WHAT A COUP IN MAHARASHTRA?

Who says silence is not golden in Indian politics? Just a few hours ago, when it seemed that the Shiv Sena, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and the Congress had all but stitched together a fragile alliance to form a government in Maharashtra, people woke up from slumber to a new reality and a new government. Political pundits failed to read the mistaken silence of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) since Devendra Fadnavis resigned as chief minister following the collapse of talks with its oldest alliance partner, the Shiv Sena, in the aftermath of a hung assembly after elections. The BJP master strategists led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah were secretly at work without even giving an iota of hint what was cooking.

Pix courtesy: seelatest.com

The Indian media jumped the gun and rushed to anoint NCP chief Sharad Pawar as the modern-day Chanakya for succeeding in cajoling the Congress to join what critics termed as an “unthinkable and unprincipled alliance”. But it was the real Chanakya Amit Shah who sprang a surprise by breaking in in Pawar’s own party. In fact, it was the Sena which was very apprehensive of the BJP’s attempts of horse-trading and poaching of its newly elected MLAs and had therefore huddled them to the safe environs of the Congress-ruled Rajasthan. But none had the inkling of the BJP’s master stroke that it could strike at the heart of the NCP and wean away Pawar’s nephew Ajit Pawar. 

As things stand, it is now almost certain that Ajit will walk out on his parent party with more than 18 MLAs to avoid anti-defection law either by forming a new party or merging the entire block with the BJP. The BJP, which fell short of 40 seats in the 288-member house, will also need support of some smaller parties and independents, some of them BJP rebels, to prove majority. That the BJP has already done its homework by enlisting their support is a foregone conclusion.

In the latest twist of turns, the chief protagonist Sharad Pawar, who had almost scripted an unimaginable story of bringing the two warring parties Shiv Sena and Congress together, has been left red-faced. Never in his dreams could he have imagined that that his nephew would do a Vibhishana to him! But it is surprising that the Maratha strongman, who himself had been giving conflicting signals to the media in recent days regarding the government formation, could not read the riot act.

pix courtesy: newsclick.in

That all was not well between the uncle and nephew was not a hidden secret. Sharad Pawar’s ambition of promoting his daughter Supriya Sule at the expense of his nephew never went down well with the latter. The early signs of rift appeared in 2009 when Sharad Pawar appointed Chhagan Bhujbal as the deputy chief minister in the Ashok Chavan-led government after the Congress and NCP swept the polls. Miffed by Sharad Pawar’s decision to cut him to size, Ajit showed up his clout when he secured the support of a majority of the NCP MLAs a year later forcing his uncle to instate him as the deputy chief minister replacing Bhujbal. Since then, Ajit has been working to come out of the shadow of his dominant uncle.

Early this year, Ajit took some political positions which did not gel with the official policy of the NCP. Not only did he support the Modi government’s decision to abrogate the controversial Article 370 from Jammu and Kashmir, he went on to demand that Pakistan-occupied Kashmir should also be made a part of India.

What surprises the most is that the senior Pawar did not even get a whiff of his nephew’s designs who was at the helm of the talks along with him leading to an almost certain Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress government! Till a month-and-a-half ago, Ajit must have endeared himself to his uncle after he resigned as an MLA after Sharad Pawar’s name got embroiled in the 25,000 crore rupee Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank scam saying he was perturbed over the allegations against the latter. He also owed his deputy chief ministership to his uncle then.

But, as they say, politics is a strange game like cricket where fortunes change in just a matter of time. The same thing happened in Maharashtra. While Uddhav Thackeray, Sharad Pawar and Sonia Gandhi might be ruing for taking their own sweet time to firm up the alliance, the Modi-Shah duo should be commended for thumbing the nose of the opposition and walking away with the trophy. For, everything is fair in love and war. And this was Maharashtra, the second largest state after Uttar Pradesh which sends maximum MPs to the Lok Sabha, where political stakes are very high for all the parties.

BJP- SHIV SENA MARRIAGE HAS GONE HORRIBLY WRONG

Mistrust, lies and deceit! This is how the BJP-Shiv Sena relationship can be summed up. It has been more than 10 days since the Maharashtra election results were announced; the two parties have not able to consummate their marriage which seemingly is headed for a disaster. There is no doubt that the voters, though sceptical about the alliance, still gave their verdict in favour of the two parties. The failure of both the parties to sink their differences to form a government and their open accusation of lies against each other portends a rocky if not a failed marriage.

The two parties have been sharing love-hate relationship since they entered into an alliance first in 1989 for the Lok Sabha as well as Maharashtra state elections. The bromance did not last long and both the parties parted ways in 2014 over bitter differences regarding seat sharing. Both the BJP and Shiv Sena went to polls independently with none garnering enough seats to form a government on its own. Shiv Sena, which misread the pulse of the voters, contested in 282 of the 288 assembly seats winning only 63. The BJP, which contested lesser number of seats (260), emerged as the single largest party winning 122 seats. The Sena, which had then claimed to play the role of opposition, soon had a change of heart and within two months kissed and patched up with the BJP to join the government in the state in December 2014.

pix courtesy: moneycontrol.com

Then again in January 2018, Shiv Sena raised the banner of revolt and announced to contest all future elections, including the 2019 Lok Sabha elections and Maharashtra assembly elections, alone. But by the time the 2019 general elections approached, it made a U-turn and announced the alliance with the BJP in February 2019 for the general elections as well as Maharashtra state assembly elections.

Shiv Sena, which largely draws its strength from the Maratha community, has failed to replicate its success in 1995 when it contested 169 seats and won 73. 

The two parties have been sharing love-hate relationship since they entered into an alliance first in 1989 for the Lok Sabha as well as Maharashtra state elections ...  Has the Shiv Sena realised the dangers and pains of an ill-assorted marriage and wants to move on?

It has not being able to penetrate in rural areas where its success rate is not too impressive. But it is driven by personal ambition to rule the state on its own. This explains the reason behind Shiv Sena’s demand for a 50:50 formula and rotation of chief minister post even though it won almost half of the seats in comparison to the BJP in the just concluded elections. While the BJP bagged 105 seats, the Shiv Sena won 56, closely followed by National Congress Party (54) and the Congress 44 seats.

