The Democracy Tax is Rising

By M H Ahssan

Indian politics is becoming ever more labyrinthine

To get the measure of India’s political class, picture this. On July 21st Manmohan Singh convened an historic gathering at the Sansad Bhavan, India’s rotund parliament building. The government had been abandoned by its Communist allies, putting Mr Singh’s great achievement, a civil nuclear co-operation deal with America, in jeopardy. The government had been reduced to a minority. If it folded, the deal would die with it, so Mr Singh asked parliament for its support.

Over two days a few brave politicians debated the nuclear deal. The rest of the house jabbered and yowled, in many tongues, for the television cameras. A convicted murderer stretched out on a backbench; he and four other jailbird members (all pro-government) had been freed for the vote. Shortly before it took place, three members of the main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) produced bricks of rupee notes: part of a bribe, they said, given by government supporters for their votes. By hook or by crook the government won, by 275 votes to 256.

In a coup-ridden region, Indians are justifiably proud of their democracy. It has been interrupted only once: in 1975, by Indira Gandhi’s 21-month state of emergency. At their next opportunity India’s voters threw out Mrs Gandhi and her Congress party, for the first time in its history. Thereby they issued a message about the importance of timely elections that India’s leaders have never forgotten—and if they did forget, India’s Election Commission would issue a reminder. It is strong and independent: it can—and does—remove any official it suspects of undue bias. This ensures that, every five years, over a period of a few weeks, India holds a reasonably orderly and fair election. Its 29 states do the same, according to their own electoral calendars. For a vast and somewhat unruly nation, where the state is often partial and corrupt, these are tremendous accomplishments.

If only the election commissioners could decide which Indians are fit for election. The country’s politicians are mostly an unsavoury lot. Of the 522 members of India’s current parliament, 120 are facing criminal charges; around 40 of these are accused of serious crimes, including murder and rape. Most Indian politicians are presumed to be corrupt, which is less surprising. In India’s poor and fractious society patronage politics is inevitable. But Indian politics has got much muckier in recent years because of two factors: the rise of regional and caste-based parties, nakedly dedicated to delivering patronage; and the mutinous coalitions this has led to.

In 2004, after eight years in the wilderness, Congress returned to power after winning 145 seats in parliament. The BJP, which had run a fairly competent coalition government under Atal Bihari Vajpayee, won 138. To form a government—for which 272 seats are required—Congress put together the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) with 12 other parties. Ruling in this arrangement would have been hard enough, but the UPA was still short of a majority. So Congress recruited “outside ” support from another five parties, the most important of which was a coalition of Communist parties, the “Left Front”.

Suspended animation
This absurdly complicated and unrepresentative government has turned out to be more enduring than many expected. For Congress’s leaders, indeed, its survival is a formidable achievement: the party had never managed a coalition before. With competent managers in the main economic ministries, the government can also take some credit for India’s strong economic performance. But it has failed to pass almost any of the reforms India will need to keep up that performance. The Communists were the most obvious blockage; they opposed every liberal proposal on principle. But more broadly, like India’s vast bureaucracy, the government has expended far too much energy merely to sustain itself.

The nuclear deal epitomised its weakness. As a bilateral agreement, signed by Mr Singh and President George Bush in 2005, it did not need parliamentary approval. But because of opposition from the Communists the government was unable to seek the necessary approvals for the deal from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, a club of 45 nations. All last year this stand-off dominated the government’s business. The deal was said to be off, then on, then off again. Pranab Mukherjee, a senior Congress leader who is close to the Communists, mediated between them and Mrs Gandhi. This left regrettably little time for his other job, as India’s foreign minister.

In September 2007 Congress’s regional partners urged Mrs Gandhi to forget the nuclear pact rather than risk an early election. She agreed. The deal was resurrected in June only after Mr Singh allegedly threatened to quit. The Communists walked out. But the government survived by recruiting a new ally, the low-caste Samajwadi Party (SP) from Uttar Pradesh.

The hope had been that the government, relieved of its Communist allies, might push through a few financial-sector reforms. In the event, reduced to a minority, now squabbling with the SP and with an election season coming, it has felt too weak even to try.

This is troubling. It indicates the risks India’s governments will increasingly have to take to get support for any bold policy. Reaching a consensus is becoming impossible, so fragmented is the polity. In the 2004 election Congress and the BJP mustered only 283 seats between them, a record low and only 11 more than is needed for a majority. Both parties saw their share of the vote decline. Congress’s shrank more, to 26.7%, almost a record low. Yet it increased its share of seats, partly because the BJP’s vote was spoiled by smaller parties. Congress nonetheless got the opportunity to form a government, for a reason beyond either party’s control: the BJP’s allies fared unexpectedly badly.

All that can confidently be said about India’s next government is that it will be a coalition, probably led by Congress or the BJP. If neither party can make the necessary alliances to get a majority, there is a slim third possibility: a government led by a regional, caste-based or conceivably even Communist party, with “outside” support from one of the two national parties. Such an arrangement could make the current government look positively united and progressive.

Elections this month in three important northern states, and six states in all, should offer clues as to which scenario is the most likely. As this special report went to press, results were pending from Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, which are all currently held by the BJP. A sweep for either of India’s main parties would be a big boost, though not conclusive, as the BJP found in 2004. It called that general election six months early, on the back of poll victories in those same northern states, and lost. Results are also due from elections being held this month in Delhi, which Congress has ruled for a decade; in Mizoram, a small north-eastern state; and in troubled Jammu and Kashmir.

The general election will be an important test of Congress’s ability to reverse its long decline. Since 2004 it has scored some modest hits. Besides survival, its government has a number of lavish welfare schemes to boast about, including a programme of public works that it claims will provide work for 30m households this year. But the recent turn of events in India, including last month’s terrorist attack in Mumbai, will make such things hard to boast of. And because Congress’s state-level machinery is weak, it is not good at advertising even these small successes.

This reflects the party’s highly centralised leadership structure, based on the cult of the Gandhi family of which Sonia is the current representative. The Italian-born widow of Rajiv Gandhi, a fourth-generation leader of Congress and of India who was murdered in 1991, Sonia was persuaded to take over the party in 1998. She, like this government, has done a bit better than expected. But even if Mrs Gandhi was better than she is, she could not restore Congress to anything like its former power.

The Gandhi factor
For almost four decades it ruled India by relying on three main groups for support: Muslims, high-caste Hindus and Hindu dalits (formerly “untouchables”). The fragmentation of Indian politics is partly a consequence of these groups turning to other parties. Congress’s performance in general elections does not fully reflect this: it actually does better at the centre than in the states, where patronage politics is more intense. That may be because of a residual fondness for the Gandhi family. But it will not restore the party’s lost base.

Congress knows this. But having no strong ideology to unite its squabbling factions, the party’s leaders remain forlornly faithful to the Gandhi dynasty. This was painfully obvious last year when the party charged Mrs Gandhi’s 38-year-old son and heir apparent, Rahul, with restoring the party’s fortunes in UP, India’s biggest state. It is the ancestral seat of the Gandhis and also the birthplace of India’s most powerful low-caste parties. Under Mr Gandhi’s well-meaning but unimpressive leadership, Congress got 22 out 402 seat in UP. A party for dalits, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), won a big majority.

In difficult times it would be reasonable to suppose that Congress is in for a hiding in the coming election. Even in good times Indian voters tend to be disappointed with their governments. Indeed, that was another reason why the BJP lost in 2004. The terrorist attacks in Mumbai should also improve the chances of the security-obsessed BJP. But it is not clear to what extent the Hindu nationalists can capitalise on this.

During the 1990s the BJP built a base of perhaps 15% of Indian voters—typically high-caste and from the north—who liked its Hindu-chauvinist creed, known as Hindutva, or “Hinduness”. In power, from 1998 to 2004, the party tried to expand its base into a broad temple of right-of-centre nationalists. To avoid offending its allies, many of whom had Muslim followings, it also placed less stress on Hindutva. But after its 2004 defeat the party fell to feuding. Its modernisers were demoralised. Its Hinduist ideologues, a more powerful group, attributed the election defeat to insufficient Hindutva. In 2005 they forced the party’s prime ministerial candidate, L.K. Advani, to resign as its leader.

The BJP’s fortunes have since improved. In the past two years the party or its allies have won six out of 11 state polls. Congress has won in only three minor states. A victory for the BJP in May in Karnataka—its first in a southern state—was especially impressive. Mr Advani, an octogenarian bruiser, has also been reinstated as the party’s prime ministerial candidate and unofficial leader. He has restored some of the BJP’s old sense of purpose.

But this momentum may not take it very far. Badly as it did in 2004, the BJP performed well in a few populous northern states, including the three currently awaiting election results. If it loses ground there, as the anti-incumbency tick suggests it might, it is not obvious where it can make it up. In the past, when times were hard, the BJP responded by lambasting Muslims. But to do that, even after the outrage in Mumbai, would be a mistake—not least because the BJP urgently needs to recruit new allies.

