The Politics of Winning
by Neelima Choahan
I NEVER thought I’d say this, but I have gained a new found respect for missionaries after my early morning foray into canvassing for BJP.
Armed with a few Friends of BJP flyers, I and a friend recently took to Lodhi Garden one Sunday morning to spread the message of ‘good governance, development and security’.
My friend Varun Shankar, who had gamely agreed to accompany me at the last moment, is a 20-year-old law student at Amity Law School, I P University, Delhi.
Though in the middle of his second year exams, he graciously dragged himself out of his bed and reached the park near dawn (or at least that’s what it felt like to us night creatures).
I don’t know whether I was more nervous about approaching perfect strangers or asking them the million dollar question:
“Who do you vote for?”
The sprawling gardens in up market South Delhi attract visitors from all sections of society.
Diplomats rub shoulders with yogis doing Surya Namaskar; families out on a picnic share the greens with youngsters playing pithu and Frisbee, while the fitness conscious huff and puff their way around the walking tracks criss-crossing the park.
That election was in the air could be discerned from a group of men and women discussing the merits of the different political parties.
Having never done this before, it took us some time to get our technique right.
Spotting our first target, Varun boldly went up to a couple of elderly gentleman lounging on a bench and asked if we could have a brief chat with them.
After ascertaining both the men were registered to vote (no point wasting our time) he then followed it up with the question ‘who are you voting for in this election?’.
Unfortunately, this direct approach got us nowhere as we were told in no uncertain terms that their vote was private and confidential.
I then asked them if they were happy with the present government. Alas, their answer was yes and they finally revealed they would vote for Congress.
Though, somewhat dejected we refused to give up and continued on our expedition.
All in all, we spent three hours at the park and approached about 25 people of different age groups from mostly middle to upper middle class background.
We came upon at least eight voters who were definitely supporting Congress yet only two women said they were going for BJP.
Around five people said they were former BJP supporters but had not made up their mind about who to vote for in this election.
These are the people that we targeted hoping to convince them to remain with BJP.
The issues discussed varied according to the concerns of the people. A young family said they were concerned at the rise of Islamic terrorism and Congress’ appeasement policies targeting minorities. Yet, they felt the BJP did not have concrete game plan for the future.
We emphasised the uncertainty surrounding UPA Prime Ministerial candidate vis-à-vis NDA’s Lal Krishna Advani.
Price rise, lack of security and economic growth were some of the other topics discussed.
However, a lot of those leaning towards the BJP said they would choose it because it was the “lesser of the two evils”.
If we were to judge BJP’s standing based on the people we spoke to, then I would say that BJP has not been able to maintain its USP or unique selling point.
Jaded from years of broken promises, the Indian voters seemed to be in no mood to be patient and are ready to tar BJP with the same brush as the corrupt Congress.
If BJP succeeds this election, it will not do so because it has convinced the apathetic Indian voter that it is the only choice but because of the mayhem and confusion in its rival’s camp.
So win or lose, both BJP and Friends of BJP has a lot of work to do.
No Effort is Small
by Neelima Choahan
WITH Delhi set to go to polls on May 7, I took the opportunity to engage a small group of young voters about the upcoming general election.
The members were all part of a youth group at the Delhi centre of-an organisation focusing on the study of Vedanta.
Two amongst the group were first time voters while one was still underage.
Before the talk I had assumed that any patron of the organisation would necessarily support the BJP.
However, I was in for a surprise as it seemed that most of them were considering voting for Congress.
I started the meeting with the aim of initiating a discussion about the election. Once, I established that they were all registered voters, I proceeded to ask them what they thought about the present government.
One person said that though he was a BJP supporter he did not think his one vote would make a difference.
Two of them said that they were happy with the work done by the Congress candidate in their constituency so they were leaning towards the UPA.
I reminded them that local issues were best left to be considered during Municipal Corporation and state election. While, on May 7, the Delhi elector needed to focus on national issues like defence, foreign and economic policy.
Touching upon issues of security I asked if they were happy with UPA Government’s response during the Mumbai terror attacks on November 26, 2008.
One of the first-time-voters said though she was unhappy at the breach in security that had led to the attacks, she was largely satisfied by the Government’ response.
I asked them to compare the US’ aggressive response to September 11, 2001 terror attack in New York to the Manmohan Singh-led Government whose actions seemed to be limited to exchanging letters with the Pakistani Government.
I also pointed out since then the US had never again experienced another such attack on its soil. On the other hand, 67 Indian cities were blasted in the last five years of the UPA Government rule.
Championing the need of a strong and able leader, I spoke about the present dangers to India from its neighbour.
India is more vulnerable today with an unstable and nuclear armed Pakistan, an aggressive China, the built of Islamic terrorists training camps in Bangladesh and Nepal.
One of the Congress-leaning voter then pointed out how the highest number of terrorist infiltration were from Congress-ruled Rajasthan while BJP-ruled Gujarat reported the lowest number of figures.
Touching upon communalism, a young first-time voter said she prided herself for belonging to a tolerant nation. But she agreed the diversity in India owed its existence to the pluralistic tradition of Hinduism.
Finally, I rounded up the conversation by reminding them that a vote for UPA may mean a Mulayam Singh Yadav, Lalu Prasad Yadav or Mayawati as Prime Minister.
