The Republic

Man can’t handle drink, at any age

2011-06-16T12:25:00.000+05:30

Maharashtra’s new legal age for drinking is the oldest in the world. Here’s why it won’t make a difference to the parties affected by alcohol

There are many reasons why humans like alcohol, only one of them being the thrill of doing something one is not supposed to when very young. Like anywhere else, they tend to drink like there’s no tomorrow in Maharashtra, home to some of the worst cases of alcoholism and addiction in India.

Until a few days, the legal age for drinking was 21. Now it is 25, the oldest on the planet. The decision was made after Maharashtra Minister of Social Justice and Deaddiction Activities Shivajirao Moghe pushed for it. That Maharashtra has such a portfolio is extraordinary and there are many states in India that could do with similar responsibility.

But Moghe’s measures require attention. He has pushed the government into banning alcohol at all public functions and ceremonies, imposing fines for underage drinking, increasing the number of dry days, extending the areas where liquor vends are not permitted, limiting the number of alcohol bottles an individual may have and ordering the closure of a vend or bar if 25 per cent of the residents of a municipal ward say so.

These are some of the measures in the run-up to a policy on deaddiction, which is no mean thing in these times of denial.

Governments, like everyone else, are creatures of habit. Administrations the world over have tried the methods being proposed in Maharashtra. And they haven’t worked. Age makes no difference to people. They’ll reach for a drink if they feel like it, or if the risk is thrilling enough and worth it.

So, it’s not like anyone is going to freeze and think they are only 24. They’d go right ahead and drink. Likewise, dry days have failed everywhere. Most people stock up for dry days. The ones who don’t simply head for the bootlegger’s. Even making liquor vends scarcer doesn’t work because they’ll just go the extra mile.

What might work is the 25 per cent objection clause, where a vend or a bar could be shut if a quarter of the population says so. This is fairly democratic and gives people a chance to debate it. In the chawls of Mumbai, this could be a boon.

Women, thus far terrified by the drinking habits of male partners, would have an option henceforth. Community shame is still a powerful tool and could be used effectively against liquor sellers, by forcing them to look elsewhere.

However, while liquor barons can be shamed into taking their business elsewhere, people who drink think differently. The new Maharashtra policy is not aimed at the liquor seller. It is aimed at the liquor buyer. The average normal drinker has no cause to feel embarrassed. They are not doing anything illegal. They want to have a good time. They meet, have fun and go home. This is what a majority of the drinkers do.

We have to remember that if everyone who drank became an alcoholic, there would be no place for the sane. Since we haven’t been overrun by alcoholics yet, it is a fair call that the normal drinkers outnumber the alcoholics.

Here comes the tricky part. Almost unnoticed, the normal becomes the abnormal. Lulled by habit, people who drink tend to increase their intake slowly. Even the best of humans is susceptible to this. It takes extraordinary balance of mind and body to stay a sober drinker.

When things tend to go out of control, as they do when people start to get home late and drunk every day, there’s tension at home. Over time, this travels out of a home and there is tension wherever a problem drinker is: at work, in a bar, at a party or in a cinema.

This is what the new policy is targeted at. They want to make access to liquor difficult for people. Trouble is, it never works. From 1920 to 1933, the United States had banned the sale, manufacture and transportation of alcohol. It created the first instance of organised crime, led by Al Capone who was among the world’s most notorious bootleggers.

The US repealed its prohibition policy and reverted to normal after the streets began to be littered with corpses. The US undid prohibition for crime reasons and Mumbai might want to pick up the history books.

Crime apart, there are reasons why the rest of the world either doesn’t bother with legal ages for drinking or keeps them young. For instance, in European nations and Albania people are allowed to drink in homes at whatever age they wish to. Some families offer medicinal quantities to children on festive occasions to make them feel part of the fun that the adults are having.

So there is no concept of a legal age for drinking in these countries. Most Muslim nations too don’t bother with legal ages for drinking. They simply don’t allow anyone to drink. But as these societies begin to open up, the authorities don’t get after people who drink anymore. In Pakistan, for instance, liquor has a huge social following.

In most countries, the legal age is between 17 and 21. But that in any case has no bearing over the process that a person undergoes from being a normal imbiber to becoming a problem drinker. Barely anyone drinks merely for the fun of breaking a law. They do so because of a complex mix of emotional, family and social reasons that are not under a government’s control.

Resentment is a principal cause of alcoholism and this resentment is rarely over government policies. For example, almost no one becomes an alcoholic because they resent the labour laws or gender laws. Serious resentments are always personal.

Laws have nothing to do with them. Family usually becomes the first cause of alcoholism, just as it becomes the first cause of achievements too. Governments have nothing to do with how a person relates to family.

Money is another big reason why laws fail. Political parties are almost always beholden to liquor manufacturers for funds. This makes it difficult for them to push tough laws. Also, governments tend to rely on alcohol sales to raise precious revenue. Many governments in India sell alcohol and use the revenue to fund infrastructure projects.

The governments of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, to list a few, balance their books from liquor revenue. This makes it difficult for them to deal with ensuing problems when crime and alcoholism rise. In some states, arguments are made out that a child going to school is a more powerful motivator than a dying alcoholic. So, they want to sell liquor and build schools.

Gujarat has managed to hold on to its prohibition policy but there are more than crime reasons for that. The liquor lobby in the pre-Narendra Modi days was run by Muslims and Modi broke their back. This pleased the Hindu business lobby and so they support the prohibition policy.

Maharashtra works differently. It is India’s commercial capital and must have more than do-good reasons for serious policy. It is not clear just how much of this complex mix pushed actors Amitabh Bachchan and Imran Khan, one old and the other young, into opposing the new policy. Bachchan tweeted saying it was strange and Khan is considering a Public Interest Litigation.

This piece first appeared in The Financial World and Tehelka.com on 16 June 2011

The most valuable politician in India

2011-06-13T15:52:00.000+05:30

In one sense, everything has already been laid out for politicians in India. They have no necessity of inventing anything, for everything has been said and done, in India and outside.

For instance, moral codes have been handed down in the families that the politicians come from, the textbooks they may have studied and the religious texts they might have read. What then remains is how to do the best they can in a career of their choice.

Since public service is what politics is all about, Indian politicians are left with the task of correcting the wrongs of their time. If social injustice is the issue, as with the Dalit movement, then the liberation of slaves in the US is a template. If laws and jurisprudence are the issue, then the Magna Carta and the founding documents of the US are predecessors. If corruption is the issue, then there are numerous revolutions to study from – in France, Russia, Mexico and other countries.

The simplest lesson is this: nations have never progressed on greed. They progress from excellence in thought and act.

In India, politics has become so intricate that the mere act of winning an election is complex and tiring. A politician consequently may have no energy or motivation to do anything else. But that is not what our lives are about. Right now, it appears that acceptance of greed may be diminishing. Right now, there is a need to see who can do the right thing. What then are our options?

At the moment, the following personalities have gained a modicum of public approval. They are among the most important politicians in India right now. They have spent time in public offices and thus need to be assessed.

They are: Nitish Kumar, Mamata Banerjee, Omar Abdullah, Naveen Patnaik, Mayawati, Prithviraj Chavan, Narendra Modi, Raman Singh (all chief ministers), Manmohan Singh (prime minister), Pranab Mukherjee (union finance minister), Sushma Swaraj, Mohan Bhagwat, Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Sitaram Yechury (all in top party positions), and T Muivah and Ganapathi (heads of underground organisations that have shown the tenacity to fight the state for long periods with some success).

Generally, politicians need to possess some traits to win acclaim. For instance, they ought to be in some measure agreeable, open, conscientious, pacific, friendly, charming, kind, clever and ambitious.

In India, however, most politicians, barring, at times, members of the mainstream Left, have an amplified sense of self-regard, a noticeable degree of deception and dishonesty, a significant absence of remorse and an ability to twist things.

But in the end, they must possess value, as understood by the simple ability to do good.

For, by choosing to be politicians they have opted for a life in making decisions that affect life. India has elected 15 Lok Sabhas and numerous state assemblies. Many organisations have sprung up in this time to contest these politicians.

The Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) and the People’s War Group (PWG, now the CPI (Maoist)) were formed around the same time, 1980, and are two of India’s biggest militant groups.

Born 1950, Thuingaleng Muivah, head of the NSCN (IM), holds the key to peace in the sensitive Northeast. The Indian state has travelled the globe to talk to this man for years, almost always outside India, in effect agreeing that Muivah is the most crucial extremist leader in the Northeast.

He is a longtime practicing Christian who wants to form an independent Greater Nagaland by changing the structure of states like Manipur and others. He is not comfortable with other Naga groups but maybe softening towards New Delhi. He is a crucial figure.

Ganapathi, born 1952, is the elusive head of the CPI (Maoist), who is also one of India’s most wanted men. A former teacher, he has fought the state for years and has plotted numerous attacks on security forces including some huge murderous attacks.

Observers of the Maoist movement in India credit Ganapathi with moving out of Andhra Pradesh when things got hot and shifting the Naxal base to Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. He is also credited with the mega move to unite India’s two biggest Naxal factions, the PWG and the Maoist Coordination Centre (MCC) into the CPI (Maoist).

He has often spoken of overrunning the Indian state militarily and New Delhi believes he has put together a credible force. Ganapathi is the man to talk to if India is serious about solving the Naxal issue.

Born 1946, Sonia Gandhi is astonishingly the longest serving head of the Congress party, which boasts of several luminaries with far better credentials in its history. She has, over the years, proven to be a conservative, left of Centre politician who usually prefers to maintain the status quo.

Her big moment came when she said no to the prime minister’s post, partially driven by the parties opposed to it and partially propelled by her own sense of right and wrong. She has held the Congress together better than anticipated.

She could be around for three years at least before she makes way for a successor, widely believed to be her son Rahul Gandhi. Her big contribution: she has kept the Congress left of centre and sustained a secular temperament in the organisation.

Rahul Gandhi, born 1970, is seen as a good bet for the Congress, which otherwise appears to be lacking in energy. Rahul tends to display a mix of his father Rajiv Gandhi’s idealism and mother Sonia’s caution. His big advantage is that he is India’s best-known politician around the age of 40. He has begun to take important decisions and is believed to be preparing for the top job after Manmohan Singh. His big contribution: the reform of the Congress.

Mohan Bhagwat, born 1950, is the intriguing head of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) who is quietly trying to reform the RSS. He is the first post-Vajpayee, post-Advani RSS head, which helps him deal with most seniors in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

He has no patience for much of the ancient thought in the RSS and its uniform. He is expected to be around for a while. His biggest contribution: trying to modernise the RSS.

Sushma Swaraj of the BJP and Sitaram Yechury of the CPI(M) are seen as contenders to head their respective parties. They are survivors and they have the task of winning over reluctant colleagues before they take a shot at the top posts.

Yechury is believed to have a better chance after the recent Left debacle, though the CPI(M) often tends to give its leaders many chances, which means Prakash Karat may still be around. Swaraj has to fight her way through as well. Yechury’s biggest contribution: keeping the Left credible with his openness and moderation. Swaraj’s biggest contribution: she is the first woman to go that far in the BJP.

Manmohan Singh and Pranab Mukherjee have lost traction over the past few months after a series of old and new scams began to be reported on. Singh is Sonia’s prime minister and Mukherjee is Singh’s prime minister.

Singh had incredible goodwill, last seen for Rajiv Gandhi in his first year as PM, but he has lost some lustre because of impudent colleagues in the union council of ministers. It appears that Singh’s concept of giving ministers a free hand has not been reciprocated with integrity and this has hurt Singh.

His biggest contribution: a wise head that almost never gets provoked. Mukherjee is Mr Governance. He could have been bolder but he has done his bit in managing things for Singh. Mukherjee’s greatest contribution: he may be the best number two since Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.

This brings us to the chief ministers. Raman Singh matters because he has gained priceless experience, and a fair bit of notoriety, in dealing with the Maoists. He has had several crises and these have made him a man to watch in the BJP. But his ability to gain wide trust is suspect. His big thing: he has come across as a centre-right politician with a tough mind.

Naveen Patnaik is the subtle one. No one expected him to survive this long in the tricky Odisha political set-up. Patnaik presides over some of India’s biggest conflicts over land and mining and has successfully been friends with the right, the Left and the Centre. His big thing: staying Spartan and staying personally free of corruption.

Omar Abdullah is the young hope in Jammu and Kashmir. He has survived initial scorn to make a few friends. His big gestures have been to forgive opponents, most notably when a constable hurled a shoe at him.

Abdullah went to the constable’s home, talked with him, withdrew the cases against him, forgave him and sent him home to his family in an official helicopter. His big contribution: keeping the lid on the stormy Kashmir dispute and staying the course. He also gains points for being a secular Muslim.

Prithviraj Chavan has been pushed into tricky Maharashtra politics when he was least expecting it. Maharashtra is perhaps among the most corrupt states, with a dangerous mix of politics, land issues, the underworld, big business and Bollywood. It’s also the state of Anna Hazare and Bal Thackeray.

So far, Chavan has done well to keep ambitions in the Maharashtra Congress under control and send a message that transparency and integrity matter in politics. Veterans tend to treat him as a passing phenomena but Chavan has done well to stick around and retain control. His big contribution: refusing to sup with shady figures and sending a message that honesty will be rewarded.

Narendra Modi, born 1950, is the man most people look to in the BJP. He is the best administrator thrown up by the RSS and the BJP and is often pitched as an opponent to Rahul Gandhi. But Modi hasn’t been able to effectively shrug off the stigma of the 2002 riots in Gujarat, which makes it difficult for him to make a move in New Delhi.

Another issue with him is his disdain for colleagues and peers in the RSS and the BJP. He barely speaks with anyone and this makes the others in the rightwing nervous. His big thing: he has stayed free of corruption personally and has led a performance-driven administration.

Mamata Banerjee has become the big hope in West Bengal after a long hard struggle to best the Left Front. Her victory in the recent assembly election sets her up for what could be one of the toughest tasks in India.

She has begun well, taking land back from the Tatas and offering them a new deal at the same time, and rushing to deal with tempers in Darjeeling. She has solid pro-people instincts and there is a tad too much expected of her. She has some way to go in putting together a second rung but she has the goodwill, which offers space for unpopular decisions. She is among the best new hopes in the country at the moment. Her big contribution: her Spartan life and an unrelenting commitment to the poor.

Then there are Mayawati and Nitish Kumar. Mayawati matters because she represents a formidable anti-Congress force and because she heads the Uttar Pradesh government.

She is the best hope for the Dalits of India and is relentless in her political energy and ambition. Her big contribution: battling great odds to create an option for Dalits.

However, Nitish Kumar is perhaps the most valuable politician in India because of his cool approach to crippling problems. Nitish Kumar is almost unbelievable in Bihar, thrashing opponents, making integrity attractive and making some very important policies like the bill on corrupt officers and their assets.

You can sense the relief in large parts of Bihar because of him. New Delhi learns much from him and he is probably the best bet, acceptable to everyone at the moment.

How India became a nation of managers

2011-06-11T10:50:00.000+05:30

It’s been said in whole and parts for about 2,500 years, but we still ponder over it: before all else comes character.

It doesn’t matter whether Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is desperately keen on fixing black money, it doesn’t matter if LK Advani has been living in 7, Race Course Road mentally for a while, it doesn’t matter if Barack Obama has made healthcare his priority for Americans, and it certainly doesn’t matter if Rahul Gandhi has a game plan for India.

Before they do any of this, they need to have it in them. They must by instinct be able to give before they seek. They must by instinct know the difference between right and wrong. They must, as is said, be able to walk behind the people. It’s been a long while since anyone in India was able to be with the people. Jayaprakash Narayan was an interlude, before him was Indira Gandhi who had a degree of comfort with the everyday Indian.

Leadership is about character, and we seem to be short on it. That is basically it.

So, when we suddenly need someone to lead, we find that India has quietly metamorphosed into a nation of managers. Congress president Sonia Gandhi is a manager. When she became the party president, her brief was to manage the crisis in the party. She was tasked with holding the organisation together in the late 1990s and after. She was to do this by shunning risk, sticking to the familiar path of family and keeping tempers down. She did so.

It worked so well for the Congress that they seem to have granted her keys to the party until she wishes to hand them over. Sonia Gandhi is the closest anybody has come to a lifetime presidency in the Congress. But has the party changed in any way? Has it been able to command some honest rigour? Is it relevant to an ordinary Indian? Has Sonia Gandhi been able to lead?

For all its assets, the Congress is still a bit of this and that, held together by an accepted chain of command and run by a slightly larger circle of the second rung. The party has superb survival instincts. And it is able to summon great loyalty from the bureaucracy.

But the party has not been able to cultivate a scientific temperament in its ranks, has not been able to adapt to the demands of transparency and has found it difficult to give people their due. It can manage. It cannot lead.

Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi is a manager. He has apparently been tasked with retaining control of power in New Delhi after the Manmohan Singh years. He appears to have given himself the task of opening up the Congress.

There is a world of difference in the lives of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi. The world has changed a fair bit from the time when Sonia was young. Formative influences, therefore, ought to have shaped the two vastly differently. Rahul ought to have been a risk-taker. He ought to be able to chuck everything and try an instinct-driven purge from the top below.

Instead, he has far too easily ceded control to the Congress managers. We know he gets around a bit and has travelled perhaps the most of any Congressman in recent times. But is there a Rahul moment we all remember? Is there a great Rahul act of courage and risk-taking in the Congress? Has he made integrity a central requirement of the Congress?

For all his talents, Rahul Gandhi has a big drawback: the Congress has set itself up to protect him from all trouble. In the absence of a good crisis, therefore, Rahul has not had reason to evolve as a leader. There’s no space for him to mature on his own. Consequently, he gets by fine as a manager.

When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was chosen for the job, he was tasked with managing. So we can’t truly expect him to be a great leader in what are probably his last few years as a politician. There is, of course, every reason to start.

For reasons best known to it, the Congress party seems to have put all its ethical and economic eggs in the Manmohan basket. This gives him the best opportunity of all to turn things around in the country, get a grip on the general atmosphere of mistrust, and restore India’s credibility.

You need an instinct to be a leader, however. You need that moment of clarity, which tells you it’s going to work. You need to grab it. Instead, Manmohan Singh manages. His instinct is to check the rules. He calls for meetings and forms committees.

His practiced earnestness is a great asset – and a great liability too. Because India is not a committee, Manmohan Singh has trouble figuring out what people expect of him. He is trained to delegate, which he does very well. But he is not trained to make men out of mortals. And so he lets us down. Our Prime Minister is a manager.

Nitin Gadkari, the president of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is a manager. When he was chosen to head the BJP he was tasked with managing intra-party issues. His core competence is to get the various sides of a dispute to back off a little and pass it off as a moment of history.

He has spent all his time dealing with the detritus of BJP wrangles. He has had to help bail out Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yeddyurappa more than once. He has had to deal with Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj more than once. He has had to settle the leadership of the BJP Jharkhand unit for a long time.

But Gadkari has never had to grab the leadership of centre-right thought. Gadkari has not had to even look like a leader. In New Delhi, he doesn’t even try. He looks, talks and conducts himself like a businessman who is on the verge of making truly big money.

The BJP expects the minimum of Gadkari and he delivers. They are not remotely thinking leadership and so they are not remotely leaders. Gadkari is a manager.

When he was chosen as general secretary of the CPI(M), Prakash Karat was tasked with managing the party after the giants like Jyoti Basu and Harkishen Singh Surjeet got too old. Karat is superb with theory and logic. He can read Communist theory for weeks and talk about it forever. He is Spartan in personal needs and so comes across as economically honest.

But what the CPI(M) needed was a leader. The party was going to seed in its strongholds after an extended period in governance and it needed fresh energy, fresh feet on the streets, and a fresh mind in meetings.

Karat’s basic instinct is to rationalise. He explains why things are the way they are; he will tell us how we got here and he will also explain how we move on from here. But he will not hit the streets. He will not step in to guide the masses because he doesn’t have those instincts.

In political circles, he is the envy of many for his poise, simplicity, intelligence and the ethos of the party he heads. But he is not feared. His lack of evil intent is both his strength and weakness. He is a decent manager who is now probably out of time. But leader he is not.

Ever so quietly leadership walked out of the room and we didn’t even notice. We have a surfeit of managers and it’s hurting us. If Delhi is bare, they are no different in the states.

Jharkhand is ridiculed as a stateless society. Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh have far too much to clean up. Punjab, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, the whole of the Northeast and even Kerala are populated largely by managers. Arjun Munda in Jharkhand is a manager, so is Yeddyurappa in Karnataka, the Badals in Punjab, Kiran Kumar Reddy in Andhra Pradesh, Ashok Gehlot in Rajasthan and Oomen Chandy in Kerala.

Eerily, the rise of the political manager in India appears to coincide with the rise of the business manager. Most urban youngsters in India rush to grab an MBA degree or diploma or even pretence of it. Their list of heroes would most likely include Rahul Gandhi, even before he has had a chance to mould his political character.

Some of this may be sourced to the Nehru-Gandhis. As long as Jawaharlal Nehru was around, we didn’t know much about Indira Gandhi the leader. We knew about her as daughter and as demure politician. But she transformed after Nehru died.

Suddenly, a genius for leadership began to take shape as she was engulfed by early political crises. Each tough moment taught her something and she learned very well. She picked up momentum as she passed the age of 50 and for a while, it did seem as if things were finally getting manageable in India. This, however, may have led to a rethink in Indira.

As she honed her survival skills, she began to lose trust in party colleagues. She found them less and less worthy. She stopped thinking of the Congress. The resultant lethargy is still crippling the party. It might take a while for the organisation to develop work ethic again.

Some of the lack of leadership may also be sourced to the stability in India now. There is a modicum of economic rhythm, which may be independent of political instability. Also, the culture of political coalitions has taught the various parties how to adapt.

They don’t seem to make much of a fuss, barring what the Left parties did on the Indo-US nuclear deal. This is shaping managerial skills too. Most politicians are drafted into keeping coalition allies happy, which involves risk and crisis management but not much of integrity and character.

Therefore, we have an astonishing situation in an important regional party, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), where there is a huge family but no leaders. The whole of the DMK, it appears, cannot rustle up an ounce of character.

Overall stability here may as understood by the absence of major natural disasters to cope with, by the relative stability in call rates, by not having to go to war, by not having to borrow heavily from international donors, by being able to increase fuel prices repeatedly without major protests, by being able to cope with the disintegration of Pakistan without much fuss, and by having the same person as prime minister for more than one full term.

Much of this is beneficial but much of it has also proved harmful. Stability creates an aura about managers. It makes people want to be like managers because things are normal. Over time, the outlook of a people becomes short-term and there is much relief in relatively easier lives.

This lulls people. And when they start to learn uncomfortable truths – that their politicians may have been looting the nation all this while – they are not quite sure how to respond. First, there is disbelief. Then there is anger. But there is no leadership.

Crises tend to hit suddenly; they don’t usually leave calling cards though they may have alerted us to their presence. This manifests on the streets, like everything else. Therefore, where the masses find it easy to step it up and join mass fasts on the issue of corruption, the polity is slow to respond.

They look for managers – the current favourite is Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, who epitomises the conservativeness of the system – but this is not a manageable problem. This is asking us to transform ourselves, and this needs leadership.

Without leaders it becomes a free-for-all, which is what happened at Baba Ramdev’s fast. Ramdev is excellent with yoga, but he hasn’t yet attained perfection. Yoga bestows completion only after a lifetime and Ramdev is still work in progress. He needs to choose counsel wisely now. So, in the absence of leaders, there is chaos.

It’s the same across the globe. In Syria, Yemen, Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, Russia, etc. There is hunger for leaders, not managers. This is why the United Nations (UN) – the global manager – barely makes a difference.

No one looks to the UN except for some peacekeeping in strife-hit areas. In the end, the unease grows so much that sacrifice is the only way out. Leaders are made out of sacrifice and India is yearning for sacrifice. It may not come immediately from a lethargic polity but it may not take too long either for the vacuum to fill.

Managers can only do so much.

The slyness in Manmohan Singh's statement on the WikiLeaks bribery cable

2011-03-18T18:42:00.000+05:30

There are a few problems with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's response to the uproar in Parliament yesterday on the WikiLeaks cables that said Singh's partymen had bribed opposition MPs to win the July 2008 confidence vote.

Here's the back story first.

The Left parties, which were supporting the then UPA1 coalition, had withdrawn support to the government in the summer of 2008 on the issue of the Indo-US nuclear deal. Consequently, the government's majority was tested in a vote in Parliament in July 2008.

Manmohan Singh won the vote, but there were huge allegations that cash was paid for votes. An important opposition party and a mainstream English news television channel had got together to sting a few MPs, who were believed to be receiving the money.

At that point, virtually everyone who could do so was conducting a sting operation. Many politicians and several journalists were at it, all in the hope of getting that crucial footage showing people paying and accepting bribes to vote for the UPA1 government.

For a while, the television channel aired promos saying they had sensational footage. In the end, they didn't televise anything on it.

Two days ago, The Hindu published cables sent by the US Embassy in New Delhi to Washington, saying the government had survived after paying bribes. The cables were accessed by WikiLeaks. The opposition kicked up a ruckus, asking Manmohan Singh to resign as he had no moral authority to continue after the revelations.

In response, Singh made a statement today in the Lok Sabha. This is what he said:

"Yesterday, several honourable members raised allegations based on reports in a newspaper of what purport to be cables from the US Embassy in New Delhi to their authorities in Washington. The Government of India cannot confirm the veracity, contents or even the existence of such communications. I may point out that many of the persons referred to in those reports have stoutly denied the veracity of the contents.

"An issue was raised that the offence of bribery was committed in India. The government rejects that allegation absolutely and firmly. Let it be remembered that in July 2008, in the 14th Lok Sabha, the government moved a Motion of Confidence. In an open vote that was taken on the floor of the House, the government won the confidence of the Lok Sabha by 275 votes for and 256 votes against. The allegations of bribery were investigated by a committee constituted by the 14th Lok Sabha. The committee had concluded that there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion of bribery.

"I am disappointed that members of the Opposition have forgotten what happened thereafter. Upon the conclusion of the term of the 14th Lok Sabha, there was a General Election. In that General Election, the opposition parties repeated their allegations of bribery in the trust vote. How did the people respond to those allegations? The principal opposition party, which had 138 seats in the 14th Lok Sabha, was reduced to 116 seats in the 15th Lok Sabha. The Left parties found that their tally was reduced from 59 to 24. It is the Congress Party alone which increased its tally from 145 to 206, an increase of 61 seats.

"It is unfortunate that the opposition continues to raise old charges that have been debated, discussed and rejected by the people of India. It is most surprising that speculative, unverified and unverifiable communications should be given dignity and seized upon by the opposition parties to revive old charges that have been soundly rejected.

"I wish to make it clear that no one from the Congress Party or the government indulged in any unlawful act during the trust vote during July 2008. The UPA I Government always enjoyed the confidence of the people and the 14th Lok Sabha. The UPA II Government has been formed in the 15th Lok Sabha and enjoys the confidence of this House and the people of India."

Now, there are some sly observations here.

First, the one on people having denied the allegations in the WikiLeaks cables. Singh said: "I may point out that many of the persons referred to in those reports have stoutly denied the veracity of the contents."

The people who have denied the allegations are Satish Sharma, who is alleged to have organised the money, and Nachiketa Kapur, Sharma's oily aide who the cables say showed the money that was stacked and kept nearby. Kapur is even said to have shared the then going rate for votes.

The Prime Minister is relying on the denials of two shifty individuals, one of whom now says the other one never worked for him. No prime minister takes such a risk. If this is all the ammo Singh has, then it is not good for India.

Then the bit about how the people had validated the UPA by voting them to power again. This is the argument Narendra Modi uses to show how the people of Gujarat have voted him back to power even after the 2002 Gujarat anti-Muslim riots. Surely, the Prime Minister is not saying that everything is valid if a party gets votes.

Elections in India are never free of doubt. Again, if the results are all that Singh has it means trouble for India.

The opposition, principally the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is not a gathering of saints. But then, we thought Singh was a notch above. Were we wrong?

The WikiLeaks Cable on Hillary Clinton and her queries on Manmohan Singh's team, Pranab Mukherjee in particular

2011-03-18T10:10:00.000+05:30

This is the cable from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's cabinet ministers, especially Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
09STATE95493 2009-09-14 21:09 2011-03-18 01:01 SECRET//NOFORN Secretary of State
VZCZCXRO5353
RR RUEHBI RUEHCI
DE RUEHC #5493 2572144
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
R 142126Z SEP 09
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 6726
INFO RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 9744
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA 3390
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 2761
S E C R E T STATE 095493

NOFORN
SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/14/2034
TAGS: PINR IN
SUBJECT: (S/NF) INDIA: NEW GOVERNMENT ECONOMIC LEADERS
(C-SA9-01390)

Classified By: MICHAEL P. OWENS, ACTING DIR, INR/OPS. REASON: 1.4(C).

¶1. (S/NF) WASHINGTON ANALYSTS ARE CLOSELY MONITORING THE NEWLY APPOINTED ECONOMIC LEADERS IN THE UNITED PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE (UPA) COALITION GOVERNMENT. WE ARE INTERESTED IN THEIR VIEWS REGARDING FUTURE ECONOMIC POLICY, OPPORTUNITIES FOR BILATERAL ECONOMIC COOPERATION, AND THEIR ABILITY TO WORK TOGETHER AS A COHESIVE TEAM. AS TIME AND RESOURCES PERMIT, WE WOULD HIGHLY VALUE ANY INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOWING TOPICS AND QUESTIONS, AND PLAN TO INCORPORATE POST REPORTING INTO FINISHED ANALYSIS FOR POLICYMAKERS. THANK YOU.

¶A. (U) PRANAB MUKHERJEE, MINISTER OF FINANCE

¶B. (S/NF) WHAT ARE MUKHERJEE'S PRIMARY ECONOMIC CONCERNS AND HIS VIEWS ON PRIME MINISTER SINGH'S ECONOMIC REFORM AGENDA? HOW QUICKLY DOES HE PLAN TO PURSUE THESE REFORMS? WHAT IS HIS ABILITY TO ENACT REFORMS?

¶C. (S/NF) WHAT ARE MUKHERJEE'S VIEWS OF THE US BILATERAL ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP AND WHERE DOES HE SEE THE RELATIONSHIP HEADED? WHAT AREAS OF COOPERATION IS HE EAGER TO ADVANCE? HOW DOES HE SEE THE US-CHINA ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP IN COMPARISON TO THE US-INDIA RELATIONSHIP?

¶D. (S/NF) WHY WAS MUKHERJEE CHOSEN FOR THE FINANCE PORTFOLIO OVER MONTEK SINGH AHLUWALIA? HOW DO MUKHERJEE AND AHLUWALIA GET ALONG?

¶E. (S/NF) TO WHICH INDUSTRIAL OR BUSINESS GROUPS IS MUKHERJEE BEHOLDEN? WHOM WILL HE SEEK TO HELP THROUGH HIS POLICIES? WHAT ARE MUKHERJEE'S PRIORITIES IN THE UPCOMING BUDGET PRESENTATION?

¶F. (S/NF) WHAT POLICIES ARE MUKHERJEE AND OTHER LEADERS CONSIDERING TO ADDRESS THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS?

¶G. (S/NF) WHAT DOES PRIME MINISTER SINGH THINK ABOUT MUKHERJEE,S NEW ROLE AS FINANCE MINISTER?