A BJP-led government would offer India a better prospect of reform than the current arrangement, but possibly not much better. Compared with Mr Vajpayee’s government, the BJP would probably be a smaller component of the coalition. And Mr Advani is not the deft coalition manager that Mr Vajpayee was. Whether Congress could make a better fist of bringing change, given another chance, would depend first on whether it was again shackled by the Communists.

Mayawati thinks bigOf the other possible coalition leaders, one, the BSP, which is led by an autocratic former primary-school teacher called Mayawati, has captured India’s imagination. The dalit party’s victory in UP was a stunning achievement. Until then, caste-based parties had struggled to attract much support from outside their narrow base. The BSP succeeded, through skilful negotiations, by recruiting leaders of other castes, including brahmins. Thus it aped Congress’s own historic strategy. If Mayawati can replicate this success in the general election, she could play a big part in deciding the composition of the government. UP alone commands 80 seats in parliament. And Mayawati is trying hard to increase her reach outside the state: in February she drew 80,000 people to a rally in Delhi. She has declared her ambition to be India’s first dalit prime minister.

That would be truly inspirational for members of a still downtrodden group. But it might be disastrous for India. Mayawati has a reputation for egomania and gross corruption (though this has never been stood up in court). Newspaper reports, working from her tax return, have estimated her personal income at $12m, twice the figure for her party. Her support for an unsuccessful scheme to append a shopping mall to the Taj Mahal, which is in UP, does not speak well of her judgment. India’s democracy tax, like Mayawati’s income tax, is rising. But so, at least to some extent, is its ability to pay.

What's General About a General Election?

By M H Ahssan

There is nothing general about a general election. It is the sum of a set of particular elections in separate but contiguous and occasionally overlapping geographical and demographic spaces.

The Indian electorate lives in concentric circles. The federal state is one definition of such a circle, but not a comprehensive one. Identities can overlap into national space, as well as shrink into regions within a state. The case of Jharkhand yesterday and Telangana today might be obvious, but even newly-formed Chhattisgarh, which offers only 11 MPs to Parliament, has voters with different priorities, as we witnessed in the recent Assembly elections. Raipur, the old haunt of veteran V.C. Shukla, went largely to the party he has rejoined, Congress. But the tribals of Bastar gave the decisive tilt to the final tally, putting the BJP way ahead with an enthusiastic endorsement of the Salwa Judum programme, in which the state Government armed tribals against Naxalites.

This was greeted with palpable despair by urban liberals. But if they want to add to their despair they should note an almost imperceptible reversal of voter-preferences. Till the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi the Congress vote was secure among tribals, Dalits and the poor; the middle classes and the rich would abandon the Congress when they wanted to. After fifteen years of Narasimha Rao, Dr Manmohan Singh and Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the BJP has made serious inroads into the affections of the underprivileged in central India. This is a serious pointer to the growing perception that the Congress has become the party of the rich.

I can think of only two elections which were fought on a single issue: the one in 1977, after the Emergency; and the one in 1984, after Mrs Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Generally, there are a handful of concerns that determine the voter’s decision. But there is always a primary issue, and many secondary ones. Every one of the recent Assembly elections, from Delhi to Mizoram, was a referendum on the Chief Minister rather on the party of the CM. Mrs Sheila Dikshit won re-election in Delhi, not the Congress. The BJP was ahead of the Congress, but Mrs Dikshit was far, far ahead of the man who sought to replace her, Vijay Malhotra.

The Indian voter is more mature than the Indian politician. He was not distracted by emotion, even one as powerful as terrorism inspired by forces hostile to India. He concentrated on what mattered most in an Assembly election, good governance, and he knew that this is provided by an individual, a leader. Equally, the leader is responsible for mismanagement and corruption, where that prevails. He placed terrorism also within the matrix of good governance, for it is the duty of the state to provide security to the citizen. But his judgment was remarkably honest. He would not blame Mrs Dikshit for the collapse of authority in Mumbai. Those who failed in Mumbai, whether at the state or Central level, will be held culpable when their time comes.

Narendra Modi made an interesting point when campaigning for tougher anti-terrorism laws. He told Gujaratis during last year’s Assembly elections that he could assure them a better life, but what was the point of the assurance if they were left with no life to enjoy? He could make this an effective claim only because he had delivered on development. In Delhi, Mrs Dikhshit had the record, and the attacks on her looked like gamesmanship because they were not backed by either a fresh face or fresh ideas. Everywhere, people are tired of politics at the expense of development. And they do not care if development comes wrapped in a tricolour or saffron. The voter is now colour-neutral.

Of course victory and defeat in a state do impact the fortunes of a party. And so the advantage in the next general elections will lie with whichever coalition offers the better collection of Chief Ministers. Or, to put it in another way, which team has fewer disasters in its ranks. The Congress is in serious trouble in the two large states where it is in power. It has been forced to replace its Chief Minister in Maharashtra; unwisely, it shifted merely from a callous face to a lacklustre one. In Andhra, the extraordinary rise of Chiranjeevi is a warning to both the Congress and the Telugu Desam. He is soaking up the gap between anger and what might be called lukewarmth. Its principal ally, the DMK, has become synonymous with corruption, hobbling in the process Prime Minister Singh, who has tolerated putrid partners in order to remain in office. The Congress should feel happier about its prospects in Punjab, to tick off one of its potential assets in the general election balance sheet. A political party might be a broad church, an alliance a broader faith, but every church needs a pastor.

The team must be led by someone who can display authority, and a programme that encompasses a nationwide horizon. Manmohan Singh and L.K. Advani will be their respective team-leaders, of course; but the Third Front will be hampered if it cannot offer a candidate for Prime Minister.

The Delhi result might just be the best thing to happen to the BJP. If it had won, its leaders might have forgotten precisely why they were re-elected in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Media’s fixation on its urban base can be mesmerising, driving out facts from analysis. The BJP presumably has realised that the voter will not pick up anything thrown in its way. Both the slogan and the leader have to be credible. All politicians are prone to get stuck in the treacle of smugness at the first hint of success. The split decision should have sobered all parties. There was a welcome sobriety in the commentary from spokesmen of both the Congress and the BJP following the results. It should have also reaffirmed to both parties that the general election is going to be won by whichever has the better allies. Neither is strong enough to march too far ahead of its partners. This will also have an ameliorating effect on the formation of the next Government in Delhi.

December 2008 was a wake-up call. This should ensure that all political parties go into the general election with their eyes open, and common sense intact.

What's General About a General Election?

By M H Ahssan

There is nothing general about a general election. It is the sum of a set of particular elections in separate but contiguous and occasionally overlapping geographical and demographic spaces.

The Indian electorate lives in concentric circles. The federal state is one definition of such a circle, but not a comprehensive one. Identities can overlap into national space, as well as shrink into regions within a state. The case of Jharkhand yesterday and Telangana today might be obvious, but even newly-formed Chhattisgarh, which offers only 11 MPs to Parliament, has voters with different priorities, as we witnessed in the recent Assembly elections. Raipur, the old haunt of veteran V.C. Shukla, went largely to the party he has rejoined, Congress. But the tribals of Bastar gave the decisive tilt to the final tally, putting the BJP way ahead with an enthusiastic endorsement of the Salwa Judum programme, in which the state Government armed tribals against Naxalites.

This was greeted with palpable despair by urban liberals. But if they want to add to their despair they should note an almost imperceptible reversal of voter-preferences. Till the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi the Congress vote was secure among tribals, Dalits and the poor; the middle classes and the rich would abandon the Congress when they wanted to. After fifteen years of Narasimha Rao, Dr Manmohan Singh and Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the BJP has made serious inroads into the affections of the underprivileged in central India. This is a serious pointer to the growing perception that the Congress has become the party of the rich.

I can think of only two elections which were fought on a single issue: the one in 1977, after the Emergency; and the one in 1984, after Mrs Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Generally, there are a handful of concerns that determine the voter’s decision. But there is always a primary issue, and many secondary ones. Every one of the recent Assembly elections, from Delhi to Mizoram, was a referendum on the Chief Minister rather on the party of the CM. Mrs Sheila Dikshit won re-election in Delhi, not the Congress. The BJP was ahead of the Congress, but Mrs Dikshit was far, far ahead of the man who sought to replace her, Vijay Malhotra.

The Indian voter is more mature than the Indian politician. He was not distracted by emotion, even one as powerful as terrorism inspired by forces hostile to India. He concentrated on what mattered most in an Assembly election, good governance, and he knew that this is provided by an individual, a leader. Equally, the leader is responsible for mismanagement and corruption, where that prevails. He placed terrorism also within the matrix of good governance, for it is the duty of the state to provide security to the citizen. But his judgment was remarkably honest. He would not blame Mrs Dikshit for the collapse of authority in Mumbai. Those who failed in Mumbai, whether at the state or Central level, will be held culpable when their time comes.

