Modi's suprise visit to Pakistan

Modi 's unannounced visit to Pakistan, must have taken the world by surprise. It is a well marked deviation from the formal schedules. Now can any one accuse us of running away from peace process with Pakistan? I can say that this Modi's outreach to Pakistan is an act of statesmanship because he has taken a calculated risk as past attempts in Normalising relations have been sabotaged by Pakistani military establishment and ISI. Any provocative act from Pakistan's non-state players would weaken Modi 's popularity and image. But certainly this brief stopover in Lahore on his way back to India from Kabul on the invitation from Nawaz Shariff must have given a flip to Indo- Pak dialogue. This brand of diplomacy was hailed by everyone, which may help in infusing positive atmosphere to move forward and to sort out outstanding issues.

      In this connection much significance is attached to this visit, which comes just after a friendly meeting between two PM's, India & Pakistan in Paris, a breakthrough meeting between, NSAs of India & Pakistan in Bankok and FMs of the said countries and even the Pakistan's military too must come round now because of the prevailing situation in Pakistan. The fact of the matter is Modi's out- of - the-box diplomacy may not give dividends immediately but may pave way for a comprehensive dialogue in due course of time.
        Here again, I have to call spade a spade with regards to Congress 's opposition to the visit and what it shouldn't do is to undermine the efforts of Mr Modi. Now I will not be going into the details on this aspect as this itself is a big topic in its own way.
But it is also true that though, UN, US, China etc have supported the move, it is not free from objective criticism and I will be failing in my obligation if don't put it before you for better appreciation and understanding as I have the habit of thinking from the other  man's point of view. Some intellectuals are of the opinion that the visit has only sent out confusing signals about how the Govt wants to direct the bilateral relations with a country that has till now refused to address our deep concerns over ISI aided acts of terror in India. Some individuals have said, that there is a lack of consistency which is the hallmark of Modi's highly personalised style of functioning, while keeping aside the institutionalised foreign policy making process. They even went to the extent of saying that the theatrics and showmanship do make good headlines, but are not substitutes for initiating structured diplomatic moves. Whether it is Mumbai serial blast prime accused Dawood, being sheltered and protected in Pakistan or Lakhvi of 26/11 mastermind, Pakistan's response has been least encouraging. These two examples have been quoted them,
Since strong and weak points are there on both sides of argument, our media should stop making a song and dance, about the whole event, It must be a just normal planned visit and the drama must have been an after thought. But whatever it is one hopes that only the incidents to follow will be able to prove the validity of the visit.

Rise of a strong leader

KCR's recent astounding victory in recent by-election must have emboldened him to reprimand the opposition more strongly now. 

 Despite was even after facing serious opposition campaign which accused him of back- tracking on its election promises and the anti- incumbency factors.  I don't hesitate to say that this entire credit goes to only KCR as it is proved beyond doubt that he is the man of masses while the opposition has miserably failed to get even deposits. 

    The sad part is , the opposition has  meekly surrendered in MLC elections and conceded its 4 seats in the local bodies quota. While congress has no takers for MLCs in Adilabad, Warangal, and Karimnagar, surprisingly its candidates even defected to TRS on the penultimate day of nominations and the same was the case with TDP., whose candidates withdrew in 4 North Telangana districts, making the way for a unanimous election in 6 seats

       Now KCR's agenda must be to capture , GHMC, the fifth largest metropolitan city in the country and in the process he could very well encash the already demoralised Congress and TDP cadres and also we have seen , how he could grab, the opposition MLAs into his fold under OPERATION AKARSH. And a report says that some more are in the pipeline, latest entrants being Sayanna MLA of TDP and MS Prabhakar MLC of Congress. Earlier T Srinivas Yadav, Teegela KrishnaReddy, Manchireddy Kishan reddy, and M Krishna Rai have already joined. It has been reported that KCR went to former Director CBI and staunch TDP man Vijaya Rama Rao to persuade him to join TRS and accordingly he had already resigned from TDP. While Danam Nagendar, of Congress would have joined but for the efforts of Congress High Commond.
        It looks like KCR has a remarkable quality of taking the setbacks as a challenge and this is evident that in last 12 years of his struggle for separate state. Many times he had experienced serious setbacks and he was written- off as a failed politician. But still with his perseverance he achieved the goal, and people started believing only KCR and none else. Even after coming back to power many senior politicians doubted his political and administrative abilities. He has fulfill all the promises made by him.
     I feel that there is a lot of change in his style of functioning after Warangal by- poll. He must be silently working on a political strategy of eliminating the opposition slowly. While aggressively persuing developmental and welfare agenda of construction of double bedroom houses for weaker sections, filling of teacher vacancies, implementation of Kalyana Laxmi, and shadimubarak schemes, bringing Godavari water to Hyderabad etc. And simultaneously he has changed the strategy in dealing with centre, maintaining cardinal relations to avoid confrontation .
PV Narasimha Rao once said, that governance of dynamics require flexibility and purposiveness. In politics winning election is only the criteria while the governance is a different ball game and the history would judge one only on the basis of quality of governance not political  victories, and I'm sure KCR is very much aware of this.