Though both the parties together have 161 seats, way past the half-way mark of 144, the Sena is playing hardball by demanding an equal share in the ministry besides the chief ministerial post for half the term largely due to the BJP’s tally dipping from 122 in the last assembly elections.  With November 9 being the deadline by which time the government has to be sworn in otherwise the state will be headed to President’s rule, it remains to be seen which of the two saffron parties blinks first or will they go separate ways.

Politics is an unfamiliar territory where strange bedfellows become welcome friends. With so much of heart burn and mud-slinging from both sides, who knows Shiv Sena may well spring a surprise and realise its dream by coaxing the NCP and Congress to do the unimaginable. For, the enemy of my enemy is my friend! Even while remaining with the BJP, the Shiv Sena has been its shrillest opposition taking on the Narendra Modi government at the centre and Devendra Fadnavis in the state on several issues. Has the Shiv Sena realised the dangers and pains of an ill-assorted marriage and wants to move on? Only time will tell.

Why Exit Polls in India often go wrong?

It is high time that such a charade is put to an end forever. Election after election, absurd pretence has been thrust on the people in the form of the so-called exit polls and countless hours of mundane analysis on something which is a far cry from reality. Soon after the polling is over, broadcasting channels go gung ho over their predictable election outcome without any iota of shame when they are so off the mark when the final results come in.

In a country as vast as India, is it advisable to bank on the opinion of a few voters leaving a polling station after they have cast their vote? What is the guarantee that the voter is not lying? Moreover, in many instances it has been found that there is a pronounced contrasting pattern of voting in constituencies. Do the media channels cover each and every constituency? Importantly, a very small sample of population is covered for exit poll and a very few constituencies are targeted. Predicting the results of an election with around 900 million voters is awfully difficult. This is the reason why there is a boomerang effect on such predictions.

Pix courtesy: indiatoday.in

The case in point is the 2004 Exit Polls when almost all the major television channels went horribly wrong when they predicted the return of Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s NDA government. To their shock, the Congress-led UPA emerged victorious. Again in the Delhi assembly elections in 2015, the predicted victory margin of the Aam Aadmi Party was nowhere close to the reality when it bagged 60 of the 70 assembly seats. And in the latest case, all pollsters, except the India Today, predicted the humungous victory of the Manohar Lal Khattar government between 71 to 80 seats in the 90-member House. The performance of Khattar-led Bharatiya Janata Party was nowhere close to the expectations as it could not even achieve a simple majority leading to the hung house. The Congress, which most exit polls predicted to win between 11-12 seats, went on to win 31 seats.

What has often been seen that a media channel propounding the cause of a particular political party tends to defend as well as predicting its victory? And when the shocking election results are announced, the channel would not eat the crow. It is an open secret that most of the Indian media channels, barring a very few, are biased and they tend to overzealously favour a particular political party (no prizes for guessing), often jeopardising their authenticity.

When the ludicrous exit polls are beamed, it has a cascading effect. Besides the usual spectacle in the news channels, there is eruption in social media. They too join the party, take over from the channels and start expressing their political views. Amidst all this frenzy, who gets martyred? Investors! The stock exchanges too react to the exit polls and sometimes a fortune is wiped out. The markets open disastrously if a defeat is predicted for the incumbent ruling party or the possibility of a rag-tag coalition government. 

Given the vast difference between the predicted and actual results, these Exit Polls should do well to widen their sample size to arrive at a more realistic opinion. But can they afford it? Given the cut-throat competition, media channels often run against time and are forced to telecast the show immediately after the polling ends as it has high viewership and generates healthy advertisement revenues. It is high time all the media houses ponder over the issue and take measures to come out with more pragmatic opinion polls.

WHY PAKISTAN’S HEART BLEEDS FOR HAFIZ SAEED?

pix courtesy: nytimes.com

Pakistan continues to play hide and seek game with the international community as far as Mumbai terror attack mastermind and Jammat-ud-Dawah chief Hafiz Saeed is concerned. Within a month of Counter Terrorism Department (CTD) arresting Saeed in connection with a terrorism financing case on July 17 this year, Pakistani authorities moved swiftly to move the United Nations to allow him to use his bank account for his family's basic monthly expenses. It is baffling to figure out the purpose behind Pakistan writing a letter to the United Nations Security 

Council,  which though approved its request as no objections were raised by member countries by the deadline of August 15. Pakistan seems to have scored a self goal by approaching the United Nations, which shows its apathy for a terrorist. Does Saeed really need access to his bank account to meet his daily expenses when he is hosted by the Pakistani authorities? Couldn’t Pakistan bear his expenses covertly as it has been doing for the last several decades? 

pix courtesy: dw.com

The recent development has not only put Pakistani foreign policy mandarins shamefaced, but also exposed their shady character.  This comes at a time when Prime Minister Imran Khan is besieging the international community on the sidelines of the ongoing United Nations General Assembly against possible blacklisting of his almost bankrupt country by the inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Pakistan, which has been placed on the grey list of countries whose domestic laws are considered weak to tackle challenges of money laundering and terrorism financing, has time till October to get the decision revoked. The Paris-based body is holding its week-long plenary meeting from October 13 when Pakistan’s fate will be sealed. Pakistan, which has been reeling under double-digit inflation, high interest rates and massive discontentment as unemployment rises, will be dealt a major body blow if it is blacklisted by FATF.

It should be recalled that the Asia Pacific Group (APG) under the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) during its last month meeting in Bangkok had placed Pakistan in the Enhanced Expedited Follow Up List (Blacklist) for its failure to meet 21 of the 27 action parameters. Out of 118 UN- designated terrorists, Pakistan could show action against only five, including Hafiz Saeed. The agency noted that no demonstrable action could be shown against individuals like Masood Azhar, Rauf Azhar and Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi or groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Falah-e-Insaniat, Haqqani network or Daesh (Islamic State).

What makes Saeed such a formidable force that Pakistan wants to protect the UN-designated terrorist, who carries a $10 million American bounty on his head for terror activities. Saeed is an important asset for Pakistani establishment which uses his influence to carry out terror activities in Kashmir and elsewhere. 

Last year also, Pakistan had made a mockery of its so-called avowed commitment to the implementation of the United Nations Security Council 1267 sanctions regime on terrorists when it freed Saeed from the purported “house arrest” with the lame excuse that the Lahore court did not merit his detention. If that was not enough, Pakistan allowed Saeed to open the first office of his political group Milli Muslim League (MML) in Lahore. Ironically, according to Pakistani government records, the MML is the offshoot of the banned Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and JuD.