Narendra Modi made an interesting point when campaigning for tougher anti-terrorism laws. He told Gujaratis during last year’s Assembly elections that he could assure them a better life, but what was the point of the assurance if they were left with no life to enjoy? He could make this an effective claim only because he had delivered on development. In Delhi, Mrs Dikhshit had the record, and the attacks on her looked like gamesmanship because they were not backed by either a fresh face or fresh ideas. Everywhere, people are tired of politics at the expense of development. And they do not care if development comes wrapped in a tricolour or saffron. The voter is now colour-neutral.

Of course victory and defeat in a state do impact the fortunes of a party. And so the advantage in the next general elections will lie with whichever coalition offers the better collection of Chief Ministers. Or, to put it in another way, which team has fewer disasters in its ranks. The Congress is in serious trouble in the two large states where it is in power. It has been forced to replace its Chief Minister in Maharashtra; unwisely, it shifted merely from a callous face to a lacklustre one. In Andhra, the extraordinary rise of Chiranjeevi is a warning to both the Congress and the Telugu Desam. He is soaking up the gap between anger and what might be called lukewarmth. Its principal ally, the DMK, has become synonymous with corruption, hobbling in the process Prime Minister Singh, who has tolerated putrid partners in order to remain in office. The Congress should feel happier about its prospects in Punjab, to tick off one of its potential assets in the general election balance sheet. A political party might be a broad church, an alliance a broader faith, but every church needs a pastor.

The team must be led by someone who can display authority, and a programme that encompasses a nationwide horizon. Manmohan Singh and L.K. Advani will be their respective team-leaders, of course; but the Third Front will be hampered if it cannot offer a candidate for Prime Minister.

The Delhi result might just be the best thing to happen to the BJP. If it had won, its leaders might have forgotten precisely why they were re-elected in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Media’s fixation on its urban base can be mesmerising, driving out facts from analysis. The BJP presumably has realised that the voter will not pick up anything thrown in its way. Both the slogan and the leader have to be credible. All politicians are prone to get stuck in the treacle of smugness at the first hint of success. The split decision should have sobered all parties. There was a welcome sobriety in the commentary from spokesmen of both the Congress and the BJP following the results. It should have also reaffirmed to both parties that the general election is going to be won by whichever has the better allies. Neither is strong enough to march too far ahead of its partners. This will also have an ameliorating effect on the formation of the next Government in Delhi.

December 2008 was a wake-up call. This should ensure that all political parties go into the general election with their eyes open, and common sense intact.

What's General About a General Election?

By M H Ahssan



There is nothing general about a general election. It is the sum of a set of particular elections in separate but contiguous and occasionally overlapping geographical and demographic spaces.



The Indian electorate lives in concentric circles. The federal state is one definition of such a circle, but not a comprehensive one. Identities can overlap into national space, as well as shrink into regions within a state. The case of Jharkhand yesterday and Telangana today might be obvious, but even newly-formed Chhattisgarh, which offers only 11 MPs to Parliament, has voters with different priorities, as we witnessed in the recent Assembly elections. Raipur, the old haunt of veteran V.C. Shukla, went largely to the party he has rejoined, Congress. But the tribals of Bastar gave the decisive tilt to the final tally, putting the BJP way ahead with an enthusiastic endorsement of the Salwa Judum programme, in which the state Government armed tribals against Naxalites.



This was greeted with palpable despair by urban liberals. But if they want to add to their despair they should note an almost imperceptible reversal of voter-preferences. Till the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi the Congress vote was secure among tribals, Dalits and the poor; the middle classes and the rich would abandon the Congress when they wanted to. After fifteen years of Narasimha Rao, Dr Manmohan Singh and Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the BJP has made serious inroads into the affections of the underprivileged in central India. This is a serious pointer to the growing perception that the Congress has become the party of the rich.



I can think of only two elections which were fought on a single issue: the one in 1977, after the Emergency; and the one in 1984, after Mrs Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Generally, there are a handful of concerns that determine the voter’s decision. But there is always a primary issue, and many secondary ones. Every one of the recent Assembly elections, from Delhi to Mizoram, was a referendum on the Chief Minister rather on the party of the CM. Mrs Sheila Dikshit won re-election in Delhi, not the Congress. The BJP was ahead of the Congress, but Mrs Dikshit was far, far ahead of the man who sought to replace her, Vijay Malhotra.



The Indian voter is more mature than the Indian politician. He was not distracted by emotion, even one as powerful as terrorism inspired by forces hostile to India. He concentrated on what mattered most in an Assembly election, good governance, and he knew that this is provided by an individual, a leader. Equally, the leader is responsible for mismanagement and corruption, where that prevails. He placed terrorism also within the matrix of good governance, for it is the duty of the state to provide security to the citizen. But his judgment was remarkably honest. He would not blame Mrs Dikshit for the collapse of authority in Mumbai. Those who failed in Mumbai, whether at the state or Central level, will be held culpable when their time comes.



Narendra Modi made an interesting point when campaigning for tougher anti-terrorism laws. He told Gujaratis during last year’s Assembly elections that he could assure them a better life, but what was the point of the assurance if they were left with no life to enjoy? He could make this an effective claim only because he had delivered on development. In Delhi, Mrs Dikhshit had the record, and the attacks on her looked like gamesmanship because they were not backed by either a fresh face or fresh ideas. Everywhere, people are tired of politics at the expense of development. And they do not care if development comes wrapped in a tricolour or saffron. The voter is now colour-neutral.



Of course victory and defeat in a state do impact the fortunes of a party. And so the advantage in the next general elections will lie with whichever coalition offers the better collection of Chief Ministers. Or, to put it in another way, which team has fewer disasters in its ranks. The Congress is in serious trouble in the two large states where it is in power. It has been forced to replace its Chief Minister in Maharashtra; unwisely, it shifted merely from a callous face to a lacklustre one. In Andhra, the extraordinary rise of Chiranjeevi is a warning to both the Congress and the Telugu Desam. He is soaking up the gap between anger and what might be called lukewarmth. Its principal ally, the DMK, has become synonymous with corruption, hobbling in the process Prime Minister Singh, who has tolerated putrid partners in order to remain in office. The Congress should feel happier about its prospects in Punjab, to tick off one of its potential assets in the general election balance sheet. A political party might be a broad church, an alliance a broader faith, but every church needs a pastor.



The team must be led by someone who can display authority, and a programme that encompasses a nationwide horizon. Manmohan Singh and L.K. Advani will be their respective team-leaders, of course; but the Third Front will be hampered if it cannot offer a candidate for Prime Minister.



The Delhi result might just be the best thing to happen to the BJP. If it had won, its leaders might have forgotten precisely why they were re-elected in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Media’s fixation on its urban base can be mesmerising, driving out facts from analysis. The BJP presumably has realised that the voter will not pick up anything thrown in its way. Both the slogan and the leader have to be credible. All politicians are prone to get stuck in the treacle of smugness at the first hint of success. The split decision should have sobered all parties. There was a welcome sobriety in the commentary from spokesmen of both the Congress and the BJP following the results. It should have also reaffirmed to both parties that the general election is going to be won by whichever has the better allies. Neither is strong enough to march too far ahead of its partners. This will also have an ameliorating effect on the formation of the next Government in Delhi.



December 2008 was a wake-up call. This should ensure that all political parties go into the general election with their eyes open, and common sense intact.

The Congress Should Act Before it’s Too Late

By Javid Hassan

The Congress Party should stop being a fence-sitter and spell out its stand clearly as the juggernaut of the Telangana movement thunders towards its goal of a separate state. By appearing as a faction-ridden party in Andhra Pradesh and as an organization that believes in a marriage of convenience at the all-India level, it has exposed its weaknesses, which the BJP and other political outfits are exploiting in the context of the snowballing movement.

Given the fact that all other parties have an equally dismal record when it comes to delivering on promise or sticking to principles, the Congress has an edge over them, as it was during its tenure that India gained an international stature and became a force to reckon with. It has also stood up for the minorities and other backward classes, besides pursuing a policy of raising India’s profile on the educational and technological fronts.

The other plus point in its favour was seen in the recent Assembly elections, where it won 3-2 by sweeping the polls in Delhi, Rajasthan and Mizoram and losing out to the BJP in Madhya Pradesh and Chhatisgarh. These electoral victories could yield political mileage in the general elections scheduled in April next year.

Yet, its track record especially in Andhra Pradesh, has become a political liability when it went back on its promise of creating a separate Telangana state after it won the elections with the support of the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS).

That the party acts according to its own agenda rather than the national agenda came to the fore much earlier in 1956 when the Centrally-appointed

States Reorganization Commission (SRC) declared that it was not in favour of merging the Telangana region with the then Andhra state. Para 382 of the SRC Report said: "..opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit, (while) public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallize itself".