¶H. (S/NF) WHAT IS MUKHERJEE'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GOVERNOR OF THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, D.V. SUBBARAO? HOW DOES SUBBARAO VIEW THE REMOVAL OF CHIDAMBARAM FROM THE MINISTER OF FINANCE SLOT? WHAT IMPACT HAS HIS REMOVAL HAD ON RELATIONS BETWEEN THE FINANCE MINISTRY AND THE RBI?

¶I. (U) ANAND SHARMA, MINISTER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

¶J. (S/NF) WHAT POLICIES DOES SHARMA PLAN TO PURSUE? HOW DOES HE VIEW INDIA'S TRADE POLICIES? WHAT ARE HIS VIEWS ON PRIME MINISTER SINGH'S PLANS FOR GRADUAL ECONOMIC REFORM? WHAT DOES HE PERCEIVE AS INDIA'S PRIMARY TRADE OBSTACLES?

¶K. (S/NF) WHAT ARE SHARMA'S VIEWS ON THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO)? HOW WILL HE APPROACH INITIAL MEETINGS WITH HIS COUNTERPARTS? WHAT DOES HE THINK OF PREVIOUS MINISTER OF COMMERCE KAMAL NATH'S ACTIONS OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS? HOW CLOSE WILL SHARMA REMAIN TO THE NAMA-11? IS HE WILLING TO BEGIN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE US TO ADVANCE WTO NEGOTIATIONS?

¶L. (S/NF) HOW DOES SHARMA VIEW US-INDIA ECONOMIC RELATIONS?

¶M. (S/NF) HOW DOES SHARMA VIEW INDIA'S CURRENT FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT (FDI) GUIDELINES? WHICH SECTORS DOES HE PLAN TO OPEN FURTHER? WHY IS HE RELUCTANT TO OPEN MULTI-BRAND RETAIL? WHAT ARE HIS VIEWS ON THE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONES?

¶N. (S/NF) WHY WAS SHARMA CHOSEN FOR THE JOB? WHAT ARE HIS LARGER AMBITIONS? WHY WAS NATH MOVED TO THE ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS PORTFOLIO? WHAT ARE NATH'S VIEWS ON THE CHANGE?

¶O. (S/NF) DOES SHARMA GET ALONG WITH MUKHERJEE AND PRIME MINISTER SINGH?

¶P. (U) DEPUTY CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION MONTEK SINGH AHLUWALIA

¶Q. (S/NF) WHAT IS SHARMA'S RELATIONSHIP WITH AHLUWALIA? HOW DOES AHLUWALIA FEEL ABOUT REMAINING IN THIS POSITION? WHICH, IF ANY, PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEMS WILL HE BE PUSHING? DOES HE GET ON WELL WITH THE PRIME MINISTER?

¶2. (U) PLEASE CITE C-SA9-01390 IN THE SUBJECT LINE OF REPORTING IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS.

CLINTON "

The WikiLeaks Cable on India Preparing for a Worst-Case Maoist Takeover

2011-03-17T16:11:00.000+05:30

This is a partial extract of an original cable on how the Indian government talks privately of a worst-case Maoist takeover in New Delhi. WikiLeaks says the full text of the original cable is not available.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
03KATHMANDU2366 2003-12-04 02:02 2011-03-15 00:12 SECRET//NOFORN Embassy Kathmandu

S E C R E T KATHMANDU 002366

SIPDIS

NOFORN

STATE FOR SA/INS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/03/2013
TAGS: PREL PTER NP IN
SUBJECT: NEPAL: AMBASSADOR RELAYS CONCERNS ABOUT
ACTIVITIES OF INDIAN INTELLIGENCE AGENTS

REF: A. REF: KATHMANDU 2282
¶B. KATHMANDU 2298

Classified By: AMB. MICHAEL E. MALINOWSKI. REASON: 1.5 (B,D).

¶1. (S/NF) On December 3 the Ambassador raised with Indian Ambassador Shyam Saran reports that intelligence agents assigned to the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu have been characterizing USG policy and motives in Nepal as malevolently aimed at undermining Nepal's sovereignty. The Ambassador told Saran that the reports had been passed to us by several Nepali political sources, who claimed to have had such conversations in the recent past with Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) agents based at the Indian Embassy. He also briefed Saran about unsubstantiated reports suggesting that some Nepali Maoist women may have received training at a security facility in Dehra Dun in northern India (Ref A). Noting that Nepalis, both within the government and in the opposition, sometimes attempt to play off Indian and American interests, he stressed that the information passed on by these sources had not been verified. He noted that the reports predated the meeting between Nepali Maoists and Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist Leninist General Secretary Madhav Nepal in Lucknow (Ref B)--an event that has SIPDIS set Nepali nationalists teeth on edge against India. The Ambassador emphasized that he was communicating these concerns to Saran as a friend and ally.

¶2. (S/NF) Ambassador Saran thanked him and expressed concern, describing the reports as ""unfortunate"" and not an accurate reflection of official GOI policy--a point confirmed in his recent policy discussions in New Delhi (see para 3). The GOI is committed to ensuring Nepal's stability, he said, adding that he has obtained unprecedented levels of development and security assistance for the kingdom. Nonetheless, sometimes people in different branches of the GOI ""go off on their own,"" he acknowledged, and promised to look into the reports.

¶3. (S/NF) In a separate meeting on November 30, Saran briefed the Ambassador on the just-concluded policy deliberations in New Delhi. He stressed that his interlocutors had expressed concern about possible spill-over of the insurgency onto Indian territory. According to Saran, Indian Defense Minister George Fernandes told him that ""the fight against the Maoists is also India's fight."" Saran noted, however, that certain quarters within the GOI had argued that India should maintain contact with the Maoists in order to influence them and to keep open communication channels in the event of a worst-case scenario in which the Maoists ultimately gain power.

¶4. (S/NF) We cannot discount the possibility that our Nepali sources, many of whom resent India's influence in their country, may have their own motives in conveying to us reports of Indian double-dealing. We have always found Saran professional, collegial, and cooperative, and believe that he does not sanction--and may probably not be aware of--all of RAW's activities in Nepal. His acknowledgement that some in the GOI ""go off on their own"" and that some advocate maintaining contact and influence with the Maoists is his first admission to us that some elements within his Embassy may be working at cross-purposes to official GOI policy.

MALINOWSKI

The WikiLeaks Cable on Sonia Gandhi's Conversation with Maria Shriver

2011-03-17T15:54:00.000+05:30

This is the full US Embassy cable on what Congress President Sonia Gandhi told Maria Shriver, wife of former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06NEWDELHI5495 2006-08-04 13:01 2010-12-16 21:09 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy New Delhi
VZCZCXRO0758
OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHNE #5495/01 2161317
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 041317Z AUG 06
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7400
INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 3340
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 6682
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 6697
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 9735
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 7380
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 9589
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 3677
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL CALCUTTA 5773
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 5796
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI 5113
RUEHLH/AMCONSUL LAHORE 2934
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 5008
RUEHPW/AMCONSUL PESHAWAR 3575
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1971
RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 4271
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RHMFISS/HQ USSOCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
Friday, 04 August 2006, 13:17
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 NEW DELHI 005495
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
STATE FOR INR/B
EO 12958 DECL: 08/04/2016
TAGS PGOV, PREL, PINR, PHUM, SCUL, KWMN, PINS, IN
SUBJECT: A GARRULOUS SONIA GANDHI OPENS UP TO MARIA SHRIVER
Classified By: Charge Geoff Pyatt for reasons 1.4 (B,D)
¶1. (C) Summary: In a relaxed August 3 conversation with California first lady Maria Shriver, Sonia Gandhi revealed a rare glimpse of herself. Usually withdrawn and reserved in public, she spoke at great length and radiated confidence on women’s’ issues and some aspects of her private life. Mrs. Gandhi demonstrated a strong commitment to a progressive left-of-center agenda aimed at combating socially conservative forces bent on oppressing Indian women. However, she was also realistic, revealing an in-depth knowledge of Indian culture, especially the rural/urban divide. At times suppressing her emotions, she spoke about the compulsions of political life, her parents’ objections to her marriage to Rajiv Gandhi and the sacrifices she and her family have made. Her comments and demeanor put the lie to cocktail party suggestions that she courts Manmohan Singh’s job. End Summary.
Two Dynasties Meet
------------------
¶2. (C) Maria Shriver, California’s first lady and wife of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, met with Congress Party President Sonia Gandhi on August 3 as part of her official visit to India. Shriver is in India to discuss her various initiatives on women’s’ affairs and to solicit Indian involvement. She is also laying the groundwork for a proposed trade mission led by Governor Schwarzenegger around February, 2007. After her stay in Delhi, she will go to Dharamshalla to meet the Dalai Lama. In addition to the Gandhi meeting, Shriver met with the head of the National Commission for Women and toured NGO’s involved in women’s’ affairs. Mrs. Gandhi was accompanied by former Cabinet Minister Karan Singh.
Indian Women Bear a Heavy Burden
--------------------------------
¶3. (C) Shriver and Gandhi engaged in an over one hour exchange that was lively and open and covered many issues, both personal and political. Shriver explained that she was concerned with women’s issues, including sexual abuse and exploitation and trafficking. Mrs. Gandhi replied that the situation for women in India is more troubling and traumatic than that in the US and other developed countries, as Indian women must deal with myriad problems not found in the west, such as child labor. In addition, most Indian women live in remote villages with severe “cultural compulsions” that work against women, making it difficult for the GOI to enforce the law. She pointed out that Indian women remain largely uneducated which is a “big problem” for Indian society and makes progress difficult. This compels the GOI to rely on television and radio to reach women with messages aimed at their concerns. Mrs. Gandhi noted that while she had a deep personal interest in women’s’ issues, she “only rarely” gave personal interviews aimed at female audiences.
And Sonia Bears a Personal Burden
---------------------------------
¶4. (C) Without prompting and at her own initiative Mrs. Gandhi then spoke at length about her personal life. She revealed that after her mother in law’s murder Rajiv Gandhi was under intense pressure to take up the political mantle of the Gandhi family, but both Rajiv and Sonia were intensely
NEW DELHI 00005495 002 OF 005
personal and had no interest in politics. According to Mrs. Gandhi, she urged her husband repeatedly to avoid politics, but he insisted. After Rajiv Gandhi became Prime Minister, Sonia was determined to avoid the limelight and “kept in the background.” She clarified that she accompanied her husband to official events, but refrained from making political statements. After her husband’s assassination, Mrs. Gandhi withdrew, working only on a charitable foundation established in Rajiv’s memory. In a candid revelation of her personal political stance, Mrs. Gandhi stated that “the right was becoming strong in India and Congress weak,” tipping her hand and “compelling” her to enter politics to protect the Gandhi family legacy. She also revealed that her children were “not keen” about the idea, but eventually told her, “whatever you decide, we will back you.”
Turning Down the PM Spot
------------------------
¶5. (C) Mrs. Gandhi was reluctant to provide details regarding her decision to turn down the Prime Minister post after the UPA’s surprise 2004 electoral victory, stating that “I am often asked about this, but tell people that I will write a book someday with the whole story.” She would only say that she “felt better” that someone else became PM and “did not regret” her decision. Shriver congratulated Mrs. Gandhi for her resoluteness and described her as “courageous.” Clearly embarrassed by this adulation, Mrs. Gandhi made no response. She elaborated, at Karan Singh’s insistence, saying that she was under lots of pressure, as the “party workers” were “very upset.” They “could not understand” why she, as party President, was not taking up the post, since they had voted for her and won a majority.
Politics and Women
------------------
¶6. (C) Shriver noted that she chairs a “Women’s Conference” that brings 11,000 women to California to discuss relevant issues, and reinforced the point that “women can change the world.” Shriver invited Mrs. Gandhi to attend next year. She pointed out that last year’s keynote speaker was Sandra Day O’Connor, who spoke about balancing public and private life, and how she left the Supreme Court to look after her ailing husband and spend more time with her children. Shriver emphasized that Justice O’Connor also did not want to enter public life but was “pushed by her husband,” and noted how difficult it is to be a wife and mother and play a public role. Mrs. Gandhi made no commitment to attend.
Indian Steps to Bring Justice
-----------------------------
¶7. (C) Mrs. Gandhi explained the steps that her UPA government had taken and planned to take to help women achieve greater social mobility and rights. She explained that the GOI had instituted a “Panchayati Raj” program under which major decisions regarding the economic development of villages are made by Panchayats (village councils). To ensure female participation, Rajiv Gandhi had “reserved” 33 percent of the positions on the Panchayats for women. Although there were “some complaints” that the women were “manipulated by their husbands,” Mrs. Gandhi asserted that “research had confirmed that women will invariably take the right decisions.” She noted that the UPA now wants to extend the same reservations to Parliament and the Legislative
NEW DELHI 00005495 003 OF 005
Assemblies. Mrs. Gandhi confirmed that currently the number of female MPs was “very small,” as “some parties believe that women should not be in power.”
The Indian Contradiction
------------------------
¶8. (C) Shriver pointed out that her trip had made her aware of the “great contradiction” between a society in which women occupied many leadership positions, including, at times, Prime Minister,” but still were denied many basic rights. Mrs. Gandhi agreed with Shriver, noting that several Indian states had female Chief Ministers, and that an increasing numbers of Indian women are CEOs of major corporations, doctors, and scientists, and “we will keep fighting.” She explained that the situation for women varied from state to state, and that South India was “more progressive” than the North for various historical and cultural reasons, and that, for example, the state of Kerala supplied nurses to much of the Middle East.
Possible Indian Collaboration
-----------------------------
¶9. (C) Praising the contribution of Indians and Indian-Americans to California, Shriver suggested that perhaps the GOI could help the state government combat its teacher and nursing shortage. She also noted that her family is very involved in the Special Olympics program and would like 500,000 participants for the Indian Special Olympics and hoped that Mrs. Gandhi would attend the events scheduled for November 6. Mrs. Shriver pointed out that those with intellectual disabilities were making great strides in the US, with many becoming self sufficient. This is necessary, she pointed out, “as we do not have the relevant institutions in the US.” Mrs. Gandhi conceded that Indian government institutions for the intellectually disabled are “nothing to write home about,” leaving parents and NGOs to deal with the problem, and that in rural areas, such children are “often hidden” and their disability “kept secret.”
Slow Social Change
------------------
¶10. (C) Mrs. Gandhi was not the least defensive about the gravity of India’s social problems. When asked by Shriver about adoption, she noted that adoptions remained rare in India and most Indians continued to “see nothing wrong” in that. It is a “happy change,” however, that more families are taking in orphans. She readily agreed with Shriver that many Indians still considered female children as “a problem” and preferred males and, as a result, more girls are abandoned than boys. Mrs. Gandhi reiterated that “education is the key to change” as much legislation is not enforced. This makes it necessary to “convince families and make them understand” to bring about positive change.
Personal Insights Into an Active Life
-------------------------------------
¶11. (C) Mrs. Gandhi then provided personal insights into her life, saying that she travels constantly all over India, often to remote areas to visit the common people, as “it is only by going out and interacting with people that we are in a better position to understand their problems and determine what they want.” She confided that there has been a big
NEW DELHI 00005495 004 OF 005
change in the Indian mindset regarding education. Earlier, parents were not very interested in ensuring their children were educated, while today, “99 percent want to send their children to school.” Everywhere you go in India today, she noted, you see children in their uniforms heading for school, and this is “something that makes us happy.” In addition to education, Indian parents want their children to have access to basic health care - “doctors and medicines,” and some assurance that they will have a job after they complete their education. Mrs. Gandhi worried that there will be huge numbers of young Indians leaving school with no guarantee of finding a job.
Population Control Off the Screen
---------------------------------
¶12. (C) Mrs. Gandhi pointed out that “population control” is a political taboo in India after Indira Gandhi was voted out of office over this issue. Although she insisted allegations of forced vasectomies and other abuses were “highly exaggerated” and “politically motivated,” the historical memory has forced the UPA to focus on raising awareness and providing basic health services and means that progress on reducing the birth rate will be “slow.” Again, education will be the key, as demonstrated by the small family norm in urban areas.
Culture and Fighting AIDS
-------------------------
¶13. (C) Karan Singh pointed out that population reduction and AIDS control are linked as it requires condom distribution to combat both problems. Mrs. Gandhi pointed out that Northeast India faces a severe AIDS problem, as it is a transshipment point for narcotics with a growing drug problem. Cultural factors also inhibit AIDS control, as the government “cannot be open” with condom distribution because of “certain mindsets.” This compels the GOI to find an “appropriate way” to communicate with the population. Shriver responded that the US, as a multicultural society, faces many of the same problems, as men from some cultural backgrounds “don’t want anything to do” with family planning and AIDS prevention. The key, she emphasized, was “empowering women to demand action on these issues.”
India and the US
----------------
¶14. (C) Shriver observed that there was “no anti-Americanism” in India and that Indians from diverse backgrounds, cultures and religions have successfully found ways to coexist. Mrs. Gandhi replied that Indians are “inherently tolerant” as they have co-existed for centuries. Karan Singh added that the “freedom movement of Mahatma Gandhi” also played a crucial role as it was inclusive, pluralistic and emphasized that multiplicity of Indian culture. Mrs. Gandhi jokingly pointed out that the “Indian Left is anti-American,” but then agreed that its stance was aimed at “American policy” rather than the American people. Karan Singh emphasized that he and “most Indians” objected to many aspects of current American policy but held no brief against the American people. Mrs. Gandhi also pointed out that many Indian Muslims “resent certain policies of the US.”
More Personal Revelations
NEW DELHI 00005495 005 OF 005
-------------------------
¶15. (C) Mrs. Gandhi revealed that her own parents objected to her marriage to Rajiv Gandhi and she “resented their position” and went ahead and married him anyway. She also noted that she felt that her gender has never been an issue in her political life and that Indira Gandhi also made the same observation. In Hinduism, “women are seen as goddesses and no puja (worship) can take place without them,” while, ironically, oppression of women is common. She also revealed that common women in India’s rural areas do not hold her in great awe and don’t think of her as a great personality, as “their priorities are so different.”
Comment: A Relaxed Gandhi Provides A Rare Personal Insight
--------------------------------------------- -------------
¶16. (C) Sonia Gandhi is often stiff and detached when in public. This was a more relaxed Sonia, possibly because she felt a personal rapport with Maria Shriver. In this more relaxed setting, Sonia Gandhi revealed a left of center political orientation which stresses the strong role of the government in ensuring social progress and her inherent opposition to the social conservatism of the Hindu right. At the same time, she entertained no illusions that she or the UPA will bring about rapid social change or uplift quickly India’s oppressed women. Instead, she embraced an evolutionary and patient approach based on a broad knowledge of Indian culture and traditions. She was, for example, acutely aware of the vast divide between rural and urban India and the inherent difficulty of pushing entrenched villagers into the 21st century. Deeply hurt by personal tragedy, she has erected a strong and stoic persona to prevent public access to her personal space. Whenever she spoke of the deaths of her husband and mother-in-law, she struggled to keep her emotions in check. Despite her carefully erected Indian persona, her basic Italian personality is clearly evident in her mannerisms, speech and interests. She presents an intriguing enigma of a warm private personality that remains concealed and is available only to her closest confidants and family members.
¶17. (U) Visit New Delhi’s Classified Website: (http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/sa/newdelhi/) PYATT

The WikiLeaks Cable on Political Corruption in South India

2011-03-17T13:37:00.000+05:30

Viewing cable 09CHENNAI144, BHARAT BALLOT O9: CASH FOR VOTES IN SOUTH INDIA
This is the full cable from the US Embassy in New Delhi on how South Indian political parties routinely bribe voters.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
09CHENNAI144 2009-05-13 05:05 2011-03-16 00:12 CONFIDENTIAL Consulate Chennai
Appears in these articles:
http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/article1541302.ece
VZCZCXRO3824
OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDBU RUEHLH RUEHNEH RUEHPW
DE RUEHCG #0144/01 1330511
ZNY CCCCC ZZH ZDS NOT DELIVERED
O 130511Z MAY 09
FM AMCONSUL CHENNAI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 2262
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 0237
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0218
RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA 0225
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0150
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 0152
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 CHENNAI 000144

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/13/2019
TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM KDEM IN
SUBJECT: BHARAT BALLOT O9: CASH FOR VOTES IN SOUTH INDIA

CHENNAI 00000144 001.2 OF 004

Classified By: Acting Principal Officer J. Frederick Kaplan for reasons 1.4 (B, D)
Refs: A) Chennai 011 B) 2007 Chennai 337

¶1. (C) Summary: Bribes from political parties to voters, in the form of cash, goods, or services, are a regular feature of elections in South India. Poor voters expect bribes from political candidates, and candidates find various ways to satisfy voter expectations. From paying to dig a community well to slipping cash into an envelope delivered inside the morning newspaper, politicians and their operatives admitted to violating election rules to influence voters. The money to pay the bribes comes from the proceeds of fundraising, which often crosses into political corruption. Although the precise impact of bribery on voter behavior is hard to measure, it no doubt swings at least some elections, especially the close races. End summary.

¶2. (C) The subject of politicians bribing voters, with either cash or gifts, was a recurring theme in the course of covering the 2009 election campaigns in South India. Wherever we went, journalists, politicians, and voters spoke of the bribes as a commonly accepted fact of the election process. Political insiders, and in some instances candidates themselves, admitted to us that candidates regularly violate India's election rules in the course of campaigning for office. This cable examines methods by which political parties bribe voters and how those bribes affect elections in India.

Poor voters expect cash
---------

¶3. (SBU) In visits to slums in Chennai and Hyderabad we learned that poor urban voters expect political parties to pay come election time. A DMK political strategist told us slums are critical to a campaign because their population density and poverty allows them to be more ""easily mobilized"" by bribes. Representatives of an NGO that works in Chennai's slums told us that the two main political parties in Tamil Nadu -- the DMK and AIADMK - regularly bribe voters. They described a sophisticated operation used to distribute the cash. According to an NGO representative, in the weeks before the elections, ""agents of the parties come to the neighborhood with cash carried in rice sacks. They have copies of the voter lists and they distribute the money based on who is on the list."" The agents come in the middle of the night, ""between two and four in the morning, when the Election Commission is asleep."" A neighborhood resident confirmed this version of events, noting that in the 2004 election each family got 500 rupees for their vote. (Note: The residents of this slum reported that they earned around 4000 rupees a month working as day laborers. End note.) In a Hyderabad slum voters we talked with three weeks before voting told us that they were expecting candidates' representatives to pay them a visit soon. ""We'll see what they offer, and then we'll decide,"" said one man who spoke for the group.

¶4. (C) Rural voters also expect candidates to deliver goods in exchange for votes. Home Minister P. Chidambaram's son, Karti Chidambaram, who is managing his father's campaign for the Lok Sabha seat from Sivaganga, Tamil Nadu, told us that ""every village leader asks for two things: some money for the local temple and a community hall."" Chidambaram went on to say that it is impossible to fulfill every such request, but that he does give ""a few sops"" to villages that might be on the fence about supporting his father. He specifically denied paying cash for votes, but not because of any moral objection to doing so. According to Chidambaram, he does not pay cash for votes in his rural constituency because it is impossible to distribute the money effectively when the villages are spread so far apart. But the President of the Tamil Nadu Youth Congress told us that he had just visited Chidambaram and said, ""Karti is doing a good job in Sivaganga. He is distributing some money to the people, which his father won't do.""

Member of Parliament admits to bribing constituents
---------

¶5. (C) Assaduddin Owaisi, a sitting Member of Parliament and leader of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) party, was surprisingly candid. Owaisi explained to us the ins-and-outs of campaigning over a late dinner after spending a long day on the trail. He said that

CHENNAI 00000144 002 OF 004

during the campaign he tries to cover every street in his urban constituency in Hyderabad's Old City, visiting people at their homes and businesses. As he walks the neighborhood, he said, people regularly appeal to him for small favors. One community's leaders asked Owaisi that day to dig them a well. ""So I sent one of my party men back later in the day,"" he explained, ""to give them 25,000 rupees (approximately 500 USD)."" Owaisi emphasized that he does not give cash directly to voters, but rather funds worthy requests: ""If they want a well, I give them the money, but make sure they use it for the well."" On the same day, he also told us that he had paid 35,000 rupees (700 USD) to pay for the marriage of an orphaned girl. Owaisi contrasted his practice of funding projects for the community's benefit with the Congress and Telugu Desam parties, which Owaisi said pay money to individual voters.

¶6. (C) We asked Owaisi point blank whether it was against the law for him to pay for the well and the marriage. Owaisi laughed and said, ""Of course, but that's the great thing about democracy."" He went on to describe the legal spending limit of 2.5 million rupees (50,000 USD) as ""a joke,"" noting that he would spend 2.5 million rupees on ""polling day alone.""

Karunanidhi's son runs for parliament
---------

¶7. (C) On a recent trip to Madurai in southern Tamil Nadu virtually every conversation centered on the parliamentary candidacy of M.K. Azhagiri, son of the M.K. Karunanidhi, Tamil Nadu's Chief Minister and head of the DMK party. Azhagiri's control of the DMK's south Tamil Nadu operation has earned him a reputation for political thuggery. He was recently acquitted in the case of the 2003 murder of one of his political rivals, though critics argued that the trial, held in Tamil Nadu, could not be impartial with Azhagiri's father as the state's Chief Minister. In 2007, Azhagiri's supporters burned down a newspaper office in Madurai, killing three people, after the paper published a poll that Azhagiri was a distant second choice to his brother among DMK supporters as successor to Karunanidhi (ref B).

By-election sets the stage
---------

¶8. (C) After long relying on political muscle to enforce his will in Madurai, Azhagiri has added money to his arsenal and is using it to a degree previously unseen in Tamil Nadu. Azhagiri's approach debuted in the January assembly by-election held in Thirumangalam near Madurai, which he managed for the DMK. This race was marked by unprecedented bribes to voters (ref A). M. Patturajan, the former Mayor of Madurai and a confidant of Azhagiri, told us that ""it is no secret at all, Azhagiri paid 5,000 rupees (approximately USD 100) per voter in Thirumangalam."" S. Kannan, a mid-level Congress party official in Madurai, told us ""the 5,000 rupees per voter in Thirumangalam changed everything,"" noting that previous bribes to voters had topped out at 500 rupees. S. Annamalai, Madurai editor of The Hindu, also confirmed the 5,000 rupee figure, telling us that all of his employees who live in Thirumangalam received the money.

Can I get another morning paper?
---------

¶9. (C) The Thirumangalam campaign that Azhagiri ran for the DMK was notable for how the money was distributed, in addition to the amount distributed. Rather than using the traditional practice of handing cash to voters in the middle of the night, in Thirumangalam the DMK distributed money to every person on the voting roll in envelopes inserted in their morning newspapers. In addition to the money, the envelopes contained the DMK ""voting slip"" which instructed the recipient for whom they should vote. Annamalai pointed out that distributing the money with the newspapers forced everyone to receive the bribe. ""This way makes it impossible to refuse the money,"" Annamalai noted. Patturajan confirmed the newspaper distribution, but questioned its efficiency. He pointed out that giving bribes to every voter wasted money on committed anti-DMK voters, but conceded that it was an effective way to ensure the bribes reached every potential persuadable voter.

Applying Thirumangalam to a parliamentary race
---------

CHENNAI 00000144 003.2 OF 004

¶10. (C) Patturajan and others pointed out that the larger size of a parliamentary constituency makes it difficult to apply the Thirumangalam approach. The Thirumangalam contest concerned a single assembly seat, which is about one-seventh the size of a parliamentary district. A journalist for Thuglak, a Tamil weekly, confirmed that the Madurai parliamentary constituency has approximately one million voters. It would cost Azhagiri $100 million USD to replicate the Thirumangalam payment of $100 USD to each voter in the Madurai constituency, which is ""impossible"" according to Patturajan. As a result, Azhagiri has been forced to ratchet the payment back down to more typical levels, but he still plans on giving it to every voter through the newspaper distribution method. The journalist said that he had personally seen some of the one million envelopes that the DMK had prepared for the Madurai race, each of which contained a 500 rupee (10 USD) note. The journalist told us that Azhagiri wanted to double the amount to 1000 rupees (20 USD) per voter, but the DMK leadership was reluctant to commit 20 million USD to one parliamentary race. A week after we met with the journalist, newspapers reported that DMK officials were handing out envelopes with 500 rupees to voters.

Does vote-buying work?
---------

¶11. (C) Although our interlocutors agreed that paying cash influences voter behavior, they disagreed on the extent to which it did. We consistently probed why parties trust people to cast their vote for the candidate who pays them in light of the fact that there is no way to confirm that an individual voter actually ""honors the deal."" Patturajan of the DMK said voters who take money feel ""honor bound"" to vote for the candidate. Kannan, the Congress official from Madurai, agreed that cultural norms ensure that poor voters in particular will feel obligated to vote for the candidate from whom they accept money. He said candidates play to religious sentiments and traditional beliefs to ensure bribed voters hold up their end of the bargain.

¶12. (C) Annamalai of The Hindu argued that many voters ""will still vote their conscience."" He said voters find the bribes ""insulting,"" and they vote against the candidate even though they are forced to take the money as it is left on their doorstep. He cited his own staff as an example, noting that the ones who received money during the Thirumangalam by-election pooled it together to donate to a scholarship fund for a poor student but largely voted against the DMK candidate. Annamalai's view, however, is likely limited to the largely middle- and upper-class readership of his English-language newspaper.

¶13. (C) Karti Chidambaram said that bribes are useful but not necessary to political success. He said that bribes are one factor among many, along with the quality of the candidate, the strength of the party, and the issues. But he cautioned that bribes alone will not prevail: ""Anil Ambani (an Indian billionaire who is one of the world's richest men) can't win an election just by paying people off. It doesn't work that way."" Chidambaram said that candidates need a strong party apparatus in order to win elections, but that ""bribes can help put you over the top"" in a close race.

Diminishing returns due to bribe inflation?
---------

¶14. (C) The DMK's decision to field Azhagiri for the Madurai parliamentary seat has raised voter expectations. Congress's Kannan said that 110,000 people signed up for voter identification cards after he announced his candidacy, presumably motivated by their desire to get Azhagiri's bribe by putting their names on the voting rolls. Patturajan said that Azhagiri's presence on the ballot had ""raised expectations"" with people expecting to get the same 5,000 rupees per vote offered in Thirumangalam. He said that his dhobi (clothes washer) told him, ""I have five votes in my family, so I should get 25,000 which will pay for my daughter's marriage."" When Patturajan told the dhobi that the DMK would not be paying 5,000 per voter this time around, the dhobi replied that he would vote for Azhagiri (presumably keeping in mind Patturajan's relationship with Azhagiri) regardless of the amount offered, but that ""most people will hesitate if the DMK only gives 1,000."" Patturajan conceded that he was concerned that the DMK could be harmed by its failure to meet the expectations created by the extraordinarily large Thirumangalam

CHENNAI 00000144 004.2 OF 004

bribes. But he remained optimistic, arguing that Azhagiri will still prevail by paying more money to more voters than his opponent, who is from the more law-abiding Communist Party of India.