What makes Saeed such a formidable force that Pakistan wants to protect the UN-designated terrorist, who carries a $10 million American bounty on his head for terror activities. Saeed is an important asset for Pakistani establishment which uses his influence to carry out terror activities in Kashmir and elsewhere. Whilst LeT remains banned in Pakistan, the political arm of the group, Jamat-ud-Dawah (JuD) continues to function unhindered. LeT has been accused of attacking military and civilian targets in India, most notably the 2001 Indian Parliament attack, the 2008 Mumbai attacks and the 2019 Pulwama attack on armed forces. Despite the ban, Pakistan's main intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), continues to offer LeT help and protection. Not only the ISI, Saeed also enjoys the support of the powerful army as well. In fact, Pakistan Army chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa had come in full support of him when he appeared before a parliament forum last year and said that Saeed, like every other Pakistani, had the right to raise the Kashmir issue.

Approaching the UN Security Council is nothing but a false show by Pakistan that it has choked all funds to Saeed who desperately needed money to meet his expenses. In the letter, Pakistan has described Saeed, a designated global terrorist, as an assistant professor of engineering and technology in Lahore. In its overzealousness in garnering support for Saeed, Pakistani foreign ministry officials convincingly forgot that the establishment had only a few months ago arrested him on charges of terror financing. The latest development is another concrete proof of Pakistan’s deepening nexus between the establishment and the terrorists and terrorist organizations.

Pakistan’s steadfast support to terrorists like Saeed, that too when the FATF meet is scheduled next month, is something hard to digest. Either it is not aware of the impending dangers or is it confident that it will manage to extricate out of the mess. In the event of Pakistan downgraded further and blacklisted by FATF, not only will it lose its power to approach major international banks for loans, no country or institution will be permitted to invest in Pakistan. Can Pakistan afford this? In the 36-member FATF, Pakistan needs at least 15 votes to escape the humiliation and getting blacklisted, which looks highly unlikely.

It is high time the global community sees through the shenanigans of Pakistan whose Prime Minister Imran Khan has proudly claimed to be hosting 30,000 to 40,000 terrorists and threatening nuclear war with India. Khan also boasted that "40 different militant groups" were operating from Pakistan. What more evidence does the international community need when an elected prime minister of Pakistan himself claims that his country is the hub of terrorists!  The world’s major powers have time and again failed to practice what they preach the so-called war against terrorism. The problem is every country looks at terrorism through its only prism. For example, Iran is a ‘number one nation of terror’ according to President Donald Trump who carefully avoids a question on Pakistan as a terrorist country. For President Trump, Pakistan can still prove its worthiness whenever he takes a U-turn, as has been his forte, and wants to reopen talks with the Taliban so as to pull out his forces from Afghanistan before he bids for re-election next year.

Until and unless the world comes round the view that terrorism offers the biggest challenge to the mankind and requires concerted action, the war against terrorism is not going to succeed. Or one to understand that some powerful countries don’t really want an end to terrorism so that they can continue selling their military hardware to countries afflicted with terrorism and make a capital out of it!   

CONGRESS'S WOES: PRESENT TENSE AND FUTURE UNCERTAIN

India’s grand opposition Congress party seems to be inflicted with conspicuous confusion with very little clarity on the direction it wants to move. Amidst its bid to arrest the sagging fortunes and improve its presence, the party is simultaneously conspiring for the defeat of the National Democratic Alliance government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). There is an old proverb: “One foot cannot stand on two boats.” And that is precisely what the Congress is doing. Can the Congress take on the ruling party when it itself is struggling to regain the space it ceded to the BJP and other regional parties in the last few years?

pix courtesy: dnaindia.com

If the Congress has failed to stitch together an effective counter-alliance to the NDA, it is because of its refusal to give room to smaller but growing parties fearing further erosion in its shrinking base. As a result, not only did it miss the opportunity to be part of the ‘Mahagathbandhan’ in Uttar Pradesh, it is facing alliance blues in other states as well. The classic case is of Sharad Pawar-led National Congress party (NCP), which has been steadfastly associated with the Congress, has chosen to go it alone in Gujarat even though the two parties have pledged to contest together in Maharashtra. There is no doubt that with NCP choosing to contest all the 26 parliamentary seats in Gujarat, there will be a division of votes, which will ultimately benefit the BJP.

In fact, it was Sharad Pawar who had first taken the initiative to form a “Mahagathbandhan” of opposition parties to take on the ruling alliance. But his idea could not materialise as the Congress was not ready to play second fiddle to some parties which had grown in stature. The Congress, which was wiped out from Delhi in both the assembly and parliamentary elections, lacked maturity in entering into any understanding with the Aam Aadmi Party which also wanted the alliance in both Punjab and Haryana besides Delhi. But the Congress, which snatched power from the BJP-SAD alliance in Punjab and lost ground to the BJP in Haryana, did not want to share space with AAP which was spreading its wings there. As a result, what we see is a loosely-knit alliance led by Congress party with smaller parties in some states.

It reflects very poorly on the leadership of the Congress, which is not sagacious enough to come out of its shadow. Congress president Rahul Gandhi should realise that his party is not in a position to command a premium on its value. Had he been sensible and could see the writing on the wall; he would have gone ahead to accommodate as many parties which still wanted a solid and credible opposition alliance? The problem with the Congress leadership is that it wants to have the cake and eat it too. That’s not only practical but impossible also.

If the NDA alliance has been largely successful, it is due to the open-heartedness of the principal party, the BJP, which has been careful in creating a non-disturbing environment for smaller and regional parties. While continuing to pursue its agenda of maximising its reach in states where it does not have much influence, the BJP has been wise enough to enter into an alliance with regional parties.

With the Congress not having the stomach to accommodate the interests of other parties, it would have been better had it gone alone with an aim to improve its reach and tally. The Congress, which recorded its worst performance in the last general elections bagging just 44 seats, could corner only 19.5 per cent of votes then. Before it recovered some ground by winning state elections in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh last year, the Congress was only ruling Punjab and sharing power in Karnataka. The party showed some signs of recovery last year when elections to nine states – Tripura, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Mizoram, Rajasthan and Telangana – were held in 2018. Of the 1082 seats in these states, the Congress won 414 seats whereas the BJP won 355 seats.