The concerns of the Telangana people were on several grounds. The region had a less developed economy than Andhra, but a larger revenue base (mostly because it taxed rather than prohibited alcoholic beverages), which Telanganites feared might be diverted for use in Andhra.

Even so, the Centre bypassed the SRC recommendations and opted for a unified Andhra Pradesh on November 1, 1956 after a "Gentlemen's agreement" assured the Telangana people that their interests would be safeguarded. Although the Congress faced an internal revolt on this score, its leadership stood against additional linguistic states, which were regarded as "antinational."

This triggered a spate of defections from the Congress led by Dr.M. Chenna Reddy, who founded the Telangana People's Association (Telangana Praja Samithi). Despite electoral successes, however, some of the new party leaders withdrew their support to the agitation in September 1971 and rejoined the Congress for their own ends.

However, the Telangana movement received a new lease of life during the 1990s when the BJP promised a separate Telangana state if it came to power. But the BJP could not live up to its promise due to the opposition from its coalition partner, Telugu Desam Party.

This game of political charade was again in evidence when Congress party MLAs from the Telangana region constituted a Telangana Congress Legislators Forum in support of a separate Telangana state. The launch of a new party, Telangana Rashtra Samithi (or TRS), was masterminded with the same goal in view— a separate Telangana state with Hyderabad as its capital.

That the Congress has never been unified in its ranks was again in evidence earlier this year when two senior leaders, who were leading a movement for a Telanagna state for the past few months, changed their stance during a meeting of the party’s state unit, when Chief Minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy was present.

This game of political horse trading and floor crossing that the Congress has been playing for the last four decades has got to end not only in its own interest but also in the larger socio-economic interest of the region and its people. We would like to know when the party will crystallize its stand instead of changing its colors like a chameleon.

In a perceptive paper titled “Separate Telangana: Beginning of the End” published in Mainstream (September 29- October 5, 2006 ) its author Sreedhar argues emphatically that Telangana state is not going to be a reality. He cites various reasons that may compel the Congress-I to deny a separate statehood for Telangana.

The paper lists four major factors that, according to him, do not justify the demand for a separate Telangana. First, the movement lost its chance apparently because it was not spearheaded by one of the Congress leaders, “especially the one who has weight to throw around or disturb the peace of delhiwallahs.”

Secondly, the Congress started doubting the ability of TRS to govern the state because of its links with Naxalites. Thirdly, the state developed its knowledge-based-industry during the TDP regime which the YSR government is vigorously pursuing by creating employment opportunities in a big way, rendering the demand for a separate Telangana irrelevant. Fourthly, more than one million NRIs from Andhra, who went to Europe and North America during the 1980s, are willing to invest in the region as an undivided state.

However, according to Syed Zia-ur-Rahman, NRI from the Telangana region now based in Saudi Arabia, Congress-I’s interests in the current situation would be best served if it backs the Telangana movement instead of remaining non-committal. He argues that given the track record of all the parties championing its cause, the Congress is still the best bet for the region in spite of all its wrongdoing in the past.

Zia points out that even though the Muslims are an influential minority in the region, they have never been consulted by any of the political players. Moreover, their track record vis-à-vis Muslims leaves much to be desired. He doubts the credibility of the parties that claim to work with a single-minded devotion for the welfare of the Telanganites. “It’s about khissa kursi ka,” he says, referring to the political plums and cherries that the politicians would pick for themselves if Telangana becomes a separate state.

It is a fact that all parties across the political spectrum put their own interests above everything else, even though they profess to work for the downtrodden and the dispossessed. At least the Congress fares better on the political score board, since it has provided educational and employment facilities for minorities which some parties have balked at.

Since the Congress has done fairly well in the state elections, it should turn that political capital to its advantage by forging alliances with parties. A separate Telangana is set to become a reality in 2009. The Congress should not create a political vacuum for others to fill in. No one wants to jump from the frying pan into the fire, with the evil forces waiting to pounce on them.

However, the biggest challenge for the Congress this time is that it finds iself wedged between the left and the rightwing parties. On top of it, pop star Chiranjeevi could eat away Congress votes, leaving it high and dry. The political stakes are high which only its political heavyweights can counter on this new Telangana chess board.

What Wins Elections?

By M H Ahssan

Clearly, good governance -- or the ability of a political party to "connect" with the electorate's hopes, needs and desires -- can be an electoral winner. Politics of terror, on the other hand, may not resonate with the voters...

In Delhi, development may have meant the vision of a modern megalopolis, in Chattisgarh, the populist promise of rice at Rs 1 a kg, and in Madhya Pradesh, better roads. But it worked for the incumbent chief ministers of these three states -- the Congress’s Sheila Dikshit, and the BJP’s Raman Singh and Shivraj Singh Chauhan -- who have all emerged as convincing victors. On the other hand, the BJP’s Vasundhara Raje failed to deliver in Rajasthan, as did the Mizo National Front in Mizoram: in these two states, corruption and the inability to deliver ensured defeat for the sitting chief ministers.

Clearly, the principal message that has emerged from this round of assembly elections is that good governance -- or the ability of a political party to "connect" with the electorate’s hopes, needs and desires -- can be an electoral winner. But equally, it needs to be underscored that the BJP’s attempt to use the terror card -- especially the recent terrorist violence in Mumbai -- especially in Delhi , did not resonate with the voters. And this despite the wall-to-wall coverage of the tragic events in the media, with the Congress facing the brunt of the criticism.

All this, however, cannot obscure one fact -- that the Bahujan Samaj Party is slowly but surely growing outside Uttar Pradesh, having made its presence felt in all but one -- Mizoram -- of the states that went to the polls. In Delhi , for instance, its poll percentage share has risen from 5.8 to 12.2 per cent. As one has seen in U.P., this is the way the BSP grows, incrementally, till it reaches a critical mass which can actually then begin to deliver seats.

So what do these elections mean for the two principal parties, the Congress and the BJP, given that the general elections are just five months away in April-May 2009? For the Congress, reeling under the impact of a global economic meltdown and a series of terror attacks around the country culminating in 26/11, winning three states out of five should come as a big shot in the arm. Not because it presages victory in 2009, but because it should help galvanise the despondent workers of a party facing a serious crisis of confidence, while conveying to its electoral allies outside these states -- whether the RJD and LJP in Bihar , the NCP in Maharashtra or the DMK in Tamil Nadu -- that it is still in the game.

At the level of individual results, the most remarkable result is clearly the one in Delhi , where Sheila Dikshit has delivered the state for a record third time. Dikshit was careful not to take the credit when asked about her success, but the fact is she defied not just the pollsters and the opposition, but her many critics within the party to do the impossible: she led the Congress to a clear win and as the results came in it became clear that but for the BSP, it would have been a landslide victory. In the Congress, the emergence of leaders outside the Gandhi clan is always a cause for concern for the crabs in the party: indeed, Dikshit appeared only too aware of how double edged her victory could be as she parried questions on whether she saw herself as a possible future Prime Minister.

Ashok Gehlot, another Congress leader who is seldom in the limelight, led the party to victory in Rajasthan in a quiet campaign against the flamboyant Vasundhara Raje, whose face beamed down from hoardings across the state. The question now is: will the Congress give the credit to Gehlot, someone who is grudgingly acknowledged not just as a good organizer but who set very high standards of good governance as chief minister between 1998 and 2003? The Congress’s third victory comes in Mizoram where it will return to power after two terms of MNF rule.

If the results have been unexpectedly good for the Congress -- given the party’s low expectations -- they have been disappointing for the BJP, even though it has seen the birth of two low-key leaders, Shivraj Singh Chauhan and Raman Singh, who retained MP and Chaittisgarh for the party. Chauhan, on his part, has finally emerged from the shadow of Babulal Gaur and Uma Bharati -- once his mentor -- and come into his own. Approachable and modest, the fact that he crisscrossed the state has earned him the epithet of "panv panv bhai". If his message of development helped him retain MP, he was helped in equal measure by the in-fighting in the Congress. If the BJP stood rock solid behind Chauhan, the Congress seemed to have more leaders than followers -- there were central ministers Kamal Nath and Jyotioraditya Scindia, party general secretary Digvijay Singh, state chief Suresh Pachauri and Arjun Singh’s son, Ajay Singh -- all working at cross purposes.

Chattisgarh’s is an equally interesting story. Here Raman Singh’s quiet style and promise of cheap rice, which earned him the sobriquet of Chawal Wale Baba, appears to have helped him retain the state for the BJP. But the real story could well lie in the Naxal-affected Bastar region. Here, the BJP did remarkably well by fielding several Salwa Judum leaders -- so is this a victory for the Salwa Judum? Apparently not, as the Congress Legislature Party leader Mahendra Karma -- and the face of the Salwa Judum -- has lost his seat, Dantewada. Reports coming in suggest that the low polling here ensured that only those backing the state sponsored Salwa Judum came out to vote -- and as the Congress’s face in the state, Ajit Jogi, was opposed to the Salwa Judum, the benefit went to the BJP.