Where's the money come from? Corruption and corporates...
---------

¶15. (C) The money required to pay bribes comes from a variety of sources, primarily from the proceeds of corruption and from funds the parties raise from businesses. Corruption, according to interlocutors, is a major source of funds for political parties who are in power. ""The DMK can try to buy elections because it has spent years in power in Delhi and Chennai,"" said one journalist. In addition to corruption, backers in the business community regularly fund political parties' election activities. Ravi Sam, Managing Director of Adwaith Lakshmi Industries, Inc., a major textile manufacturer in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, told us that he had been avoiding visiting Chennai as of late. ""It is the season for the political parties to come looking for donations,"" he said. But, Sam said, ""There is no avoiding it in the end,"" and each party gets its ""package"" depending on its place in the hierarchy. Another entrepreneur echoed Sam's comments, telling us that even in a one-party town like Azhagiri's Madurai, business people hedge their bets by contributing to multiple political parties.

Cash for votes a way of political life
---------

¶16. (C) Comment: Among the many factors -- personalities, alliances, caste, and religion, to name just a few -- that play out in Indian elections, the role of money is one of the most difficult to analyze. Observers and participants see bribery as a fact of life in India's elections. But the methods used and the degree to which they impact voter preferences are, by their very nature, hard to assess, especially for outsiders. That said, our experience in South India suggests that the practice of paying cash for votes is widespread and that it is likely to swing elections, especially close contests, given India's predominately poor electorate. The influence of the many other factors makes it impossible for a political party to ""buy"" all of the seats in play in any election, but cases like the Thirumangalam by-election and Azhagiri's run for parliament show that voter bribery will no doubt have an impact on the results of India's elections when they are announced on May 16. End comment.

KAPLAN

The WikiLeaks Cable on the New Delhi US Embassy's Political Round-up

2011-03-17T13:27:00.000+05:30

This is the Delhi Diary cable from the US Embassy in New Delhi on happenings in India.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
10NEWDELHI321 2010-02-22 08:08 2010-12-16 21:09 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy New Delhi
VZCZCXRO9333
OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDBU RUEHLH RUEHNEH RUEHPW
DE RUEHNE #0321/01 0530852
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 220852Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9547
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 8251
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 7298
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 3943
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 2152
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1534
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8904
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUMICEA/USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL
Monday, 22 February 2010, 08:52
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 000321
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INS, DRL
EO 12958 DECL: 02/22/2020
TAGS PGOV, PHUM, PINR, PTER, IN, EAGR
SUBJECT: DELHI DIARY, JANUARY 30 - FEBRUARY 19, 2010
Classified By: Political Counselor Uzra Zeya for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)
¶1. (U) Below is a compilation of political highlights from Embassy New Delhi for January 30 - February 19, 2010, that did not feature in our other reporting.
My Name Is Rahul
----
¶2. (SBU) Rahul Gandhi’s Mumbai visit and his skirmishing with the Maharashtra chauvinist Shiv Sena party shows he is becoming increasingly sure-footed in his political instincts. He first hurled some blunt words at the Thackerays and Shiv Sena’s xenophobic agenda. These were widely and sympathetically reported around the country. He then took it a step further when the Shiv Sena issued “Keep Off Maharashtra” threats by going to the Thackeray’s home ground of Mumbai, where he continued to take shots at them. He topped it off by showing the common touch when he made a last minute change in his itinerary to travel across town in a second-class train compartment. All in all, a public relations bonanza for Rahul as the press gave wide coverage to his Siv Sena bashing and his train ride. Forty Shiv Sena activists were detained by the police for Rahul’s visit.
Don’t Talk About My Mother
----
¶3. (U) Not to be outdone, the Shiv Sena has been grabbing headlines in recent days with its attacks on Rahul Gandhi, Reliance Group’s Mukesh Ambani and Bollywood icon, Shah Rukh Khan. The Shiv Sena has also been in a tussle with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which is the parent organization of its ally, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP), over the rights of North Indian migrants in Mumbai. Media reports a rift between the RSS and the Shiv Sena over the Sena’s verbal attacks on migrants from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Rahul Gandhi came to the defense of North Indians living and working in Mumbai during an ongoing visit to Bihar by telling press that the Sena was irrelevant and that all Indians had a right to reside freely in India. Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray responded by launching an attack on Rahul Gandhi’s “Italian Mummy,” referring to Italian-born UPA chief Sonia Gandhi.
The Tiger Roars Again?
----
¶4. (U) Raj Thackeray-led vitriolic splinter group, the MNS, has cut into the Shiv Sena’s support base in recent years. The MNS usurped the Shiv Sena’s xenophobic platform to exclude non-Maharashtrians from power and influence in Maharashtra. Finding themselves increasingly marginalized and losing support from their anti-migrant Marathi-speaking base, the Shiv Sena has gone on a publicity and campaign blitz to position itself as the undisputed champion of ethnic Marathi speakers.
The Bollywood Show Must Go On
----
¶5. (U) The Shiv Sena had threatened to ban screenings of Shah Rukh Khan’s upcoming movie, “My Name is Khan”, because Shah Rukh Khan publicly lamented the absence of Pakistani cricket players in India’s professional cricket league for the coming season. Shiv Sena goons burnt posters of Khan’s upcoming movie and protested in front of his home, asking Khan to “move to Pakistan.” Khan himself did not bid on any Pakistani players as co-owner of one of the frachises. While some theater owners refrained from screening the film on its Friday opening due to security concerns, a show of force by the police convinced theaters to roll out a full release on Saturday. With protests and controversy generating far more international buzz than the typical Bollywood movie, Khan’s new movie opened to packed audiences in Mumbai and elsewhere.
NEW DELHI 00000321 002 OF 003
New Indian Youth Congress President Appointed
----
¶6. (U) On February 3, the Congress Party appointed Rajiv Satav the President of its youth wing, the Indian Youth Congress (IYC). Party General Secretary Rahul Gandhi hand-picked Satav for the job, surprising political observers who had expected an election for the top IYC post per Gandhi’s previous statements about making the party “more democratic.” Contacts speculate that the appointment of Satav -- a native of the state of Maharashtra -- is intended to enhance the Congress Party’s position in the state. A Congress Party-Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) coalition governs Maharashtra, but the coalition partners have been feuding over rising food prices. (Note: The Congress Party has repeatedly tried to shift the blame for rising prices on to NCP chief Sharad Pawar, who is also the Agriculture and Food Supplies Minister in the Congress Party’s United Progressive Alliance government in Delhi. End Note.) Gandhi’s IYC pick may signal that Maharashtra is the next data point along the Congress Party’s trend of going it alone in some large states where it had previously been reduced to a junior partner or a non-entity.
¶7. (U) Rajiv Satav, 35, is the son of former Maharashtra Minister Rajnitai Satav. Satav was elected to the Maharashtra legislative assembly for the first time in 2009, following his big political break when he was nominated as the Maharashtra Youth Congress chief in 2008. Satav has accompanied Rahul Gandhi on several high profile visits, including his recent tour of Bihar and his train ride in Mumbai. As the Youth Congress chief, Satav will face the challenge of increasing youth participation in the political process, while countering the influence of the Raj Thackeray-led MNS in Maharashtra, whose aggressive and street-smart style has attracted Indian youth.
Valentine’s Day Vignettes: Rainbows and Pink Hearts
----
¶8. (U) February 14 marked the first time some couples were able to paint the town pink in India. On July 2, the Delhi High Court overturned some provisions of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, a colonial-era law that outlawed same gender sex between two consenting adults. The GOI allowed the historic ruling to stand after deciding not to appeal it. Over six months later, Archie’s, India’s largest greeting card company, gave the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community another cause for celebration by selling cards targeted for the community in 500 stores across New Delhi and major Indian cities to celebrate Valentine’s Day. Archie’s spokesman Yohan Arya told the Times of India that the company had been considering making available several LGBT cards for some time. They decided the time was right after the July 2 high court judgment. “The court judgment ...clearly said that it’s legal to be gay... so we felt this was the right time to add these cards,” Arya added. (It is not yet known how well these new cards sold.) New Delhi also embraced the LGBT community by focusing on them as customers for Valentine’s Day celebrations. Clubs and lounges were buzzing with theme parties and special cocktails, with some bars openly encouraging LGBT couples - the first time this has happened in New Delhi.
A Peaceful Valentine
----
¶9. (U) The Sri Ram Sena (SRS), a small, fringe Hindu extremist group which has in the past engaged in isolated violence against young men and women celebrating Valentine’s Day, lost its momentum this year. The leader of the SRS, Pramod Muthalik, claims that he is fighting for India, the youth, and Indian culture. Valentine’s Day, he alleges “is
NEW DELHI 00000321 003 OF 003
aimed at ruining (Indian) culture.” This year, his message was lost, as the Sri Ram Sena joined ranks with the Shiv Sena and spent the days leading up to February 14 fighting the release of Shah Rukh Khan’s latest Bollywoodblockbuster. The SRS faced additional humiliation on February 11 when an individual “attacked” Muthalik. While Muthalik was preparing to participate in a debate on Valentine’s Day in an open air theater, six young men barged in, dragged him off stage, and blackened his face with ink. The shocked Muthalik fell down during the melee before he could be rescued by his supporters. The police arrested two of the perpetrators and brought three more youths in for questioning. With its leader brought down a peg, the SRS was not heard from during this year’s Valentine’s Day celebrations.
Update on Tibetan Refugee Flow
----
¶10. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX told PolOff on February 4 that an average of 2,500 to 3,500 refugees from Tibet typically arrive in Dharamsala each year, with most returning to Tibet after receiving an audience with the Dalai Lama. XXXXXXXXXXXX confirmed that from 1980 to November 2009 87,096 refugees were processed by the Dharamsala Reception Center (RC) and that 46,620 returned to Tibet after a short pilgrimage in India. Most of those who do stay in India are children who then attend schools run by Tibetan Children’s Villages. XXXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXX both highlighted to PolOff that, following the March 2008 uprising in Tibet, the number of Tibetan refugees markedly decreased, with only about 650 refugees arriving at the RC from April 2008 to March 2009. XXXXXXXXXXXX speculated that Beijing has asked Kathmandu to step up patrols of Nepali border forces and make it more difficult for Tibetans to enter Nepal. XXXXXXXXXXXX reiterated this belief to PolOff during a XXXXXXXXXXXX meeting in Delhi, stating “the Chinese government rewards (Nepali forces)” by providing financial incentives to officers who hand over Tibetans attempting to exit China. XXXXXXXXXXXX was optimistic that flow of refugees will soon go back to normal levels because admission statistics for 2010 are surpassing those from an equivalent period in 2009. XXXXXXXXXXXX ROEMER

The WikiLeaks Cable on Manmohan Singh's Cabinet

2011-03-17T13:23:00.001+05:30

This is the full cable on the composition of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's council of ministers.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06NEWDELHI657 2006-01-30 13:01 2011-03-15 00:12 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy New Delhi
Appears in these articles:
http://www.thehindu.com/news/the-india-cables/article1538397.ece
VZCZCXRO6052
OO RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHKUK RUEHMOS
DE RUEHNE #0657/01 0301324
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 301324Z JAN 06
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 9175
INFO RUCNIRA/IRAN COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 9960
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 3066
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 3084
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 5969
RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 3728
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 6410
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 2672
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL CALCUTTA 1198
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 0921
RUEHKP/AMCONSUL KARACHI 1919
RUEHLH/AMCONSUL LAHORE 2019
RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 0158
RUEHPW/AMCONSUL PESHAWAR 2704
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 8771
RHMFISS/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 0905
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RHMFISS/HQ USSOCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 09 NEW DELHI 000657

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

USDOE FOR U/S DAVID GARMAN, DAS DPUMPHREY, RAJ LUHAR,
THOMAS CUTLER, STATE FOR EB/ESC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2016
TAGS: PGOV PINR PREL ECON ENRG EPET EMIN EAID MASS
REF: A. NEW DELHI 166 B. NEW DELHI 165 C. 05 NEW DELHI 9343 D. 05 NEW DELHI 8809 E. 05 NEW DELHI 8507 F. STATE 1151
NEW DELHI 00000657 001.2 OF 009

Classified By: Ambassador David C. Mulford, for reasons 1.4 (B,D)

¶1. (C) Summary: The UPA's January 28 cabinet shuffle signifies a determination to ensure that US/India relations continue to move ahead rapidly, and strengthens the cadre of modernizing reformers at the top of the GOI. Removing contentious and outspoken Iran pipeline advocate Mani Shankar Aiyar from the Petroleum portfolio, the UPA replaced him with the pro-US Murli Deora, who was one of several figures inducted with long-standing ties to the Indo/US Parliamentary Forum (IUPF) and the Embassy. The UPA also inducted a large number of serving MPs, including seven from the IUPF who have publicly associated themselves with our strategic partnership. To ensure that there are no foreign policy ripples before the President's visit, PM Singh retained the critical MEA portfolio and is likely to hold on to it until after the next session of Parliament concludes and Congress has weathered crucial Assembly elections in Kerala and West Bengal in May. Viewing the shuffle as a shift towards the US, the left has become more alienated from Congress and more determined to obstruct UPA economic liberalization and foreign policy initiatives, all but ensuring political fireworks in the months ahead. The net effect of the reshuffle, however, is a Cabinet that is likely to be excellent for US goals in India (and Iran). End Summary.

¶2. (U) After our analytical paragraphs, this cable includes a full Cabinet list plus bios of new entrants. See paras number 17 and 18.

An Eventful Weekend
-------------------

¶3. (U) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced a major cabinet shuffle and President Kalam swore in the new members on January 29. Eighteen new personalities were inducted, including 10 Ministers, one Minister of State with Independent Charge, and 11 new Ministers of State. All the new faces were from Congress, including three senior Congress leaders from Maharashtra - Sushil Kumar Shinde (Power), AR Antulay (Minority Affairs) and Murli Deora (Petroleum). Although PM Singh retained the Foreign Affairs portfolio, he announced that he would try to shuffle the Cabinet again after the Budget Session of Parliament (the third week in May.) Most expect him to name a new Foreign Minister at that time. The two top names making the rounds are Finance Minister P Chidambaram and Rajya Sabha MP and former Maharaja of Kashmir Karan Singh. Longtime Embassy contact Anand Sharma was named Minister of State for Foreign Affairs. In the most significant development, the GOI replaced Petroleum Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar with Murli Deora (Aiyar was retained and was given Panchayati Raj, Youth Affairs & Sports as a consolation prize.) The PM maintained on January 29 that regional considerations took priority, as Congress wanted to provide opportunities to deserving individuals from Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. He also noted

NEW DELHI 00000657 002.2 OF 009

that there was a need to ""accommodate MPs with a lot of talent.

The Aiyar Controversy
---------------------

¶4. (C) Our Foreign Ministry contacts welcomed Aiyar's departure, commenting that his energy diplomacy had encroached on MEA turf too many times, leading to MEA appeals to the Prime Minister's Office to intercede. Despite the PMO warning to back off, Aiyar's Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MPNG) continued to interfere with MEA attempts to craft policy, our contacts said, citing Pakistan, China, Burma, Bangladesh, Iran and Sudan as areas of intergovernmental conflict. Aiyar's unwillingness to step back reportedly led to the PM's decision to remove him from this high-profile portfolio, and cements MEA's position as the lead bureaucracy on strategic policy making.

¶5. (C) Aiyar's dismissal as Petroleum Minister will leave MEA officials breathing easier, and put MEA back in charge of policy toward these energy suppliers, including the ""problem children"" of Sudan, Burma and Iran. Unlike Aiyar, who cultivated a reputation for anti-Americanism, Murli Deora has been associated with the US/India relationship for years. Lacking Aiyar's ambitions (or entrepreneurial zeal), he will be a more cautious Minister. Clearing these lines of authority should make the PM's job of coordinating India's often-conflicting interests in energy security, trade, investment, anti-terrorism and stronger ties with the West a bit less muddled. His departure also weakens the holdouts fighting a rear-guard action against stronger engagement with the US, who would prefer that India hold true to its non-aligned traditions. Local journalists speculate that Aiyar's parting shot was the leak on January 28 of the USG demarche (ref A) protesting Indian investment in Syrian oil projects, spun by opponents of US-India engagement as another attempt by the US to dictate policy to India.

¶6. (C) Our contacts (protect) in the Government-owned Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) confirmed that Aiyar had vexed the PMO and MEA by positioning the MPNG to usurp the lead on India,s strategic posture for energy security issues, inducting Additional Secretary Talmiz Ahmad, a senior career diplomat, to lead on oil and gas diplomacy, and taking a pro-active stance on the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) natural gas pipeline (Reftels B and C). Before Aiyar,s ouster, a Planning Commission energy expert (protect) told us that Aiyar,s international forays in search of oil and gas equity had been taken as ""fishing expeditions"" at Aiyar,s initiative, and that any significant deals would be subject to Cabinet scrutiny before approval. The GAIL contact said the MPNG,s civil bureaucracy had run a whispering campaign against Aiyar calling him autocratic and disrespectful of IAS officers, including a public criticism of MPNG Joint Secretary (for International Cooperation) Prabh Dass in front SIPDIS of government-run entities.

¶7. (C) Aiyar's replacement as Petroleum Minister, Murli Deora, is a stalwart supporter of stronger US-India ties, and one of the few high-profile Congress leaders who embraces the PM's vision of the bilateral relationship. He is currently the Chairman of the India-US Forum of Parliamentarians, a

NEW DELHI 00000657 003.2 OF 009

non-partisan, industry-sponsored counterpart to the US Congress's India Caucus that advocates closer political and economic ties to the United States. Deora is a Gandhi family loyalist and a wealthy Mumbai-based industrialist, and is currently serving his fourth term as a member of the Lok Sabha. Deora's only vulnerability, as a Mumbai politician, is his long-standing connection to the Reliance industrial group, which includes significant energy equities.

¶8. (C) One analyst at Petrowatch, an industry publication in Mumbai, noted that Aiyar,s dismissal removes a powerful supporter of the Iran Pipeline project and speculated that it could signal a shift in the GOI's energy-related foreign policy. Our GAIL contact said the private conglomerate Reliance probably lobbied heavily for Deora, particularly in view of Aiyar,s clashes with Reliance during the five year rule of the National Democratic Alliance. Deora said his priority is to strengthen the chronically loss-making public sector oil firms and tackle the fuel subsidy issue, drawing on his experience as chairman of the standing committee on finance. While we expect Deora to more faithfully uphold the PM's foreign policy vision, the MPNG Petroleum Ministry is likely to be less pro-active and energetic in its drive to acquire foreign oil and gas assets than it was under Aiyar's globe-trotting leadership. New Delhi energy analysts have questioned the wisdom of removing Aiyar, predicting that his departure puts several nascent energy partnerships and deals in doubt (including a much-trumpeted pact to cooperate with China on energy purchasing signed during Aiyar's January visit to Beijing). In the end, however, the high-profile deals have all been of highly tentative nature, and Aiyar's self-promoting maverick diplomacy was too much for PM Singh to accommodate.

The New Minister of Power
-------------------------

¶9. (C) The new Minister of Power, Sushil Kumar Shinde, a close political ally of Sonia Gandhi, fills the ministerial slot vacated by the death last December of Minister PM Sayeed, who was viewed more as a figurehead political appointee. The power ministry is pivotal, in that the power sector must attract huge investment, while being politically-sensitive to needed price increases; and rapid long-term growth in power generation capacity and production is crucial to achieving the GOI goal of sustained 8% annual GDP growth. The power sector,s reliance for growth on most forms of generation - nuclear, hydroelectric, coal-thermal, gas-thermal, wind, and solar - underscores the political sensitivity of related issues outside the Power Ministry's purview, such as seeking natural gas from Iran or alternative foreign sources, civil nuclear energy cooperation with the US, or social and environmental aspects of increasing coal production.

¶10. (C) The UPA Government appointed Shinde as Governor of Andhra Pradesh State after he led the Congress party to victory in the 2004 State Assembly elections in neighboring Maharashtra, where he had been elected Chief Minister in 2003. Shinde was Sonia Gandhi's election campaign manager when she first contested for the Amethi Parliamentary constituency in Lok Sabha. Shinde, age 65, was born into a poor cobbler's family of the disadvantaged (scheduled) Dalit

NEW DELHI 00000657 004.2 OF 009

Caste in Solapur district. In 1971, he quit his job as a sub-inspector in the state police intelligence wing to run for and win a seat in Maharashtra,s legislative council. By 1981, he became Finance Minister in Maharashtra,s Government, serving for nine years.

The New Minister of Coal and Mines
----------------------------------

¶11. (C) A vindicated Shibu Soren, was re-inducted into the Union Council of Ministers as Minister of Coal. The thickly-bearded tribal leader had been forced to resign in July 2005, both as Minister of Coal and as Chief Minister of Jharkand State, after getting embroiled in a number of criminal cases, including being arrested for inciting arson and violence during a deadly rally in 1975. Earlier he was acquitted of accepting bribes to support the minority government of the late Prime Minister Rao. Soren was elected to parliament in 1980 and to the Bihar State Assembly in 1981. He founded in 1972 the Jharkhand Liberation Front, which successfully achieved Statehood for the coal-rich tribal region of Jharkhand. He has been President of the JLF since 1990.

¶12. (C) Coal now accounts for over 50% of India,s power generation and is projected to remain at 52-55% for at least 20 years thereby requiring sustained production growth to underpin rapid growth in India,s power sector, potentially with close US. cooperation in clean coal technology. Greater exploitation of India,s huge coal reserves faces issues of environmental protection and social disruption in areas with coal seams below tribal areas.

And Good News on Kashmir
------------------------

¶13. (C) Another welcome addition to the cabinet is Kashmiri Congress Party Rajya Sabha member Saifuddin Soz, a long-standing contact of the Embassy's Political section. Soz, a Sonia Gandhi confidant, worked discreetly and diligently behind-the-scenes to help launch the PM's dialogue with Kashmiri separatists such as the Mirwaiz, Yasin Malik, and Sajjad Lone. For his loyal service and his successes on Kashmir diplomacy, Sonia has elevated him to the Cabinet. In doing so, she also ensured that a prominent and well-respected Kashmiri Muslim would occupy the important Water Resources portfolio. Kashmir has tremendous water resources, including massive untapped hydroelectric potential. Given the on-going dispute between India and Pakistan over the construction of the Baglihar dam on the Chenab river near Jammu, and Soz's new job's supervision of the India-Pakistan Indus Waters Treaty, it is clear that Soz will play a key role in Delhi's efforts in Kashmir and its dialogue with Pakistan. Soz -- a professor -- is a moderate, earnest gentleman who has been a good friend of the US. He could potentially be Chief Minister of Kashmir one day, or rise even higher in the Cabinet, if he does a good job as minister.

Comment - A Boost to US Energy Interests
----------------------------------------

¶14. (C) Our initial assessment is that appointment of the

NEW DELHI 00000657 005.2 OF 009

three new energy ministers will boost USG interests by enhancing bilateral cooperation under the US/India Energy Dialogue (Reftel F) prior to US. Department of Energy Under Secretary David Garman,s visit to New Delhi (expected Feb SIPDIS 8-9). Aiyar,s dismissal, following on USG demarches against oil and gas cooperation with Iran and Syria, will probably disrupt the recent momentum built by Aiyar and MPNG Additional Secretary Talmiz Ahmad in favor of the Iran-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline, as well as cooperation with Syria, as Deora conducts a thorough review of these transactions.

And a pro-US Shift
------------------

¶15. (C) The Cabinet shuffle contained lots of good news for the USG, confirming the UPA government's determination to maintain rapid progress in the India/US relationship. The demotion of Aiyar was the most significant indicator. The new entrants with strong pro-US credentials include Saifuddin Soz, Anand Sharma, Ashwani Kumar, Kapil Sibal and Aiyar's replacement Murli Deora. Seven of the new faces are also members of the pro-American Indo/US Parliamentary Forum, while the induction of so many entrants from the Rajya Sabha reflects the declining importance of a mass political base. The timing of the shuffle and the PM's retention of the MEA portfolio were dictated by the impending POTUS visit, and reflects the PM's commitment to ensure that there is no foreign policy surprises before the visit.

That Angers the Left
--------------------

¶16. (C) The undeniable pro-American tilt of the Cabinet shuffle has infuriated the Left, which will view it as a throwing down of the gauntlet and an invitation to open warfare. The editorial comment of the pro-Left ""Hindu"" was typical ""Mr. Aiyar paid with his job for...going against the Government's strategic pro-US policy and its increasing acceptance of unilateralism and unipolarity."" Increasingly infuriated by what they view as Congress subservience to the US, the Left is likely to become even more uncooperative in the aftermath of this move. Congress hoped to pacify the Left by bringing in Jairam Ramesh, who has been close to the Communists while in the National Advisory Council and Vayalar Ravi (Overseas India Affairs), who has been a consistent critic of the UPA's economic liberalization and pro-US tilt. These moves are unlikely to mend the growing rift between the Left and Congress, however, making increased confrontation more likely.

The New Cabinet
---------------

¶17. (U) After the Cabinet shuffle the current shape of the Cabinet is as follows:

Cabinet Ministers

Manmohan Singh--Prime Minister, External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee--Defense Arjun Singh--Human Resource Development Sharad Pawar--Agriculture, Food & Civil Supplies

NEW DELHI 00000657 006.2 OF 009

Lalu Prasad Yadav--Railways Shivraj Patil--Home P Chidambaram--Finance Kamal Nath--Commerce & Industry Ram Vilas Paswan--Chemicals & Fertilizers, Steel Jaipal Reddy--Urban Development PR Dasmunshi--Information & Broadcasting, Parliamentary Affairs Mahavir Prasad--Small Scale, Agro & Rural Industries PR Kyndiah--Tribal Affairs, Development of North East TR Baalu-- Shipping, Road Transport & Highways Shankarsinh Vaghela--Textiles HR Bharadwaj--Law & Justice Sushil Kumar Shinde--Power Mani Shankar Aiyer--Panchayati Raj, Youth Affairs & Sports Sis Ram Ola--Mines Meira Kumar--Social Justice & Empowerment K Chandra Shekar Rao--Labor & Employment A Raja--Environment & Forests Dayanidhi Maran--Information Technology & Communications Anbumani Ramdoss--Health & Family Welfare Shibu Soren--Coal (new) AR Antulay--Minority Affairs (new) Vyalar Ravi--Overseas Indian Affairs (new) Murli Deora--Petroleum (new)-IUPF member Ambika Soni--Tourism & Culture (new) Saifuddin Soz--Water Resources (new) Santosh Mohan Dev--Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises (new) Prem Chanda Gupta--Company Affairs (new) Kapil Sibal--Science & Technology (new) Ministers of State with Independent Charge
Oscar Fernandes--No Portfolio allotted yet (new) GK Vasan-- Statistics & Program Implementation (new) Renuka Choudhury--Women & Child Development (previously Tourism & Culture) Subodh Kant Sahai--Food Processing Vilas Muttemwar--Non-conventional Energy Sources Kumari Selja--Urban Employment & Poverty Alleviation Praful Patel--Civil Aviation Minister of State
E Ahamed-- External Affairs Suresh Pachauri--Personnel, Parliamentary Affairs BK Handique--Chemicals & Fertilizers (previously defense) Mrs. P Lakshmi--Health & Family Welfare D Narayan Rao--Coal & Mines Shaqeel Ahmed--Information Technology & Communications Rao Inderjit Singh--Defense (previously MEA) Narainbhai Rathwa--Railways KH Muniyappa--Road Transport & Highways MV Rajashekharan--Planning Kantilal Bhuria--Agriculture, Food and Civil Supplies Manik Rao Gavit--Home Affairs Sri Prakash Jaiswal--Home Affairs Prithviraj Chavan--Prime Ministers Office Taslimuddin--Agriculture, Food and Civil Supplies Mrs. Suryakanta Patil--Rural Development, Parliamentary Affairs

NEW DELHI 00000657 007.2 OF 009

A Narendra--Rural Development Mohammed Ali Ashraf Fatimi--Human Resources Development R Velu--Railways SS Palanimanickam--Finance S Regupathy--Home Affairs K Venkatapathy--Law & Justice Ms. S Jagadeesan--Social Justice & Empowerment EVKS Elangovan--Commerce & Industry Mrs. Kanti Singh--Heavy Industry Namo Narayan Meena--Environment & Forests Akhilesh Prasad Singh--Agriculture, Food & Civil Supplies Pawan Kumar Bansal--Finance (new) T Subbirami Reddy--No portfolio allotted yet (new)- IUPF member Anand Sharma--External Affairs (new)- IUPF member Ajay Maken--Urban Development (new) - IUPF member Pallam Raju--Defense (new) - IUPF member CS Sahu--Labor (new) Akhilesh Das--Steel (new) Jairam Ramesh--No portfolio allotted yet (new) Ashwani Kumar--Industry (new) - IUPF member Ms. D Purandareswari--Human Resources Development (new) - IUPF member Dinsha Patel--No portfolio allotted yet (new)

Bios of New Entrants
--------------------

¶18. (C)(All Bios):
Sushil Kumar Shinde - Minister for Power - A long time Congress party activist and Gandhi family loyalist, Shinde was the Governor of Andhra Pradesh until he took this position. Prior to that, he was Chief Minister of Maharashtra. He has held many positions in the Congress party including General Secretary and Congress Working Committee Member. He is a dalit and his inclusion in the cabinet is seen as an attempt to reach out to the community.
Shibu Soren - Minister for Coal - Leader of the regional party Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM), Soren is considered to be the father of the JMM movement that ultimately led to the creation of Jharkhand state. He was a minister earlier in the cabinet, quit after he was charged with arson and rioting for acts he committed during the hey days of the JMM movement in the 1980s. The charges have since been quashed and so Soren comes back into the cabinet.
AR Antulay - Minister for Minority Affairs - Another Gandhi family loyalist, Antulay is from Maharashtra and has been Chief Minister of the state. He was infamous in the early 1980s for floating fictitious trusts and amassing money in the name of Indira Gandhi that led to the fall of his government in Maharashtra. Antulay has been in the political wilderness since then, but as a Muslim was rehabilitated as a concession to the Muslim community.
Vyalar Ravi - Minister for Overseas Indian Affairs - Another old time party loyalist, Ravi is the first UPA Minister from Kerala, and his induction was a concession to that state, where the Congress government faces the voters this year. Ravi also comes from a backward caste.