The ideal strategy for Congress would have been to recoup and revitalise its organisation before going overboard with the aggressive approach of dislodging the Modi government. It has scored a self-goal by compromising with its prime objective of reviving the almost moribund party and simultaneously working to remove the present government. It is this confusion which has prevented it from allying with potential parties leading to three-cornered contests in several constituencies which is only going to help the BJP. In a nutshell, the present is tense and the future uncertain for the oldest political party.

(The article was first published at wionews.com)

SADLY, EC IS NO CHOWKIDAR

If the political discourse has reached an abysmal low this poll season, the Election Commission will have to apportion blame as it has failed miserably to redeem its reputation as a watchdog. Its conduct since the model code of conduct came into effect after the announcement of dates for the general elections leaves much to be desired. That it allowed free run to some of the politicians to continue with their irresponsible remarks during the campaigning does not augur well for the institution. Had the Election Commission used the discretionary powers that it enjoys, not only could it have reined in imprudent forces, it could also have escaped censure from the Supreme Court of India.

It took the rap from the country’s top court for the Election Commission to finally act against some of the lumpen elements who have brought shame not only to themselves but also to the political parties they  represent. It is a terrible loss of face for the institution which has been described “toothless” by the Supreme Court for failing to act against politicians breaching the model code of conduct through hate speeches and appealing for votes in the name of religion. The apex court rebuke not only puts the election watchdog in a poor light, it also raises questions of its conduct while ensuring free and fair elections. Being a constitutional authority, Election Commission is amongst the few institutions which function with both autonomy and freedom, but sadly it has not lived up to its image.

Over the years, the healthy debate has given way to theatrics with candidates sparing no efforts to grab the attention of the prospective voters with the media and experts also contributing to the democratic theatre going near hysterical. The near abandonment of normal political discourse and rise of nauseating campaign has, no doubt, led to a frenzy paying rich dividends, but the political process is a clear loser. There seems to be a sinister design by political parties to raise such frivolous topics so that the real issues affecting the common man remain buried under the carpet and the failings in their performance delivery get deflected.

It is not that only leaders of one political party are offenders. The entire political class seems to be obsessed with this crass stagecraft leading to politics of devaluation. It does not bode well for the largest democracy in the world. As the electioneering turns more vitriolic with leaders unabashedly hitting below the belt, the Election Commission has a moral duty to ensure that political leaders and their parties don’t cross the ‘lakshman rekha’.  But at a time when there is a critical loss of moral or ethical values, the model code of conduct needs statutory backing.

In the absence of statutory support, the model code of conduct is largely persuasive in nature leading to offenders getting away with minor reprimand from the Election Commission whenever it receives any such complaint of violation of code. With political parties and their leaders paying scant respect to such advisories, there is an urgent need to arm the Election Commission with legislative powers to ensure the model code of conduct. There should be a provision empowering the Election Commission to debar a candidate from contesting the elections if he or she is found guilty of repeat offence.

There is no doubt that the Election Commission has, from time to time, tried to bring improvements in the political process, but there is a long way to go before the Indian election system is cleansed of all the ills. An Election Commission petition pending before the Supreme Court seeking a life term ban on MPs, MLAs from contesting election after being convicted in criminal cases is one such noteworthy step. The existing law disqualifies politicians sentenced to a jail term of two years or more from contesting elections for six years from the date of release from prison. If the Supreme Court gives a favourable ruling to the EC petition and the parliament enacts such a law, it will lead to decriminalisation of politics.

With the Election Commission found floundering in strictly implementing the moral code of conduct, there is an urgent need for parliament to come up with an effective law to restrain candidates from hate speeches and seeking votes in the name of religion. The country cannot wait for clean politics any longer.

ELECTION MANIFESTOS: POPULISM VS PRAGMATISM

Come election season, Indian political parties vie to outdo each other by promising moon to the voters through their manifestos. The manifestos largely come in the shape of sops, which are mostly forgotten once the election process is over and the new elected government assumes office. These manifestos die their natural death till the new election is called after the five-year tenure of the government ends or if it falls ahead of its tenure. By the time the next election is called, nobody talks about the last manifesto. Interestingly, even the voters are not bothered whether the ruling government stuck to the promises it made in the manifesto when it rode to power last time.

A manifesto is a statement of intent by political parties detailing their aims and policies if they came to power. But sadly, the pre-election manifestos have never been treated as bible that should be followed and abided by religiously. This is so because several promises included in the document are too practical to be carried out.

How real are election manifestos? Do political parties adhere to these manifestos or these have merely been used to entice voters ahead of elections? It is high time political parties are held accountable for failing to implement what is promised to voters.

Of late, a new populist political culture is emerging which is fast catching up with people, not only in India but across the world. Populism seems to be the flavour of political parties tapping people’s frustration and anger against the incumbent government for ignoring their concerns and excluding them from the benefits of higher growth. This model has proved to be so successful that it has become an important tool for political parties to woo the voters, particularly those belonging to the disadvantaged groups of the society who feel delineated because of the government policies and programmes which they think have resulted in concentration of wealth among a few only.

This is one of the main reasons why political parties resort to populism to win the support of voters who are often taken for granted. These manifestos are loaded with goodies offering free laptops for students, cycles, gold etc at state level and waiver of farmers loans or even bigger as depositing a large amount of money in voters’ accounts at the national level while downplaying the failings in their performance delivery. The political parties should also come out with proposals how they plan to implement their ideas without jeopardising the economy.

Last week, the Congress party made some grandiose announcements while releasing the manifesto for the forthcoming general elections. The one which stands out is the offer of Rs. 72,000 annually to the poorest 20 percent of the population. Did the party calculate how much will it cost the exchequer and put budgetary pressure? And, mind you, it is not a one-time offer. 