Now that this round of elections is over, what do they hold out for the general elections? For the Congress, which is likely to introspect as much on its victories as losses (so stunned is it by its success!), the challenge will be to take some of the lessons of this round forward -- the need for unity in its ranks and to delegate work to its more capable leaders. For the BJP, which was hoping to make internal security -- or terror, if you like -- one of its key campaign planks in 2009, it will need some time to give the issue a fresh spin.

India's Polls Cool War Fever

By Siddharth Srivastava

The unexpected performance of India's ruling Congress party in this month's state assembly elections has gone some way towards dampening the likelihood of armed conflict between India and Pakistan, which had peaked since the November 26 terrorist attacks on Mumbai.

Government officials have said the New Delhi government, led by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, could be in pause mode following the party's surprising victory in three of the five provincial elections. The poll results seem to indicate that the electorate is more concerned with the government's performance on development and governance issues than its ability to tackle terror.

The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had strongly attacked Congress over its failure to prevent recent terrorist attacks in India, particularly the Mumbai strike, in the lead-up to the election. But the ruling party successfully defeated it in Delhi, the northwestern state of Rajasthan, and Mizoram in northeastern India.

Many commentators had predicted a backlash against the government's failure to prevent the Mumbai attack, which left 171 dead, and even Congress leaders admitted privately they were surprised with the results. The BJP's electoral charge, led by stalwarts such as L K Advani, Narender Modi and Rajnath Singh, had focused on the government being "soft on terror".

But rather than reacting to the government's security lapses, the electorate has chosen to reward Congress chief ministers in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh who have bucked strong anti-incumbency trends and delivered on basic promises to improve water and electricity supply, roads, and law and order. The electorate appears to have been reluctant to single out the Congress for negligence on terror, which is fair considering there were also major strikes in India during the BJP's tenure of 1998 to 2004.

The Pakistan origins of the militant group behind the Mumbai attack initially provoked the Indian government into threatening "hot pursuit" into Pakistan-administered Kashmir, the disputed mountainous region which has twice led the nations to war since their independence from Britain in 1947. India warned it was planning strikes on militant training camps there ran by the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET), the group widely thought responsible for the plot, and handed Islamabad a list of 20 terror suspects, including LET leaders, with demands for their arrest and extradition.

"If Congress was defeated in the elections it is almost certain that India would have conducted precision strikes to dismantle terrorist camps [in Pakistan], as Pakistan has refused to hand over any of the known terrorists that Indian wants,'' said one senior official who declined to be named. "New Delhi would have needed to obliterate charges it is soft on terror before the general election next spring."

Sources have indicated that India's military commanders had advised the government it would take just two weeks to launch an attack on Pakistan. The initial plan was to send unmanned aerial vehicles, possibly with the help of Israel, if Islamabad did not take concrete action against the terrorism suspects in Pakistan. The list of 20 suspects handed to Pakistan includes the notorious gangster Dawood Ibrahim, Masood Azhar, the leader of the Jaish-e-Mohammed - LET's parent organization, and Hafez Mohammed Saeed, the LET chief suspected of masterminding the Mumbai attack.

While the election results seem to have postponed the plans for "hot pursuit", it has not been ruled out entirely, as New Delhi has managed to convince Washington of the need to take out the terror infrastructure on Pakistan's border with India.

Since a US ultimatum on December 6 which gave Pakistan 48 hours to act, it has reportedly arrested top LET commander Zakiur Rehman Lakhwi, and struck at the group's camps in Kashmir. Pakistani Defense Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar said on Tuesday that Masood Azhar had been put under house arrest. Intelligence sources have told Asia Times Online that most of the terror camps along Pakistan's Kashmir borders have been dismantled. But officials in New Delhi and Washington have been skeptical of the strikes, viewing them as token efforts aimed at easing global pressure.

"How is it that these terrorist leaders have been arrested so easily? India's top commandos needed more than 60 hours to neutralize 10 foot soldiers in Mumbai,'' said one Indian official. "They know that they are going to be mollycoddled and have no fear due to protection by the army. House arrest means nothing - Masood Azhar will continue to have access to every communication tool to continue with his activities and access his people.''

If Pakistan is merely trying to appear strong on the militants until international attentions shifts elsewhere, this may be a high-risk charade, given the high-profile nature of the Mumbai attacks. America is breathing down Islamabad's neck and has given New Delhi the go-ahead to strike targets beyond its borders. At the same time Washington has said it would not tolerate war breaking out between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

Pakistan has made it clear that it will not hand over any of its recently captured terrorist suspects to India, however, its defense minister has suggested it is prepared for joint interrogations or probes with India. This could be a significant step but this depends on wether the Pakistan government's control of the country is as tenuous as has been suggested. Also, even if there is a joint probe, Pakistan's army could use the opportunity to drum up nationalistic fervor against India.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has recently said that the main impetus of the attacks could have been to stir up a Pakistan-India conflict. "These terrorists are undoubtedly unnerved by the increasingly good relations between Pakistan and India, really going back before the civilian government" but certainly since President Asif Ali Zardari came into power, she said in an interview on CBS News Radio on Wednesday.

Voters Defy Predictions

By M H Ahssan

The Congress party’s surprisingly good showing in India's state assembly elections has not only given the party a boost ahead of general elections next spring, but also provides useful pointers for political parties charting their strategies for the upcoming showdown. Voters have sent out a clear signal that they are not impressed by parties hoping to derive the maximum political mileage from terrorist attacks.

The Congress, which heads the ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, went into the assembly elections on the back foot, having to defend its rather poor performance in tackling terrorism and controlling fuel and commodity prices. However, it was able to hold on to Delhi for the third time in a row, wrest control of Rajasthan in northwestern India from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and come to power with an impressive two-thirds majority in the northeastern state of Mizoram, after a decade in the political wilderness there.

The BJP retained control over Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh in central India, while the results for the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir, which has completed four rounds of voting and has another three to go, will be known at the end of December. No date has been set for the national polls, but they must be held by May, when the current government’s term expires.

The assembly elections are important for several reasons. They have been described as the "semi-final" ahead of the general elections, and the results will help parties determine their electoral platforms for the big vote.

Congress' results are a reversal of its electoral fortunes in recent years. Since it came to power in May 2004, Congress has lost 16 out of 25 assembly elections. It has not won a single large state since 2005; and the few victories it has managed were in small states such as Goa and Puducherry.

That jinx has now been broken, and what seemed like a terminal slide for the Congress has been arrested. The victories in the polls will give it much needed confidence ahead of the general elections. And allies that might have been thinking of abandoning it ahead of the national vote for its poor electoral performance could now decide to stick with the party.

More importantly, the election results show the BJP’s harping on about the terror issue and its cynical exploitation of public alarm over the November 26 terrorist attacks in Mumbai did not work.

Of the states which went to the polls recently, only Chhattisgarh had finished voting before the attacks on Mumbai. Madhya Pradesh voted on November 27 and Delhi two days later. Polling in Mizoram and Rajasthan was held on December 2 and 4, respectively.

India has been hit by a nationwide wave of terrorist attacks in recent months, and the BJP has often accused the government of being "soft on terrorism". This campaign turned shriller following the Mumbai attacks, after which the BJP issued a blood-red, front-page advertisement in the Hindustan Times, an English daily with a very large readership, ahead of the Delhi polls reading: "Brutal Terror Strikes at Will. Weak Government Unwilling and Incapable. Fight Terror. Vote BJP." It also put up hoardings in cities and sent out text messages to hundreds of thousands of voters, blaming the Congress for the attacks.

At a time when public anger with the government’s repeated failure to protect ordinary civilians from terrorism has assumed serious proportions, it was widely believed that the terrorist attacks, especially the ones in Mumbai, would favor the BJP. Analysts predicted and politicians felt voters would succumb to the BJP's fear-mongering.

Both Delhi and Rajasthani have suffered brutal terrorist attacks, and although they have a sizeable population sympathetic to the BJP’s Hindutva (Hindu supremacist) ideology, the BJP’s tough talk on terrorism did not pay off electorally. Its divisive campaign, while likely to have struck a chord in many, did not get it the number of votes it needed to win Delhi.

The BJP is not the first party to have used terrorist attacks and the fear they generate to win elections. In 1984, when prime minister Indira Gandhi was gunned down by Sikh terrorists, the Congress launched a virulent election campaign that portrayed Sikhs in general as terrorists. Advertisements and hoardings spoke of the threat they posed to national security. “Your neighbor could be a terrorist," said advertisements, which had pictures of turbaned Sikhs. The campaign worked. The Congress won with a landslide majority.

More recently, the Republicans and US President George W Bush played on American fears of terrorist attacks in the 2004 presidential election. That campaign worked too and Bush was elected for a second term.

But the Indian voters, often dismissed as illiterate and ill-informed, did not allow the BJP’s campaign to determine their electoral choices.The election result indicates that voters are unwilling to pin the blame for India’s vulnerability to terrorism on one party alone and that they are uneasy with politicizing terrorism.

