Who is caught ‘pants down’?

What Asif Ali Zardari, the President of Pakistan has expressed in an Op-Ed piece in The New York Times on the 9th (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/opinion/09zardari.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=zardari&st=cse), is a far more courageous act than that of any Indian leader after the recent Mumbai attacks of November 26. At the most what our leaders have said is ‘sorry’! This is where we need to think about the leaders we choose and how they appear and act in crisis situations.

When 26/11 happened, there was public anger against the terrorist elements that used Pakistani soil but also towards our own political, security and intelligence establishment. There was no immediate anti-Pakistan sentiment among the masses in India because they understood that Pakistan is also suffering, although for them they are home-products. The Indian public and media were outraged against it’s own government and political leadership for their inappropriate handling of this whole episode and the events thereafter.

As the confusion and anxiety settled down or, as some would say simmered up, our government and political leaders took its advantage to hide their own mistakes and lassitude. Their fears and worries were two sided. One, from within the government and its political allies who blamed it for not being able to perform tough and effectively against the threat of terror, despite repeated incidences in last few months all over the country. Second, the unfounded fear of loosing the upcoming Lok Sabha elections and the ongoing state assembly elections in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir. The media itself was in the dock over its over-enthusiastic and ‘not-so-right’ coverage of the incident. The media has several reasons of its own for this – it’s inefficiency and lack of training in covering such events and the race for TRPs, among many others.

This mix of the weaknesses of the government and political establishment, the public outcry and media hype compelled many in the Indian government and the incumbent political coalition to believe that they were at the very verge of loosing the next general election. This made them pose tough on terror, sack ministers, issue unwanted statements and acquire an irrational hard attitude against Pakistan. In total, India’s leadership appeared anxious, desperate and confused over this crisis, which was extraordinary but definitely not unexpected. Indian leadership did not have the courage to accept the situation, let alone the question of tackling it rationally and strategically. Zardari has also mentioned this subtly in his piece.

For the leadership of a country which flaunts it’s nuclear might, whose economy had been expecting to grow in double digits and which is being talked about as the next super power, this was definitely a loss of face – to the whole world and to its own people. What is at issue here is not just the exact way the government dealt with 10 terrorists or failures of the intelligence and security establishments along with the political handling of the situation, but the way they appeared to the whole world and its own people – as stupid and gullible. In these times, when your expressions can’t be concealed from anyone in the world or in the country, the government and the leadership should have, at least, appeared confident and tough, even if it was not actually so. This is where our leadership failed in this whole episode and where Pakistan outsmarted us. This is exactly what is meant by ‘India caught with its pants down’ as pronounced by a senior TV journalist.

What Asif Ali Zardari has expressed and accepted is something more than just courageous. He has not restricted himself and his country to medieval dilemmas where warlords or patriarchs kept themselves and their populations under a false sense of pride, honour and wellness. He, the President of Pakistan, has accepted that Pakistan has suffered at the hands of these rogue elements and, importantly, he has accepted that Pakistan has been ‘used’ and exploited as an instrument during the cold war and is still paying the price. This is courageous and a very big acceptance of the facts, by a head of nation in troubling times where his country is literally at war within its own borders, begging for loans and has a looming threat from India.

This is something which has happened at a time when India is also being pulled towards the same tub where United States is washing its dirty linen. Zardari’s acceptance and revelations have also come as a warning to India’s leadership to be rational and cautious in taking further steps towards Pakistan when any untoward action against Pakistan by India could derail the democratic process in Pakistan and create problem for the whole region of South Asia. It could also lead India to the same situation in which Pakistan is today.

And Zardari has not been ‘caught pants down’. When you accept that you are not wearing any pants or you are showing your undies, you are also expressing that you don’t have a pair of pants, you only have undies. In case of India, when you are ‘caught your pants down’, its not your choice not to show your undies. You are simply caught. This is where Zardari as a leader – however he may have become a leader or whatever kind of leader he may be – has outsmarted Indian leaders. I believe, now, when results for the so-called ‘semi-final’ elections are out and the ruling coalition is more at ease, our leaders should relax. They should accept the situation, fight it and in doing so, they should appear confident, calm and composed, even if they do not feel so.