Another such announcement is the proposed implementation of MGNREGA 3.0 with minimum days increased from 100 to 150. When not much work could be created in MGNREGA’s first avatar, how does the party propose to increase work in rural areas? A study by the National Council of Applied Economic Research and the University of Maryland found in 2015 that only 24.4 percent of rural households participated in the rural employment scheme, while nearly 70 percent of the interested households could not participate due to lack of work. Again another proposal of a new GST regime based on a single, moderate, standard rate of tax on all goods and services is not practical. In a country where there is a wide disparity of income among people, the single rate GST would, in fact, hurt the poor the most as costs of several essential items too will go up.  There is no doubt that there should be further simplification of rates with fewer exemptions and simpler policies, but the idea of a single rate GST is flawed. Another audacious proposal is to fill all the four lakh central government and institutional vacancies before March 2020, which if implemented will balloon the already bloated non-planned expenditure. Any sharp increase in the government spending will result in widening of the fiscal deficit and affect the economic growth. While the Congress president Rahul Gandhi tom-tommed the party’s election manifesto as the panacea for all the ills, he failed to enumerate how he planned to implement such utopian ideas.

Almost a week after Congress’ manifesto release, the BJP too came out with its own version today. It, however, desisted from announcing tall promises, but could not resist the temptation to offer some sops to farmers in view of the agrarian crisis and small traders who were hit by demonetisation and GST exercise. While announcing yearly support of Rs. 6,000 to all farmers under Kisan Samman Nidhi Scheme, the BJP reiterated its promise to double famers’ income, which has been borrowed from last manifesto in 2014.  The 6,000 rupees yearly dole, though pales in contrast to the Congress offer of Rs. 72,000 annually to the poorest 20 percent of the population, seems doable.

The BJP decision to provide pension to small farmers and small shopkeepers after they attain 60 years of age is vague in a sense that it did not elaborate how much pension it plans to offer. At a time, when the government has stopped pension to government employees from 2004 onwards, this new offer is bound to raise heckles, and put pressure on the budget.

The BJP’s promise to increase the doctor-population ratio to one per 1,400 by 2022 is a tough task given that there is just one allopathic government doctor available for around 11,082 people across the country, which is more than 10 times the WHO recommended ratio of 1:1000. On March 23, 2018, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare informed the Lok Sabha that a total of 30,455 seats in state-run institutions and 36,165 seats in private medical colleges in the country are available for MBBS admissions while about 2,930 seats in state-run institutes and 24,130 seats in private dental colleges in India are available in BDS programmes. According to government figures, there are altogether 93,680 seats available for both MBBS and BDS programmes together every year, so how can the government expect to increase the number of doctors?

It is high time the political parties come out with realistic manifestos offering solutions to the problems the country is facing rather than offering bribes to the voters ahead of elections. It should be incumbent upon the ruling party to come out with an action taken report at the end of its tenure so that the voters feel enlightened and not cheated to know how many of the promises have been honoured. Otherwise, the relevance of poll manifestos will be lost.

Thankfully, there is growing awareness among the young electorate who know the value of their votes. In an age of vibrant social media and increasing citizen activism, one hopes the political parties will no longer treat the manifestos as only an election ritual. With just a few months left for the election verdict, it remains to be seen if pragmatism or populism rules the day in India.

Masood Azhar proving to be Albatross around China’s neck

China is finding itself increasingly isolated after its blind support to Pakistan by repeatedly thwarting the United Nations efforts to declare Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist. The United States’ decision to discuss the issue of Azhar in the open UN General Assembly has put China in a very embarrassing situation. Frustrated by China’s intransigence not to lift the technical hold on the UN listing of Azhar as a global terrorist, the three key members of the P-5 Club in the UNSC have sought explanation from Beijing. There is no doubt that major countries have been exasperated with China for torpedoing the repeated efforts of the United Nations to ban Azhar.

Pix courtesy: the print.in

Rankled by the US decision to take the issue directly to the UN Security Council, China seems to be running out of its options. Sensing that it can no longer protect Jaish chief, China made its all-weather ally Pakistan to bail it out with a statement which exposes the nexus between the two countries. Last week, Pakistan suggested that China could withdraw its technical hold on Azhar if India agreed to military de-escalation along the border and resumed the stalled bilateral talks. It is clearly indicative of the realization on the part of both China and Pakistan that the issue could not be procrastinated further. China has reportedly been rebuked by the US after it made the issue of Indo-Pak military de-escalation and resumption of talks as pre-condition for lifting the technical hold on Azhar, thus allowing later to be listed as a global terrorist.

With the US refusing to play ball with China in linking the two issues and major members of the UN Security Council hardening their position on Azhar, time is running out for Beijing. China is now working to wriggle itself out of the situation and this week’s statement by its foreign office says it all. China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said in a regular media briefing: “After the application for designation of Azhar was proposed (in the 1267 Sanctions Committee), China is in close communication and coordination with various parties and made positive progress. The US knows that very well.”

“We hope various parties will meet each other half way and continue to properly solve this issue under the 1267 Committee framework. Last Friday, UN Security Council members exchanged views on the US-proposed draft resolution. The majority believes that efforts should be made to solve the issue under the 1267 Committee framework,” the spokesperson added.

The statement is not only significant but self-explanatory as China seems to be feeling the heat. It is matter of time before China falls in line and throws its weight behind the world in declaring Azhar a global terrorist. But it would make every effort to prolong the issue knowing well that India’s ruling party could use it as a major victory ahead of the national elections. Not mentioning US by name, the foreign ministry spokesman went on to add: “We believe under the current circumstances, forcing a draft resolution at the Security Council is not a constructive move and sets a bad example… It is also not conducive for peace and stability in South Asia. China is opposed to this.”

When asked specifically whether the US move to take Azhar’s listing directly to the UN Security Council could benefit the ruling BJP in general election, Geng said: “It is setting a bad example that will only complicate the matter … The general election is the domestic affair of India. We do not comment on that.”

There are three important elements to the statement. One, China has made its displeasure known at US attempts to corner it by referring the issue to the wider Security Council. Once the issue is deliberated in the Security Council, China will find itself isolated in the important forum as all the 15 countries (10 non-permanent members and five members) excluding Beijing are in favour of Azhar being declared a global terrorist in the aftermath of Pulwama attack when a JeM operative rammed an explosive-ridden vehicle into a convoy of CRPF killing at least 40 personnel in February. China is aware of its imminent defeat in the Security Council.