The issue of credible governance was more important for voters. In Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Delhi voters returned incumbent governments to power, the BJP in the first two, where welfare programs for farmers and women played a role in keeping voters on its side, and the Congress in Delhi. In Rajasthan and Mizoram, voters endorsed the opposition Congress over incumbents.

What are the lessons that parties can draw from the polls? For the BJP, the election results should serve as a reminder that its divisive politics will not work. As for the Congress, there is a danger that it could draw the wrong lessons from the verdict and go back to its lethargic approach to tacking terrorism. But it needs to see the writing on the wall. Voters are not unconcerned about terrorism, but they also expect good governance, which includes responding adequately to development issues as well as internal security needs.

The semi-final contest is effectively a draw between India's two main parties, the Congress and the BJP, with voters putting both parties on notice. The party that draws the right lessons from the "semi-final" will hold the advantage going into the general election.

However, both parties will have to tread cautiously in drawing lessons from the assembly elections, as the factors influencing them in general elections are quite different, as previous elections have indicated. The assembly elections provide pointers that politicians and analysts will pounce on to make grand predictions for the general election, but past elections show the need for caution. Six months is a long time in politics and the mood of voters can change dramatically.

India is too large a country and too complex a democracy for politicians and analysts to make easy predictions. What the election underscores yet again is that both would do well to approach the Indian voter with more humility.

Telangana Goes for a Toss ahead of Polls

By M H Ahssan

Elated over the 3-2 victory for the party in the just concluded Assembly polls, the Congress on Tuesday decided to dump Telangana and go to the people with the development plank of the Y S Rajasekhara Reddy government in the 2009 elections.

“The Congress High Command has decided that it will take up the Telangana issue only after the elections next year,” AICC sources told HNN.

This decision of the party high command was conveyed to chief minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy by AICC general secretary in-charge of the state M Veerappa Moily when the two met in the national capital on Tuesday. Congress president Sonia Gandhi has also directed Rajasekhara Reddy to make the developmental programmes of the state government as the party’s election plank, the sources added, clearly implying that the Congress would go it alone in the polls.

“No more Telangana trouble. The election results of five states has proved beyond doubt that the people prefer a performing government. Except the performance of the state government, nothing matters in the 2009 elections. Therefore, it has been decided to take up the T issue only after the general elections next year,” AICC sources told HNN.

The chief minister is scheduled to meet Congress president Sonia Gandhi in New Delhi on Wednesday at which ‘madam’ is expected to wholeheartedly back Rajasekhara Reddy. The chief minister has all along been maintaining that the separate state is not really an issue on the ground and that the developmental programmes undertaken by his government in the region would be enough for the party to sail through in the hustings. “With the thorny issue kept aside for the time being, we can completely focus on returning to power by publicising the developmental programmes,” a CM’s aide said.

Meanwhile, the election results has come as a dampener for both the Telangana Congress leaders and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi. “In the backdrop of the Congress win in Delhi, Rajasthan and Mizoram, we cannot press for a decision on Telangana. The results have strengthened the hands of the chief minister,” a Congress leader from Telangana region admitted. Another Congress leader said that they had dropped the idea of meeting Sonia Gandhi on the need to announce creation of Telangana before the general elections.

According to sources, the TRS too is suddenly caught in a dilemma. “Since we cannot go it alone, we will be forced to agree to the TDP and Left terms and join the alliance and hope to counter the Congress in the region,” one TRS leader said.


LOSING HOPES: Is Congress losing hopes of a favourable decision from the party high command on formation of separate Telangana State before the next elections? The tenor of PCC president D Srinivas comments on the issue suggests so.

"It is not an issue to be discussed at the PCC level. In fact it has been discussed at several levels. What is there do discuss now?" the PCC chief said with a tinge of despondency in his voice at a news conference. The reaction came when the reporters asked him if the issue figured in the DCC presidents’ and PCC office bearers’ conference held earlier in the day.

"The party high command has to take a decision on the issue," he said, finally. Asked about senior member and MLA V. Purushotham Reddy’s remarks that lack of unity among senior Congress members had resulted in `dilution’ of Telangana issue, the PCC chief shot back saying that it was for him (Purushotham Reddy) to bring about unity since he is a senior leader.

Dismissing as hollow claim the contention of the Praja Rajyam Party (PRP) that it would win all the 294 seats in the State, Srinivas said Chiranjeevi’s party had no `history or leadership capability’ that would prove decisive in the elections. Srinivas said that he had given instructions to the party cadre to organise `human chain’ programme on December 28, Congress party Foundation Day. The programme would reflect party’s achievements and commitments with main thrust on development and welfare activities.

Participants would take pledge to rededicate themselves for the success of Congress party.

Another programme titled `Sankshema utsavaalu’ would be taken up to ensure that local Congress leaders and workers visit households of beneficiaries covered under various State and Central Government schemes. Public meetings would be organized in each and every mandal, he said.

On the other hand, BJP accused the Congress, TRS and TDP of sabotaging the Telangana issue by dive r t i n g public attention to the Babli controversy.

Addressing mediapersons, BJP Telangana Udyama Committee chairman Ch Vidyasagar Rao alleged that these parties diverted public attention from Telangana by projecting Babli as the burning issue. "Both are important, but Telangana is paramount. People must realise that this is the right time for the Telangana issue to be taken up on a massive scale. It is a sinister design by all these parties to push the issue on to the backburner," he said.

Rao said the credibility of TRS was at its lowest, as it had been continuously trying to stay afloat by raking up one issue or the other, but not Telangana. "It has not made a sincere effort to convince the Congress to sign a resolution in support of a separate state. TRS is full of pseudo Telangana activists. They should have forced the Congress to introduce a bill in Parliament by now on the separate statehood demand. So, we have no reason to ally with TRS," he said.

Rao said the resounding success of the BJP in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattissgarh were indicators of NDA's bright chances to come back to power at the Centre. "Though we cannot form government in Rajasthan, neither can the Congress given an unclear mandate," he said.

Ruling out the concept of a third front, Rao said the Congress and BJP were the only key players left in the national political arena. "It is time for all regional and the Left parties to introspect, else they will be wiped out. They should start looking at political parties with an open mind and stop claiming that they have nothing to do with parties like BJP, the BJP leader said."

Assembly Elections - Time to Retrospect

By M H Ahssan & Kajol Singh

Although the outcome of the Assembly polls is being described as a 3-2 victory for the Congress, it is actually a two-all draw since Mizoram’s results do not have much influence on national politics. Even then, the Congress can be said to have its nose ahead since the BJP’s earlier string of victories seems to have come to an end.

After its successes in Gujarat, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Karnataka, the BJP had seemingly convinced itself that it had acquired an unstoppable momentum on the road to Delhi. But, now it is bound to have a rethink, for the tide appears to have turned, even if partially. However, that is not the only reason for the sadness that was noticeable in its New Delhi office on Monday evening. What may have concerned the BJP more is the belief that it may have lost its terror card, which apparently gave it a permanent edge over the Congress.

By accusing the latter of being soft on terror in order to preserve its minority vote bank, the BJP evidently thought that it had an irrefutable argument to influence the voters. But what has proved this assessment wrong is the Delhi election results because the elections took place the day after the horrendous terrorist attack on Mumbai. Yet, the ease with which the Congress swept the polls showed that the tragedy had virtually no impact on the electorate. Even the Congress seemed to have been taken aback by this response, for it had believed that terrorism, coupled with inflation, would spell disaster for it.

If the voters thought otherwise, it was apparently because they looked upon these as passing phases with no long-term effect. Not only would prices come down, as they have already started to do, but the very insanity of the jihadis would lead them to their doom. They were also probably not too pleased by the BJP’s propensity to make political capital out of such tragedies.

The BJP is apparently worried that such an interpretation of its motives will not leave any cards in its hands for the next big test the general election.

The other indication from the voters relates to their interest in development. The reason why Sheila Dikshit, Shivraj Singh Chauhan and Raman Singh won in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh is that their almost exclusive focus was on the bijli-sadak-pani factor. If politicians get this message, it will mark an end of divisive politics.

Results of five states that went to election over the past few weeks have surprised many observers. Congress has won Delhi and Mizoram decisively and inching towards the half-way mark in Rajasthan. BJP on the other hand has managed to retain Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.

Delhi
Bucking anti-incumbency factor in Indian elections once is quite an achievement and doing it twice is extraodinary. Sheila Dixit has been able to do just that. Her opponent, Vijay Malhotra, currently a BJP MP from South Delhi parliamentary seat was not able to enthuse the base or adapt to the changing demographics in Delhi. Delhi that went to polls just three days after Mumbai attacks seemed to suggest that even in assembly elections local factors play a bigger role. It also seemed to rebut BJP’s allegation that Congress is soft on terrorism.

