, filled with ripening stalks. When Elias Canetti used such strong imagery to explain crowds, he visualised homogeneous faceless masses. &nbsp;

Crowds in India seem homogeneous but they are not. Village folk sit, crouch, and stand in similar ways; they lean together and when prompted, cheer in unison. They are the audience, watching political dramas unfold on the stage in front of them. &nbsp;

What they see and what they hear is not what is telecast or broadcast. Leaders often hail this janata as ‘janardan’, likening them to a benevolent God, who always helps. What a turn and twist in this phrase: Janata janardan hai. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The Gandhi cap is still an omnipresent image. But it just doesn’t fit all or anybody! Even though the cap is freely available at all Khadi Bhandar showrooms, stacked in cardboard boxes, it really seems like a limp relic of the past. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Neither the Congressmen and women nor leaders of other political hues have shown the imagination to make capital out of this simple cap. Merely putting the cap on has become a defining moment. Like during the ‘India Against Corruption’ movement at Ramlila grounds of New Delhi. Each leader who donned one was hoping it would create a new image, generate a new aura around them and make history. &nbsp;

The socialists of Uttar Pradesh prefer red instead of white caps. Colours change but the simplicity, austerity of the Gandhi cap continues to be a complete misfit in today’s time and age of consumerism, opulence and fortune-for-the-few. &nbsp;

On TV studio-floors, there’s the taandav of image-making. Television anchors are adept at creating their own imagery, aesthetically designed to pull audiences into a studio-generated illusionary world. &nbsp;

Here colours streak across screens with music rising to a crescendo and merging visuals into words. One TV anchor has made rubbing hands his signature style. It was a gesture rarely seen on TV screens; he created the imagery of an eager auctioneer rubbing his hands in glee. Breaking news made him break the mould. &nbsp;

Other anchors are in throes of self-induced ecstasy, a news-morphine-high, which makes them leap across studio floors, punching the air in front of large studio screens.

The whiplash of their words activates a mass of graphical data, conjuring images of a ringmaster on a circus floor, summoning jokers, who cartwheel and monkeys who ride bicycles. And then suddenly it all fades away…time now for Chyawanprash ads to roll. &nbsp;

These images and performances go on, evening after evening, night after night, when electoral politics are dissected, debated and discussed. Our television studios, newspapers, magazines and news portals are a world of such profound sound and fury, music and graphics. &nbsp;

It signifies our reality: so western, so contemporary, where modern style and substance go together hand in hand. Who said we are stereotypical, regressive, chauvinistic, unimaginative and unconstitutional…? 
&nbsp;

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-the-imagery-of-poll-politics-2735806">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader.

Everyone loves elections in India. Especially the vibrant Indian media which lives off elections, seemingly at the cost of all other news. In the process, television news today has created its own imagery: capturing the pandal, a stage set high above the ground far removed from the people gathered in front; a line-up of leaders in white khadi photographed with arms raised, their hands clasped in a photo-op of solidarity; tinselly crowns, swords, bows, and arrows being presented to a supreme leader. It is the crowning glory. What takes the cake, rather the crown, is the mukut or tiara itself. Innumerable images, even of Dalit leaders, who have spent lifetimes fighting for equality and constitutional freedoms are on camera juggling uneasily with gold-plated tiaras on their heads. An accessory befitting a local theatre group enacting Ramayana scenes is now seen occupying pride of place. For upper caste political leaders, the mukut seems just right. The mukut-dhaaris wear it with a sense of entitlement completely at odds with our democratic polity. The King-like mystique or Goddess-like aura is recreated time and again, reinforcing the image of rulers with their ‘right to rule’ persona. No questions asked. Now is the time when swords create images. Throughout the Hindi heartland, the talwar or sword held aloft is a metaphor of martial strength sanctified by our caste hierarchies. Leaders are filmed drawing the sword, often shakily, from its scabbard. Undoubtedly, it is a mighty act. Unsheathing the power of the sword, bringing die-hard bravery to the fore and reaffirming their right to fight for democratic rights with such ancient weaponry. Images of women leaders, conservatively draped in saris, now with a naked sword in hand gets its share of coverage. It is an image of empowerment in this age of gender fluidity, with the clarion calls for Bharat Mata ki Jai in the background. Next is the imagery of togetherness and leadership. On a dais or a stage way above the ground level, a mass of men and women come together signifying their unity and uniformity. Seen from a distance, this critical mass of leadership is often indistinguishable. The images captured have flashes of white and red, green and saffron, the dominant colours signifying India. The leaders’ attire, body language and speeches do make them distinct for a while, as they speak from the rostrum. Speech over, they merge together again. Today’s leadership is about numbers; the more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be. Politics and perceptions share shadowy borders. When there are people, people everywhere, there’s new powerful imagery. Janata or the crowds are packed together. Like a wheat-field packed, filled with ripening stalks. When Elias Canetti used such strong imagery to explain crowds, he visualised homogeneous faceless masses. Crowds in India seem homogeneous but they are not. Village folk sit, crouch, and stand in similar ways; they lean together and when prompted, cheer in unison. They are the audience, watching political dramas unfold on the stage in front of them. What they see and what they hear is not what is telecast or broadcast. Leaders often hail this janata as ‘janardan’, likening them to a benevolent God, who always helps. What a turn and twist in this phrase: Janata janardan hai. The Gandhi cap is still an omnipresent image. But it just doesn’t fit all or anybody! Even though the cap is freely available at all Khadi Bhandar showrooms, stacked in cardboard boxes, it really seems like a limp relic of the past. Neither the Congressmen and women nor leaders of other political hues have shown the imagination to make capital out of this simple cap. Merely putting the cap on has become a defining moment. Like during the ‘India Against Corruption’ movement at Ramlila grounds of New Delhi. Each leader who donned one was hoping it would create a new image, generate a new aura around them and make history. The socialists of Uttar Pradesh prefer red instead of white caps. Colours change but the simplicity, austerity of the Gandhi cap continues to be a complete misfit in today’s time and age of consumerism, opulence and fortune-for-the-few. On TV studio-floors, there’s the taandav of image-making. Television anchors are adept at creating their own imagery, aesthetically designed to pull audiences into a studio-generated illusionary world. Here colours streak across screens with music rising to a crescendo and merging visuals into words. One TV anchor has made rubbing hands his signature style. It was a gesture rarely seen on TV screens; he created the imagery of an eager auctioneer rubbing his hands in glee. Breaking news made him break the mould. Other anchors are in throes of self-induced ecstasy, a news-morphine-high, which makes them leap across studio floors, punching the air in front of large studio screens. The whiplash of their words activates a mass of graphical data, conjuring images of a ringmaster on a circus floor, summoning jokers, who cartwheel and monkeys who ride bicycles. And then suddenly it all fades away…time now for Chyawanprash ads to roll. These images and performances go on, evening after evening, night after night, when electoral politics are dissected, debated and discussed. Our television studios, newspapers, magazines and news portals are a world of such profound sound and fury, music and graphics. It signifies our reality: so western, so contemporary, where modern style and substance go together hand in hand. Who said we are stereotypical, regressive, chauvinistic, unimaginative and unconstitutional…? (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.)

Politics and perceptions: The more leaders on stage, the more powerful they are perceived to be