This is the fourth time that China has blocked a combined bid by the United States, France and the United Kingdom to declare Azhar a global terrorist by putting the proposal on a “technical hold” before eventually terminating it on the grounds that “there is no consensus” in the 1267 Committee of the UN Security Council.  How can there be a consensus if one country (read China) continues with its unprincipled stand on Azhar? In 2017 also, it was the odd nation out in the 15-member Security Council when the P3 nations – the US, UK and France – sought to place Azhar on the 1267 sanctions list that would have entailed his travel ban and freezing of assets. While the proposal had approval of all the other 14 members of the Security Council, it was China which censored it. Needless to say, China is misusing its veto power.

Second important point which exposes China’s double standards in the war against terrorism is how can listing Azhar as a global terrorist is not conducive for peace and stability in South Asia. One fails to understand the weird explanation offered by China. China’s opposition to proscribing Azhar is baffling given that Jaish-e-Mohammad has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council of which China is one of the five permanent members. The Jaish was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001, a year after its formation, following a deadly attack on Indian parliament in December 2001, which had brought India and Pakistan on the verge of a fourth war. Strangely, China considers JeM an outlawed organization, but not its leader? 

What is China’s compulsion in protecting Azhar, who is, no doubt, a prized asset for Pakistan? Well, if the United Nations declares Azhar a global terrorist, then Pakistan will be compelled to arrest him and seize his assets.  And this is something the Imran Khan government can’t afford to do fearing violence by an army of militants prepared by Azhar. Most importantly, he enjoys the support of the Pakistani army. Does Imran Khan, who himself has been propped up by the army, have the guts to go after Azhar?

Thirdly and lastly, China does not want to give an issue on a platter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi when India is in midst of campaigning to elect its new parliament two months from now. The designation of Masood as a global terrorist and his subsequent arrest will no doubt be a big boost for Modi’s attempts in returning to power.  Therefore, China will keep on prolonging the issue as much as it can, but ultimately, it will be forced to fall in line. Any further attempts by China to stall the move will be seen as its weakening resolve to fight the global war against terrorism. It now needs to take a stand on which side of terror it stands. The world is watching it closely.

WHY PRIYANKA MAY SPOIL SP-BSP PARTY IN UP?

Struggling with its sagging fortunes, India’s grand old party – the Congress – seems to have found its ‘Brahmashashtra’ in Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, who it believes can revive the political destiny of the party. Realising that the road to its revival hinges in the bellwether state Uttar Pradesh, which sends the maximum 80 lawmakers to parliament, the Congress president Rahul Gandhi has appointed his sister as the party general secretary and in-charge of eastern Uttar Pradesh in the hope that her charismatic personality may arrest the party’s steep fall in the crucial state.

In the last few decades, the Congress, which used to draw its maximum strength from Uttar Pradesh, has ceded space to the regional parties – the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party – besides the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which all have grown at its expense. Therefore, it becomes crucial for the party to devote its maximum energy in the state, and the appointment of Priyanka and Jyotiraditya Scindia, who has been tasked with the western Uttar Pradesh, is being seen in that direction. Scindia had recently played a significant role in the party’s success in Madhya Pradesh elections.

pix courtesy: latestLY.com

The responsibility is huge for both Scindia and Priyanka, whose role so far was limited to campaigning to the family pocket boroughs of Amethi and Rae Bareli, the parliamentary constituencies of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, respectively. Not only that the duo will have to cope with the rising graph of the BJP, which swept the last parliamentary elections by bagging 73 seats (including two seats by its ally, the Apna Dal), the party will be hard pressed to find its footing in the face of the “gathbandhan” of Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party.  The Congress had recorded its worst performance in the 2014 parliamentary elections when it could only protect its traditional seats of Amethi and Rae Bareli.

While the selection and responsibility of Priyanka Gandhi can be understandable from the party’s point of view, the decision may hurt the SP-BSP alliance more than the BJP. The BJP garnered 42.30 % of the total votes polled registering an impressive growth of 24.80% and its ally – the Apna Dal – one percent. On the contrary, the SP saw its fortunes dip by just 1.06 percent (it got 22.20% votes), but it won only 5 seats losing 18 in the process. But Mayawati’s BSP and the Congress were hit the hardest losing 7.82% and 10.35% respectively of the total votes polled. BSP, which had won 20 seats in the 1999 parliamentary elections, was completely wiped out failing to secure even one seat, the Congress managed to secure only two seats while forfeiting 19 seats.

If one has to go by arithmetic, the SP (with 22.20% votes) and BSP (with 19.60% votes) together hope to corner 41.80 percent votes as against the BJP and Apna Dal’s vote share of 43.30 percent with a deficit of just 1.50% if the voting pattern remains the same. If both the SP and BSP manage to protect their voter base and don’t lose ground further, they are hoping to upset the apple cart of the BJP. Keeping the Congress, which garnered 7.50 percent votes in the last elections, out of the alliance and the entry of Priyanka Gandhi in the state, may put paid to the two regional parties’ analysis.

If Priyanka really manages to wean away the disgruntled die-hard voters to her party’s fold, it will be the SP and the BSP, which will suffer the most. For, it is highly unlikely that she will be able to make inroads into the BJP, which has a committed cadre who have remained steadfast with the party over the years.

It remains to be seen whether Priyanka will be able to bring any windfalls to the party in terms of seats, but her arrival is bound to galvanise the party, which is on a free fall. There is every possibility that the party may benefit in terms of vote share. And if that happens, she will be cutting into the traditional vote base of the SP and BSP. Instead of a direct contest between BJP on one hand and SP-BSP alliance on the other, there will now be a three-cornered contest. In this scenario, there is bound to be division of votes, which will ultimately help the BJP. Mayawati and Akhilesh seem to have misread the situation completely by maintaining a distance from the Congress as they were unsure that the latter could pitchfork Priyanka in the politically crucial state with wider responsibilities. This might prove to be a costly miscalculation on their part.

WHY DOES CHINA PROTECT MASOOD AZHAR?