NEW DELHI 00000657 008.2 OF 009

Murli Deora - Minister for Power - Long considered as a key fund raiser for Congress, Deora has been a parliamentarian for many years, as well as President of the Mumbai District Congress Committee. He is well-known as a friend to the business community and pro-US. His son, Milind, is also a member of the Lok Sabha.
Ambika Soni - Minister for Tourism & Culture - Having cut her political teeth under the tutelage of Sanjay Gandhi, Soni is a long term Gandhi family loyalist. Since Sonia Gandhi's entry into active politics, Soni has been one of her close confidants and supporters and was for many years the Secretary in charge of the Congress President,s office.
SIPDIS Always quick to defend the party and Sonia on any issue, Soni,s induction into the cabinet is seen as a reward for her loyalty.
Saifuddin Soz - Minister for Water Resources - A veteran parliamentarian from the Kashmir valley, Soz was environment minister in the Gujral government and his was the crucial vote that brought down the Vajpayee government in March 1998. Soz was expelled from the National Congress for defying the party whip and voting against the BJP-led government. Soz,s induction into the cabinet is a reward for his hard work to promote the ongoing dialogue between the government and the Kashmir separatist groups and allows Congress to claim credit for appointing a Muslim and Kashmiri to the Cabinet.
GK Vasan - Minister of State for Statistics and Program Implementation - Son of the veteran Congress leader GK Moopanar, Vasan is from Tamil Nadu and is the President of the state's Congress party. His induction is a concession to Tamil Nadu, where Congress hopes to benefit in elections later this year.
Pawan Kumar Bansal - Minister of State for Finance - A Congress MP from Chandigarh, Bansal is a long time party loyalist. He recently became the subject of controversy after providing MP development funds to the Chandigarh Golf Club in return for a privileged membership.
T Subbirami Reddy - No Portfolio - Another major fund raiser for the Congress party, Reddy is an industrialist and film producer. Known as the best party-giver in town, Reddy has been in Parliament since 1989. He is from Andhra Pradesh.
Anand Sharma - External Affairs - A Congress spokesman, Sharma is a former President of the Youth Congress and a well-known Gandhi family loyalist. He is very friendly to the US, where one of his two sons receives treatment for autism. Sharma is a Rajya Sabha MP from Himachal Pradesh.
Ajay Maken - Urban Development - One of the younger MPs in the Lok Sabha, Maken is serving his first term. He was widely praised for his performance as Minister for Power and Transport in the Delhi government and Speaker of the Delhi Assembly. A tough task master, he is credited with initiating power reforms in Delhi.
M Pallam Raju - Defense - Educated at Temple University, Philadelphia, Raju is a Lok Sabha Member from Andhra Pradesh. A member of the house from 1989-91 and an engineer by profession, Raju worked in the US and Norway before coming

NEW DELHI 00000657 009.2 OF 009

back to India and joining politics.
CS Sahu - Labor - A first time member of the Lok Sabha, Sahu has been in Congress politics for a long time, serving as Mayor of Behrampur, Orissa. A lackluster politician, his induction into the council is mainly to give representation to Orissa.
Akhilesh Das - Steel - A member of the Rajya Sabha since 1996, Das is the publisher of a leading Hindi daily ""Jansatta, "" and was Mayor of Lucknow. Das has a Ph.D. in Management Studies from Agra University.
Jairam Ramesh - No portfolio - Along with Manmohan Singh, considered one of the leading members of the Congress Economics brain trust, Ramesh is a Rajya Sabha member. Close to Sonia Gandhi, he is one of her key advisors on economic issues.
Ashwani Kumar - Industry - A long standing Rajya Sabha member, Kumar is another Gandhi family loyalist. He is a very successful Supreme Court lawyer and strong proponent of closer US/India ties.
D Purandareswari - Human Resources Development - A Daughter of former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister NT Rama Rao, Purandareswari is serving her first term in the Lok Sabha. She has been brought into the Cabinet as a reward for her strong performance in the house.
Dinsha Patel - No portfolio - A member of the Lok Sabha from Gujarat since 1996, Patel is a veteran Congressman. He was a member of the state assembly from 1975 to 1996. He has been brought in to give representation to the powerful Patel community of Gujarat.

¶19. (U) Visit New Delhi's Classified Website: (http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/sa/newdelhi/)

MULFORD

The WikiLeaks Cable on the Congress Party and Religious Politics in India

2011-03-17T13:17:00.001+05:30

This is the full cable on how the Congress party in India was feeling the effects of communal politics.

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08NEWDELHI3228 2008-12-23 13:01 2010-12-10 16:04 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy New Delhi
VZCZCXRO3518
OO RUEHBC RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDE RUEHKUK RUEHLH RUEHPW RUEHROV
DE RUEHNE #3228/01 3581326
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 231326Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4847
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNISL/ISLAMIC COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7276
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 5744
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 2993
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 1462
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 6005
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEIDN/DNI WASHINGTON DC
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 7411
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 8040
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
Tuesday, 23 December 2008, 13:26
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 003228
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INS
EO 12958 DECL: 12/22/2018
TAGS PGOV, PREL, PTER, KISL, IN
SUBJECT: CONGRESS PARTY STUNG PLAYING RELIGIOUS POLITICS
WITH TERRORISM
REF: MUMBAI 518
Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)
¶1. (C) Summary: On the floor of parliament, Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram officially dismissed comments made by the Minority Affairs Minister A.R. Antulay that implied Hindutva elements may have been involved in the Mumbai attacks. Antulay sparked a political controversy on December 17 with comments insinuating that the killing of Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad (ATS) Chief Hemant Karkare by the Mumbai terrorists was somehow linked to Karkare’s investigation of bombings in which radical Hindus are suspected (reftel). The outlandish comments suggested that somehow Hindutva elements were in league with the Mumbai attackers, or used the attacks as cover to kill Karkare. The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) immediately called for Antulay’s resignation and protested with boisterous walkouts in parliament over the course of five days. Compounding matters, the Congress Party, after first distancing itself from the comments, two days later issued a contradictory statement which implicitly endorsed the conspiracy. During this time, Antulay’s completely unsubstantiated claims gained support in the conspiracy-minded Indian-Muslim community. Hoping to foster that support for upcoming national elections, the Congress Party cynically pulled back from its original dismissal and lent credence to the conspiracy. Regardless of Chidambaram’s dismissal (and Antulay’s party-ordered retraction), the Indian Muslim community will continue to believe they are unfairly targeted by law enforcement and that those who investigate the truth are silenced. The entire episode demonstrates that the Congress Party will readily stoop to the old caste/religious-based politics if it feels it is in its interest. End Summary.
Killed in Mumbai Attacks, Karkare Led Investigation into “Hindu Terror”
---------------------------------------------
¶2. (U) Indian Minorities Affairs Minister A.R. Antulay’s sparked controversy on December 17 with comments insinuating that the killing of Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad (ATS) Chief Hemant Karkare by the Mumbai terrorists was somehow linked to Karkare’s investigation of “Hindu terrorists.” Two of the Mumbai terrorists gunned down Karkare, and his ATS colleagues Additional Commissioner of Police Ashok Kamte and Inspector Vijay Salaskar the first night of attacks, November 26. The three officers were killed as they reached a hospital the terrorists entered after attacking the Mumbai train station.
¶3. (U) As Maharashtra ATS Chief, Karkare led the investigation into the September 2008 Malegaon blasts which claimed the lives of six people. Initially the police suspected Muslim terrorists. However, authorities recently arrested eleven Hindus, including an Indian Army Lieutenant Colonel. Police identified five of those arrested as having ties to the BJP’s youth wing in their earlier years. Two others had ties to a recent addition to the Sangh Parivar family of Hindu nationalist organizations.
Antulay’s Comments
------------------
¶4. (U) On December 17, even as a solemn debate on the Mumbai attacks and counterterrorism was taking place in parliament, Antulay made a series of public comments drawing attention to a possible link between Karkare’s killing and his investigation. He offered no evidence to back-up his claims.
-- “Superficially speaking they had no reason to kill Karkare. Whether he was a victim of terrorism or terrorism plus something, I do not know.”
-- “Karkare found that there are non Muslims involved in the
NEW DELHI 00003228 002 OF 002
acts of terrorism during his investigations in some cases. Any person going to the roots of terrorism has always been the target.”
-- “Unfortunately his end came. It may be a separate inquiry how his end came.”
-- “There is more than what meets the eyes.”
Congress Party Dismisses...
---------------------------
¶5. (U) Most Congress Party leaders quickly disassociated the Party from Atulay’s comments. Congress Party spokesman Abishek Singhvi told the press, “We do not accept the innuendo and the aspersions cast. This should be the end of the matter. The Congress does not agree with Antulay’s statement.” Another Congress Party spokesman, Manish Tiwari, followed the next day with, “The Congress in any manner does not endorse Antulay’s views.” Just as quickly BJP leaders called for Antulay to resign or be sacked.
...Then Equivocates...
----------------------
¶6. (U) However, on December 21 senior Congress leader Digvijay Singh told the media, “I don’t think Antulay made a mistake. What he asked for is a probe. What is objectionable in his statement?” Two days earlier the Congress-led government of Maharashtra rejected a demand for an inquiry into Karkare’s death. The opposition BJP took exception to both the substance of Antulay’s comments and the Congress Party’s inconsistent response. Shouting slogans, the BJP staged a walkout in the parliament three days in a row and demanded a formal clarification from the government. Emboldened by the equivocation, Antulay refused to apologize or retract his statements and said they reflected the views of a large segment of the Muslim population.
...And Finally Dismisses
------------------------
¶7. (U) After taking flack for nearly a week, the Congress Party finally gave its official view when Home Minister Chidambaram stated in parliament, “There is no truth whatsoever in the suspicion that there was conspiracy.” Chidambaram called Antulay’s comments “regrettable.” Shortly thereafter Antulay backed down and told the press, “For me the matter is settled.” He ruled out his resignation.
Congress Party Plays Cynical Politics
-------------------------------------
¶8. (C) Comment: While the killing of three high level law enforcement officers during the Mumbai attacks is a remarkable coincidence, the Congress Party’s initial reaction to Antulay’s outrageous comments was correct. But as support seemed to swell among Muslims for Antulay’s unsubstantiated claims, crass political opportunism swayed the thinking of some Congress Party leaders. What’s more, the party made the cynical political calculation to lend credence to the conspiracy even after its recent emboldening state elections victories. The party chose to pander to Muslims’ fears, providing impetus for those in the Muslim community who will continue to play up the conspiracy theory. While cooler heads eventually prevailed within the Congress leadership, the idea that the party would entertain such outlandish claims proved once again that many party leaders are still wedded to the old identity politics. The seventy-nine year old Antulay was probably bewildered to find that his remarks, similar in vein to what he would have routinely made in the past to attack the BJP, created such a furor this time. End Comment. MULFORD

The WikiLeaks Cable on Cash for Votes during the UPA1 Government in India

2011-03-17T13:08:00.000+05:30

This is the full text of the cable sent from the US Embassy in New Delhi on how the then Congress-led government in New Delhi was preparing for the vote in the Lok Sabha.

Viewing cable 08NEWDELHI1972, POLITICAL BARGAINING CONTINUES PRIOR TO KEY VOTE

Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08NEWDELHI1972 2008-07-17 13:01 2011-03-17 01:01 SECRET Embassy New Delhi
VZCZCXRO9793
OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHNE #1972/01 1991323
ZNY SSSSS ZZH
O 171323Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 2668
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNNSG/NUCLEAR SUPPLIERS GROUP COLLECTIVE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA 1566
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 6661
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 04 NEW DELHI 001972

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/17/2018
TAGS: PREL PARM TSPL KNNP ETTC ENRG TRGY IN
SUBJECT: POLITICAL BARGAINING CONTINUES PRIOR TO KEY VOTE
IN PARLIAMENT

REF: KOLKATA 209

Classified By: Charge D'Affaires Steven White for Reasons 1.4 (B and D)

¶1. (C) SUMMARY. Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon and his delegation departed for Vienna on July 17 to brief the 35 Board members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and another 19 members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) on the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative. In Delhi, government officials responded positively to suggestions about how to address concerns emerging from Vienna, particularly the need to begin negotiating an IAEA Additional Protocol and for the IAEA to circulate India's (INFCIRC) already-public separation plan as an official IAEA document. Political horse-trading continued in anticipation of the special session of parliament to consider the confidence vote on July 21 followed by the vote itself on July 22. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader L.K. Advani each plan to host a dinner for supporters on July 20; the parties will presumably have to chose one or the other. An estranged Congress Party MP and three Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) MPs publicly stated their intention to vote against the UPA, leaving the government still clinging to a slim majority. Small parties representing collectively about 20 votes find themselves with generous suitors; one party chief has reportedly succeeded in having the Lucknow airport renamed after his father. The unrequited Left continued its anti-government rant, but showed signs of internal strain. Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee refused to resign despite pressure from within the Communist party to do so and has made it clear that he was not in favor of the Left voting with the opposition BJP against the government, a position that seems to have resonance among comrades disinclined to face early elections.
END SUMMARY.

GOI to Address IAEA Member Concerns, Fumbles on Scheduling
- - -

¶2. (SBU) Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon departed for Vienna on July 17 for his briefing on July 18 to IAEA Board members and NSG members on the U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation Initiative. Local media had reported statements by an IAEA spokesman on July 16 that the briefing by the visiting Indian delegation had been canceled. In fact, the briefing was scaled down from all 140 IAEA members to just the 35 Board members, in addition to the 19 others that comprise the 45-member NSG that do not also sit on the IAEA Board. Menon is traveling with Department of Atomic Energy director for strategic plans Dr. R.B. Grover, Department Of Atomic Energy's (DAE) Gitish Sharma, and Chief of Staff Naveen Srivastava. They will be joined in Vienna by Geneva-based Ministry of External Affairs Counselor Venkatesh Varma, a veteran of nuclear deal negotiations.

¶3. (C) Pursuant to recommendations from the U.S. Mission to the IAEA, PolCouns raised two issues of concern to IAEA Board members on July 16 with Ministry of External Affairs Joint Secretary for the Americas Gaitri Kumar and Virender Paul in the National Security Adviser's office. PolCouns stressed the importance of starting negotiations on an Additional Protocol as soon as possible, relaying that such agreements usually take about a year to conclude but that IAEA Legal could have a model text ready quickly if the Indians ask to begin negotiations. PolCouns also reported, following messages from UNVIE, that some IAEA delegations did not understand the connection between the safeguards agreement (with its blank safeguarded facilities list) and the separation plan listing the civil nuclear facilities that would fall under safeguards (already a public document). PolCouns shared that the IAEA is prepared to circulate the separation plan as an official IAEA document if the Indians request it. Both Kumar and Paul promised to get on these two tasks ""right away"" to set things up for a productive trip to Vienna for Menon. On the Additional Protocol, the Prime Minister's Special Envoy will have to push the Department of Atomic Energy, which will have the lead. On the facilities list, an instruction could go to India's mission in Vienna fairly quickly.

UPA Maintains Precarious Lead In Vote Count
- - -

NEW DELHI 00001972 002 OF 004

¶4. (SBU) The special session of parliament to consider the confidence vote will begin on July 21 and conclude with a vote on July 22. Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Vayalar Ravi claimed on July 15 that the government would prevail in the July 22 confidence vote with over 280 votes cast in its favor. Kuldip Bishnoi, an estranged Congress Party MP who had been suspended for floating the idea of forming his own party in December 2007, confirmed his intention to defect in the confidence vote. (This development was apparently expected by party insiders and not a leading indicator of further fragmentation within the party.) Consulate Chennai reported on July 17 that the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) has publicly stated it will vote against the UPA. One of its three members of parliament has broken from the party, but is unlikely to support the government because the TRS has positioned the trust vote as a statehood issue, so voting for the UPA would mean voting against Telangana interests.

¶5. (SBU) Our best guess at this time show the government maintaining its slim majority with the anticipated vote count at about 273 in favor, 251 opposed, and 19 abstentions. A similar analysis from the British High Commission tracks closely with our numbers.
Dueling Dinners Force Parties to Declare Loyalties - - -

¶6. (SBU) Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader L.K. Advani each plan to host a dinner for supporters on July 20, the evening before the special parliamentary session begins on July 21. Media reported that Advani will use the dinner as a strategy session to field MPs to speak against the confidence motion. Advani will also reportedly meet the BJP's National Democratic Alliance (NDA) supporters on July 17, including Chief Ministers of the states where NDA constituents are in power. Rajasthan Chief Minister Raje reportedly plans to skip the meeting, raising the ire of the BJP leadership.

¶7. (SBU) Prime Minister Singh's dinner on July 20 will include the Congress Party's new allies in the Samajwadi Party as well as other recent converts and fence-sitters from smaller parties. The Telegraph quoted a senior government source who said that PM Singh was ""neither crunching numbers nor seeking daily briefings on the political sensex. His bottom line is clear."" It also claimed that PM Singh was upset with the BJP for allegedly recanting on an ""understanding"" that it would support the deal. The article concludes that if the government survives the July 22 vote, PM Singh's priority would be to implement flagship social programs to thank his party for rallying behind him.

Votes For Sale
- - -

¶8. (SBU) Behind the scenes, the Congress Party machine is working overtime. Sonia Gandhi reportedly plans to meet Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leader Shibu Soren and Janata Dal Secular (JD-S) leader H.D. Deve Gowda. Retaining the support of JMM's five seats and the JD-S's three seats is reportedly vital to the UPA government's strategy. In exchange for retaining the support of the three votes of the Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD), the Congress Party has reportedly pledged its support to rename Lucknow's Amausi airport after Chaudhary Charan Singh, father of RLD leader Ajit Charan Singh, who may also get a cabinet seat.

¶9. (C) On July 16, PolCouns met with Captain Satish Sharma, a Congress Party MP in the Rajya Sabha, a former Indian Airlines Pilot, and a close associate of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi considered to be a very close family friend of Sonia Gandhi. Sharma mentioned that he, as well as others in the party, was working hard to ensure that the UPA government wins the confidence vote on July 22. He said that the Prime Minister, Sonia Gandhi, and Rahul Gandhi were committed to the nuclear initiative and had conveyed this message clearly to the party. Sharma said that PM Singh and others were trying to work on the Akali Dal (8 votes) through financier Sant Chatwal and others, but unfortunately it did not work out. He mentioned that efforts to encourage Shiv Sena (12 votes) to abstain were on-going. While different Congress operatives were working on different groups of MPs, Sharma said that Rahul Gandhi was personally working Omar

NEW DELHI 00001972 003 OF 004

Abdullah's Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (J&KNC), whose two MPs are inclined to vote in favor of the UPA. Sharma mentioned that he was also exploring the possibility of trying to get former Prime Minister Vajpayee's son-in-law Ranjan Bhattacharya to speak to BJP representatives to try to divide the BJP ranks. He mentioned that if the party wins the trust vote, they would then prefer to go for national elections in February or March 2009, which would give the UPA time to control prices and bring down inflation.

¶10. (S) Sharma's political aide Nachiketa Kapur mentioned to an Embassy staff member in an aside on July 16 that Ajit Singh's RLD had been paid Rupees 10 crore (about $2.5 million) for each of their four MPs to support the government. Kapur mentioned that money was not an issue at all, but the crucial thing was to ensure that those who took the money would vote for the government. Kapur showed the Embassy employee two chests containing cash and said that around Rupees 50-60 crore (about $25 million) was lying around the house for use as pay-offs.

¶11. (S) Another Congress Party insider told PolCouns that Minister of Commerce and Industry Kamal Nath is also helping to spread largesse. ""Formerly he could only offer small planes as bribes,"" according to this interlocutor, now he can pay for votes with jets.""

""What If""s: No Vote or a UPA Defeat
- - -

¶12. (SBU) PM Singh appears to have opened the door to the Left to call off the vote, telling media on July 16 that the government had the numbers to prevail in the confidence vote and that it was ""unfortunate"" that the special session had to be foisted upon parliament and distract the government from addressing urgent issues like inflation. PM Singh publicly acknowledged trying to get the BJP to support the nuclear initiative by reaching out to former PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee, but Vajpayee reportedly deferred to opposition leader L.K. Advani to make the call.

¶13. (SBU) There are some signs that the GOI may decide to go ahead with the nuclear initiative even if it loses the confidence vote on July 22. Media quoted Rahul Gandhi on July 16 as saying, ""I support the PM 100 percent on the nuke deal. We are going to win the trust vote, but even if the government falls, so be it."" He also claimed the BJP was divided over the nuclear initiative, saying, ""There are people in the BJP who support the deal and do not know why their party is opposing it."" Rahul Gandhi also recalled how Left parties in the mid-1980s had stonewalled his father Rajiv Gandhi's efforts to introduce computers in government offices and vision of a computerized India. Congress Party Chief Sonia Gandhi said in Andra Pradesh on July 17 that the government ""will not compromise on the nuclear deal because it is in the national interest.""

Disagreements Among Comrades: Left Shows Signs of Strain
- - -

¶14. (SBU) The Left continued its rant against the government. The Community Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) Polit Bureau groused that the Prime Minister's Office set a ""dangerous precedent"" by meeting industrialist Mukesh Ambani on July 14, during which Ambani reportedly offered help in securing Shiv Sena support for the UPA government. The CPI-M said the government's rejection of the use of force against Iran by Israel was ""timely,"" but that it would only be credible if the government were to cut military ties with Israel.

¶15. (SBU) The Left has also begun to show signs of internal strain. CPI-M Polit Bureau member Sitaram Yechury told media on July 15 that the party erred in listing Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee among its members who withdrew support from the UPA government on July 8. Chatterjee said he does not want to step down as Speaker despite pressure from within the party to do so. He also wrote a letter to Prakash Karat making it clear that he was not in favor of the Left voting with the opposition BJP against the government. (Chatterjee has looked to the UPA government to help him keep his position as Speaker and appears to be rallying moderate CPI-M members disinclined to join their comrades in voting with their rival BJP against a government that they supported for

NEW DELHI 00001972 004 OF 004

several years.) Also on July 15, Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh and two other SP leaders called for Chatterjee not to quit his post.

¶16. (SBU) Consulate Kolkata reported on the growing split within the CPI-M (reftel). Many CPI-M members, particularly Muslims, cannot fathom voving with the ""communalist"" BJP. A large group of West Bengal MPs do not want to bring down the government and are angry at Karat for his failed strategy. If the government falls, they fear the CPI-M could lose 10-15 seats in new elections based on unfavorable recent local election results. If the government survives, the Left will be embarrassed for having achieved nothing on the issues that are important to their constituents, few of whom care about the nuclear initiative. Though defection is a possibility, Communist Party discipline remains strong and members are unlikely to vote with the government.

Communists Find Muslims To Be More Anti-BJP Than Anti-American
- - -

¶17. (SBU) A Times of India report on July 17 claimed that Muslim MPs do not view the nuclear initiative confidence vote as a communal issue, but rather one of differences in perception of national interest based on party positions. Of the 37 Muslim members of parliament, 26 are in parties that have declared their support to the government for the confidence vote, while 11 are with anti-deal parties. Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) has tried to turn the confidence vote into into a communal issue by reaching out to Muslim councils (""bhaichara"" committees) and Islamic scholars in Uttar Pradesh and claiming that the Congress Party has compromised their interests. This strategy appears to be failing, partly because Muslims view the BJP as a more immediate threat than closer relations with the U.S. Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) MP and central committee member Hannan Mollah reportedly told media, ""Let's see what strategy can be worked out to convince the Muslim electorate that we are not working in tandem with the BJP."" Media reported a Forward Bloc local assembly member in West Bengal, Mehboob Mondal, saying, ""It's becoming difficult to explain that we are not with the BJP. It's clear that Muslims are not happy with us and their feelings may well reflect on Lok Sabha results.""

WHITE

10 Things to emulate from Japan & 10 Things to give up

2011-03-17T09:17:00.000+05:30

10 THINGS TO EMULATE FROM JAPAN

1. THE CALM
Not a single visual of chest-beating or wild grief. Sorrow itself has been elevated.

2. THE DIGNITY
Disciplined queues for water and groceries. Not a rough word or a crude gesture.

3. THE ABILITY
The incredible architects, for instance. Buildings swayed but didn’t fall.

4. THE GRACE
People bought only what they needed for one time, so everybody could get something.

5. THE ORDER
No looting in shops. No honking and no overtaking on the roads. Just understanding.

6. THE SACRIFICE
Fifty workers stayed back to pump sea water in the n-reactors. How will they repay them?

7. THE TENDERNESS
Restaurants cut prices. An unguarded ATM is left alone. The strong cared for the weak.

8. THE TRAINING
The old and the children, everyone knew exactly what to do. And they did just that.

9. THE MEDIA
They showed magnificent restraint in the bulletins. No silly reporters. Only calm reportage.

10. THE CONSCIENCE
When the power went off in a store, people put things back on the shelves and left quietly.

& 10 THINGS TO GIVE UP

1. The nuke plants. Be very cautious
2. A skewed demography. Too many old people
3. Growth based on debt
4. Underestimating nature
5. Overemphasis on local dialect. Many may not know it
6. Living too close to the coast
7. Building low rise near water
8. Ignoring foreshocks. There was a 7.2 before the 9.0
9. Postponing charity. Give now
10. Political instability

This was written for the 10 Things column in Tehelka Magazine

10 Things Manmohan Singh Should Say & 10 Things He Shouldn't

2011-03-10T01:02:00.001+05:30

10 THINGS MANMOHAN SINGH SHOULD SAY

1. YES WE CAN
Three magic words. Might work, even if he sounds most unconvinced about it.

2. MY SHIP, MY WAY
Especially to A Raja. To be fair, he might still wonder if the Prime Minister was selling ships.

3. READ THE PAPERS, I DO
The killer. If he actually did, he’d know more about CVC PJ Thomas than what his boys told him.

4. COUNTRY FIRST, COALITION NEXT
Means the same thing in the UPA. But needed, given the confusion about coalition compulsions.

5. HAVE A CIGAR
To the Maoists, who he really needs to invite for dinner. McDonalds? Hmmm … Domino’s.

6. WRITE @MANUBHAI
Time to tweet, considering how Raja and, most likely, his gardener ignore his letters anyway.

7. HERE'S THE SECRET
Time he shared what the Chanakya, Narasimha Rao, told him. Ever since, Manmohan is immovable.

8. CAESAR’S WIFE? WHO?
Must be wondering why everybody compares him with her. Did she have a raja too?

9. I LOVE ITALIAN
Considering the hours he spends in 10 Janpath meetings. Still, always nice to nail it.

10. I NEED AN OFF
Could even catch a movie or two. Wonder if they have moved to colour.

& 10 Things He Shouldn’t
1. I accept responsibility. Naturally
2. I am not afraid
3. India is a marvel. Yes sir, we know
4. We take our job seriously
5. Our economy is in good shape. No one believes it
6. We are not a scam-driven country
7. We are doing our best
8. You cannot please all the people
9. I am confident we will succeed
10. Rahul is very qualified. Is a tad sycophantic

This piece was written for Tehelka Magazine dated 19 March 2011. Illustration by Anand Naorem

New combinations likely after DMK goes cold on UPA2

2011-03-08T14:50:00.000+05:30

First things first, the Congress and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) are not natural allies. They have parted ways in the past as well, and are at best fair weather friends.

So, when the DMK said it was moving out of UPA2 on the evening of 5 March, the Congress was prepared for it. By the party’s calculations, the DMK is set to lose the May Tamil Nadu assembly election. Tamil Nadu parties are of no consequence when out of power. Therefore, the Congress was looking at a weak DMK anyway.

That the parting of ways has happened before the May election fits nicely with the Congress plan, for the moment. What’s the worst that can happen now? The first bit of unease could come on the Finance Bill. Governments fall if money bills are not passed, and the DMK has opened up this possibility.

Since it has gone into issue-based support, the DMK could say that it doesn’t agree with a policy or plan in the Budget and could force the issue in the Lok Sabha. But then, the Congress knows this. So, its floor managers have been assembled to deal with this possibility.

Once this is out of the way, there’s nothing to worry about for the Congress until the monsoon session of Parliament, normally scheduled for July and August. A government cannot fall outside Parliament unless the Prime Minister resigns. In this case, that is virtually ruled out.

So, nothing might happen at least until July.

Now to the issue of allies which is the next question. The Congress believes it could score two major victories in West Bengal and Kerala in the May assembly elections. That should provide important political momentum for the Congress, irrespective of what may happen in Assam, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.

The Congress is internally focused a great deal on Uttar Pradesh. Two of its key general secretaries, Rahul Gandhi and Digvijaya Singh, have been working on plans for Uttar Pradesh. There is a school of thought that suggests the Congress and the Samajwadi Party could come together to fight Mayawati.

That ought to provide the numbers in the Lok Sabha should it come to that. On the plus side, the parting of ways with the DMK could provide the Congress crucial political space to go ahead on corruption cases involving DMK politicians.

In a sense thus, the news of the DMK leaving UPA2 should worry A Raja more than Manmohan Singh. The jailed former telecom minister now has even less chance of using political means to wriggle out. And the Prime Minister gets another opportunity to show he means business by going the whole hog.

A whole new set of friends and foes are likely to emerge over the summer. The issue of seat-sharing is not even worthy of interpreting. It’s just a tool to get your way and the Congress has done that.

Let’s just assume that the DMK suddenly decides to offer the Congress 63 seats instead of 60. Or, let’s assume the Congress agrees for 60, and drops its demand for 63. How does that translate into a victory in the election? How does the Congress suddenly become a winning force in Tamil Nadu because it got three extra seats from the DMK?

Therefore, it cannot be about the three seats. The people of Tamil Nadu have been watching and reading about the 2G spectrum issue, like everybody else in India. They too have heard of the Radia Tapes, at least many of them. They’ve heard Kanimozhi lobbying desperately in the tapes. All this must surely mean something. It can’t be good for the DMK.

Also important is that AIADMK chief Jayalalithaa had in the past offered support to the Congress if it dumped the DMK on the 2G spectrum case. She is an interesting option for the Congress. Then, the Congress has new friends in Andhra Pradesh like Chiranjeevi. He will do his bit.

Overall, the Congress is comfortable as things stand. If, however, the DMK were to overturn its own decision and stay with the UPA2, it could be tricky. Then, the Congress is stuck with the DMK. At the moment, that’s not top of the mind in the Congress.

A bit of history here. In November 1997, the then Congress President Sitaram Kesri withdrew support from the IK Gujral United Front government on the issue of the DMK.

This is part of what Kesri wrote to the then President, KR Narayanan: “The report of the Jain Commission which was set up to enquire into the circumstances leading to the assassination of late prime minister Shri Rajiv Gandhi was placed on the table of both Houses of Parliament on 20 November 1997. The DMK party has been indicted as a supporter of the LTTE (the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) organisation, members of which were responsible for the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi.

“The report has exhaustively dealt with the role of a section of the DMK party, particularly its leadership and the Tamil Nadu government led by Shri Karunanidhi, in aiding and abetting the LTTE organisation, particularly after this militant organisation took a hostile attitude towards India and the IPKF (the Indian Peace Keeping Force) after the signing of the Indo-Sri Lankan agreement in 1987.”

So, Congress-DMK issues are not new. This is not the first spat among them. This won’t be the last. The real thing is Uttar Pradesh, which is where political activity could next heat up.

This piece first appeared in www.tehelka.com on 5 March 2011

10 Things that may happen this summer, and 10 Things that may not

2011-03-08T12:51:00.000+05:30

10 THINGS THAT MAY HAPPEN THIS SUMMER

1. SAMAJWADI PARTY JOINS UPA2
Most likely, especially if the DMK loses in Tamil Nadu and moves out of the UPA.

2. MAYAWATI ADVANCES UP ELECTION
Likely, given her free run in Uttar Pradesh. This could bring the Congress and the SP close.

3. CONGRESS JOINS MAMATA GOVERNMENT
Probable, if the Congress and the Trinamool Congress form a poll alliance in West Bengal.

4 MANMOHAN SINGH REVAMPS CABINET
New allies could come in, from Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

5. BIGGER AND NEWER SCAMS EMERGE
Some Congress bigwigs are likely to acquire fresh notoriety, from available indications.

6. CONGRESS RETHINKS TELANGANA
It has nothing to gain right now, so the Congress could stall formation of a new state.

7. CPM, CPI LOSE NATIONAL PARTY STATUS
Serious for mainstream Left as they face possible defeats in West Bengal and Kerala.

8. NORTHEAST PACTS TAKE SHAPE
Finally, at least one big ticket peace announcement is possible in the Northeast.

9. FORWARD MOVEMENT IN KASHMIR
New Delhi could back the interlocutors’ efforts and reports with policy announcements.

10. INDIA WINS CRICKET WORLD CUP
Needs to be listed for sheer mathematical possibility and unpredictability in sport.

& 10 THINGS THAT MAY NOT
1.Sheila Dikshit moves to Centre. Not after CWG
2. Bollywood revival. Dead summer ahead
3. Stability in petrol prices
4. Peace in Telangana
5. Drop in inflation
6. Let up in Maoist activity
7. Action against corrupt judges
8. BJP unity
9. UPA2 launches Operation Clean-up
10. India makes new friends in the Arab world

This piece first appeared in Tehelka English magazine, Vol 8, Issue 10, Dated 12 March 2011

Reading Mamata Banerjee

2011-03-08T12:27:00.000+05:30

If all goes well for railway minister Mamata Banerjee, this should be the last we’ll see of her for a while in New Delhi.