Rajasthan
After the Meena Gujjar agitation earlier this year, it was very difficult for Vasundhara Raje to dig herself out of the hole and win the elections. Her performance, though credible will leave BJP with a big headache where it has to defend 21 out of 25 Lok Sabha seats in the upcoming general elections. Ashok Gehlot, has led his party to victory again and he will be able to cobble up a coalition with independents to form a government.

Madhya Pradesh
The central Indian state has had three chief ministers in five years. It was Uma Bharati who won a decisive victory against the Congress in 2003 but resigned from the post due to her role in the Hubli-Idgah controversy. Her place was taken by Babulal Gaur who was then replaced by a much younger Shivraj Chauhan. It is to his credit that he had been able to win the state again despite Uma Bharati contesting elections as a separate entity and a much powerful Bahujan Samaj Party.

Chhattisgarh
Raman Singh has managed to win a narrow victory in a very close fight in this small state. Ajit Jogi, who was caught on tape after last assembly elections bargaining with opposition MLAs, led the challenge this time too and lost.

Mizoram
The tiny northeastern state brought Congress back to power after 10 years with the ruling Mizo National Front losing by a big margin. BJP hardly has any presence in the state.

Some quick thoughts on the results:
Good governance matters. It might not matter every time but it still pays to perform and then go asking for votes.
Terrorism is a national issue and these assembly elections might not exactly be a referendum on policy positions of either Congress of BJP.
Caste politics still pays in India but it might not be a winning proposition anymore. It increasingly is providing little dividends at high risk.
The results are like a hung parliament. Everyone can claim victory.
Mayawati can be the next Prime Minister of India. I can’t believe I just wrote it.

Asia faces growing rice crisis

By M Raja & M H Ahsan
An Indian government ban of rice exports has plunged neighboring Bangladesh into crisis, in a grim preview of growing global grain shortages. Leading rice-exporting nations such as India and Vietnam are reducing sales overseas to check domestic price rises. Previously healthy buffer stocks in the world's largest rice exporter, Thailand, are shrinking. The February 7 ban by India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry intensifies a worldwide rice shortage that according to the Rome-based United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization drove up prices by nearly 40% last year.

Large rice importers such as Myanmar, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia are worst affected. An additional 50 million tonnes of rice is needed each year up to 2015 to plug the demand-supply gap, according to the Manila-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), equivalent to a 9% annual production increase from current levels of 520 million tonnes. Intensifying price pressures, additional agricultural land for growing rice, a dietary staple for more than half the world's 6.6 billion people, is extremely limited, say analysts, while rice consumption is growing worldwide and wheat stocks are hitting record lows. The US Department of Agriculture has reported three-decade lows in wheat stocks, and India - Asia's largest wheat producer - expects lower production for 2008.

Unregulated private cross-border trading makes exact figures hard to come by, says Duncan Macintosh, director of the IRRI, told HNN from his Manila office. "Besides, Asian governments have a strategic interest in rice stocks and any declared shortage will send prices shooting up," Macintosh says. India's rice export ban seems born out of such price rice fears, and comes at a sensitive time ahead of the final annual budget to be presented by the ruling United Progressive Alliance government on February 28 before the country's general election next year. India's ban on rice exports follows a gradual limiting by the government of exports over the past few months. In October 2007, rice exports priced under $425 per tonne were banned and on December 31 the floor price rose to $505 a tonne. The February 7 ban extended to all exports of rice except government-to-government trading, but excludes exports of basmati rice, a more fragrant, long-grained and expensive variety.

The government will supply a previously committed 500,000 tonnes of non-basmati parboiled rice to Bangladesh at an average of US $399 per tonne, excluding insurance and freight. The exemption was not much consolation to Bangladesh, which desperately needs food grains after Cyclone Sidr in December destroyed $600 million worth of the country's rice crop. Rice prices soared 70%, hitting hard a population in which the majority survive on less than $1 a day. In the rare years that the country is free of climatic disasters, Bangladesh produces 28 million tonnes of food grains, meeting 95% of domestic needs.

To cope with the rice crisis, the Bangladesh government in January floated global tender notices for 300,000 tonnes of various varieties of rice. The country is also importing 180,000 tonnes of white rice from neighboring Myanmar. The Kolkata-based national daily The Statesman reported that India's export ban caused 300 rice trucks to be stranded in India-Bangladesh border zones such as Mahedipur land customs station in English Bazaar and other land ports in West Bengal. Rice traders on both sides face losses and are threatening to take to the streets if the Indian government does not reconsider the ban.

Worse, in a repeat of a disaster that last struck in 1959, a famine threatens remote areas of southeast Bangladesh after millions of rats devastated food crops as the rodents reproduced in dramatic numbers following a flowering of bamboo forests that happens every 50 years. The rat breeding out-paces the bamboo flower growth, and soon the animals turn to ravaging rice stalks and vegetables in the affected region. Northeastern India has been similarly hit after bamboo forests in Mizoram began blossoming in 2007. Local authorities declared the area a disaster zone but the Indian government has not yet announced plans to combat this bi-century rat storm. Long-term trends and short-term shocks are both putting pressure on rice prices.

Higher incomes across Asia are leading to increased consumption of grains and vegetables and of meat, which leads to more grain being diverted for use as cattle fodder. Production of biofuel further squeezes supply, while the drift off the land by workers and into industry curbs the supply of labor. "There is less land, less water and less labor available for rice growing across Asia," says Macintosh. "Agricultural labor in countries like Thailand is increasingly shifting to industrial sectors. And rice is the most labor- and water-intensive crop." In the shorter term, prices can spike as natural disasters ranging from severe drought and floods cause havoc on agriculture. The recent three-week snow storms in China caused $7.5 billion in damages, according to early government estimates, including destruction of winter crops leading to a $700 million relief package for farmers. Asian countries are making different responses to domestic and international demand.

Vietnam in the third quarter last year suspended exports to protect domestic needs amid insect epidemics, while in the other direction Thailand plans to auction an additional 500,000 tonnes of rice to cater to increasing international demand, particularly from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Thailand exported 800,000 tonnes of rice in January 2008, a 25% year-on-year increase. As a long-term measure, food scientists are developing sturdier varieties of rice that can withstand climate challenges as well as higher yielding seeds. Asia averages 3.6 tonnes of rice per hectare, according to the IRRI.

Better yielding varieties will increase average output to six tonnes per hectare, particularly in Thailand, which grows rice across 9.8 million hectares but has the lowest rate of output in Asia - 2.6 tonnes of rice yield per hectare in the planet's largest area of land made available for rice cultivation. In contrast, China's produces six tonnes of rice per hectare and Japan has the global record at 6.2 tonnes. The world's leading philanthropists are pitching in to combat the rising grain crisis, similar to supporting cancer and AIDS research. Leading the way, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates in January announced a grant of $19.9 million over three years to the IRRI.

The grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation aims to first help 400,000 small farmers in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa access improved rice varieties and better growing technology. Farmers may increase yields by 50% by 2018, but "there are no short-term solutions," says Macintosh of the IRRI.

Asia faces growing rice crisis

By M Raja & M H Ahsan
An Indian government ban of rice exports has plunged neighboring Bangladesh into crisis, in a grim preview of growing global grain shortages. Leading rice-exporting nations such as India and Vietnam are reducing sales overseas to check domestic price rises. Previously healthy buffer stocks in the world's largest rice exporter, Thailand, are shrinking. The February 7 ban by India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry intensifies a worldwide rice shortage that according to the Rome-based United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization drove up prices by nearly 40% last year.

Large rice importers such as Myanmar, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia are worst affected. An additional 50 million tonnes of rice is needed each year up to 2015 to plug the demand-supply gap, according to the Manila-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), equivalent to a 9% annual production increase from current levels of 520 million tonnes. Intensifying price pressures, additional agricultural land for growing rice, a dietary staple for more than half the world's 6.6 billion people, is extremely limited, say analysts, while rice consumption is growing worldwide and wheat stocks are hitting record lows. The US Department of Agriculture has reported three-decade lows in wheat stocks, and India - Asia's largest wheat producer - expects lower production for 2008.

Unregulated private cross-border trading makes exact figures hard to come by, says Duncan Macintosh, director of the IRRI, told HNN from his Manila office. "Besides, Asian governments have a strategic interest in rice stocks and any declared shortage will send prices shooting up," Macintosh says. India's rice export ban seems born out of such price rice fears, and comes at a sensitive time ahead of the final annual budget to be presented by the ruling United Progressive Alliance government on February 28 before the country's general election next year. India's ban on rice exports follows a gradual limiting by the government of exports over the past few months. In October 2007, rice exports priced under $425 per tonne were banned and on December 31 the floor price rose to $505 a tonne. The February 7 ban extended to all exports of rice except government-to-government trading, but excludes exports of basmati rice, a more fragrant, long-grained and expensive variety.