...

आज खोज करने पर एक टूल क्विलपॅड मिल गया है.... आज अख़बार पढ़े तो है पर यात्रा, थकान, कुछ अकर्मण्यता, और थोड़े काम की वजह से कुछ लिखने का मन नहीं है.... इसलिए अपने आप से माफी ....

http://quillpad.in/hindi/

sunday, sunday...

it was sunday yesterday... and also, i was traveling without access to net...
lets see.

Where is Lalu?

Glimpses of HT Leadership Summit 2008 on television channel (mainly CNN-IBN) and newspapers clearly reflect an elitist character. I will talk about who’s who and son-in-laws and daughters and husbands at this moment. I am beginning with the leaders first. Those who spoke yesterday were Manmohan Siingh, Sonia Gandhi, Cherie Blair, Lalu Yadav, Chandra Babu Naidu, Jerry Linenger, Nayan Chanda, Gary Samore, Vali Nasr, Karl Inderfurth, and L K Advani. I hope all of us and ‘the common man’ knows about Manmohan Singh, Sonia, Lalu, Naidu and Advani – the ‘netas’ in common parlance. Others are ‘leaders’. I think it’s the same difference as that of ‘Bharat’ and ‘India’. I will also dissect the introductions of the ‘leaders’, the common people doesn’t know them but later, towards the end.

Let me first deal with the title ‘Lalu misses the lead’. I am saying this after looking at the headlines of Hindustan Times and its centre-spread on the summit. Those who have made it to the front page with photo and larger space are: Sonia – a never before picture of Sonia Gandhi – smiling at full throttle. Manmohan Singh and Advani have their sketches and Lalu has his face alongside a small quote. Advani and Manmohan Singh have found space for what they said there on both sides of photographs. Lalu misses here. Then come to the centre-spread. Lalu has find a place here as a ‘wit machine’ – that’s what he is known for and that’s what he does everywhere. There is no harm in it rather it is a quality our leaders miss today. But why only the wit part of Lalu gets highlighted? Where is the leader in Lalu finds mention? Yes he finds mention with Naidu, but heading is what Naidu said, not what Lalu said. What he said about Rahul Gandhi and which finds prominent mention in other newspapers (IE, ToI, Hindu) is written at the end of a little piece. It did not get highlighted and not been put in quotes even. HT can translate and put in quotes what Lalu said about Raj Thackeray, on politicians turning authors and all other things, but it can’t put in quotes what he said about Rahul Gandhi and and why didn’t they hinghlight even a little what he said about Rahul Gandhi? It,s their own editorial decision, but we can at least question and comment on it. Why has not HT mentioned about Lalu’s comment where he has compared him to Mahatma? It’s more a political question, which involves serious (!) issues like political economy of media, and it’s objectivity. Lets not get into it at this stage.

Another point about this is that they need a ‘hansod’, a joker between them, who should be a politician too and which gives them authenticity that they have a fair representation. Lalu fits well in this place. Lalu replied in Hindi though there were many foreigners and many ABCDs types. And it’s their compulsion that they have to listen to him – whatever his style, content and medium is. This is what Lalu is. This is what Indian democracy is about. I am not praising Lalu or justifying his brand of politics. (I think it echoes “janta ki abe paltaniya, to hille re jhakjhor duniya”

Doon’t misunderstand me for another revolution…but just some stray thoughts). But what is not their compulsion is their print edition. Where they can edit the way it suits them. They have almost warded him off from the front page, they have not published his comment on Rahul and they have shown him on the sides in a smaller picture. Even pictures of ‘wheeler-dealers’ like Suhel Seth and Salman Khurshid; Robert Vadhera and Murli Deora; and Rajeev Shukla and Naveen Jindal have found a prominent position than Lalu on the page. This is where we know whose conclave it is and what is the nature. I may be sounding against it but I am not. I rather propose more such conclaves and spaces where our leaders can interact with each other and they could be asked questions. That’s what is necessary for the health of our democracy. But think a little about the distinctiveness of people who have been termed as leaders and who gets invited to places like this.