The 2011 Indian Railways Budget was not about the fares or the figures. No government hikes train fares to an extent where it hurts the parties announcing them. If they have to, it means the wolf is already at the door. So, the chances of Banerjee increasing fares two months or so before the West Bengal election were below zero.

The big news, therefore, is not that she didn’t hike fares.

Numbers are not Banerjee’s core efficiency. The balance sheets in Rail Bhavan must be pretty ordinary right now. Weeks before the Budget, the railway ministry put an end to spending because it had no money. So, Banerjee was not making grand pronouncements about her ministry. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh knows the money isn’t there. Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee knows it too. Congress President Sonia Gandhi doesn’t need to, and she probably doesn’t.

Banerjee’s bosses thus knew exactly what was coming. She announced new trains, more trips for some trains, reintroduced the double-decker air-conditioned trains on two high profile sectors, and then said more stuff intended for her core audience.

The people of West Bengal are Banerjee’s only audience now. She spoke of social revolution through the railways, which was an exaggeration. She talked of the tough times being over for the railways, which is a political lie. A political lie is where everyone knows it’s not true but no one makes a fuss about it. The implication is that any politician in place of the lying politician would have said the same.

The railways will have to borrow heavily from the market to keep going. Banerjee said they would. India has a job crisis on its hands. There are no jobs in the country and the railways have for ever been India’s largest employer. Banerjee said the railways would employ more people, 16,000 ex-servicemen straightaway. Plus, there are the routine works every year, which even at snail’s pace cost money.

Even if the railways earns over Rs 1,00,000 crore, there’s no way the railways can turn it around fast. Most of the money, almost all of it, would go into salary, pension and routine expenses.

The big story, therefore, is not about the plans Banerjee announced.

The real story of the rail budget is whether Banerjee is ready.

Unless something unseen happens, the Left Front in West Bengal is likely to pay the price for too much time and too little work at the top. As a consequence, Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress appears to be heading for an important victory in the May assembly election.

It’s not like, say, the AIADMK (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) defeating the DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam), or vice-versa. There’s a déjà vu about such a victory. Banerjee, on the other hand, could mark a crucial moment in Indian politics. She might unseat the longest-serving elected Communist government on the planet. It could at the very least push mainstream Communism to the fringes in India.

At a time when extreme Communist parties like the CPI(Maoist) are gaining traction, the insignificance of the mainstream Left could open things for two pan-India fronts, the Congress-led and the BJP-led. This is the scale of what Banerjee may be on the verge of doing.

Even if Banerjee were to return to New Delhi after five years, it is unlikely that she would be given a ministry involving a budget presentation

She has to be prepared. Else, it can unravel rapidly.

On the evidence of her performance in the Lok Sabha, she is. Banerjee came looking like she had paid attention to her appearance. She had her hair coloured jet black. She had a chain around her neck, looking like it was made of gold. She draped a lemon yellow shawl. She was television-ready.

Then, there were her 90 minutes in the limelight. Schoolteacher mostly, admonishing and fraternising by turn, she began to scream on two occasions before she quickly lowered her volume. Not that the Opposition had anything much to pummel her with. The BJP seniors were indifferent. Others in the NDA cared even less. Only the back-benchers made pretence of shouting for a while.

It was a free run. It told us much about Banerjee. It told us she is sensing her moment. It told us she is willing to plunge into administrative minutiae, boring but important. It told us she is comfortable in the House.

It told us she knew this could be her last budget in New Delhi.

Should she win in West Bengal, she is a shoo-in for the chief minister’s post. The sheer momentousness of that could give her five honeymoon years. In West Bengal, it could even lead to another five years. But that is too far away.

Assuming Banerjee wins, she would need to quit the Union Cabinet. It is one reason why Manmohan Singh keeps talking of a big reshuffle of his team after the budget session of Parliament. The end of the budget session and the results of the West Bengal election are almost simultaneous events.

Even if Banerjee were to return to New Delhi after five years, it is unlikely that she would be given a ministry involving a budget presentation.

Just a short caution. In the long run, lies don’t pay. It makes no sense to make promises you know you can’t keep. West Bengal is not the Ministry of Railways.

But then, Banerjee always knew this.

This piece first appeared on www.tehelka.com on 25 February 2011

Posted on 25 February 2011

Why the Supreme Court CVC ruling damns Manmohan Singh

2011-03-08T12:13:00.000+05:30

Turns out in the end, the Supreme Court verdict on the appointment of India’s top anti-corruption officer wasn’t about him.

True, the court quashed the appointment of Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) PJ Thomas because it was ‘non-est in law’, meaning not entirely legal. But, it dealt more with what Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Union Home Minister P Chidambaram and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj did as members of the HPC (High Powered Committee that chose Thomas).

It is an extraordinary examination of how the Prime Minister went about choosing the country’s top corruption sleuth. It is a damning dismantling of what Manmohan Singh prides himself on, impeccable integrity and impeccable loyalty to the book.

One remarkable passage in the verdict goes like this: “We do not wish to discount the personal integrity of the candidate. What we are emphasising is that institutional integrity of an institution like the CVC has got to be kept in mind while recommending the name of the candidate. Whether the incumbent would or would not be able to function? Whether the working of the Institution would suffer? If so, would it not be the duty of the HPC not to recommend the person.”

Let’s for a moment forget the CVC and read this passage again.

‘We do not wish to discount the personal integrity of the candidate.’ It’s absolutely what Manmohan Singh comes up with each time he is questioned on the happenings in his council of ministers. Every time there’s an A Raja or an S-band spectrum controversy, personal integrity is Singh’s principal alibi.

Then, ‘What we are emphasising is that institutional integrity of an institution like the CVC has got to be kept in mind while recommending the name of the candidate.’ This is the most used argument against Singh; that the emphasis has to be on the integrity of the whole government and not just the person heading it. It’s something Singh is uncomfortable with and doesn’t encourage: a distinction between him and his government.

And, most cruel, ‘Whether the incumbent would or would not be able to function? Whether the working of the Institution would suffer?’ There isn’t an Indian who hasn’t felt this niggling doubt about the Prime Minister. Clean though he might be, would he be able to function? Would the functioning of the government suffer?

Over the past year, Singh’s ability to function appears to have been severely limited for no apparent reason. Congress President Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi are still solidly backing the Prime Minister. He still has his reputation for personal honesty intact. He has time at least until 2014, a long time in Indian politics. There is no rival with a matching reputation for integrity in the BJP.

Yet, there’s a growing unease about Singh. The Supreme Court has willy-nilly nailed it, it would appear.

This is the most serious consequence of the ruling. No one anyway knows what exactly Thomas has done as the CVC. But everyone has a point of view on the Prime Minister. And, when there seems to be a hunger for a strong leader, Singh’s insistence on personal integrity as panacea is wearing thin.

Thomas is a footnote. Manmohan Singh is not.

There are several other things the ruling says that must make us think. For instance, it says, “If the selection adversely affects institutional competency and functioning then it shall be the duty of the HPC not to recommend such a candidate. Thus, the institutional integrity is the primary consideration which the HPC is required to consider while making recommendation under Section 4 for appointment of Central Vigilance Commissioner.”

Extend this to political parties in India. If the selection for an important position affects organisational competence, it shall be duty not to recommend such a candidate. Think Nitin Gadkari. Think Rabri Devi. Think BS Yeddyurappa. Think most people.

At another place, “We should not be understood to mean that personal integrity is not relevant. It certainly has a co-relationship with institutional integrity. The point to be noted is that in the present case the entire emphasis has been placed by the CVC, the DoPT and the HPC only on the bio-data of the empanelled candidates.”

Wow.

How many times has Manmohan Singh’s bio-data been the big Congress weapon? How many times have Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi been outraged when Singh’s actions have been questioned?

This is not to say that Singh’s conduct is impeachable. This is not to say that Singh isn’t the best we have. This is not to say that he has no case.

This is to say that at all times the Prime Minister must be able to function exactly the way he or she wants to in the best interests of the nation. This is to say that in a coalition structure, an honest man means nothing if he cannot ensure that his team is equally honest.

This is to say that impeccable integrity is not only about taking home Re 1 as salary. This is to say that impeccable integrity means having the gumption to take decisions only in public interest. This is to say that people always come before party.

This is to say that Caesar’s wife must not only be above suspicion, she must be seen as being above suspicion. Manmohan Singh would agree.

Trouble is, after the Supreme Court CVC ruling, that isn’t enough.

This piece first appeared on www.tehelka.com on 3 March 2011

I owe Arjun Singh Rs 500

2011-03-08T12:01:00.000+05:30

By the time I met Arjun Singh, life had not much use for either of us.

Singh was in the midst of probably his worst phase. He had lost two consecutive elections to the Lok Sabha, from two seats in Madhya Pradesh, and had not recovered from them yet.

I was in the midst of my worst phase, having reached the streets of New Delhi struggling with a severe addiction to brown sugar.

There wasn’t a soul who wanted to be with us. There was no way Singh would have recalled my existence at that point. One evening, I was in the throes of cold turkey on the streets of Connaught Place, New Delhi’s showpiece marketplace and a regular haunt of addicts.

The last serious journalism I had done before I became a skid row bum was on the Congress party. I covered the Congress for The Indian Express, and many Congressmen knew me in the course of that. As I sat trembling in a corner of Connaught Place, I began thinking of ways to raise money for my next fix.

In cold turkey, an addict needs to reach the source of money asap. At random I began to think of Congressmen I had known in the past, especially those who lived close to where I was. For some unfathomable reason, I thought of Arjun Singh.

There were evenings when I strolled down Canning Lane, just off Kasturba Gandhi Marg, in the heart of New Delhi. I used to be high and often I glanced at one of the houses, which said Arjun Singh on its nameplate. That evening I called and went in.

There were two aides and a general air of indifference. When a man is down in the dumps, even nature seems to know. There wasn’t much greenery in the lawn. I was shown in. Looking unwell, desperate for money, I walked in.

Anyone who has known Singh knows the way he sits. With a hunch, lips mostly stretched in a half-smile, a walking stick at hand. That was how I found him.

“Sir, my car has stalled because there’s no fuel. I’m some distance away from my office. I need to fill fuel. Can you lend me money? I’ll return it as soon as I leave office,” I said.

I’m not sure if he was expecting this. He had in the past done many favours to journalists in Madhya Pradesh. But this was different. He looked at me for a while. Then, he rang a buzzer. Younus, a trusted aide, entered. “Do you have any money,” Singh asked Younus. Younus was taken aback but he was trained enough not to show it.

“I’ve got Rs 500 with me,” he replied. “Give it to him,” Singh said, looking at me. Younus gave me the money. For an addict, this is the supreme moment. Everything changes in a flash. I smiled, thanked Singh, and got out the fastest I could.

I reached the peddler’s and blew the money up on smack.

The next time I met Singh was to interview him on a row kicked up by his remarks on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). It was September 2004 and I had begun to work for TEHELKA only some months earlier.

It was my first serious job after getting off drugs in a rehab. I still didn’t have money. What I earned went into expenses and clearing dues. Singh was there, this time with his tape recorder. His voice had gone even softer since I had last seen him.

You had to strain to catch what he was saying. It was a typical Arjun Singh interview. Dry, to the point, factual. After some effort, we reached a headline, “Let RSS register as a political party.”

I never met Singh again. Many times, I planned to but got swept in the day’s affairs. My mentor had told me to meet people in person while making amends. This meant I had to meet Singh, explain why I took Rs 500 from him, apologise for the lies, explain my addiction and recovery, and seek forgiveness.

It just didn’t happen.

For Singh too, many things just didn’t happen. He couldn’t adapt. He thought the old school style of politics—where you identified an enemy, generally told the world where you stood, kept the media on your side, and did nothing much—would deliver each time. It didn’t.

Loyalty wasn’t enough. Even the Nehru-Gandhis realised it when they virtually retired Singh from politics, attended the public function where this happened and sang praises of him.

Singh’s children are not the same. They haven’t made a mark yet, and probably won’t. His protégés are not the same either. Only Digvijaya Singh went on and still has a future.

In the end, loyalty killed Singh. He made one last bid to push for the President’s post. But times had changed. The Congress chose Pratibha Patil.

As for me, I’ll do what I was taught to. Pay it forward.

I’ll do that. I’ll donate in Singh’s name. He’ll approve, wherever he is. I’ll also catch up with Younus.

This piece first appeared on www.tehelka.com on 7 March 2011

A Manifesto for Dantewada

2010-04-13T17:34:00.000+05:30

As long as there is India, and as long as there is poverty in India, we must not forget how 300 Maoists massacred a sleepy lot of 76 Indian para-military who were not on a mission to kill the Maoists.

It ought to be the stuff of movies, books, songs, national memory. Far more than mere news. It ought also to make us act. It really should be the last massacre.

Here, then, is a manifesto for Dantewada that could help.

1) The Congress, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and the Left Front must form a joint peace corps.

2) The Congress must contribute 50,000 people, the BJP 30,000 and the Left 20,000.

3) The peace corps must have 35,000 women.

4) The peace corps must have at least 30,000 adivasis.

5) Members of the peace corps may be from anywhere in India. It may be better for them not to belong to Chhattisgarh.

6) Members of the peace corps must be between 25 and 50 years of age.

7) They must all be paid salaries into their bank accounts by the 4th of each month. The respective political parties they belong to must pay the salaries.

8) The salary will be uniform: Rs 30,000 tax-free a month.

9) The peace corps shall be paid expenses in the field: food, phone bills, housing rentals if applicable.

10) Each member of the peace corps will have a three-year contract.

11) The peace corps will wear white and green. They will live in the villages.

12) Their contracts should provide for insurance in case of death on duty. More compensation may also be paid in such an eventuality.

13) Their only job: to liaise between the government and the villagers.

14) The peace corps will monitor targets of building roads, schools, hospitals and homes.

15) In effect, the corps will monitor work of a nature that India is doing in Afghanistan: reconstructing the nation.

16) Money for this ought to come from a Dantewada Special Fund, to be maintained by a panel of officers from the central and Chhattisgarh finance ministries, and civil society members.

17) Such a panel will have five members: one each from the union and state finance ministries and three from the civil society.

18) They will put everything on a website: in Hindi, Chhattisgarhi, and English.

19) All work will have three-year targets with three-month audits.

20) If possible, there must be a three-year ceasefire between the Maoists and the state and union governments to allow full and unhindered progress by the peace corps.

21) In any case, both sides must give public undertakings, in the media, over YouTube, twitter, facebook, whatever, not to kill or otherwise target peace corps members. In the villages, this must be told clearly to each resident by drums, one-on-one meetings, whatever.

22) The only mandate for the peace corps is to speed up the mainstreaming of Dantewada. High quality roads, cell phone connectivity, high speed Internet, jobs with wages, doctors on call in hospitals and teachers in schools are mandatory.

23) No election of any kind shall be held in Dantewada for three years.

24) The Dantewada Special Fund will have Rs 5,000 crore to start with. It will have an additional Rs 5,000 crore every year. This figure may be amended according to need.

25) Other works in other parts of the country must not suffer because of this Dantewada plan. The manifesto for Dantewada is an immediate need, not the only one.

(A week after the worst attack on Indian security forces, on 6 April 2010, the Indian government and the Maoists appear to be readying for more killings. Neither side is willing to cede.)

Trouble for Nitish as JD(U) likely to split in Bihar

2010-01-29T22:13:00.004+05:30

Just when it seemed that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar had things under control, his party, the Janata Dal (United) is about to split. The news hurts Nitish Kumar because this is the first serious challenge to his leadership, and undermines his image as the reformer of Bihar.

The likely split is led by Bihar JD(U) president Rajiv Ranjan Singh, mostly known as Lalan Singh, who represents Munger in the Lok Sabha. Munger is also the hub of one of the world’s big tobacco firms, the Indian Tobacco Company (ITC). It is not known, however, what role big money might have played in the split.

Lalan Singh was a confidant of Nitish Kumar, but has apparently drifted from the chief minister some time ago. Indications are that Lalan Singh has 13 members of Parliament and 32 members of the Bihar legislative assembly with him in the split group.

It seems that the split is led by forward caste seniors of the JD(U), who have been upset with Nitish Kumar’s focus on the most backward castes, called the Maha Dalits in Bihar. However, the split JD(U) group could have a few Dalit MPs as well.

Indications also are that the Congress party is supporting the split group in the JD(U), and may have offered Lalan Singh a post in the union cabinet. The JD(U) has 20 members in the Lok Sabha and seven in the Rajya Sabha.

It is believed that Nitish Kumar has known of the problem for several weeks. Apparently, Lalan Singh had informed Nitish Kumar and JD(U) national president Sharad Yadav that he was quitting from the post. It was the equivalent of serving notice.

Nitish Kumar runs a coalition government in Bihar with the rightwing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It is one of the more stable and credible governments of the rightwing National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in India.

It appears that careful preparation has gone into the split with the numbers drawn in a manner to escape the provisions of the anti-defection law. If the early figures hold, of 13 MPs and 32 MLAs, then the split group would probably be recognised as a separate entity.

It is understood that the split faction would offer support to the Congress government at the Centre. This should help the Congress, which is preparing for a possible parting of ways with Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress in West Bengal.

A big player in the possible JD(U) split is Digvijay Singh, independent member of the Lok Sabha from Banka in Bihar. Singh has been minister of state in the Chandra Shekhar and Atal Bihari Vajpayee governments at the Centre. He was with the JD(U) in the past but has moved away from Nitish Kumar.

As of now, it would seem that a JD(U) split could help three people get ministerial berths at the Centre: Lalan Singh, Digvijay Singh, and Rajya Sabha member Shivanand Tiwari. Tiwari has gone cold towards Nitish Kumar for some months and has been looking to move out of the JD(U).

Bihar is slated to go to polls in October this year, though Nitish Kumar could advance them if he so feels. Until the JD(U) split, Nitish looked set for another term. Now, things may change in the normally complex Bihar.

Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi is slated to visit Bihar in the first week on February, though it is not clear if the JD(U) split has been timed for Rahul’s visit. Principal beneficiaries of a JD(U) split could be the Congress party and Lalu Prasad, whose Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) could look for a comeback.

IN A NUTSHELL

• JD(U) to split. Bihar JD(U) president Lalan Singh quits post
• 13 MPs and 32 MLAs apparently with Lalan Singh
• Split group likely to support the Congress-led union government
• Central ministries likely for Lalan Singh, Digvijay Singh and Shivanand Tiwari
• Congress looking for support elsewhere if Trinamool Congress parts ways
• Congress looking to make a dent in October Bihar polls with split JD(U) faction

NDT sex scandal becomes battle of liars

2009-12-29T02:05:00.003+05:30

The fallout of the Narayan Datt Tiwari sex scandal in Hyderabad is beginning to get more interesting. After being shunted out of Andhra Pradesh, without even the routine farewell due to an outgoing Governor, Tiwari reached Dehradun and began making claims contrary to what the Indian National Congress has been saying.

Tiwari reached New Delhi on 28 December 2009, stayed for six hours and took a flight to Dehradun, the capital of Uttarakhand. Remember, Radhika, the woman who says she filmed Tiwari in secret, is also believed to be from Uttarakhand.

In Dehradun, Tiwari shuffled inch by hesitant inch to a waiting car outside the airport. He was supported by an aide holding him by his left elbow. He was wearing a thick white shawl turned around his neck, and appeared to have changed from a black coat in New Delhi to a grey coat by the time he reached Dehradun. He had his favourite white Gandhi cap on his head and raised his right hand to shield his eyes from a weak sun.

As he was helped by three men into the car, Tiwari was surrounded by waiting reporters. “What do you have to say about the allegations against you,” was the first question.

Tiwari, sitting in the back left of the car, said: “Totally baseless . . . It is a fake allegation. Today, the situation is such that it has become difficult to talk to a woman anywhere. Anyone can make an allegation. So, this is 100 percent false.” He kept gesticulating with his right hand as he spoke.

“Will you issue a clarification, or ask for an inquiry,” came another question.

“I have already asked for an inquiry, right at the beginning. You know . . . some people . . . there is a fight going on there between the people of Telangana and the people of Andhra Pradesh coastal areas. The President was also slated to arrive at such a moment.

“Some people came (to see me) and they were all agitated. I thought discussions in Raj Bhavan would worsen things. I requested them with folded hands but people started to push their way in. They got upset that I was not meeting them inside. I keep meeting so many people from different places.

“So, amid all this, a couple of people thought that I don’t want to meet them . . . Like I am meeting all of you who have come in such numbers . . . There is nothing to misunderstand here. So, I am not disturbed by this. I have fought all my life. I have been fighting from the time of the freedom struggle until now. I will continue to do so.”

This was what Tiwari said. One news report said Tiwari had apologised to the nation, and added that he had nothing wrong. This was not supported by the footage aired on television of Tiwari’s interaction with the media.

This is interesting. When Tiwari resigned in disgrace, the Hyderabad Raj Bhavan said he had done so on health grounds. But, here was Tiwari threatening to keep going. Here was Tiwari insisting he was not disturbed by what happened.

Also, Congress party general secretary Janardan Dwivedi had said after Tiwari quit that he had done so keeping in view the high standards of public life. But, here was Tiwari claiming there was a Telangana angle to his being asked to resign. Here was Tiwari claiming he was framed.

Thus, we have a list of possible liars. The Congress party could be lying when it claimed Tiwari quit on moral grounds. Tiwari could be lying when he says there is a Telangana angle to the sex scandal. The press secretary in the Hyderabad Raj Bhavan could be lying when he says Tiwari quit on health grounds. Radhika, the woman who conducted the sting on Tiwari, could be lying when she says he promised her an iron ore mining licence.

And all this is around the highest constitutional office in a state, that of the Governor.

(ND Tiwari was sent off from Hyderabad on 28 December 2009 after a cursory meeting with Andhra Pradesh chief minister K. Rosaiah. He is the first Governor in India to have quit after a sex scandal. There are several unanswered questions from the scandal.)

The dark side of small states in India

2009-12-28T17:53:00.007+05:30

The fight over Telangana is forcing India and her people to once more confront the form of governance in the country, and consider if smaller states are the way forward. The Republic believes it won’t stop with Telangana. It is, therefore, a time to consider the pros and cons of smaller states in India. We begin with the cons.

The following are some of the disadvantages of having smaller states in India. Some or all of them may be present in larger states as well. But, their impact is severe on smaller states. Others have worked on problems that smaller states face, notably the World Bank, which has looked in detail at economic issues. The Republic is taking this debate forward.

Every issue here is crucial to the way we want to live and govern ourselves in India. We hope that reason and sense will lead us.

These then are principal problems with smaller states.

1. Vulnerable to external events like natural disasters, which cause extreme volatility in state income and affect the entire population. (For instance, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Jharkhand.)

2. Face an uncertain and difficult economic transition in trade in India and the world.

3. Have limited capacity in private and public spheres.

4. Smaller private sector could mean lesser competition and lesser development.

5. Lack major markets.

6. Have little influence on Indian and global markets because of their small footprint.

7. Smaller size of markets means lesser diversification in products and exports. One dominant activity tends to be replaced by another, which makes them vulnerable to changes in national and global trade environment.

8. Are located far from major markets. (For instance, Kerala, Chhattisgarh.)

9. High transport costs make it harder for them to make Indian markets compensate for the small size of their own state markets.

10. The openness of their small markets mean they are majorly exposed to developments in the Indian and global markets, over which they have little influence.

11. Private players may see smaller states as more risky than larger states.

12. Insufficient institutional capacity to participate fully in national trade and finance negotiations, the outcomes of which can profoundly affect their economies.

13. May start taxing imports from other states and countries as a means of revenue.

14. When tariffs are reduced nationally, it would seriously hurt revenue.

15. Such uncertainty creates a public sector that may be larger than necessary.

16. An increase in public sector size may not mean increase in capacity. For instance, the government may want to step in where the private sector doesn’t exist, but may not have the skills to deliver.

17. Highly vulnerable to climate change.

18. Poverty levels may be higher.

19. Income distribution may be more uneven. This income volatility could cause more hardships because the poor are less able to withstand negative shocks to income.

20. Range of per capita incomes and rates of growth may not be significantly different from larger states.

21. Seek more assistance from New Delhi, instead of lesser.

22. Susceptible to land injustice. Bigger land holdings create more negative shock in smaller states than in larger states.

23. Divide people on language, social, political, and economic grounds.

24. Diminish outlook. When India desperately needs her people to think globally, small states make them think regionally, even sub-regionally.

25. Weak education institutions, especially in higher education. Most students go to other states for higher education and do not return home for work because of weak career prospects.

26. Lack depth to produce own educational material and resources to keep them up-to-date. This takes a serious turn when textbooks start to be written.

27. Lack trained manpower to sustain an education system.
For perspective, creation of skilled manpower takes about 50 years or so. This creates a need to import talent from other states. This in turn raises expenses because professors from other states will need higher salaries. Also, what’s the point in having a professor from Bihar if you want to Jharkhand to prosper?

28. Insufficient intellectual capacity to participate fully in national debate, the outcome of which can crucially affect their existence.
For instance, forty years after the Telangana movement began, it is still difficult to gather a handful of recognised thinkers from the region. There are politicians. There is emotional logic. But, there are few sane thinkers whose credibility is respected. This is partly why the mainstream media in India has little or no writing that can help understanding and learning on Telangana, or on other smaller states.

29. Limited administrative capacity. This becomes acute as globalisation pushes smaller states into interacting with not only larger states in India, but with the world itself.

30. Poor political and bureaucratic models.
For governance to work well, it has to be impersonal and impartial. In smaller states, as administration goes local, proximity pushes politicians and bureaucrats into informal and flexible work ethics. They begin to bend rules to favour people they know and meet regularly in non-official circumstances. This makes everything illegitimate and irrelevant.

31. Avoid hard management decisions.
Once the rules are bent, monitoring and evaluating others, which is an essential requirement of governance, loses meaning. Politicians and bureaucrats begin to focus on avoiding conflict to survive in a smaller state. Corruption sets in.

32. Kill merit.
Merit loses relevance when avoidance of conflict, and the consequent making of deals, becomes the dominant theme. This affects morale negatively in a small state. People begin to leave for other states and countries.

33. Create motivation to replace the state.
When the moral, ethical, and professional fibre of a small state thus begins to go, strife appears. Organisations are formed, which may see violence as a reasonable means to undo a malignant state. From then on, the state spends time battling such organisations and justifying the war. There is no space for healing a sick state.

34. Become wastelands.
Once a small state becomes sick, it spreads the sickness. Vast tracts of such a state become wastelands. There is fighting, corruption, and sickness. (For instance, the Northeast.)

35. Strengthen the centre.
The last act in such a process is that a small state now makes the idea of bigger states, and a strong centre, look attractive. There is confusion. People wonder what happened to the idea that they could improve their life with smaller states. There is heartbreak. The younger generation has moved on, the older ones have no more illusions. New Delhi is, yet again, the only hope. This makes the centre bold and blind. Bold, because they gain control once more. Blind, because they think they are right. This puts people off and they want smaller states, again.

(On 28 December 2009, politicians in Andhra Pradesh discussed more plans to force New Delhi to create the state of Telangana. Members of the Telugu Desam Party and the Indian National Congress, otherwise rivals, started working together for Telangana. The same day, in Gujarat, former union textiles minister Shanker Sinh Vaghela said a second states reorganisation commission must be constituted to look at the issue.)

The real questions from the Tiwari tapes

2009-12-27T02:08:00.004+05:30

It would be a mistake to compound other mistakes if the ND Tiwari scandal is treated as a sexcapade.

There are other questions that need answers.

1. Who is Radhika?

It is not enough to say she is a woman from Uttarakhand. What does that mean? Is she a political worker? Is she a member of the Indian National Congress? Is she a businesswoman? How did she gain such proximity to Tiwari? If she is from Uttarakhand, how is she able to arrange for so many sex workers in Hyderabad? Did she get the women from Uttarakhand? If so, how do they travel? Where do they stay in Hyderabad? Who pays for their travel and services? If the sex workers are from Hyderabad, how does Radhika know them? Did she hire an escort service? Or a brothel? How much did she pay them? How could she do all this without leaving a trace?

2. What is Radhika’s interest in mining?

Mining is big business. It needs vast investment, experience, and markets. So, why was Radhika so interested in iron ore mining in Andhra Pradesh? Where did she intend to sell the ore? What does she know of mining? Did she have a specific iron ore mine in mind? How much was she willing to pay for the deal?

3. Who was Tiwari banking on to swing the mining deal?

It is extremely unlikely that a Governor, even one as resourceful as Tiwari, could have swung a deal for iron ore mining on his own. There are ministers and bureaucrats involved. Decisions have to be formally taken and put down on paper. Files with notings have to be maintained. So, who was Tiwari’s man in Hyderabad? Who was his man in the Andhra Pradesh government?

4. Why are the cops silent?

Sex trade, like everything else, flourishes when the state has a share in it. Illegal activity cannot go on unhindered without the police benefiting from it. For instance, it is astounding that the entire security network around Tiwari knew nothing. It stretches the imagination to think that the cops knew nothing as well. So, who’s on the take? Why are the police silent? Why is no one asking them questions?

5. Did the Congress party lose touch with Tiwari?

The office of the Governor is basically meant to keep an eye on state governments. It is routine practice for political parties to keep an eye on Governors as well. Parties plant men within a Governor’s staff for this. It is frightening to think that the Indian National Congress lost touch with Tiwari to an extent where they knew nothing. Tiwari was unhappy with Sonia Gandhi and had to virtually coerce her into making him a Governor. All the more reason, therefore, for the party to keep an eye.

6. What was K. Rosaiah {Andhra Pradesh chief minister} doing?

A chief minister is who a Governor primarily keeps an eye on. The favour is routinely returned, with a chief minister also keeping a close watch on a Governor. It is true that Rosaiah has had a rough beginning with the rebellion against him, the Telangana muddle, and so on. He still has no alibi for ignorance. A chief minister has the entire state apparatus to command. How can’t he know what’s happening in a Raj Bhavan?

7. What if Tiwari had kept his word?

The fall of ND Tiwari, and the host of questions it has raised, rests on one premise: that Tiwari didn’t deliver on his promise. Radhika’s revenge apparently came about after this. What if she had got the mining contract? The supply of sex workers would have continued, and we wouldn’t have known a thing. Remember, Radhika saw nothing wrong in offering sex for iron ore. She is no paragon. What if Tiwari had delivered? Good lord . . .

8. Were drugs involved?

It seems inconceivable that a man with failing health can sustain daily sexual activity with more than one partner. Tiwari’s memory is apparently fading, he needs two people to hold his arms from either side to help him walk without falling, and his knees can’t hold his weight when he rises after squatting. All this is in public. So, how does he mutate in private? Such a swift change is only possible with drugs. Was Tiwari on drugs? What was he taking? Who gave them to him?

9. Was this planned?

Could Tiwari be right after all? Is Tiwari innocent? What could it mean if the story was a lie? Why would anyone target Tiwari? Was this a dry run at a Raj Bhavan? Is Radhika part of a larger conspiracy? Who benefits with Tiwari out of the way?