The Chinar Leaves -- a peek into murky polictics of Congress

I have finished reading the book "The Chinar Leaves" yesterday. Author of this book M L Fotedar, a Kashmiri Brahmin, was a political secretary to the Indira Gandhi and to Rajiv Gandhi. It was regularly reported back then that he advised them on various matters of political and administrative importance at the national level. As per his version, he played a major role in ensuring that Rajiv succeeded his mother after her assassination. He also writes how he was able to persuade Sonia into active politics and thereafter getting her installed as Congress President.
    After their recent electoral setbacks, many senior politicians of the Congress party now seem to have a lot of spare time at their disposal.  Some of them wrote books as their memoirs.   We may refer to his memoir as insider account of the Gandhis that is Indira, Rajiv and Sonia. To me though, it appears to be unabashedly biased. To put it in proper perspective, the memoirs of Jairam Ramesh and Sanjay Baru were quite dispassionate in comparison in their respective books "To The Brink and Back: India's 1991 Story and "The Acciental Prime Minister".
    "The Chinar Leaves" paints a portrait of M.L. Fotedar’s six- decade long political career. A career that began in Kashmir and reached the inner corridors of power during the Gandhi heydays.  The memoir gives us a peep into the murky goings on that made up the national politics back then. In it there are stories galore of many careers made and unmade within the Congress Party. Among these are P. V. Narasimha Rao's efforts to stay in power, Amitab Bachan's falling out with Mrs Gandhi's family, Zail Singh's rift with Rajiv Gandhi etc. Also described in detail are the complex web of politics, deceit and conflict that took place in the immediate aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination.
The book also deals with the way the Indian National Congress, the political party of our national movement, was turned into “Indira Congress" first then into “Sonia Congress”. Somewhere in between there was also a period of “Tiwari Congress”.  Fotedar lays claim to these and many more machinations that were planned and executed by such party luminaries as G.K. Moopanar, Sharad Pawar etc. He also narrates how Mrs Gandhi stoically withstood the grief of Sanjay's death and groomed Rajiv to take charge. In this way she ensured that Rajiv, and not R. Venkat Raman, PV or Pranab, succeeded her. According to Fotedar, it was during the time that he was being nudged out of the family coterie, that Rajiv gradually lost his grip on power. A significant portion of the book also tells us the finesse with which he (Fotedar) had facilitated Sonia's rise. This came after PV was installed at the helm, that was against the wishes of Pawar, all the while handling and checking the ambition of  Sitaram Kesri etc. But then again, when Sonia formed a new coterie of her own, he was left out.

While narrating such stories with ample "Mirch Masala" , Fotedar doesn't reveal all. He does not say why Indira warned Rajiv not to have Amitabh and Madhav Rao Scindia in his cabinet. He doesn't say whom Amitabh recommend for the Chairperson of women's wing of Rajasthan Congress. We find many such incomplete stories, and I would say, it hides as much as it reveals. Moreover it is totally biased against Narasimha Rao. Mr Fotedar assertion that Anjaiah, the CM of AP, was removed at the behest of Narasimha Rao, is hard to take. From whatever little I know, Narasimha Rao and Anjaiah never had any differences. He might have had something against Chenna Reddy or Vengala Rao or even Mr Shivashankar, but not with Anjaiah. In fact it was reported that when Rajiv Gandhi, as General secretary of Congress visited AP, some differences had led to the removal of Anjaiah. Either Fotedar knows only half the truth or perhaps he wants to blame PV?
Regarding the division of AP, he says, that none of them were interested in the division and blames the party high Command. Sitting in New Delhi, he would have had very little perception of a problem that that simmering down south for sixty years. Congress lost because it delayed the matter for years. And then again there was no real leader with mass appeal after the demise of YSR. In erstwhile AP elections of 2004 and 2009, YSR had taken the individual responsibility and won. Now there is no such leader. Take any state for that matter, Congress is losing because it lacks leaders with charisma. The allotment of tickets, among others, is also to blame. Without clearly spelling out the reasons, Fotedar blames Mr. Narsimha Rao for losing big states such as UP and Bihar.  In my humble opinion this does not seem to be right.
       While commenting on this book Sanjay Baru says,  Fotedar  made Narasimha Rao a villain and Priyanka Vadra a heroine. The decline of Congress is placed solely on Narsimha Rao’s shoulders. From the defeat of Congress in  AP in 1982 to its decision to align with AIDMK (as against the  DMK), all the political failures of Congress are laid at Narasimha Rao’s door. In truth Fotedar siding with Arjun Singh and D Tiwari, had actively sought to unseat PV. Writing about Priyanka he says Mrs Indira Gandhi wanted her (Priyanka) to be her successor and lead the party. To this Rajiv too was in agreement. Fotedar sees no hope for Congress under Rahul. Sonia is a non Indian and Rahul is no Rajiv while Priyanka could be Indira redux.
   Coming from a man who wielded immense influence behind the scenes, this is a shocking view of Indian politics. The book falls very short as it is a mix of half-truths with scant regard for objectivity. Finally, it is no match to Jairam Ramesh 's or Mr SanjayBaru's memoirs.