The infighting between the various factions of the UPA meant that the ruling coalition is an opportunistic alliance.
Whereas by voting for the BJP-led NDA electors knew exactly what they were getting.
I feel the meeting went well as we openly discussed performances of both the NDA and UPA. The talk managed to crystallize the main issues facing the country and the results of choosing the wrong party.
But whether the meeting will result in a vote for BJP that only May 7 will tell.
The Curious Case of Dr. Manmohan Singh
by Neelima Choahan
IT is ironical that the very personal traits that enabled Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to ascend India’s highest post have also brought him so much angst.
Much has been said about the apparent weakness or strengths of Singh as a leader in the last few weeks.
Often referred to as the ‘accidental Prime Minister,’ the 76-year-old has been quoted in the past as having never wanted to aspire to the top job.
Indeed, the quiet and unassuming Sikh is above all a consummate bureaucrat. And a bureaucrat’s strength lies in his or her ability to serve the political masters.
In fact, a successful bureaucrat is not that much different from a faithful family retainer.
Unquestioning in its loyalty, the retainer guards its owner’s property. In return for its devotion, the favourite is entrusted with the full control over its master’s hearth.
The family faithful gives unconditional love to its owners, not caring whether they are a bunch of criminals, liars or murderers.
Likewise, a civil servant is known for protecting the best interests of his political masters whether they are wrong or right.
And why not, the bureaucrat’s success depends upon the ability to ruffle as few feathers as possible.
A Gandhi loyalist, Singh has also endeavoured to always please the high command. In return he has been trusted with the family’s most prized possession - the royal throne - i.e., the post of India’s Prime Minister.
This move is a master stroke by the once reluctant but now-turned-savvy politician Sonia Gandhi.
Gandhi fully understands the perils of power and its ability to corrupt. So, she shies away from promoting any leader who may secretly harbour ambitions beyond that of crowning the “rightful” heir to the PM’s post.
The self-effacing Singh is therefore the perfect candidate for the job. His gentle persona and inability to take strong actions helps him maintain the current political status quo.
Smarting at the “weak leader” charge and afraid the label might stick the Gandhi troika of Sonia, Priyanka and Rahul have scrambled to defend Singh’s record.
Speaking at a rally recently, Gandhi said it was up to the people to decide who is strong and who is weak.
But having proven himself to the “family” the Prime Minister shows no desire to prove himself to the people.
And so we have a situation where the Prime Minister of the world’s largest democracy refuses to test his political mettle in the rough and tumble of an election campaign.
Because a true leader is a visionary who often inspires, sometime offends but never fails to leave a mark on the psyche of the nation.
A sycophant, however, is none of these things.
Much though Singh would like to deny it, the past five years show that though he is a mazboot sycophant he is certainly not a mazboot neta.
If the Shoe Fits
by Neelima Choahan
WITH one hurl of his shoe, journalist Jarnail Singh has forever become part of Indian political history.
The man, who from now on will always be known as the Sikh who threw the shoe at Home Minister P C Chindambaram, was no doubt inspired by Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi.
Zaidi projected his footwear missile at former President George Bush during his last visit to Iraq in December 2008.
Like Zaidi, the Dainik Jagran journalist’s action gave voice to the anger of his people. And many will remember Singh as someone who had the guts to stand up for his beliefs.
More importantly, Singh’s action has blown Congress’ “secular” cover and exposed the party’s duplicity.
For 25 years the party has turned a blind eye to the despair and anguish of the victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in the aftermath of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination by her two Sikh bodyguards on October 31.
Gandhi’s killing was in revenge for Operation Bluestar in which the Indian army attacked Sikh militants hiding in the Harmandir Sahib the holiest Sikh shrine.
Both Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar are one of the many Congress leaders accused of inciting and leading mobs through the lanes of Delhi soon after Gandhi’s death.
The party seemed to be banking upon people forgetting the shameful incident in which more than 3000 innocent people were massacred in the Capital over a period of four days.
By nominating Tytler and Kumar from North-east Delhi and South Delhi constituency respectively, the Congress was literally hoping to get away with murder.
However, with one stroke, Singh brought the party’s sodden past out in the open.
That Congress’ chant of secularism is a lie and a means to conceal its appeasement policy is clear to any astute observer of the Indian political scene.
But by fielding the accused duo, the party has made a mockery not only of the sentiments of the Sikh community but of law and order itself.
Its wait and watch policy and delay in withdrawing the two tainted leaders nomination clearly shows that the party has no regard for justice but is only concerned with its electoral fortunes.
What is particularly galling is that the same party and its supporters are so vitriolic in their condemnation of BJP candidate Varun Gandhi for his alleged hate speech early last month. And yet the same “secular” party is willing to turn a blind eye to accounts of the Kumar’s and Tytler’s alleged heinous acts.
The support rendered to the two by the party makes one wonder how hand-in-glove were the Congress supreme command in the rioting that followed Gandhi’s death?
That question can perhaps be best answered by noting Rajiv Gandhi’s comment soon after the carnage.
Dismissing the deaths of innocent fathers, husbands, sons, brothers and friends as mere collateral damage, Mr Gandhi said; “When a big tree falls, the earth trembles.”
We can only hope that the other shoe drops and the Indian electorate punishes Congress for its arrogance and blatant disregard of human lives and forever discards it into the dustbin of history.