(The Congress party sought to bury the Tiwari scandal by swiftly welcoming his resignation on 26 December 2009. The party showed no inclination to probe matters.)

Sex, a governor, and a political party

2009-12-26T21:41:00.003+05:30

A 64-year marriage may have ended today with the resignation of Andhra Pradesh Governor ND Tiwari. A one-sentence press communiqué from the Raj Bhavan in Hyderabad, where the Governor lives and works, announced the resignation, raising questions on the nature of the marriage and the character of the spouses involved.

The communiqué said: “Sri Narayan Datt Tiwari, H.E. the Governor of Andhra Pradesh submitted his resignation to the President of India on health grounds today i.e. 26th December, 2009.” There are six grammar mistakes in that sentence. There is also a huge political mistake.

Tiwari resigned when the Indian National Congress leadership did not buy his denial on the sex tapes report aired by a television channel in Andhra Pradesh on Christmas morning. ABN Andhra Jyothi, the channel, aired images of an old man, which it said was Tiwari, being kissed, stroked, and fondled by three women. The women are naked. The old man, mostly on his back, is naked from the waist below.

The channel said it had organised a sting operation on Tiwari. It said it had more footage.

This is how the news report seemed to be constructed. Apparently, Tiwari had promised a woman from Uttarakhand a mining contract in Andhra Pradesh. For this, the woman, called Radhika in the report, agreed to send sex workers to Tiwari. This arrangement continued without a problem.

Somewhere along the line, when Radhika asked about progress in the mining contract business, Tiwari said he would not, or could not, deliver. We don’t know what exactly Tiwari said. For instance, was he scornful? Did he think Radhika couldn’t hurt him? Did he enjoy snubbing Radhika? What was Radhika’s reaction?

The supply of sex workers ought to have ended here, logically. Except that Radhika plotted revenge. She continued to send the women to Tiwari. She also got in touch with the television channel for help with a sting operation.

Here, details are hazy. Conducting a sting operation is not easy. The women who slept with Tiwari would have been trained. Who trained them? The cameras need to be placed with precision (perhaps that is why Tiwari is mostly supine in the visuals). Footage has to be checked every day. Meetings have to be conducted. Audio has to be checked. Who paid for all this?

Finally, Radhika and the television channel thought they had enough. The report was broadcast 10am on Christmas 2009. The impact was huge. In an hour, Raj Bhavan got a court injunction prohibiting the channel from broadcasting the story further. But, the damage was done. The clips were uploaded on YouTube.

Thirty-six hours after the story was aired, Tiwari quit. The Indian National Congress, the party to which he belonged for 60 years or so, “welcomed” the resignation. It is a curious choice of words. What precisely is the Congress party welcoming?

Janardan Dwivedi, a general secretary of the Congress party, gave the official party stance. “I think he has taken an appropriate decision keeping in view the high standards of public life. We welcome it.” This is odd. Tiwari resigned on “health grounds”. How is that a reflection of the “high standards of public life”?

Let’s get this right.

The sex life of Narayan Datt Tiwari is of no concern to us. It has no bearing on matters of the state. It has nothing to do with improving or worsening the quality of public life. A Governor is entitled to sex. There are no laws saying a Governor must be celibate.

What should bother us is how Tiwari went about it. That a Governor can, apparently, talk of offering mining contracts to just about anyone is serious. That a Governor can ask for sex in return is reprehensible. That sex workers can mill around Raj Bhavans is grave. That anyone can carry cameras every day into Raj Bhavans is extraordinary.

Also, the health of Tiwari’s mind is surely in question. The health of his body too was in doubt. On many occasions, two aides had to hold his arms for support when he walked. He has stumbled in public view. He had difficulty rising from bent positions in public events. At inaugurations, the ritual breaking of coconuts for good luck became hazardous.

Yet, he was at it. Curious.

So, was Tiwari on drugs (even the pharma kind)? How could he sustain an active sexual life, as Radhika said he did, when he was otherwise frail? Who prescribed him his drugs? Who was the doctor supervising his intake of drugs? Where did he get them from? Where are the invoices?

That the Indian National Congress is oblivious to all this is an indictment. That we should be paying for all this, for the public office of the Governor, is appalling.

The Congress party chose Tiwari to be the Governor of Andhra Pradesh in August 2007, when he was 82 years old. Character is not formed, or lost, in a day. Tiwari’s morals, or whatever passed for them, would have been formed before he was sent to the Hyderabad Raj Bhavan.

There would have been patterns in the way he conducted his work. His apparent bargaining on mining contracts with Radhika would not have been the first. Tiwari may have done stuff like this in the past. A man’s mind recognises patterns and past instances of behaviour. In his mind, Tiwari may have felt safe.

The people who know him best are in the Congress party. Tiwari has been a member of the Congress party at least since 1945 when he was a secretary in the then All India Students Congress. Since then, he has been a Congressman in the undivided Uttar Pradesh assembly, the Lok Sabha , the Rajya Sabha, and the Uttarakhand assembly. He was a minister in the undivided Uttar Pradesh government several times. He was chief minister of Uttar Pradesh four times. He was a minister in the union cabinet several times. He was in charge of the core ministries of finance and external affairs as well. He was the first chief minister of Uttarakhand. He also headed a breakaway party from the Congress, called the All India Indira Congress (Tiwari), for a while.

That is enough cohabitation. On no grounds can the Congress party claim innocence in what has happened now.

Tiwari is gone. He possibly cannot return to public life. But, what of the Indian National Congress?

Punishment is due in the Congress party over the Tiwari scandal. There must be accountability. How does a party get away by choosing an 82-year-old as Governor? How does it get away by being blind to what happens in Raj Bhavans? How does it allow the decadents among its people to feel safe?

The conduct of the Congress party has been supremely unbecoming in the Tiwari affair. If 10 Janpath is truly as ignorant as is made out, heads must roll. If 10 Janpath is blasé, it’s worse.

(Andhra Pradesh Governor ND Tiwari resigned on 26 December 2009 after his denial over a sex scandal did not work. Apparently, President Pratibha Patil indicated that it would not be ‘tenable’ for her to come to Hyderabad on the President’s annual winter sojourn, with the allegations on the Governor doing the rounds. The Governor would have to receive the President at the airport, hence the discomfort. In November 2009, the Delhi High Court struck down a paternity suit against Tiwari because it was filed ‘too late’.)

Five years for violating nuke liability act, state gets immunity

2009-12-25T09:58:00.003+05:30

Chapter 6, the last chapter, of India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009, talks of various miscellaneous things – principally about penalty for violation of the Act (a Bill becomes an Act when passed).

The bill says whoever contravenes any rule, fails to comply with the provisions, or fails to deposit the compensation amount shall be punishable with a jail term of up to five years or a fine, or both.

Whoever fails to comply with directions issued under the Act by the central government, or obstructs any authority or person in the exercise of powers under the Act, shall be punishable with a jail term of up to a year or a fine, or both.

Likewise, companies and government departments will also be punishable for offences committed under the Act.

However, a court can recognise an offence under this Act only when a complaint is filed by the central government.

Also, the state gets immunity under section 42 of the Act, which says: “No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the government, or the person, officer or authority in respect of anything done by it or him in good faith in pursuance of this Act or of any role or order made, or direction issued, thereunder.”

Every order shall be laid before each house of parliament after it is made.

Lastly, every rule made under this Act by the central government shall be laid after it is made before each house of parliament, while it is in session, for 30 days which may be in one session or in two or more successive sessions.

“If, before the expiry of the session immediately following the session or successive sessions, both houses agree in making any modification in the rule, or both houses agree that the rule should not be made, the rule shall thereafter have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect as the case may be.”

(The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, cleared by the cabinet of India, is to be placed in parliament in the Budget session, March-April 2010. It is a controversial legislation, which will operationalise the 123 agreement on nuclear energy between India and the US. A section of lawyers, political parties, and civil society groups have opposed the bill.)

Manmohan Singh's remarks at the Copenhagen climate conference Informal Plenary

2009-12-25T02:07:00.002+05:30

I would like to thank Prime Minister Rasmussen for his efforts in trying to build a global consensus on highly complex issues, involved in climate change, attempting to balance divergent and varied interests.

We have all worked hard to reconcile our different points of view. The outcome may well fall short of expectations. Nevertheless, it can become a significant milestone. I therefore support calls for subsequent negotiations towards building a truly global and genuinely collaborative response to climate change being concluded during 2010.

As we embark on future negotiations, we would do well to take stock of what we have learnt from our efforts over the past two years. I draw three lessons, which should guide us in the task ahead.

Firstly, the vast majority of countries do not support any renegotiation or dilution of the principles and provisions of the UNFCCC, in particular the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities.

Further, the need for action on our part is more and not less than what was envisaged at the time of the Rio Convention or the Kyoto Protocol. That is why the Bali Action Plan commits us to enhancing the implementation of the UNFCCC.

To settle for something that would be seen as diminished expectations and diminished implementation would be the wrong message to emerge from this conference. We should therefore reaffirm categorically that our negotiations will continue on the basis of the Bali mandate.

Secondly, the Kyoto Protocol should continue to stand as a valid legal instrument. Parties to the Protocol should deliver on their solemn commitments under the Protocol. It would go against international public opinion if we acquiesce in its replacement by a new and weaker set of commitments.

Finally, it is clear that any agreement on climate change should respect the need for development and growth in developing countries. Equitable burden sharing should underlie any effective global climate change regime. Any new regime will have moral authority and credibility only if it acknowledges that every citizen of the globe has an equal entitlement to the global atmospheric space.

India has a vital stake in the success of the negotiations as we are among the countries most likely to be severely impacted by climate change.

We have therefore adopted and started to implement a major National Action Plan on Climate Change, relying upon our own resources. Our targets include installation of 20,000MW of solar energy capacity by 2022, improving energy efficiency by 20% by 2020 and adding an additional six million hectares of forests over the next several years.

Excellencies, each one of us gathered here today acknowledges that those worst affected by climate change are the least responsible for it. Whatever emerges from our negotiations must address this glaring injustice, injustice to countries of Africa, injustice to the Least Developed Countries, and injustice to the Small Developing States whose very survival as viable nation states is in jeopardy.

We in India, too, are vulnerable, but, nevertheless as responsible citizens of the globe, we have agreed to take on a voluntary target of reducing the emission intensity of our GDP growth by around 20% by 2020 in comparison to 2005. We will deliver on this goal regardless of the outcome of this conference. We can do even more if a supportive global climate change regime is put in place.

Excellencies, we have a difficult task ahead of us. I hope we will all play a positive and constructive role so that we can bridge differences and come up with a balanced and also an equitable outcome during the coming year. India will not be found wanting in this regard.

Thank you.

(Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh addressed the Copenhagen climate conference on 18 December 2009.)

Jairam Ramesh statement on Copenhagen Accord in the Rajya Sabha

2009-12-25T01:48:00.004+05:30

1. I rise to make a suo motu statement on the 15th Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Climate Change that was held in Copenhagen, Denmark, between December 7 and 18, 2009.

2. Before I get into the statement, sir, let me say that this is the fourth time that I am speaking in some detail on the issue of climate change in recent weeks reflecting our government’s transparency and keenness to keep the parliament fully informed at every step. It also reflects, of course, the great interest honourable MPs themselves have in this important subject. There was a Calling Attention Motion in the Rajya Sabha on November 24 and a Zero hour discussion on December 7. The Lok Sabha had a five-hour debate on December 3. Let me reiterate that I am more than prepared to discuss this issue in parliament at any time, in any form that the house desires and the chairman directs.

3. To return to the Copenhagen conference, there were two segments to it. The first was between December 7 and 15 that involved negotiations at the official level. The second was between December 16 and 18 that involved a high-level segment at the ministerial level. In addition, the Danish presidency of the Conference of Parties had invited ministers from all countries for informal consultations from December 12 to 17, 2009. Heads of states/governments had also been invited to the high-level segment of the conference during December 17-18, 2009. Over a hundred heads of states/governments attended. Our prime minister addressed the Conference on December 18 and I had the privilege of speaking on behalf of the Government of India on December 16. Copies of these two speeches are attached to this statement.

4. There were two specific outcomes of the Copenhagen conference. In Bali, in December 2007, the Conference of Parties had decided to have negotiations on two parallel tracks, both of which were expected to be concluded at Copenhagen. The first track relates to the outcome of the Bali Action Plan and the other track pertains to the commitment of the Annex I Parties for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol in the period extending beyond 2012. These negotiations could not be concluded and the Copenhagen conference decided to continue these negotiations to be completed at the end of 2010 at the 16th Conference of Parties to be held in Mexico City in December 2010. In this respect, India, South Africa, Brazil, China and other developing countries were entirely successful in ensuring that there was no violation of the mandate for the Bali Action Plan negotiations on the enhanced implementation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Despite relentless attempts made by the Annex I Parties, the conference succeeded in continuing the negotiations under the Kyoto Protocol to establish the commitments of the Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol for the post-2012 period. Undoubtedly, many developed countries want to see an end to the Kyoto Protocol but we have been able to thwart these attempts for the time being. The major outcome of the conference is, therefore, the fact that the negotiations under the UNFCCC will continue to proceed in two tracks as set out in the Bali Road Map – one relating to the long-term cooperative action for enhancing the implementation of the convention and the second relating to the second commitment period of Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol.

5. Another decision taken by the conference relates to the Copenhagen Accord. India, along with over twenty-five other countries that included Bangladesh, Maldives, Indonesia, China, Japan, South Korea, Papua New Guinea, Australia, Russia, Mexico, USA, Brazil, Colombia, Granada, South Africa, Algeria, Sudan, Gabon, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, and the European Union, was invited by the host country to assist the President of the conference in forging a consensus on several outstanding issues. The results of such informal consultations held on December 17 and 18, 2009, were brought by the COP President, on his own responsibility, to the Plenary of the Conference for consideration on December 18, 2009. Some countries that included Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Bolivia did not join the consensus on the draft Copenhagen Accord presented by the COP President. Since the conference works on the principle of consensus, the Copenhagen Accord was not adopted as an outcome of the conference. It was, however, taken note of. The contents of the accord are not legally binding nor do they constitute a mandate for a new negotiating process under the UNFCCC.

6. The Copenhagen Accord deals with the various elements of the Bali Action Plan relating to the issues of mitigation, adaptation, financing and technology in the context of climate change. Let me present to you the highlights of the accord.

7. The accord recognises the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities of the Parties in combating climate change. The accord recognises the need to limit the global temperature rise by 2050 to below 2 degree Celsius above pre-industrial levels. While doing so, the accord clearly sets out the goal in the context of equity and sustainable development. This ensures that in achieving this goal, the right of the developing countries to have an equitable share in access to global atmospheric resources cannot be ignored and is ensured. I might add here that this was a point repeatedly made by the prime minister in all his interactions.

8. The Copenhagen Accord does speak of “cooperation in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible”. However, the accord explicitly recognises that the timeframe for peaking will be longer in developing countries. It also bears in mind that “social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries”. The accord therefore, does not speak of a specific year for peaking for developing countries which has always been on the agenda of the developed countries. This is another area of success for us at Copenhagen. This is also consistent with the position of India was outlined by our prime minister over two years ago that our per capita emissions will never exceed the average per capita emissions of the developed countries.

9. There has been insistence from the developed countries to adopt quantified emission reduction targets in the long-term by the global community. A global goal of 50% emissions reduction by 2050 with reference to current levels of emissions has been generally emphasised by the Annex I countries. Reference to such a specific numerical target in terms of emission reduction has been avoided in the accord because of the insistence of the developing countries, particularly India, that a global goal should be expressed only in terms of limit in increase of temperature and not in terms of a quantified emission reduction target. This is because such a target would result in a binding commitment for the developing countries who do not have such obligations under the UNFCCC. We can be satisfied that we were able to get our way on this issue as well.

10. The accord obliges the Annex I countries to indicate their mid-term emissions reduction target for 2020 by January 31, 2010, to the secretariat. Their actions in respect of emission reduction and financing support given to developing countries for mitigation actions in developing countries will be subject to measurement, reporting and verification as per the guidelines adopted by the Conference of Parties.

11. The mitigation actions of the developing countries are to be supported by the developed countries in accordance with Article 4.7 of the UNFCCC. Mitigation actions of developing countries will be subject to domestic measurement, reporting and verification as per its internal procedures. Report of such mitigation actions, supported or unsupported will be made to the secretariat through the National Communications which will be made every two years. There is a provision for international consultations and analysis for implementation of the actions reported through National Communications. The guidelines for such consultation and analysis will be devised and defined in due course. We have been able to incorporate a specific provision that these “clearly defined guidelines will ensure that the national sovereignty is respected”. This is another accomplishment for us at Copenhagen. Of course, as I have stated on earlier occasions, the supported mitigation actions will be open to international measurement, report and verification as per guidelines adopted by the Conference of Parties.

12. Under the accord, the developed country parties have agreed to set up a Climate Fund named “Copenhagen Green Climate Fund” to provide resources approaching $30billon during the period 2010-2012 to support the adaptation and mitigation actions of the developing country parties. The funding for adaptation will be focused on the least developed countries, small island developing states and Africa. They have also undertaken a commitment to mobilise $100billion a year by 2020 for such purposes and a high level panel will be set up under the guidance of Conference of Parties to review the progress of these commitments.

13. A Technology Mechanism is also proposed to be established to accelerate technology development and transfer in support of adaptation and mitigation actions in the developing countries. Negotiations on the precise architecture of this mechanism are underway in the UNFCCC and I am pleased to mention that many of the proposals made by India in this regard have found acceptance. A network of technology innovation centres has been proposed by India as a part of this mechanism.

14. The objectives and the implementation of the accord will be assessed and the process of assessment will be completed by 2015 in order to consider the possibility of further strengthening the long term goal of limiting the temperature rise to below 1.5 degree Celsius. This was in response to a demand made by 43 small island developing states that includes Maldives. Bangladesh and Nepal have also supported this idea.

15. Sir, a notable feature of this conference that has been widely commented on is the manner in which the BASIC group of countries coordinated their positions. Ministers of the BASIC group comprising Brazil, South Africa, India, and China has met in Beijing on November 27 and 28, 2009 to prepare for Copenhagen in a joint manner. Honourable members may recall that I had briefed them in my earlier interventions on the results of that meeting. The BASIC Group Ministers met virtually on an hourly basis right through the Copenhagen Conference. Within BASIC, India and China worked very, very closely together. I believe that the BASIC group has emerged as a powerful force in climate change negotiations and India should have every reason to be satisfied it has played in catalysing the emergence of this new quartet. Their unity was instrumental in ensuring that the accord was finalised in accordance with the negotiating framework as laid out in the UNFCCC, Bali Action Plan and the Kyoto Protocol. We will continue to work together with these countries as well as other countries of the G-77 to ensure that the interests of the developing countries and India in particular are protected in course of negotiations in 2010 and beyond. I should also mention here that President Obama interacted with the two prime ministers and two presidents of the BASIC Group and it was at this meeting that the Copenhagen Accord was clinched to the satisfaction of all present. It was at this crucial meeting that the BASIC group was able to get agreement on its proposals on global goals and on monitoring and verification. It was also able to ensure that the Copenhagen Accord was not legally binding and that there was no mention of a new legally binding instrument in the accord.

16. Sir, I have been somewhat detailed in this suo motu statement. I have never hidden anything from this parliament and have been very upfront about how our thinking on climate change has to evolve and not remain frozen in time. I have repeatedly sought flexibility within a framework of certain non-negotiables. Earlier, I spoke to both houses on the basis of my intentions and had said that ultimately actions will speak louder than words. I had assured both houses that we will negotiate in a manner that the national interest is not only protected but also enhanced. Copenhagen is not a destination but the beginning of a long process. There are indeed many risks, many hazards, many threats. We have to be extraordinarily vigilant and watchful, negotiating tough but always from a position of strength. For the moment I believe that India has come out quite well at Copenhagen and we have been recognised for our constructive approach. We will continue to play such a role. We have to deepen our capacity to pursue proactive climate diplomacy internationally. We have to get down to implementing a comprehensive domestic agenda of both adaptation and mitigation and of moving on the road to cutting our emissions intensity of GDP by 20-25% by 2020 on 2005 levels which is not only eminently feasible but which can also be improved upon to the benefit of our own people. We must soon unveil a detailed roadmap for a low-carbon growth strategy. We must also strengthen our own scientific capacity to measure, monitor and model the impacts of climate change on different sectors of our economy and in different regions of our country.

17. Mr. Chairman sir, I will now be more than glad and willing to clarify any doubts and answer any questions that honourable members may wish to raise. I see this statement as part of a continuing dialogue between our government and honourable MPs, as a reflection of our determination to ensure accountability to Parliament.

(Indian Minister for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh reported to the upper house of the Indian parliament on 22 December 2009, on his understanding of what the Copenhagen Accord meant for India. Opposition parties criticised his statement severely.)

The Copenhagen Accord – the text

2009-12-24T20:21:00.004+05:30

This is the text of the now famous, and hugely fought over, declaration from the climate conference at Copenhagen.

The Conference of the Parties,

Takes note of the Copenhagen Accord of 18 December 2009.

Copenhagen Accord

The Heads of State, Heads of Government, Ministers, and other heads of the following delegations present at the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 in Copenhagen: [Here the List of Parties comes]

In pursuit of the ultimate objective of the Convention as stated in its Article 2,

Being guided by the principles and provisions of the Convention,

Noting the results of work done by the two Ad hoc Working Groups,

Endorsing the decision on the Ad hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action and the decision that requests the Ad hoc Working Group on Further Commitments of Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol to continue its work,

Have agreed on this Copenhagen Accord which is operational immediately.

1. We underline that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time. We emphasise our strong political will to urgently combat climate change in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. To achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention to stabilise greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, we shall, recognising the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius, on the basis of equity and in the context of sustainable development, enhance our long-term cooperative action to combat climate change. We recognise the critical impacts of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures on countries particularly vulnerable to its adverse effects and stress the need to establish a comprehensive adaptation programme including international support.

2. We agree that deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science, and as documented by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report with a view to reduce global emissions so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity. We should cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible, recognising that the timeframe for peaking will be longer in developing countries and bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries and that a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development.

3. Adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures is a challenge faced by all countries. Enhanced action and international cooperation on adaptation is urgently required to ensure the implementation of the Convention by enabling and supporting the implementation of adaptation actions aimed at reducing vulnerability and building resilience in developing countries, especially in those that are particularly vulnerable, especially least developed countries, small island developing states and Africa. We agree that developed countries shall provide adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries.

4. Annex I Parties commit to implement individually or jointly the quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020, to be submitted in the format given in Appendix I by Annex I Parties to the secretariat by 31 January 2010 for compilation in an INF document. Annex I Parties that are Party to the Kyoto Protocol will thereby further strengthen the emissions reductions initiated by the Kyoto Protocol. Delivery of reductions and financing by developed countries will be measured, reported and verified in accordance with existing and any further guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties, and will ensure that accounting of such targets and finance is rigorous, robust and transparent.

5. Non-Annex I Parties to the Convention will implement mitigation actions, including those to be submitted to the secretariat by non-Annex I Parties in the format given in Appendix II by 31 January 2010, for compilation in an INF document, consistent with Article 4.1 and Article 4.7 and in the context of sustainable development. Least developed countries and small island developing states may undertake actions voluntarily and on the basis of support. Mitigation actions subsequently taken and envisaged by Non-Annex I Parties, including national inventory reports, shall be communicated through national communications consistent with Article 12.1(b) every two years on the basis of guidelines to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties. Those mitigation actions in national communications or otherwise communicated to the Secretariat will be added to the list in appendix II. Mitigation actions taken by Non-Annex I Parties will be subject to their domestic measurement, reporting and verification the result of which will be reported through their national communications every two years. Non-Annex I Parties will communicate information on the implementation of their actions through National Communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines that will ensure that national sovereignty is respected. Nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support will be recorded in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building support. Those actions supported will be added to the list in appendix II. These supported nationally appropriate mitigation actions will be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties.

6. We recognise the crucial role of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emission by forests and agree on the need to provide positive incentives to such actions through the immediate establishment of a mechanism including REDD-plus, to enable the mobilisation of financial resources from developed countries.

7. We decide to pursue various approaches, including opportunities to use markets, to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote mitigation actions. Developing countries, especially those with low emitting economies should be provided incentives to continue to develop on a low emission pathway.

8. Scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, to enable and support enhanced action on mitigation, including substantial finance to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD-plus), adaptation, technology development and transfer and capacity-building, for enhanced implementation of the Convention. The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching $30 billion for the period 2010-2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation. Funding for adaptation will be prioritised for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing states and Africa. In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilising jointly $100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries. This funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. New multilateral funding for adaptation will be delivered through effective and efficient fund arrangements, with a governance structure providing for equal representation of developed and developing countries. A significant portion of such funding should flow through the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.

9. To this end, a High Level Panel will be established under the guidance of and accountable to the Conference of the Parties to study the contribution of the potential sources of revenue, including alternative sources of finance, towards meeting this goal.

10. We decide that the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund shall be established as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention to support projects, programme, policies and other activities in developing countries related to mitigation including REDD-plus, adaptation, capacity-building, technology development and transfer.

11. In order to enhance action on development and transfer of technology we decide to establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation that will be guided by a country-driven approach and be based on national circumstances and priorities.

12. We call for an assessment of the implementation of this Accord to be completed by 2015, including in light of the Convention’s ultimate objective. This would include consideration of strengthening the long-term goal referencing various matters presented by the science, including in relation to temperature rises of 1.5 degrees Celsius.

(The Copenhagen meet, between 7 and 18 December 2009, drew the biggest political response in recent times to a formal world event. The accord agreed there is the first step of a long process of climate sense.)

The good and bad of Nitin Gadkari, new BJP president

2009-12-20T16:33:00.004+05:30

Nitin Gadkari, the Maharashtra president of the Bharatiya Janata Party, was elevated as the all-India president of the party on 18 December 2009. He is the ninth man to hold the post. So, what’s good and what’s bad about his elevation?

The good

1. It shows the BJP’s democratic side. Anyone can head the party.

Since inception, this is a trait the BJP cherishes – they keep the top job open, like the Left or the Janata Dal (United) do. Which other party would have picked Kushabhau Thakre, Bangaru Laxman, K. Jana Krishnamurthy, M. Venkaiah Naidu, and Rajnath Singh? Gadkari joins the list as a man least likely to head the BJP but who made it.

2. It showcases the ability to take a risk in the BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

The BJP didn’t do well under Gadkari in Maharashtra, but that has not stopped the RSS or the BJP from sending him to Ashoka Road (in New Delhi where the BJP headquarters is). There is no reason why anyone in Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, Orissa, Karnataka, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh should bother with Gadkari. He’s a risk, and they’ve taken it.

3. It shows the BJP has no fear of the unknown.

No one knows how Gadkari will shape up. There simply isn’t enough evidence even to guess. He kept quiet during his tenure in the Maharashtra assembly because the Congress and other smaller parties helped him get there. He barely made a political statement even during the elections to the Lok Sabha and the Maharashtra assembly in 2009. Hell, he was nowhere even in the aftermath of Mumbai 26/11.

4. It shows the BJP’s ability to look beyond the dark side of a human being.

On 19 May 2009, about 7.30pm, the body of seven-year-old Yogita Thakre was discovered inside a Fiat Linea parked in Gadkari’s Nagpur house. Gadkari’s driver Manohar Panse said he found the body when he was about to leave for the Nagpur airport to pick up Gadkari. Gadkari said: ‘‘I reached Nagpur by the 8pm flight from Mumbai. The girl’s body was found before the car came to pick me up. The girl’s heart valves were damaged and she was admitted to the super-speciality hospital two months ago.’’ How did he know? Maybe he asked.

5. It shows that there is an India beyond New Delhi for the BJP.

By strictly overlooking Delhi bigwigs like Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj, the BJP showed it has a pan-Indian perspective. Geographically, Gadkari can be traced to Vidarbha, which is not a politically important part of India. Also, Gadkari says he has spent only hours in New Delhi each time he was there in the past, never staying the night. That will change, of course, but he came in from nowhere. Until his name started to do the rounds in Delhi, in off-the-record conversations with journalists, he didn’t stand a chance. Yet, the BJP adapted.

6. It shows the RSS-BJP can ignore marketing hype.

Going by the goodwill in the media, and support among the business circles, Arun Jaitley should have been BJP president. Even Sushma Swaraj had a good chance. Both were marketing marvels, with the mainstream media overlooking every foible and every poor decision they took. The RSS didn’t fall for it, and picked Gadkari. Jaitley and Swaraj took it on the chin, at least in public. It indicated that even for a hype-driven party like the BJP, there are moments of reality.

7. It shows that the BJP can shed ageism.

Top positions in political parties in India tend to go to people who have attained the age of 55 and above. This is associated with the long years needed to learn the skills, and the time taken in responsible positions in public life. Unless one is born into a family like the Nehru-Gandhis where this aspect may be overlooked. With Gadkari, the BJP has gone below 55. Until Gadkari blows it, they shouldn’t fear younger people anymore.

The bad

1. It displays the BJP slavery to the RSS.

Within the BJP, the mood was in favour of Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi. Others with support were Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Jaitley, Swaraj, Venkaiah Naidu, and Ananth Kumar. Even Manohar Parikkar (the first IIT graduate in India to become chief minister, of Goa) had support. But the RSS picked Gadkari. The principal argument in favour of Gadkari appeared to be that he is from Nagpur, where the RSS has its headquarters. That should have been the least of the qualifications.

2. It showcases the desperation in the RSS-BJP.

For a while, the BJP has been showing signs of going the way of the Communist Party of India – into a coma. Under Rajnath Singh, the doctor was away. If Gadkari is not careful, he could be the last of the BJP presidents. There may not be a BJP the way we know it. The RSS had developed loathing for the work styles of Jaitley and Swaraj. They didn’t appear single-minded. They didn’t like each other. Finally, the RSS chose a man they knew. They now hope he will learn on the job.

3. The BJP has a president with no spine.

The thing most likely to be said about Gadkari is that he has no enemies. Why would he, when he doesn’t take anyone on? He can’t even stand up to Raj Thackeray because he may have cut deals with him. For instance, Gadkari has stayed quiet on Raj Thackeray and, in turn, Raj Thackeray has suggested that Gadkari may be the best man as Maharashtra chief minister. As head of India’s principal rightwing party, you need to show guts. Gadkari hasn’t, so far.

4. The BJP has a president with no global vision.

The BJP suffered under Rajnath Singh whose vision said the world was a district in Uttar Pradesh. If anything, the BJP needed a man with a global outlook to undo the destruction of the Rajnath Singh presidency. Most of India doesn’t know Gadkari. It’s a fair bet that the rest of the world is as clueless. The only thing global in Gadkari is his business interest in new and renewable energy, which is where plenty of money will be in the years ahead. That may not be enough to count as a global politician.

5. The BJP has a president in whose car a schoolgirl was found dead. It’s bizarre.

A Mumbai high court bench looking into the case was least impressed with the investigation. In June, the bench ticked off the police saying: “Why did the investigators not record statement of the owner of the car on his first availability in the city? How the girl land in the car when you say the driver of the car locked the vehicle and kept the keys at the police guard room? If the doors are locked and the keys are kept in the guard room, is someone using the second keys?" Can Gadkari help?