It’s the same old story as China has once again showed its intent on which side of terror it stands.  Once again, it has torpedoed the United Nations efforts to ban Jaish-e-Mohammad  chief Masood Azhar. It has been proved beyond doubt that China can’t be a trusted ally in the global war against terrorism.  China’s action is in direct contrast to the position it has maintained publicly that it is opposed to any form of terrorism.  The raison d'être behind China’s avid desire to protect Jaish chief is beyond explanation. Is it only to help its staunchest ally Pakistan or something else?

pix courtesy: nation.com.pk

China has pumped in billions of dollars in Pakistan and continues to do so. Its biggest ever infrastructure development plan – China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – itself is worth close to 60 billion dollars. Moreover, over 30,000 Chinese people, including engineers and construction workers, are posted there. China apprehends that its projects could be in jeopardy if it signaled any change in its policy vis-à-vis Masood Azhar. In the past, several Chinese engineers involved in the project have been attacked and abducted, and later released by militants active in the restive Balochistan following intervention by Pakistan. That seems to be the prominent concern of China. In preventing the Pakistan-based terrorist from being declared as a global terrorist by the United Nations Security Council, China is, in fact, protecting its assets and interests, more than anything else.

pix courtesy: en.dailypakistan.com.pk

China’s opposition to proscribing Azhar is baffling given that Jaish-e-Mohammad has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council of which China is one of the five permanent members. The Jaish was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001, a year after its formation, following a deadly attack on Indian parliament in December 2001, which had brought India and Pakistan on the verge of a fourth war. Strangely, China considers JeM an outlawed organization, but not its leader? There seems to be serious defect in the original charter of the United Nations which gave special powers to the P-5 countries. There is an urgent need for immediate rectification of this rule. Otherwise, any one permanent nation can keep on foiling adoption of any resolution. The best way is to introduce the rule of the majority within the five permanent members, otherwise, the international community would always be found wanting in arriving at any decision due to contradicting stand by one or other countries.

This is the fourth time that China has blocked a combined bid by the United States, France and the United Kingdom to declare Azhar a global terrorist by putting the proposal on a “technical hold” before eventually terminating it on the grounds that “there is no consensus” in the 1267 Committee of the UN Security Council.  How can there be a consensus if one country (read China) continues with its unprincipled stand on Azhar? In 2017 also, it was the odd nation out in the 15-member Security Council when the P3 nations – the US, UK and France – sought to place Azhar on the 1267 sanctions list that would have entailed his travel ban and freezing of assets. While the proposal had approval of all the other 14 members of the Security Council, it was China which censored it. Needless to say, China is misusing its veto power.

China’s opposition to proscribing Azhar is baffling given that Jaish-e-Mohammad has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council of which China is one of the five permanent members. China considers JeM an outlawed organization, but not its leader?

The dichotomy between China’s alleged commitment to fight terrorism and its action is quite evident as it is a signatory to the Xiamen Declaration signed in September 2017 at the 9th BRICS summit in the Chinese city of Xiamen. The Xiamen Declaration had called upon the international community to establish a "genuinely broad" international counter-terrorism coalition. Moreover, it was also a party to a decision of the five-member BRICS nations summit in Xiamen which had called for decisive action against militant groups based in Pakistan terming them as a security concern in the region. Some of the groups mentioned in the declaration included Taliban (Islamic State)..., Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. The last two groups have been involved in several deadly attacks against India, including the latest one in Pulwama in which at least 40 paramilitary soldiers were martyred in a suicide attack, and which was claimed by Jaish.

What is China’s compulsion in protecting Azhar, who is, no doubt, a prized asset for Pakistan? Well, if the United Nations declares Azhar a global terrorist, then Pakistan will be compelled to arrest him and seize his assets.  And this is something the Imran Khan government can’t afford to do fearing violence by an army of militants prepared by Azhar. Besides, Azhar has deep influence in the rural pockets of the country through his seminaries. His popularity soared during the devastating earthquake in 2005 when his seminaries provided financial and medical assistance to the affected people while the government agencies were found lacking in evacuation and rehabilitation works. Secondly and most importantly, he enjoys the support of the Pakistani army. Does Imran Khan, who himself has been propped up by the army, have the guts to go after Azhar? Your guess is as good as mine.

China, too, is aware of the predicament of its all-weather ally.  Therefore, it has been repeatedly blocking any attempt to outlaw Azhar even at the expense of its own image. But while doing so, China risks global isolation.

INDIA SERVES IT RIGHT AND TIGHT TO PAKISTAN

India has dished out to Pakistan what it had been asking for years. Pakistan had been testing India’s patience by carrying out dastardly attacks through its band of home-grown terrorists in Kashmir and other parts of the country. But for how long? It had to happen. India needed to give a strong reply to Pakistan to stop it in its tracks. For how long could Pakistan expect India to sit quiet as it went about continuing with its state policy of terror? A loud and clear message has been delivered to Pakistan that India will not hesitate in going inside the Pakistani territory to hunt out terrorists and their camps.

Here are the key takeaways from today’s aerial attacks.

METICULOUS PLANNING: The air attack was well-timed and carefully planned. It is not easy to carry out aerial attacks during the hours of darkness when operations get hampered due to lower visibility. But Indian Air Force chose 3.30 a.m. local time to exploit the advantages to maximum effect when its Mirage 2000 fighter jets dropped bombs on terrorist camps in Pakistan-controlled territory catching the enemy country unawares. In less than 30 minutes, 12 Mirage 2000 fighter jets completed the job with precision by eliminating terror camp of the Jaish-e-Mohammed, which had taken the responsibility for the Pulwama suicide attack in which at least 40 CRPF personnel were martyred. Though exact figures are not readily available, a large number of militants and their leaders and handlers (some reports put the figure between 200 and 300) were killed.

Pix courtesy: YouTube

PAKISTAN CAUGHT NAPPING: Pakistan least expected India to cross the Line of Control and conduct airstrikes inside its territory. Pakistan knew of impending response from India in the wake of the outrage following the Pulwama terror attack. Expecting India to carry out another surgical attack following the Uri attack last year, it had moved away several terror launch pads and training facilities from the line of control dividing Kashmir. But the least it had expected that India will dare to launch air strikes on its soil. This is the first time India has resorted to aerial bombing over the disputed border since the 1971 war. Indian warplanes had not crossed the Line of Control even during the brief Kargil conflict in 1999.

ZERO TOLERANCE TOWARDS TERRORISM: A hard and decisive message has been delivered to Pakistan that India will not hesitate in taking punitive measures if the former continued with its malicious designs. India had earlier indicated a change of its approach when it carried out surgical strikes in Pakistan occupied Kashmir inflicting heavy casualties on terrorists 10 days after the Uri attack in which 18 Indian soldiers were killed. At least 38 terrorists, including their guides and handlers, were killed in that operation. And today’s pre-dawn attack resulted in the elimination of close to 200-300 terrorists. With Pakistan disregarding all calls from India and the world leaders to close terror camps operating from its soil and prevent infiltration of terrorists into Kashmir, such a reply was long overdue.