Just think about Robert Vadhera . Who is he? His only qualification (read major!) is him being the husband of Priyanka Gandhi. I could say that we are becoming like Americans where the whole family gets the status of first family and even the pups find mention in speeches. Are we really like that? Or our leaders of the freedom movement have tried instilling a false sense of democratic values in us in those days and later through the Constitution. Who will lead us or represent us is a question we should more serious about now. I also oppose ‘poster parties’ like Jago Party and like that of Shiv Khera’s. They mock our democratic traditions and institutions and try to hijack it through advertisements. But irony is that they are also part of these same democratic solutions. HT mentions that Lalu talks about JP’s famous ‘right-to-recall’ becoming true in the falling of governments in coalition politics. Is that the interpretation that we all want to believe? Again, I am not in praise of Lalu but we have to think about the nature of leadership we are building up. In ‘we’ I count the media and all those who could objectively make sense of the facts.

Now, the difference between our ‘netas’ and ‘leaders’. Neta is typically a ‘politico’ in our common parlance, but ‘leader’ which is a creation of, I don’t know whom? I think I should write more about it in the next post.

Advani is Hero this morning...

Our hero is Advani – announces The Times of India. “Meeting ground: Mukesh, Anil shake hands at Advani’s house.” He has been able to do what even Murari Bapu and the Lord Shreenathji of Nathdwara has failed to do. In Advani’s darbar, Mukesh and Anil Ambani left their sibling rivalry out. This is something for which Kokila Ben will thank him with fortunes. She paid in millions to the Lord Shreenathji of Nathdwara who, couldn’t even succeed reaching a patch up between the two brothers. Advani has done it; so imagine the fortune he will be getting from Kokila Ben as dakshina! Advani could be an orator at par with Morari Bapu, but he is a bigger dealer of the Lord than him. Morari Bapu must be thanking his stars that Advani is still hopeful of becoming the PM, otherwise if he would have taken up the profession of kathavchan, his shop would have closed down till now.
Indian Express has chosen to describe what MCOCA is and that the PM-incumbent (sound like infant!!) is instructing the PM-in-waiting to know the facts right. “Sending NSA, PM tells Advani, he says read Sadhvi’s affidavit”. Had he given him this advice long back, as he took it for himself, Adwani wouldn’t have waited for so long!
The Hindu has shown that our Prime Minister can even make a call, he just don’t wait for it and can ask question too? “Manmohan to Advani: why support ‘sadhvi’ Pragnya?” Mail Today has pictures of Sardar Manmohan Singh on top and right below him is Hugh Jackman – the sexiest man alive elect! He has voted Daniel Craig out and occupied the seat. Is there some semiotic sign in placing these two pics one above others? Guess. Hindustan Times has tried its bit to separate the bi-zygotic twins. “Hindu terror targets RSS”. (It is bold enough that I saw it in the other car while stopping at traffic signal!) It’s difficult, but keep your efforts, after all this is the land where Mahabharata was written and supposedly happened.

hitchh... shall we?

Just read about Hitchh.com in Express Newsline. It’s an interesting innovation – look yourself for details. (http://www.hitchh.com/ )

We need them for the young and busy of our capital. We need such ‘spaces’ in our ‘evolving’ cities where this vacuum often (mis)lead the ‘needy’ to complex situations which many a times take criminal and anti-social turns. The BIG challenge in front of them is to keep this space free of ‘black-sheeps’ who could exploit it to malign the image of this space. It happened to few such efforts in the past.
Let’s see how they keep it uncluttered from those who usually exploit such spaces for ulterior motives. What I mean by ‘black-sheeps’ and ‘ulterior motives’ is not a complex nomenclature to understand. I admire this innovative effort.