6. The BJP has a president with no respect for fitness.

The Republic assumes that Gadkari has no medical issues that make him physically challenged. That being so, he looks terrible. He’s got layers of fat all over and is a walking advertisement for sloth. Gadkari’s looks do not generate respect. While politics is not about looks alone, Gadkari desperately needs to spend hours in the gym. Assuming, of course, that he has no medical condition that makes him the way he is. Only a fit politician can speak of fitness to fellow Indians. Gadkari can’t.

7. The BJP has a president who doesn’t contest elections. Nor does he win elections.

Gadkari’s only political stints have been in the Maharashtra Legislative Council, a Rajya Sabha-like body in the state assembly. You don’t need to face people there. Consequently, Gadkari has not contested elections. During his presidency of the Maharashtra BJP, the party didn’t win either. At least one news report after Gadkari became BJP president suggested he was interested in a Rajya Sabha ticket. Hmmm.

(Gadkari has business stakes in a bio-diesel pump, a sugar factory, an ethanol blending plant, a power generation unit, and a soybean plant. The Republic had one meeting with Gadkari, in Nagpur during an election tour. The meeting was too brief to matter. We expect there will be more now that he is New Delhi, where The Republic is headquartered.)

The cowards of Maharashtra

2009-12-20T10:45:00.002+05:30

Listing the worthies of Maharashtra is not exactly a test for the mind. The state prides itself on a long history of luminaries in addition to the numerous existing ones.

For instance, there's Sachin Tendulkar, Nana Patekar, Raj Thackeray, Bal Thackeray, Uddhav Thackeray, Amol Palekar, Anil Kakodkar, Jayant Narlikar, Ajit Wadekar, Dilip Vengsarkar, Sunil Gavaskar, Ravi Shastri, Pravin Thipsay, Mohan Bhagwat, Medha Patkar, Anna Hazare, Shivraj Patil, Sharad Pawar, Prithviraj Chavan, Ashok Chavan, Suresh Kalmadi, Vilasrao Deshmukh, Lata Mangeshkar, Sonali Kulkarni, Sonali Bendre, Padmini Kolhapure, Rohini Hattangadi, Dileep Padgaonkar, KV Pendharkar (Vicco Laboratories), Rajendra Pawar (NIIT), Kiran Karnik, and now Nitin Gadkari.

Each of them is capable of more than what they have done. Some of these big names have spent their lives in a manner that baffled the rest (like Bal Thackeray). But, impact they have.

About a week ago, news reports said the Maharashtra Raj Bhavan had sent a 'wishlist' to the Maharashtra government. In the list was a demand for a luxury sedan worth Rs32 lakh.

The sedan, described as a Honda Accord 3.5 V6, is for 'the service of' Alemla Jamir, wife of Maharashtra Governor SC Jamir. The proposal has been sent to the general administration department of the Maharashtra government along with 'other requests'.

The reports added that Maharashtra Chief Secretary JP Dange confirmed the list of demands from the Governor’s office. Dange helpfully added: ‘‘The departments concerned will expedite their requests.’’ Why?

Why does Alemla Jamir need a Honda Accord 3.5 V6 from the tax payers' money? What does she intend to do with it in Mumbai? Buy vegetables? Shop at malls? Go to the cinema?

Anyone who has been to Mumbai knows there's no point in owning a sedan there. It takes ages to reach anywhere on the roads of Mumbai. That's the first oddity about Alemla's 'request'.

Second, why on earth should people's money buy a sedan for a Governor's wife? What role does she have? Why should a Governor's wife be a state burden?

If Jamir wants a sedan for his wife, he is free to buy her one. Jamir is from Nagaland. He has been chief minister of Nagaland four times. Jamir was one of the well-fed politicians in the northeast of India. There's no record of him being short on money.

His tenure triggered such ill will against the Congress that in the end he had to be pulled out of Nagaland. He once escaped a massive attack on his convoy by sliding out his car and crawling in a roadside ditch. You won't hear many respectful words about him in Nagaland.

Point is, Jamir or his wife Alemla needs no dole.

That real shocker is that no one from Maharashtra's public figures has raised this issue. The moral bankruptcy of the Maharashtra Governor's wife seeking state funds for a car has apparently not upset Maharashtra's opinion makers.

The epidemic of silence suggests that cowardice is sweeping Maharashtra. Maharashtra's titans appear to have put their conscience to sleep.

Cowards do that.

The Bharatiya Janata Party has a new president, Nitin Gadkari, who is from Maharashtra.

He can begin by asking Jamir's wife to use her credit card.

(On 19 December 2009, Nitin Gadkari became the ninth person to serve as BJP president. Gadkari is an ultra-rich businessman. In May 2009, the body of a young schoolgirl was found in one of the cars parked in Gadkari's house. The case has not been solved yet.)

Should it get really really bad, a Nuclear Damage Claims Commission

2009-12-19T19:51:00.004+05:30

Chapter 5 of the Indian government’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009, lays down the concept and composition of a Nuclear Damage Claims Commission, to deal with nuclear incidents where the size and scale of the injury or damage may mean the operator has to pay more than the Rs 300 crore that the bill proposes as liability cap.

In such a situation, or where it is in public interest to provide for special measures for speedy adjudication of claims for compensation, the bill says a Nuclear Damage Claims Commission may be formed by notification.

The commission will have a chairperson and six members. The union government will appoint the chairperson and members on the recommendation of a three-member committee. This committee will have the cabinet secretary, as chairman of the committee, and the secretaries of the Department of Atomic Energy and the Ministry of Law and Justice as members.

The chairperson will be a person who has completed 55 years of age and is or has been, or is qualified to be, a high court judge.

Members have to attain the age of 55, have been a Claims Commissioner for five years, possess special knowledge in nuclear liability law, and have held or are holding, or are qualified to hold, the post of additional secretary to the government of India or an equivalent post in the union government.

The chairperson can hold office for a term of five years, and will be eligible for another five-year term. No chairperson can continue after attaining the age of 67.

Should a vacancy arise in the office of the chairperson or a member, when the vacancy is filled, work will resume from the point when the vacancy arose.

The union government shall sack a chairperson or member who:
a) Has been adjudged insolvent
b) Has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the union government, involves moral turpitude
c) Has become physically or mentally incapable of acting as member
d) Has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as a member
e) Has so abused his position as to render his continuance in office detrimental to public interest

The commission will have original jurisdiction to adjudicate every application for compensation filed before it. In case of transfer of cases, such applications will be dealt with afresh.

The chairperson may constitute benches of not more than three members of the commission to hear claims. Bench decisions will be by a majority.

The commission shall not be bound by the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by principles of natural justice and the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act. The commission shall have the power to regulate its own procedure including the places and the times at which it shall have its sittings.

The commission will have the powers of a civil court. The commission will dispose all applications within three months after receiving them, and make the awards. The commission can grant a temporary injunction to stop an operator from removing or disposing off his property to evade compensation payment.

The commission shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties within 15 days of making the award. Every award is final.

All applications for compensation pending before the Claims Commissioner before the commission is established will be transferred to the commission. Proceedings before a Claims Commissioner or the commission will be deemed judicial proceedings.

No civil court will have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings on any matter which the Claims Commissioner or the commission is empowered to adjudicate.

When an award is made, the insurer of the operator, who is required to pay an amount in the terms of his contract of insurance, shall deposit the amount in a time and manner stipulated by the Claims Commissioner or the commission.

The operator shall deposit the remaining amount (subject to a limit of Rs 300 crore) by which an award exceeds the amount deposited by the insurer.

When a person fails to deposit the award amount within the time specified, the amount will be recovered as arrears of land revenue.

The amount deposited will be disbursed to the person/s specified in the award within 15 days of the deposit being made.

Annual reports of the commission will be placed in parliament.

(Chapter 6 of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009, talks of miscellaneous issues including penalties. The Republic will report them as the concluding part of the series on the bill.)

The nuclear adjudicators

2009-12-19T17:57:00.002+05:30

Continuing with The Republic’s reporting on India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009, this is the third part, which deals with how and when to seek a claim and who will be the Claims Commissioner/s.

Chapters 3 and 4 of the bill deal with the Claims Commissioner/s and Claims and Awards. The bill says the union government shall notify the appointment one or more Claims Commissioners for such areas as may be specified in the notification. These commissioners will adjudicate upon claims for compensation for nuclear damage.

A Claims Commissioner has to be:
a) Qualified to be a District Judge
b) In the service of the central government and has held the post of Director to the Government of India, or any other equivalent post in the central government, for a minimum five years, and possesses knowledge in the nuclear liability law

The Claims Commissioner shall, for the purposes of discharging his functions under this Act (a Bill becomes an Act when passed), have all the powers of a civil court to take evidence on oath, enforce attendance of witnesses, compel the discovery and production of documents and other material objects, and for other purposes as may be prescribed.

The Claims Commissioner shall be deemed to be a civil court. He/she shall give wide publicity to invite applications for claiming compensation for nuclear damage.

An application for compensation for nuclear damage may be made by:
a) A person who has sustained injury
b) The owner of the property to which damage has been caused
c) The legal representative of the deceased
d) Any agent duly authorised by such a person, owner, or legal representative

Applications shall be made within three years from the date of knowledge of nuclear damage, by the person suffering such damage.

The Claims Commissioner shall conduct hearings and dispose off an application within three months from the date of receipt and make an award accordingly.

Where an operator is likely to remove or dispose off his property to evade payment of the amount of award, the Claims Commissioner may grant a temporary injunction to restrain such an act.

The Claims Commissioner shall arrange to deliver copies of the award to the parties within 15 days from the date of the award.

Every award shall be final.

The operator of a nuclear installation shall have a right of recourse where:
a) Such right is expressly provided for in a contract in writing.
b) The nuclear incident has resulted from a wilful act or gross negligence on the part of the supplier of the material, equipment or services, or of his employee.
c) The nuclear incident has resulted from an act of commission or omission of a person done with the intent to cause nuclear damage.

The right to claim compensation from any nuclear damage caused by a nuclear incident shall extinguish if such claim is not made within 10 years from the date of incident notified, where:

Nuclear damage is caused by a nuclear incident involving nuclear material, which, prior to such nuclear incident had been stolen, lost, jettisoned or abandoned.
In such a case, the 10-year period shall be computed from the date of such nuclear incident but in no case shall it exceed a period of 20 years from the date of theft, loss, jettison or abandonment.

{Where this does not apply, all claims are to be made within three years as stipulated elsewhere in the bill – The Republic.}

(The next post will be on what the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill says about a commission to deal with big nuclear incidents.)

Maximum nuclear liability cap for India – less than Commonwealth Games 2010 budget

2009-12-19T14:12:00.008+05:30

Chapter 2 of India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009, deals with liability for nuclear damage. This is what it says.

On the occurrence of a nuclear incident, the union government shall notify it within 30 days of it happening.

Before issuing a notification, the union government shall take into consideration the gravity and threat due to a nuclear incident and where the risk involved is meagre, a notification may not be issued.

The operator of the nuclear installation shall be liable for nuclear damage caused by a nuclear incident that has been notified
a) In that nuclear installation
b) Involving nuclear material coming from, or originating in, that nuclear installation and occurring before
i) The liability for nuclear incident involving such nuclear material has been assumed, pursuant to a written agreement by another operator
ii) Another operator has taken charge of such nuclear material
iii) The person authorised to operate a nuclear reactor has taken charge of the nuclear material intended to be used in that reactor with which means of transport is equipped for use as a source of power, whether for propulsion thereof or for another purpose
iv) Such nuclear material has been unloaded from the means of transport by which it was sent to a person within the territory of a foreign state
c) Involving nuclear material sent to that nuclear installation and occurring after
i) The liability for nuclear incident involving such nuclear material has been transferred to that operator, pursuant to a written agreement by the operator of another nuclear installation
ii) That operator has taken charge of such nuclear material
iii) That operator has taken charge of such nuclear material from a person operating a nuclear reactor with which means of transport is equipped for use as a source of power, whether for propulsion thereof or any other purpose
iv) Such nuclear material has been loaded with the written consent of that operator, on the means of transport by which it is to be carried from the territory of a foreign state

Where more than one operator is liable for nuclear damage, the liability of the operators so involved shall, in so far as the damage attributable to each operator is not separable, be joint and several:

Provided that the total liability of such operators shall not exceed Rs 300 crore.

Where several nuclear installations of one and the same operator are involved in a nuclear incident, such operator shall, in respect of each such nuclear installation, be liable to the extent of Rs 300 crore.

For this,

a) Where nuclear damage is caused by a nuclear incident occurring in a nuclear installation on account of temporary storage of material-in-transit in such installation, the person responsible for transit of such material shall be deemed to be the operator
b) Where nuclear damage is caused as a result of nuclear incident during the transportation of nuclear material, the consignor shall be deemed to be the operator
c) Where a written agreement has been entered into between the consignor and the consignee, or, as the case may be, the consignor and the carrier of nuclear material, the person liable under such agreement shall be deemed to be the operator
d) Where both nuclear damage and damage other than nuclear damage have been caused by a nuclear incident or, jointly by a nuclear incident and one or more other occurrences, such other damage shall, to the extent it is not separable from the nuclear damage, be deemed to be nuclear damage caused by such nuclear incident.

An operator shall not be liable for nuclear damage
a) If such damage is caused by a nuclear incident directly due to
i) A grave natural disaster of an exceptional character
ii) An act of armed conflict, hostility, civil war, insurrection, or terrorism
b) Caused to
i) His own nuclear installation or another nuclear installation, including a nuclear installation under construction on the site where such installation is located, or any property on that site which is used or to be used in connection with any such installation
ii) The means of carriage or to the place where the nuclear material is stored, if the nuclear incident occurs in the course of the carriage of nuclear material, or while the material is in storage incidental to its carriage.

An operator is also not liable for nuclear damage where nuclear damage is suffered by a person on account of his own negligence or from his own acts of commission or omission. The operator shall not be liable to such a person.

The maximum amount of liability in each nuclear incident shall be the rupee equivalent of $300 million Special Drawing Rights (SDR). ($300,000,000 = Rs14,054,993,031 or Rs 1405.50 crore at the normal exchange rate).

In terms of the IMF Special Drawing Rights, $300,000,000 = Rs22,119,000,000 or Rs 2212 crore.

Since awarding compensation is a long-drawn process, we'll stick to normal currency rates to give us a better hang of it. Meaning, 1 SDR = Rs73.73 as on 15 December 2009 (these rates vary constantly, sometimes two times a week). But, by the time a victim of a nuclear accident gets the money, effectively it will be down to normal exchange rates ($1 = Rs46.71 as on 19 December 2009) at least.

{For perspective, the union cabinet on 5 November 2009 approved a revised budget of Rs 1620 crore for the 2010 New Delhi Commonwealth Games – The Republic.}

The liability of an operator for each nuclear incident shall be Rs 300 crore:
a) Provided that the union government may, having regard to the extent of risk involved in a nuclear installation, by notification, either increase or decrease the amount of liability of the operator.
b) Provided further that where the amount of liability is decreased, it shall not be less than Rs 100 crore.
c) Provided also that the amount of liability shall not include any interest or cost of proceedings.

The union government shall be liable for nuclear damage in respect of a nuclear incident:
a) Where the liability exceeds the amount of Rs 300 crore.
b) Occurring in a nuclear installation owned by it
c) Occurring on account of grave natural disaster of an exceptional character, an act of armed conflict, hostility, civil war, insurrection, or terrorism.

The operator shall, before he begins operation of his nuclear installation, take out insurance policy or such other financial security covering his liability of Rs 300 crore, in such a manner as may be prescribed.

The operator shall from time to time renew the insurance policy or other financial security before the expiry of the period of validity thereof.

The union government need not seek insurance for a nuclear installation owned by it.

{There is not a word in the bill on the liability of the supplier – The Republic.}

(The next post will deal with chapters 3 and 4 of the bill, on the Claims Commissioner and claims and awards in case of a nuclear incident.)

Revealed: India's Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009

2009-12-19T11:41:00.004+05:30

A few weeks ago, the Indian cabinet cleared the text of what was described in the media as the Civil Nuclear Liability Bill. It was a crucial moment. Though there have been sporadic reports in the media, the bill has thus far not been available. The Republic is now sharing the details of this important legislation.

The bill is called 'The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2009'. It sets out a mechanism to deal with nuclear accidents and their liability, should such an eventuality arise. The bill is necessary to operationalise the 123 agreement on civil nuclear energy between India and the US.

American companies will not enter the Indian nuclear energy market unless a liability cap and mechanism is in place. The implications are vast and perpetual. No liability bill means no 123 agreement. Let’s get to what’s in the bill first before we understand what stand to take on it.

This could take a bit, because bills are complex by nature. So, here goes.

What the bill does

The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (CLND) Bill provides for civil liability for nuclear damage, the appointment of a Claims Commissioner, the establishment of a Nuclear Damage Claims Commission, and refers to matters connected with or incidental to all of these.

Where it applies

It extends to the whole of India.

It also applies to nuclear damage suffered:
a) In or over the maritime areas beyond the territorial waters of India
b) In or over the exclusive economic zone of India
c) On board or by a ship registered in India
d) On board or by an aircraft registered in India
e) On or by an artificial island, installation or structure under the jurisdiction of India

Except where the union government, by notification, exempts a nuclear installation or a small quantity of nuclear material where the ‘risk involved is meagre’.

How it defines nuclear damage

Nuclear damage means:
a) Loss of life or personal injury to a person
b) Loss of, or damage to, property

And the following, to the extent notified by the union government,
c) Economic loss arising from (a) and (b), which is not included in claims made under those clauses, if incurred by a person entitled to claim such loss or damage
d) Costs of measures of reinstatement of impaired environment, unless such impairment is ‘insignificant’, if such measures are taken or to be taken and are not included in claims made under (b)
e) Loss of income deriving from an economic interest in use or enjoyment of the environment, incurred as a result of significant impairment of that environment, and not included in claims made under (b)
f) Costs of preventive measures, and the further loss or damage caused by such measures
g) Economic loss other than the one caused by impairment of the environment, where permitted by the general law on civil liability in force in India and not claimed under such law

All loss or damage must arise out of, or result from, ionising radiation emitted by sources of radiation inside a nuclear installation, or emitted from nuclear fuel or radioactive products or waste in, or of, nuclear material coming from, originating in, or sent to, a nuclear installation, whether arising from the radioactive properties of such matter, or from a combination of radioactive properties with toxic, explosive or other hazardous properties of such matter.

How it defines preventive measures

Reasonable measures taken by a person, with the approval of the union government after a nuclear incident has occurred, to prevent or minimise nuclear damage.

Nuclear fuel

Any material capable of producing energy by a self-sustaining chain process of nuclear fission.

Nuclear incident

Any occurrence or series of occurrences having the same origin which causes nuclear damage or, but only with respect to preventive measures, creates a grave and imminent threat of causing such damage.

Nuclear installation

Any nuclear reactor other than one with which a means of transport is equipped for use as a source of power, whether for propulsion or for another purpose.

Any facility using nuclear fuel for the production of nuclear material, or any facility for the processing of nuclear material, including reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel.

Any facility where nuclear material is stored, other than storage, incidental to the carriage of such material.

Several nuclear installations of one operator located at the same site will be considered as a single nuclear installation.

Nuclear material

Nuclear fuel, other than natural uranium or depleted uranium, capable of producing energy by a self-sustaining chain process of nuclear fission outside a nuclear reactor, either by itself or in combination with other material.

Radioactive products or waste. This is defined as any radioactive material produced in, or any material made radioactive by exposure to, the radiation incidental to the production or utilisation of nuclear fuel. This does not include radioisotopes that have reached the final stage of fabrication to be used for scientific, medical, agricultural, commercial, or industrial purposes.

Nuclear reactor

Any structure containing nuclear fuel in such an arrangement that a self-sustaining chain process of nuclear fission can occur there without an additional source of neutrons.

Operator

The person designated as the operator of a nuclear installation.

Special Drawing Rights

As defined by the International Monetary Fund.

(The nuclear liability bill was slated to be tabled in the winter session of the Indian parliament that concluded ahead of time on 18 December 2009. It was not. It will now be tabled in March-April 2010, in the Budget session. The next post on The Republic will deal with the operative part of the bill – who pays when things go wrong, how much, what is the process to file claims, etc.)

Why Mayawati wants four UPs

2009-12-18T23:17:00.003+05:30

For a normal Indian, one Uttar Pradesh is a handful. Barring the Taj, which merely happens to be located in Uttar Pradesh, and the food of Lucknow, there’s barely anything to recommend in the state. It has progressively lost prestige because of its lack of respect for honesty and hard work.

This is where Mayawati, four-time chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, lives and works. If she were to get down to it, she has enough work for every minute of the next 30 years. Instead, she has spent recent time writing to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Mayawati’s letters have asked Singh to agree to the division of Uttar Pradesh into four states.

Good lord! Four UPs!!

Mayawati has proposed that three fresh states be carved out of Uttar Pradesh, India’s biggest state demographically. The new states are to be Paschimanchal, Poorvanchal, and Bundelkhand. In all, there would be four states. Remember, Uttarakhand has already been sliced out of UP.

Mayawati based her demand on this: The population and size of Uttar Pradesh is an impediment in speeding up development works and fine-tuning the administration.

This is not the first time Mayawati has learned this. She has had three previous stints as chief minister. So why is she making size an issue now?

Simple. Mayawati is not interested in becoming chief minister of Uttar Pradesh again. The current tenure should be her last in Lucknow, she has planned. She is restive and seeks solace in New Delhi.

In her world, Mayawati should be Prime Minister. She appears to have figured out that four states with Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) governments will give her a better shot at heading a union government.

This, of course, is a risky proposition. There is no reason why the BSP should win in the future states of Bundelkhand, Poorvanchal, and Paschimanchal. If anything, Mayawati’s poor governance should ensure defeat for the BSP.

Even if the BSP were to form governments there, the lesser number of MPs in smaller states is not a good bargaining tool. The smaller the state, the less Delhi will pay heed.

Mayawati listens to Mayawati. And Mayawati is telling Mayawati that she needs to be seen as a national leader. If she can’t win outside Uttar Pradesh, what the heck, create more UPs in UP.

Given the current grandiose state of the Indian National Congress, a harebrained scheme to split Uttar Pradesh could be on the stove.

Trouble first tempts, then terrifies. They should resist the temptation.

(Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati has written two times over the last week to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asking him to speed up the formation of smaller states in Uttar Pradesh.)

The sounds of Telangana

2009-12-18T10:06:00.004+05:30

This is the how the Telangana story is playing out, in the words of the horses. The Republic presents a selection of quotes on the issue. Each one is a story in itself.

First, Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram a little after 11pm on 9 December 2009. This started the whole thing as we see it now. This is in full, 151 words that could change the geography and history of India.

Chidambaram: We held extensive consultations. The Prime Minister is out of the country. He came back, held meetings under his chairmanship. The chief minister of Andhra Pradesh was here today. We’ve consulted him.

And after these consultations, I’m making this statement on behalf of the government of India. The process of forming the state of Telangana will be initiated. An appropriate resolution will be moved in the state assembly.

We’ve requested the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh to withdraw the cases filed on or after November 29, 2009, against all the leaders, students, and others associated with the current agitation. The chief minister has informed us that he will take the necessary steps in this regard.

We are concerned about the health of Shri K. Chandrasekhar Rao. We request him to withdraw his fast immediately. We also appeal to all concerned, especially the students, to withdraw their agitation and help restore normalcy.

Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Chidambaram’s statement: I understood it. But when such a major issue was being announced, it was the duty of the Congress to have taken the NCP (Nationalist Congress Party), TMC (Trinamool Congress) and DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) into confidence.

Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K. Rosaiah: There was preparation, but to my astonishment, to my surprise and anguish, the so-called statement issued by Chidambaram has created a sort of flutter.

Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee: Will you all come and face the West Bengal electorate? (Because there is a demand for a separate state of Gorkhaland in West Bengal.)

Telangana Rashtra Samiti President K. Chandrasekhar Rao: An arrow that leaves the bow cannot be brought back.

Pranab Mukherjee to pro-Telangana Congress MPs: Please don’t waste my time. There is nothing more to discuss now.

Pro-Telangana MPs to Mukherjee: Sir, we have come to thank you for the efforts.

Mukherjee: You don’t need to do that either. Please don’t come here again.

Reporter to Indian Home Secretary GK Pillai: What will be the future of Hyderabad?

Pillai: Hyderabad, I think, will always be the capital of Telangana.

Rosaiah on Pillai: I don’t know how a responsible person like him said this. It is astonishing for me.

Congress MP KS Rao on Pillai: We go by what the Prime Minister or the Congress President says and not by Pillai, a superintendent of police, or a clerk. Let the home secretary give a separate Telangana if he is capable.

Pillai, after a ‘rethink’: In response to a question from a journalist that the proponents for the state of Telangana wanted Hyderabad to be its capital, I stated that this was what they wanted. The issue of the capital for the proposed new state of Telangana for which steps have been initiated is a matter that is to be decided by consensus and by the government.

Indian National Congress spokesperson Shakeel Ahmed: The central government will take the next step only after the state assembly passes the resolution for Telangana and then the Congress will support it.

Rosaiah: There is no resolution. Nothing has been said to me on paper. To move a resolution and to pass it is very difficult. It is not in my hands.

Telangana Rashtra Samiti MLA KT Rama Rao: The UPA government must have thought about the repercussions before taking the decision.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: Nothing will be done in haste.

Rosaiah: It’s very chilly in Delhi. So, I can't go.

(The Indian government and the Indian National Congress party continued to grope for a way out of the Telangana crisis on 18 December as it discussed the fallout of more party MLAs resigning over the issue in Andhra Pradesh.)

Telangana, explained

2009-12-17T13:06:00.004+05:30

The Telangana chaos over the last 10 days, since the fateful announcement by Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram, requires explanation. What is the proposed Telangana? Why is it such a big deal? How does it affect India? Will it improve anything? Will it worsen anything? What about Hyderabad? Who do we trust on Telangana? Is there a global impact?

What is the proposed Telangana?

Telangana is the northwestern part of Andhra Pradesh. It is mostly merciless terrain, which makes life hard for people. It has a long history, dating from the time of the Mahabharata at least. The Telangana area was never under British rule. It was part of the Nizam's Dominion, also known as the Hyderabad state.

When India became independent, Telangana area was declared as part of the Nizam's Dominion. The rest of Andhra Pradesh was then part of the Madras Presidency. The Nizam kept his kingdom and it took India 13 months after independence to defeat the Nizam's army and make his kingdom a part of India.

The Indian government set up a States Reorganisation Commission in 1953, made up of three men, to suggest how many and what states India must be divided into. This commission made the first blunder on Telangana. It spoke of the fears of Telangana and Andhra about merging into one state. It ominously added Telangana could be a separate state after the 1961 General Election if the Andhra Pradesh assembly passed a resolution saying so by two-thirds majority. This left it hanging.

The Jawaharlal Nehru government, in turn, created Andhra Pradesh on 1 November 1956 as one entity of people speaking the Telugu language. Andhra Pradesh was the first state created on the basis of a language. Other states followed and the map of India took shape.

There are nine districts in Telangana. It is physically bigger than other parts of Andhra Pradesh. But, most good things end about twenty kilometres from Hyderabad. Everything attractive about Telangana is in Hyderabad. The rest is a challenge.

Why is it such a big deal?

Because it can create a whole new political playground, with spin-offs for years. Make no mistake, none of the politicians espousing the cause of Telangana is a saint. None of them have inspiring records. Privately, they are a bunch of depressing people who rely on the twin terrors of money and muscle to run their fiefdoms.

Telangana is also a big deal because of the money alcohol generates. Without booze taxes, there's barely any money to improve life. This is a terrifying reality.

How does it affect India?

The creation of Telangana could change the shape and look of India, in the same way that Andhra Pradesh did 50 years ago. It could become impossible to ignore demands for smaller states elsewhere. This has implications for at least 100 years.

Plus, Telangana will shape the thoughts and responses of Indian political parties, who are big players in the muddle.

The Indian National Congress was the first in the fray. Some of its members formed a separate Telangana outfit in the late 1960s. This triggered the Telangana movement, which faded many years later after several people died in the agitation and the Indian government refused to listen.

Then, the Bharatiya Janata Party Andhra Pradesh unit passed a resolution in 1996, known as the Kakinada Resolution, where they sought a Telangana state. The Telugu Desam Party, desperate for a comeback, announced in October 2008 that it would also support creation of a Telangana state. There are other political parties affected but we won't talk about them here.

Point being, these parties will do likewise elsewhere in India. Telangana, therefore, is important.

Will it improve anything?

First off, it will simplify the creation of assets for politicians and businessmen. The more often used word for this is corruption.

Second, it will simplify things for the Maoists. Remember, Andhra Pradesh has nourished the CPI(Maoist) thus far. A weaker government will be easy pickings for the Maoists.

Third, it will create more work for the media. More bureaus will be needed and they will be created.

Anything more, like in health, education, quality of life, infrastructure, etc., is iffy.

Will it worsen anything?

It will hurt Hyderabad. Residents of coastal Andhra have done their bit for the betterment of Hyderabad. They will resent it for decades, should Hyderabad be taken away to Telangana.

It will make a mockery of the concept of linguistic states because the same language is spoken in both places. Only the dialect is different in Telangana and that is not enough reason to risk all else.

It may not do anything to improve the life of people, which is the only reason why Telangana should even be an idea.

What about Hyderabad?

I can only refer to a short piece I wrote in 2004 on Hyderabad and Telangana.

Who do we trust on Telangana?

At the moment, only human rights activist KG Kannabiran and a handful of other decent folk. Trouble is, I can't remember the last time the government of India spoke to him on Telangana.

Is there a global impact?

Will be on Information Technology, Maoism, and Telugu films. There will also be a great effect, mostly unseen, on the quality of people Telangana will send into the world.

(The Telangana rumble continued on 17 December 2009, with senior Congressmen in Delhi shutting doors on their partymen from Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, and politicians in the state like Chiranjeevi quitting the assembly for the sake of a united Andhra.)

Manu bhai and the Atlas cycle

2009-08-02T13:54:00.005+05:30

The Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, is currently under the microscope for believing that he can deal with Pakistan better than anyone on the planet.

This takes The Republic back to a story of a man wanting to buy bicycles and how Singh impacted that act.

On July 22, 2008, Singh bested a no-confidence motion in Parliament.

An Opposition angry over the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement had moved the motion.

Singh won 275 to 256.

Ten members of the Lok Sabha abstained from voting.

Seven MPs defied orders from their parties and voted for Singh.

It was a critical moment.

If Singh had lost, India’s politics right now would have been vastly different.

Shortly after this, a retired professor of English went to buy Atlas bicycles in Haryana.

The professor works with the literacy mission in a part of Haryana.

Volunteers and staff of the literacy mission were finding it tough to navigate the interiors of Haryana, which is their principal area of operation.

The professor was thus looking for good Atlas bicycles to help the literacy workers reach the unlettered.

The professor and the salesman entered into a conversation over the price.

Several bicycles were to be bought. The price, therefore, had to be right.

The salesman told the professor that he would get a decent price if he bought the bicycles right then.

Now, the professor only wanted to arrive at a bargain that he could take back to colleagues in the literacy mission.

There would be a decision taken, the purchase order placed, and so on.

The professor was thus not carrying money.

The salesman bluntly told the professor that the price would change the next day.

The bicycles would get costlier and that would dent the literacy mission’s budget handsomely.

Why should it be so, the professor asked the salesman.

The salesman said the steel industry was holding back raw material. This had created artificial scarcity in the market.