PREPARED FOR ESCALATION: Today’s aerial attacks also convey Indian leadership’s readiness for an all-out confrontation if Pakistan chooses to escalate the situation. Thus far, New Delhi had been held hostage to Islamabad’s manipulation and threat of use of nuclear weapons if India dared any limited strikes on Pakistan. It resisted the military response, despite the massive outcry back home, for fear of escalation of hostilities. But New Delhi has decided to bite the bullet by extracting revenge on both the occasions. This marks a tectonic shift from India’s earlier stand when it used to share information of terror attacks with Pakistan in the hope that the latter will live up to its promise and take any concrete action against the terrorist groups operating from its soil.

MESSAGE TO WORLD: With the world leaders balking at India’s repeated requests for concerted and timely action against terrorism, New Delhi has decided to walk the talk. Frustrated by failure of the world leaders to address the issue of terrorism and offering only lip service, India has also sent out a strong signal to the global community that enough is enough and it reserves the right to self-defence against cross-border terrorism. India is unlikely to face any resistance given the global community’s strong condemnation of the Pulwama terror attacks and support to New Delhi.  In fact, the US national security advisor John Bolton had gone on to say that Washington supported India's right to 'self-defence' from 'cross-border terrorism'.

PAKISTAN’S OPTIONS: Pakistan does not have too many options right now. Can it afford to go for an all-out war against India? Seems unlikely. If it does, it will be accused of initiating the war as India chose to target only terror camps and not any civilian or military installations. Moreover, leave aside the support of China and a few Islamic countries, Pakistan today finds itself in isolation. The world opinion is heavily tilted in India’s favour. Pakistan has no option but to swallow the humiliation by terming the attacks as fictitious. At best, it can do what it is best at, by sending mercenaries to India to carry out terror attacks.

WHAT DOES IT AUGUR? There is no doubt that India’s military action has upped the ante and the world is concerned about the escalation of hostilities. The Indo-Pakistan relations have taken a severe hit and there does not seem a ray of hope of any betterment in the situation in the very near future. Any miscalculation by either of the two countries can bring them to the brink of a full-fledged war which does not augur well. Both the countries will do well to practice restraint and bide time to give peace another chance. But it is easier said than done.

PAKISTAN DESERVES NO MERCY

pix courtesy: OneIndia

It’s now or never! The terror-happy Pakistan has been repeatedly testing patience of India by orchestrating such heinous massacres. But this time, it has crossed all its limits. It just can’t be allowed to go scot free. February 14, 2019 will go down in the history of India as the worst black day when a Jaish suicide bomber rammed an explosive-laden vehicle into a CRPF convoy of 70 vehicles in Pulwama district of Jammu and Kashmir killing at least 44 CRPF personnel and injuring several others.  It is high time India realises that it is alone in its fight against terrorism and should expect no support from the world body which has been a silent spectator to the macabre of dance being played in Kashmir and elsewhere in the country for several decades now.

The world has disappointed India every time by looking the other way whenever Pakistan was found complicit in the terror activities perpetrated against the innocent people. Be it the 1993 bombings in Mumbai when 257 people were killed, or the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai when 174 people died, or the Indian Parliament attack, or the 2001 Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly car bombing, or the 2016 Uri attack. And now, the Pulwama incident! The list is endless.  Over the years, thousands of innocent people have fallen prey to acts of terrorism with no fault of theirs. What has been the response of the global community? Other than offering condolences and issuing statements of support for India, the global community has been found wanting in the fight against terrorism.

The then US President George Bush had famously said “Either you are with us or you are with terrorists” when his country came under the worst terror attacks on September 11, 2001 when close to 3,000 people were killed in a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda. Are the lives of US citizens more important than the Indians? Today, India should also ask the same question to the civilized countries where do they stand as far as the war against terrorism is concerned. It should by now be ample clear to India that it has to wage its own battle against terrorism. The so-called global war against terrorism is just a hollow statement and far away from reality. India should take all necessary steps – covert or otherwise – to protect its innocent people and its territorial integrity.

We just can’t afford to live in grief whenever such dastardly act is committed against us. Today there is anger, anger among people, anger among the armed forces. This is an open declaration of hostility by Pakistan. This anger should be directed towards finding a resolute solution to the problem, once and for all. India has taken too long to withdraw the most favoured nation status to Pakistan, which it should have done long ago. While the global community has failed India, New Delhi should work with like-minded countries to ensure that Pakistan is boycotted politically as well as economically. There is an urgent need to isolate Pakistan from the multilateral fora where it is a member. India should use all diplomatic means to ensure that the friendly countries sever their ties with Pakistan.

India has, in the past, made several attempts to buy peace with Pakistan by holding talks with it and its proxy – the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC).  It should be made crystal clear to both Pakistan and the Hurriyat that they don’t deserve talks. The political parties, especially the People’s Democratic Party(PDP) which has soft corner for terrorists, should be shunned completely. There is no room for such parties in a civilized set-up. 

The Hurriyat should be made very clear that it has no role in finding a solution to the Kashmir problem as it does not represent the masses of Kashmir. Moreover, their leaders should be divested of security. They have had enough. If their hearts bleed for Pakistan, they should be told to leave Kashmir immediately and settle down in a country from where they get all the moral and financial support. No civilised nation can allow anybody to carry out anti-national activities from its soil and Hurriyat is no exception. There is difference between dissent and sedition. Hurriyat leaders and all those who subscribe to their ideas are anti-nationals and should be charged with sedition.

Security forces should be given a free hand to smoke out each and every militant from Kashmir. They should first scout the South Kashmir, the hotbed of militancy, which ironically is the constituency of PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti. This is the breeding ground for local militants. Half the battle will be won once South Kashmir is cleared of militants. About one-third of 200-odd local militants and their accomplices are active in this part. In recent years, there has been alarming increase in the number of youths from this region joining militancy.

There is no doubt that India has been put on notice, and it has all the rights to take every resource at its command to protect its people. From now onwards, India should channelize all its resources – diplomatic or otherwise – to defeat the terror network from the country.  This act of terror can’t be left to go unpunished.