The government will supply a previously committed 500,000 tonnes of non-basmati parboiled rice to Bangladesh at an average of US $399 per tonne, excluding insurance and freight. The exemption was not much consolation to Bangladesh, which desperately needs food grains after Cyclone Sidr in December destroyed $600 million worth of the country's rice crop. Rice prices soared 70%, hitting hard a population in which the majority survive on less than $1 a day. In the rare years that the country is free of climatic disasters, Bangladesh produces 28 million tonnes of food grains, meeting 95% of domestic needs.

To cope with the rice crisis, the Bangladesh government in January floated global tender notices for 300,000 tonnes of various varieties of rice. The country is also importing 180,000 tonnes of white rice from neighboring Myanmar. The Kolkata-based national daily The Statesman reported that India's export ban caused 300 rice trucks to be stranded in India-Bangladesh border zones such as Mahedipur land customs station in English Bazaar and other land ports in West Bengal. Rice traders on both sides face losses and are threatening to take to the streets if the Indian government does not reconsider the ban.

Worse, in a repeat of a disaster that last struck in 1959, a famine threatens remote areas of southeast Bangladesh after millions of rats devastated food crops as the rodents reproduced in dramatic numbers following a flowering of bamboo forests that happens every 50 years. The rat breeding out-paces the bamboo flower growth, and soon the animals turn to ravaging rice stalks and vegetables in the affected region. Northeastern India has been similarly hit after bamboo forests in Mizoram began blossoming in 2007. Local authorities declared the area a disaster zone but the Indian government has not yet announced plans to combat this bi-century rat storm. Long-term trends and short-term shocks are both putting pressure on rice prices.

Higher incomes across Asia are leading to increased consumption of grains and vegetables and of meat, which leads to more grain being diverted for use as cattle fodder. Production of biofuel further squeezes supply, while the drift off the land by workers and into industry curbs the supply of labor. "There is less land, less water and less labor available for rice growing across Asia," says Macintosh. "Agricultural labor in countries like Thailand is increasingly shifting to industrial sectors. And rice is the most labor- and water-intensive crop." In the shorter term, prices can spike as natural disasters ranging from severe drought and floods cause havoc on agriculture. The recent three-week snow storms in China caused $7.5 billion in damages, according to early government estimates, including destruction of winter crops leading to a $700 million relief package for farmers. Asian countries are making different responses to domestic and international demand.

Vietnam in the third quarter last year suspended exports to protect domestic needs amid insect epidemics, while in the other direction Thailand plans to auction an additional 500,000 tonnes of rice to cater to increasing international demand, particularly from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Thailand exported 800,000 tonnes of rice in January 2008, a 25% year-on-year increase. As a long-term measure, food scientists are developing sturdier varieties of rice that can withstand climate challenges as well as higher yielding seeds. Asia averages 3.6 tonnes of rice per hectare, according to the IRRI.

Better yielding varieties will increase average output to six tonnes per hectare, particularly in Thailand, which grows rice across 9.8 million hectares but has the lowest rate of output in Asia - 2.6 tonnes of rice yield per hectare in the planet's largest area of land made available for rice cultivation. In contrast, China's produces six tonnes of rice per hectare and Japan has the global record at 6.2 tonnes. The world's leading philanthropists are pitching in to combat the rising grain crisis, similar to supporting cancer and AIDS research. Leading the way, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates in January announced a grant of $19.9 million over three years to the IRRI.

The grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation aims to first help 400,000 small farmers in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa access improved rice varieties and better growing technology. Farmers may increase yields by 50% by 2018, but "there are no short-term solutions," says Macintosh of the IRRI.

Asia faces growing rice crisis

By M Raja & M H Ahsan
An Indian government ban of rice exports has plunged neighboring Bangladesh into crisis, in a grim preview of growing global grain shortages. Leading rice-exporting nations such as India and Vietnam are reducing sales overseas to check domestic price rises. Previously healthy buffer stocks in the world's largest rice exporter, Thailand, are shrinking. The February 7 ban by India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry intensifies a worldwide rice shortage that according to the Rome-based United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization drove up prices by nearly 40% last year.

Large rice importers such as Myanmar, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia are worst affected. An additional 50 million tonnes of rice is needed each year up to 2015 to plug the demand-supply gap, according to the Manila-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), equivalent to a 9% annual production increase from current levels of 520 million tonnes. Intensifying price pressures, additional agricultural land for growing rice, a dietary staple for more than half the world's 6.6 billion people, is extremely limited, say analysts, while rice consumption is growing worldwide and wheat stocks are hitting record lows. The US Department of Agriculture has reported three-decade lows in wheat stocks, and India - Asia's largest wheat producer - expects lower production for 2008.

Unregulated private cross-border trading makes exact figures hard to come by, says Duncan Macintosh, director of the IRRI, told HNN from his Manila office. "Besides, Asian governments have a strategic interest in rice stocks and any declared shortage will send prices shooting up," Macintosh says. India's rice export ban seems born out of such price rice fears, and comes at a sensitive time ahead of the final annual budget to be presented by the ruling United Progressive Alliance government on February 28 before the country's general election next year. India's ban on rice exports follows a gradual limiting by the government of exports over the past few months. In October 2007, rice exports priced under $425 per tonne were banned and on December 31 the floor price rose to $505 a tonne. The February 7 ban extended to all exports of rice except government-to-government trading, but excludes exports of basmati rice, a more fragrant, long-grained and expensive variety.

The government will supply a previously committed 500,000 tonnes of non-basmati parboiled rice to Bangladesh at an average of US $399 per tonne, excluding insurance and freight. The exemption was not much consolation to Bangladesh, which desperately needs food grains after Cyclone Sidr in December destroyed $600 million worth of the country's rice crop. Rice prices soared 70%, hitting hard a population in which the majority survive on less than $1 a day. In the rare years that the country is free of climatic disasters, Bangladesh produces 28 million tonnes of food grains, meeting 95% of domestic needs.

To cope with the rice crisis, the Bangladesh government in January floated global tender notices for 300,000 tonnes of various varieties of rice. The country is also importing 180,000 tonnes of white rice from neighboring Myanmar. The Kolkata-based national daily The Statesman reported that India's export ban caused 300 rice trucks to be stranded in India-Bangladesh border zones such as Mahedipur land customs station in English Bazaar and other land ports in West Bengal. Rice traders on both sides face losses and are threatening to take to the streets if the Indian government does not reconsider the ban.

Worse, in a repeat of a disaster that last struck in 1959, a famine threatens remote areas of southeast Bangladesh after millions of rats devastated food crops as the rodents reproduced in dramatic numbers following a flowering of bamboo forests that happens every 50 years. The rat breeding out-paces the bamboo flower growth, and soon the animals turn to ravaging rice stalks and vegetables in the affected region. Northeastern India has been similarly hit after bamboo forests in Mizoram began blossoming in 2007. Local authorities declared the area a disaster zone but the Indian government has not yet announced plans to combat this bi-century rat storm. Long-term trends and short-term shocks are both putting pressure on rice prices.

Higher incomes across Asia are leading to increased consumption of grains and vegetables and of meat, which leads to more grain being diverted for use as cattle fodder. Production of biofuel further squeezes supply, while the drift off the land by workers and into industry curbs the supply of labor. "There is less land, less water and less labor available for rice growing across Asia," says Macintosh. "Agricultural labor in countries like Thailand is increasingly shifting to industrial sectors. And rice is the most labor- and water-intensive crop." In the shorter term, prices can spike as natural disasters ranging from severe drought and floods cause havoc on agriculture. The recent three-week snow storms in China caused $7.5 billion in damages, according to early government estimates, including destruction of winter crops leading to a $700 million relief package for farmers. Asian countries are making different responses to domestic and international demand.

Vietnam in the third quarter last year suspended exports to protect domestic needs amid insect epidemics, while in the other direction Thailand plans to auction an additional 500,000 tonnes of rice to cater to increasing international demand, particularly from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Thailand exported 800,000 tonnes of rice in January 2008, a 25% year-on-year increase. As a long-term measure, food scientists are developing sturdier varieties of rice that can withstand climate challenges as well as higher yielding seeds. Asia averages 3.6 tonnes of rice per hectare, according to the IRRI.

Better yielding varieties will increase average output to six tonnes per hectare, particularly in Thailand, which grows rice across 9.8 million hectares but has the lowest rate of output in Asia - 2.6 tonnes of rice yield per hectare in the planet's largest area of land made available for rice cultivation. In contrast, China's produces six tonnes of rice per hectare and Japan has the global record at 6.2 tonnes. The world's leading philanthropists are pitching in to combat the rising grain crisis, similar to supporting cancer and AIDS research. Leading the way, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates in January announced a grant of $19.9 million over three years to the IRRI.

The grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation aims to first help 400,000 small farmers in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa access improved rice varieties and better growing technology. Farmers may increase yields by 50% by 2018, but "there are no short-term solutions," says Macintosh of the IRRI.