The scarcity so created was increasing the demand, and there were indications that the prices would be revised upward within hours.

Apparently, the steel industry had pumped in vast amounts of money to help Singh win the confidence vote.

They wanted the money back.

Therefore, no one said a word when almost the whole steel industry held stuff back and then jacked up the prices.

It was payback time.

Apparently, there was a huge difference in steel prices before and after the vote of confidence.

The difference may have paid for the votes that swung it for Singh.

The Prime Minister won his vote. The steel industry won their profits.

The literacy mission lost. The unlettered lost.

The professor returned a saddened man.

It’s the same Singh who is causing more distress now, this time over Pakistan.

Just so we remember this when we look at Singh.

(Serious allegations had surfaced of MPs being bribed to vote for Singh. Some MPs had even carried the cash to the Lok Sabha. No one of consequence has however been held to account. A television reporter who oversaw a sting operation into the bribery scandal left India soon after for ‘further study’.)

The job of a man

2009-07-29T12:42:00.005+05:30

There are many ways to look at a job.

The wise have said that you could imagine yourself without one, for instance, to appreciate it better.

They have spoken of how pleasure in a job puts perfection into it.

But possibly the simplest understanding of what a human must do in a job came from Martin Luther King, Jr.

He said: “A man should do his job so well that the living, the dead, and the unborn could do it no better.”

The honourable Farooq Abdullah is the Union Minister for New and Renewable Energy.

He has no ministers of state under him, which makes him the only man to go to in the ministry.

As a nation, our understanding of new and renewable energy is basic.

Consequently, we barely know of Abdullah’s job.

Even if we did, we couldn’t care less. How on earth does Abdullah affect us?

Simple.

All fights in the world are over power.

Power comes to the ones with energy.

The US, for instance, conquered Iraq for a while and put itself at perpetual risk over oil, still a big global energy source.

China can't breathe at noon in large parts of Beijing because it can’t yet find enough clean energy fuel.

Countries run on energy.

India is desperate for energy.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh put his government on the line, and stayed away from work for 15 days, for the civil nuclear energy pact with the US.

Old fuels like coal and petrol have done a stellar job over the centuries.

But now, from the available evidence, it’s time for them to begin the slow march out.

New energy must take their place.

Wind and sun, for instance, can run India in several parts for a substantial part of the year.

They are in plenty and they are renewable. Which means they work in perpetuity. Best of all, they don’t hurt the environment.

It’s there for us to see: coal and petrol are not going to do it for us in the future.

Apparently, coal provides 46% of India’s primary commercial energy.

Oil and gas together account for 37%.

The damage to environment may well be on the same lines, with coal at the top spot.

Coal cannot go overnight. It has to happen as pain-free as possible.

In India, it could take years.

This is where Abdullah comes in.

For the record, Sushil Kumar Shinde is the Union Minister for Power.

But the Minister for New and Renewable Energy is, for all purpose, the power minister of the future.

Ever since he took the job, Abdullah has been MIA.

We don’t know what he does. We don’t know what he thinks.

He hasn’t called a media conference to lay out the landscape.

He has, instead, been full of Jammu & Kashmir.

He’s been all over the media, protecting his son Omar Abdullah from the sex scandal allegation thrown at him in the Assembly on July 28, 2009.

Well, nothing wrong in a father’s instincts to save his son.

However, Omar Abdullah is a full-grown adult. Presumably, he can care for himself.

He is Chief Minister of Jammu & Kashmir. What he does should be his business, not his father’s.

Every day, there are people engaging with energy issues in India.

Surely Abdullah has more to do there.

Martin Luther King, Jr. died at 39.

Farooq Abdullah is 72.

Abdullah is an erudite man. We may safely assume he has read his Luther King, Jr.

Sometimes, we forget job descriptions.

The mind pulls variously and the primary task is not attended to.

This is a great chance for Abdullah to make a difference to the whole of India.

(Union Minister for New and Renewable Energy Farooq Abdullah is in Srinagar attending to the row over his son Omar’s alleged proximity to an instance of organised sexual wrongdoing in Kashmir.)

Underwater sudoku

2009-07-27T21:45:00.006+05:30

Fifty-four years ago, the then President of the United States of America, Harry S. Truman, broke a bottle of champagne on the hull of the USS Nautilus, the world’s first nuclear submarine.

Soon after, the Nautilus slithered into the sea for trials.

She was 320 feet long and needed 105 men to run her. She made her last journey in 1979.

On July 26, 2009, Gursharan Kaur, wife of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, broke a coconut on the hull of the INS Arihant, India’s first nuclear submarine.

A little later, the Arihant slipped into the sea for trials.

She is 367 feet long and needs 95 men to run her. If all goes well, she will begin work in 2011.

In 1955, the Nautilus cost about $55m. In 2009, the Arihant cost about $2.9b. The Nautilus was 25 when she was decommissioned. Barring the unplanned, the Arihant will also live till she is 25.

In 1955, only the US knew how to build a nuclear submarine. Now, the US, the UK, Russia, China, France, and India do it in the open. There may be other nations who are at it on the sly.

What exactly is a nuclear submarine? Why the fuss?

A conventional submarine is powered by diesel and electricity. She is dependent on air and has to surface from time to time because of this. She moves slow.

A nuclear submarine is powered by a nuclear reactor. She is not dependent on air and can stay under water for 25 years without ever surfacing. She moves fast.

The birth of the Arihant is a typically quaint Indian happening.

If she survives her expected lifespan, she may be the only one in old age.

The trend worldwide is to scrap existing nuclear subs.

So why the Arihant now?

The only nations that might go to war with India over the next 50 years are China and Pakistan.

So the Arihant is essentially to guard India, should China or Pakistan get irascible.

Officials say India needs the Arihant because she has declared a nuclear weapons policy of “no first use”.

She can only retaliate. Therefore, they say, India needs the muscle.

The best things the Arihant can do are: a) move about without making a noise, b) move half a kilometre below the surface of the ocean, and c) fire ballistic missiles from under water.

There have been more than 400 nuclear subs with similar qualities.

Astonishingly, India first decided to have nuclear subs 39 years ago. Indira Gandhi was then Prime Minister.

It took 14 years for the government to act on the decision. For perspective, life imprisonment in India equates to a sentence of 14 years in jail.

In 1984, the year when Indira Gandhi was assassinated, India began the work fully dependent on the then USSR.

When the USSR fell apart in 1992, work on India’s nuclear sub also collapsed.

It was resumed in 1998 when APJ Abdul Kalam was scientific adviser to the defence minister.

India expects to fit the Arihant with missiles than can travel 700km. At least three countries, the US, the UK and China, have long ago reached the 5,000km range.

Another worry is whether the Arihant will report for work in 2011.

Some experts have said the Arihant could take longer to be gainfully employed because she is the first of her kind in India.

That implies that the checks and tests on the Arihant would be numerous. Some have said she could come to office only between 2012 and 2014.

Panic attacks could set in also because the Russians have helped put the Arihant together.

The Russians have built probably the most number of nuclear subs. They also have the worst record, with a number of disasters under water.

French and British subs have hit each other, and American subs have simply disappeared.

But the Russians are the worst. The explosion in the K-141 Kursk in 2000 killed everyone on board in a horrendous tragedy.

When the Cold War ended in 1989, there were more than 400 nuclear subs in the world. Close to 300 have since been scrapped.

Today, there are believed to be about 120 nuclear subs in the world including the ones newly commissioned.

Russia intends to scrap more than 200 of its decommissioned nuclear subs.

It also intends to build eight new nuclear submarines by 2015.

India, in turn, has announced four more nuclear subs.

It takes time, but in the end we learn.

In Sudoku, whatever you do, you can only reach nine.

With subs, all you can do is reach the scrap yard.

(On July 27, 2009, Pakistan said the launch of the Arihant was a destabilising step that would jeopardise the security of the Indian Ocean region.)

The view from the top

2009-07-26T12:01:00.005+05:30

So many humans have wizened this way: when you arrive at the top, you begin again like a novice.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is but flesh and blood at the end of the day.

So he begins the same journey that has launched a zillion moments of clarity since Adam.

Singh has found he has no friends in the Congress party. His Pakistan giveaway at Sharm el-Sheikh has led to this enlightenment.

In itself, it should not bother Singh much.

For, Singh has lived life in the Congress on a simple principle. He has no friends or foes. He only has objectives.

Situations arise when perceptions begin to differ on how the objectives are being met.

Singh has fulfilled one of his objectives admirably. He has been Prime Minister of India two times.

But what does he do after the flowers have been kept away and the coffee has been done.

Singh is not like the man who couldn’t be Prime Minister, LK Advani of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Advani has a few people on speed dial.

Singh may not have more than a couple.

So, when the mind begins to whir, Singh only has subordinates to call. Not peers, not friends, not foes.

For all its immense presence, the Congress party barely has anyone who Singh can talk with.

It is not likely, for instance, that Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi would sit and go over every weakness and strength of the Pakistan establishment.

They probably do not rigorously plan an engagement with Pakistan. Singh and Sonia are not the ones to work out responses, plans, contingencies, emergencies, strikes, pursuits, withdrawals, deadlocks, etc.

They can only broadly agree that a) things need to improve, b) if possible, they must not get worse, and c) India's interests must be paramount.

India and Pakistan are never going to be in a Mother Teresa-like situation, where love and mercy can cure all.

It is an eternal power game between the two. There’s no other way.

The complexity of dealing with Pakistan demands that Singh have a roomful of peers who he can talk with, not talk to.

At the moment, every face he sees can be ignored.

The only ones who matter are Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, Sonia Gandhi and, to a sharper extent, Rahul Gandhi.

Mukherjee and Singh could run India together. But they won’t.

Mukherjee has a history of challenging the Congress since the time of Indira Gandhi. He feels letdown. He feels he has given more to the party than the party to him.

When Singh became Prime Minister for the second time, Mukherjee withdrew. He has set his clock. Now, he will only venture forward when the goose is being cooked.

Like post Sharm el-Sheikh.

Mukherjee was horrified to learn of what Singh did at Sharm el-Sheikh.

The Congress has responded with silence to Singh’s shocker with Pakistan Prime Minister Yusuf Gilani, where Singh agreed to delink terrorism from the negotiations, put Balochistan on the agenda, and to discuss all outstanding issues with Pakistan. (Minding Manmohan, The Republic, July 21, 2009)

Silence is a form of expressing anger.

Singh has since said that he would not resume composite dialogue with Pakistan until India’s concerns are met and action is taken against the perpetrators of Mumbai 26/11.

What’s the point?

Singh first takes us back 30 years and then fast-forwards us to seven months ago.

Singh should know better.

He is still dealing with the consequences of Jawaharlal Nehru’s deeds on Kashmir.

It is possible that 30 years later, India would be dealing with the repercussions of Singh’s Sharm el-Sheikh benefaction.

All his life, Singh has stuck to the centre.

The trouble with walking in the middle is that you could get run over.

Fair enough. That’s a risk every human has the freedom to take.

At no point, however, can you take a country with you.

(Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told the media in New Delhi on July 25, 2009, that he has all the answers to the doubts over the India-Pakistan joint statement in Sharm el-Sheikh. He said he would speak on it in Parliament again.)

Run, rabbit, run

2009-07-21T22:59:00.002+05:30

When you hand the keys to clowns, you must be prepared to cry.

Five days after the disaster of Sharm el-Sheikh, Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon told a group of parliamentarians in New Delhi today that the terrible joint India-Pakistan statement probably suffered from bad drafting.

The joint statement is grave news for India, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh having ceded to virtually every Pakistan complaint in a sense of bravado.

Menon advises Singh on such affairs.

Menon will hopefully retire soon. But even then, there is no guarantee that we may have seen the last of him. Indian bureaucrats tend to last forever, and usually reserve their worst for their last years.

Singh trusts Menon. For most Indians, that means zilch.

So, Menon and his peers get away with almost anything. Menon, and others like him, get paid handsome salaries. They don’t need to spend on anything because the state does.

The state pays for Menon’s phone bills, fuel expenses, housing, travel, etc. He has job immunity, meaning he can’t be sacked for not doing what he should. He, like all bureaucrats in India, can only retire or die.

Yet, they can’t get it right.

“With Pakistan, it is not a T20 match,” Menon told the parliamentarians. This is from a man who was regretting poor language skills in a critical document.

Evidently, Menon was trying to say that Sharm el-Sheikh did not mean that all was lost.

He won’t be around to see if that is true.

It’s simple, really. Communication works for those who work at it. Menon and group have not.

You have to write what you mean, because language shapes what we think and do.

“One can argue how good or bad the drafting was . . . You can say it is bad drafting, but the meaning is clear,” Menon said. Indeed it is. Singh and Menon were outthought and outmanoeuvred by a bunch of people who can’t get anything done in their own country.

This is how the brains trust of one of the world’s emerging super powers thinks.

Explaining how India managed to agree on Balochistan in the joint statement, Menon said: “Pakistan has been saying this for long. We said we have nothing to hide.”

China has been saying for long that Arunachal Pradesh is theirs.

Pakistan has been saying that Kashmir is theirs.

So, a hundred years later, this could be what the textbooks say:

“India is a country in south Asia. India’s capital is New Delhi. The countries of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh border India . . .”

(India drafted its Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon for a PR job on the Sharm el-Sheikh joint statement with Pakistan. Menon gave a lecture to parliamentarians in New Delhi today.)

Minding Manmohan

2009-07-21T13:06:00.002+05:30

Great mistakes unleash great changes.

Winston Churchill refused to offer even an iota of independence to India in the 1930s.

He was in denial for so long that it gave him a terrible reputation: of an abrupt man who didn’t know right from wrong.

Churchill stayed out of power for long, and India moved on to gain freedom.

Richard Nixon oversaw a break-in into his political rivals’ office and the subsequent cover-up in the White House.

Watergate pushed Nixon into perpetual ignominy, and set standards for keeping a close watch on American presidents.

Now we have a shocker from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Five days ago, July 16, 2009, Singh sat down for a one-on-one with the Pakistan Prime Minister, the much-ridiculed Yusuf Gilani, in Sharm el-Sheikh.

Singh has a long list of achievements in his career, which place him among a handful of global leaders capable of understanding the complexities of every nuance of statecraft.

Gilani, a politician in the making, lives in denial. He pretends that Pakistan has nothing to do with any terror attack on India, least of all Mumbai 26/11.

Singh has the respect of world leaders, who listen when he speaks. Post-Nelson Mandela, Singh is the father figure of world leaders. A moral authority in times of slippery ethics.

Sharm el-Sheikh, on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, has acquired the reputation of being a city of peace. This is because it periodically hosts talks between warring nations in a serene atmosphere.

It ought to have been a piece of cake for Singh.

Instead, a horrific meltdown ensued.

Gilani seemed to have mesmerised Singh.

Singh ended up making love.

In the afterglow, Singh and Gilani issued a joint statement.

The statement has since shocked India, and baffled Pakistan. It has to be read in full to grasp its enormity.

“The Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh and the Prime Minister of Pakistan Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani met in Sharm el-Sheikh on July 16, 2009.

The two Prime Ministers had a cordial and constructive meeting. They considered the entire gamut of bilateral relations with a view to charting the way forward in India-Pakistan relations. Both leaders agreed that terrorism is the main threat to both countries. Both leaders affirmed their resolve to fight terrorism and to cooperate with each other to this end.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan would do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan has provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information and evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed.

Both leaders agreed that the two countries would share real time, credible and actionable information on any future terrorist threats.

Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information on threats in Balochistan and other areas.

Both Prime Ministers recognised that dialogue is the only way forward. Action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed. Prime Minister Singh said that India was ready to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including all outstanding issues.

Prime Minister Singh reiterated India’s interest in a stable, democratic, Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Both leaders agreed that the real challenge is development and the elimination of poverty. Both leaders are resolved to eliminate those factors, which prevent our countries from realising their full potential. Both agreed to work to create an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence.

Both leaders reaffirmed their intention to promote regional cooperation.

Both Foreign Secretaries should meet as often as necessary and report to the two Foreign Ministers who will be meeting on the sidelines of the forthcoming UN General Assembly.”

It is a poorly crafted and poorly edited statement. There’s no finesse in the thought and the language.

You could look at this as a landmark document, one that could change the history of India-Pakistan relations.

You could see it as proof that reconciliation works. That love can mend a rogue nation.

Or you could see it for what it is: a dreadful lapse of reason on Singh’s part, one that could push India into another nightmare with Pakistan.

Singh hasn’t told us a word on what actually happened between Gilani and him.

The only access has come from Gilani.

Crowing about what he got from Singh, Gilani has been on a victory high.

According to Gilani, he told Singh in Punjabi that he was Singh’s younger brother. He told Singh that he (Singh) was born in a part of the world that is now in Pakistan, and that made Singh his “elder brother”. He (Gilani) needed a gesture from “elder brother” Singh.

Gilani says Singh told him to “Just put the cards on the table, I am not scared.”

Which Gilani did. And performed the political version of having his cake and eating it too.

Singh formalised Pakistan’s problems in Balochistan, by agreeing to attend to what Pakistan has to say about it.

He has agreed to discuss all outstanding issues, which means Kashmir, Kashmir, and Kashmir.

He has kept terrorism apart from diplomacy, which means India and Pakistan could continue to tango while the bombs keep raining on us.

There is of course space for a maverick in politics, even in the notoriously conservative Indian state. But this is serious.

You do not negotiate with a patient.

When in denial, as Pakistan is, you are a patient. Agreeing to a patient’s terms can only make it worse for the patient, and the patient’s near and dear ones.

India is not dear to Pakistan. It is near to Pakistan.

This is not the first time that Singh couldn’t manage his emotions with Pakistan.

In September 2006, he met the then Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf in Havana. That too was on the sidelines of a NAM summit, like the Sharm el-Sheikh meeting.

In Havana, Singh agreed to legitimise Pakistan by resuming India-Pakistan talks that had been called off after the detestable Mumbai train blasts.

Singh and Musharraf agreed to set up a joint anti-terrorism mechanism. It fell through after Pakistan used to it to toy with India.

Now, after the Sharm el-Sheikh statement, Gilani has begun accusing India of interfering in Balochistan and “other areas”. Gilani has also said that Kashmir is the “cornerstone” of the party he belongs to, the Pakistan People’s Party.

This is how it is. The spots don’t change.

Now, great people tend to take risks. They tend to stick their necks out because only two things can happen: either the neck gets cut, or you stand out.

We might be hurrahing Singh years from now.

But we could also be haranguing him.

Pakistan seems to seriously impact male Indian politicians. LK Advani had a Jinnah meltdown, which led to his downfall, and now Singh goes gooey with the mere mention of his birthplace.

Bizarre.

Since that day in Sharm el-Sheikh, not a single Indian politician has said anything in support of Singh.

The opposition parties have been strangely formal in registering their protest, preferring a polite walkout in Parliament instead of a battle on the streets. But they are disturbed by what Singh has done.

The Congress party, to which Singh belongs, is in the throes of dismay. Their star has turned rogue. The party has, strikingly, not said a word in support of Singh.

Astonishingly, Singh turned it all upside down barely days after he lashed out at the global power structure in what was the strongest articulation of India’s ambitions in recent times. This was before the G8 summit. And now this.

It’s true what they say. The victor is a mere pinprick away from becoming the vanquished.

There must now be serious doubts over Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister.

Pakistan has to mutate soon, to save Singh. Even then, he would seem more like the Prime Minister of Pakistan.

If Pakistan worsens, as is entirely possible, it will bury Singh.

Either way, something momentous may happen.

(Indian members of parliament have continued to protest Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s stand with Pakistan in Sharm el-Sheikh, demanding a complete explanation on the reversal of the policy that terror attacks must stop before anything else is contemplated.)

The Vagina Dialogues

2009-07-17T03:33:00.004+05:30

Let us bare it all.

As recent as 2007-2008, the two most unsafe places for women in India were Delhi and Hyderabad.

These two cities, considered as India’s best examples of growth, had the maximum number of reported crimes against women during that period.

Uttar Pradesh has always been among the worst states in India for women.

The place has never got a grip on this. There is no evidence of any Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister making safety of women a part of their job.

Mayawati is no different. She may be worse, but we’ll get to that another day.

Given a choice, Uttar Pradesh, is not likely to be on a woman’s wish list.

Rita Bahuguna Joshi, the Congress party’s Uttar Pradesh head, lives in this unfortunate state.

Mayawati, Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, works in this forsaken region.

Sonia Gandhi, Congress party president, gets elected to the Lok Sabha from this wretched land.

You would think that should be enough to get something done.

Evidently it isn’t.

The National Commission for Women says that incidents of rape have gone up by 30 percent after Mayawati took charge.

Apparently, Uttar Pradesh now has the maximum cases of rape in India. This when more rapists are at work in India now than at any point in her past.

In this background, Rita Bahuguna Joshi rose to address a Congress rally in Moradabad.

Bahuguna has been Mayor of Allahabad in the past. Most recently, she lost an assembly election there to a Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) rival. She is the daughter of Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna, who was Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister once. In September 2007, she replaced Salman Khurshid as the Uttar Pradesh Congress chief.

Bahuguna spoke of how Mayawati was responding to incidents of rape. She referred to a fresh incident where Mayawati asked a top police official to give Rs25, 000 as compensation to a woman who was raped.

Are Rs25, 000 enough, Bahuguna asked. She said Mayawati had spent Rs 500,000 on the helicopter ride to reach the rape victim, and was offering an insultingly low compensation.

“Main kehti hoon phaink dain Mayawati ke moonh par aur kah dain ho jaaye tera balaatkar toh mein ek karod rupaye doongee (I say throw the money on Mayawati’s face and say if you are raped, I will give you Rs 1 crore),” Bahuguna roared.

Before you could say Rita Bahuguna Joshi, her house was attacked in Lucknow and a portion torched. She was arrested on her way to Delhi and booked under Section 153 A (for delivering inflammatory speeches), Section 109 of the IPC (for using abusive language), and under provisions of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Atrocities Prevention Act (for targeting Mayawati, a dalit).

All the charges carry possible 10-year sentences, if proven.

This is the trouble with Mayawati. She brings out the worst in people.

It is easy to understand the hatred Bahuguna may have for Mayawati. It is a common emotion that Mayawati arouses. She has no friends and opponents can only relate to her with animosity.

The intense dislike is not because Mayawati is a paragon who slays opponents by her virtue. It is because she is more venal and more ruthless than they are, and yet she gets the votes.

Loathing is a powerful emotion. It can make a person mirror the one they hate. So it was that Bahuguna spoke like Mayawati.

She later offered a reason. “My intention was to remind Mayawati that being a woman, she should realise that a paltry monetary compensation cannot make up for what a woman loses on account of rape,” Bahuguna said.

A fly could come up with something like that, were we to talk to one in a spider’s web.

It was exactly what Mayawati needed.

Bahuguna’s maid Munni described what happened at Bahuguna’s house. “Around midnight a group of masked men stormed into the house, raising slogans for Mayawati and against Bahuguna.

They came with iron rods, sticks and petrol cans. They broke whatever they could, sprinkled petrol and threw a matchstick to set the house ablaze. The fire raged for nearly two hours. There were many policemen there but they kept watching and did nothing. They later took away four servants. I hid in a toilet.”

A local daily printed a photograph apparently showing a BSP legislator leading the attackers. In the picture are policemen watching the burning vehicles.

Mayawati called Bahuguna actions “unpardonable”. We can ignore this because by that token, Mayawati should never be forgiven for what she does.

Of more interest is Sonia Gandhi’s reaction. She got her Hindi speechwriter, Janardhan Dwivedi, to speak for her. Dwivedi said Sonia had “expressed deep pain and anguish” over the developments.

This of course could be interpreted in any way: as aimed at Bahuguna, or as aimed at Mayawati. It was typical Sonia Gandhi.

Between Mayawati, Sonia, and Bahuguna, the women of Uttar Pradesh have no chance.

(Joshi was sent to jail on July 16 for 14 days by a court in Moradabad on charges of insulting a woman's modesty, insulting a person of a lower caste and promoting enmity between groups.)

The Future Manifesto

2009-07-15T21:12:00.005+05:30

A good Indian ignores the signs.

A rare Indian heeds them.

So it is with what is called climate change.

The dictionary describes climate as the general weather conditions: temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds.

All, or each of them, have influenced human activity since we came to be.

Now, it appears, human activity is influencing climate.

The consequences of that, from all indications, are fearsome.

Recent data tells us that regions across the earth, India included, are either getting hotter or colder.

Either way, they say, our end is near.

Things have been disturbing in the region where The Republic comes out from, one of the more lavish communities in India.

People have lived without electricity for half of every day, sleeping habits have changed, work has been impacted, anger levels have risen, and the air has become surly.

It gets more negative on the days it doesn’t rain, this being the time of the year that most Indians expect to see the monsoon.

Normal people become the kind of persons they wouldn’t want near them.

Apocalypse? Already?

Not quite. This, the sages say, is merely the preamble.

It could get hotter and colder if we don’t change, they say.

But change what?

Change the complex of practices that constitute daily life.

Anthony Giddens, the British sociologist, says reconfigure life on a massive scale.

This is what we may want to do, beginning from New Delhi, the first city of one of the world’s fastest-growing economies.

Monitor air quality in the cities and broadcast the results on television and radio every hour. Not as part of the weather reports, which everybody ignores, but as a sponsored slot.

Announce Air Quality Alert days when it gets bad.

On such Air Quality Alert days, make bus travel free to reduce the use of cars and two-wheelers.

Open petrol pumps after dark. That would enable refuelling of vehicles only after sunset. Apparently, it makes a big difference to the gasoline evaporation and, therefore, the ozone layer.

Please, please, employ only skilled people at petrol pumps. Most workers are pathetic and spill gas each time.

Do not fill more fuel manually after the pump shuts off automatically. Most petrol pump workers do it to round off the amount and avoid having to give change back. This is an embarrassing practice, which shames India and hurts her climate because more gas is lost each time it shifts from auto to manual and back.

Do not overcool homes, offices, cinemas, airplanes, trains, buses, and cars. Only hospitals need strict cooling at times.

Turn off the lights when you leave a room.

Turn off appliances that are not in use. Pull the plug from the socket to do it right. Indian electrical appliances leak all the time, so take the plug out.

Wash dishes and clothes manually. You would be surprised how every house can do this, but won’t. It adds exercise to your routine, cuts the costs of appliances, and helps save the climate. Even better if you could do away with the maid. Their skills are almost always suspect anyway.

If you have to use machines, absolutely have to, make sure the load is full before you wash clothes and dishes.

Cut down daytime driving. Consider walking, or taking the metro.

Pressurise car manufacturers to include free bi-monthly maintenance of vehicles. Or stop buying their cars. Proper maintenance of vehicles saves fuel, but maintenance costs make it unattractive. So, correct this.

Play sports in the evening, if done as a hobby.

Reduce outdoor activities during the day anyway.

Shift shopping to the evening. Keep markets closed during the day.

Do not burn leaves, trash, and other stuff. Delhi, in particular, is notorious for this.

Make cities more walkable and bikeable by smoothening the roads and pathways. At the moment, neither the infants nor the elderly and the infirm can walk in our cities.

Have multiple bicycle stands in the cities. Offer the bicycles free from point-to-point in cities. This will make buses, cars, and motorcycles less attractive, improve personal fitness and reduce obesity.

Try yoga instead of gyms. Yoga needs no appliances or music. You can do it in your room or a park, for instance.

Alternatively, harness the energy expended in gyms, on treadmills for instance, to light up homes. This can be done if we apply ourselves to it.

Avoid going to the cinemas. They consume too much electricity and drain your wallet. Watch movies at home, on television, laptop, or home theatre. Even the popcorn and soft drinks are cheaper and healthier at home. Movies in future will move to DVD and TV release anyway.

Play cricket, football, hockey, etc., at night. Cricket Tests, ODIs, and T20s can easily be played in the evening.

Redesign every structure in our cities. India is now an ugly country to look at because of the dumb architecture. We had great stuff in the past, which was nature-friendly and cooled by it.

Examine and relay water pipelines, both drinking water and wastewater. This is a lifesaver.

Modernise water control systems. Shift control rooms from lower ground to higher floors.

Build floodwalls, like in Mumbai.

Do not build seawalls, however, on the coasts. Move homes inward to allow the waters to advance when sea level rises. If you have to, build the coastal homes on pilings. Such homes will have a life of, say, 80 years at best. So, don’t plan permanence near the sea.

Penalise people who do not harvest water in homes. Make it a criminal offence.

Make solar energy cheap, simple, and available. The sun can run most of India for about nine months a year.

Make roads climate-proof. To avoid erosion because of heavy downpour or floods, place roads above sea level and have improved drainage around the roads. This would still cost lesser than the damage control we try to do.

Improve airports and airplanes so that aircraft can take off and land in most storms.

Extreme cold could be rare in future. So, go easy on the woollens. You won’t need them.

Keep diet flexible. The time for rigidity is gone. If you can’t get your spinach, have fish. If you can’t get your fish, have pudding.

Make mentoring a profession. We will need far more counsellors to help us deal with life ahead.

Don’t trust life insurance too much. They’ll keep your money by adding risks like extreme weather, etc.

Lastly, there is no past to teach us about climate change. We learn on the run.

So, keep life simple. Avoid too many necessities.

(Five heads of world bodies, the WHO, the WTO, the World Meteorological Organisation, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and the World Intellectual Property Organisation, have today asked world leaders to seal the deal at the December 2009 climate summit in Copenhagen.)

Shit Creek

2009-07-12T10:43:00.008+05:30

India, in the form of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, is back from the G8. If anything, the 2009 Italy summit must be treated as more evidence of the confines of talking shops. The G8, G8+G5, G14, G20, etc., etc., are sounding boards. Nothing more, nothing less.

For India, there is virtually no good news. We may be in for some of the most wrenching times of our lives. But, the decent part is that we have begun talking about it. Singh, for one, has kept it stark. In Italy, he made multiple references to the crises India will face. He has returned home with the air of a man at the stable door.

These are some of the ingredients of the sour sauce that Singh served up.

It is my sense, after the discussions, that the world economy is a long way from recovery
There must be questions whether that will soon be possible
US and European economies will decelerate in 2009
For some time to come, the world will not support India as we had imagined it
Global environment for the advancement of developing nations has deteriorated sharply
India’s exports have suffered
Her capital flows from abroad have gone down
Lending from international banks has declined
I return home convinced that we must beef our economy up at home
It is not going to be easy. The road ahead is a difficult one to traverse
The Doha round of trade negotiations can succeed only if there is a rule-based, liberal, multilateral trading system
We (India) are unable to set targets for climate change
We will do more only if the advanced nations give us finance and tech support
There will be great pressure on India on climate change
We have to stop that
India and Pakistan are close neighbours. I have never used the term close friends
I have told every forum, G8, G5, etc., that India is a victim of terrorism
I have told them we have evidence of who is trying to destabilise us for the past 30 years
I tell every world leader that they must apply pressure on Pakistan to quit terrorism and be friends with India
India has a big struggle ahead on global governance. Not everybody agrees with us
International relations in the final sense are power relationships
Nobody gives up power willingly. Those who have power want to hold on
There is no easy solution in sight, it will have to be a long drawn out struggle
In the long run, our views will prevail

Finally, there was one for the birds.

I forgot that the media were present when I said what I did to Zardari. I didn’t mean to hurt him.

The message that Singh got back from the G8 is this:

India has a very tough time ahead.

Time for some character.

(Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh returned to New Delhi on July 10 after a three-day G8 summit in Italy.)