Like it or not, the 2009 parliamentary elections are virtually a presidential-type election between two major alliances?NDA and UPA?that have projected LK Advani and Dr. Manmohan Singh respectively as their prime ministerial candidates. This is the political reality despite the perception that there is no visible national wave and that several regional satraps have prime ministerial ambitions. Political analysts believe that in the absence of a core issue in this elections, the outcome would be the sum total of state assembly elections as was the case in 2004. Acceptability of the prime ministerial candidate and performance of the central and state governments will, however, influence the choice of floating voters. Smaller parties that have formed fronts have no ideological commitments. They are in one camp or the other for tactical reasons to enhance their bargaining power. No one will be surprised if regional parties change their loyalties after the results are known on May 16.
Campaign is at its peak but there is hardly any worthwhile debate or attempt to educate the voters. Speeches of even top leaders are becoming shriller and toxic. Discussions and debates on TV channels are noisy and lack depth. Anchors rarely steer the discussion on issues that concerns the nation and the society. They appear to be more interested in dominating debates. They interrupt speakers and rarely allow them to make a point. Name calling and slogan-mongering is the order of the day. Unfortunately, Advani'sinvitation to the
Prime Minister to have a televised debate was summarily rejected by Dr. Singh. So scared is the Prime Minister of debating with the Leader of the Opposition that he chose to publicly concede that Advani was a better public speaker than him. Obviously he suffers from inferiority complex that is also reflected in his harsh and uncalled for comments on Advani. Had Dr Singh picked up the courage to accept Advani'schallenge, there could have been an in-depth debate on issues of national security, economic policy, rising unemployment, agrarian crisis and infrastructure.
Secularism, communalism and cultural nationalism may also have figured in the debate that has been given a slip. Oratory doesn'tmatter much in such discussions. What matters is the content of one'sthinking on crucial issues. The PM very well knew that the shelved one-to-one debate would be held in a television studio anchored by a senior journalist and not in a public meeting at Ram Lila Maidan. PM'snegative response has denied the people a golden opportunity to hear leaders of two major contenders for power on issues that concern their present and future and make an informed choice of the next Prime Minister.
Advani'soft-repeated description of Dr. Singh as a weak Prime Minister has belatedly provoked Congress President Sonia Gandhi to allege that the BJP leader had insulted the nation by attacking the Prime Minister.
Electronic media'srole is equally distressing. Pranab Roy, one of the most sophisticated anchors in the industry, the other day asked why was BJP protesting when Sonia Gandhi had not named it in her ?communalists more dangerous than terrorists? comment? Roy doesn'tsee anything wrong in preferring terrorists to ?communal? parties. Expectedly, Mani Shanker Aiyar, who was also on the show, defended his leader with wicked arguments. It is not surprising since both of them are crypto-communists. Only ?secularists? that have made careers demonising BJP can question the nationalist party'sright to protest against toxic propaganda unleashed by the Congress trinity. It is for the people to teach the Congress party a lesson for spreading the canard that terrorists who attacked Mumbai and Parliament House were less dangerous than BJP. As a loyalist of the Italy-born lady, Dr Singh spent sleepless nights over the plight of a suspected terrorist of Indian origin probably because he was a Muslim. That is what minorityism is. That is the issue that needs to be debated in-depth and at length during the elections. But neither the Congress nor the ?secular-liberal? brigade in the media is interested in discussing such issues. Hit and run is their time-tested strategy.
Dynasty'scrown prince distorted Advani'sstatement to castigate him for disowning his role in handling hijack of Indian Airline plane to Kandhar. Priyanka says his brother (in fact, every one in the dynasty) is qualified to be the Prime Minister. Rahul has been uttering sweet nothingness in his speeches. This time round, Rahul has erred grievously by intentionally distorting Advani'sremarks. All Advani once said was that he was not aware that Jaswant Singh would fly to Kandhar in the same plane with terrorists freed in exchange for release of hostages. As was later disclosed by Jaswant Singh, he had to travel in the same plane because of RAW'sadvice against the Minister flying in its plane for ?security? reasons. The crown prince ought to know that Congress leaders participated in the all-party meeting called to evolve a consensus on the hijackers? demands. The party refused to take a stand on the ground that it was for the government to handle the situation. This much for the party'sconcern for national security! And does he know that Home Minister, P. Chidambran is of the considered opinion that it was easy to criticise the decision but it was a difficult situation since innocent lives were involved and there was tremendous pressure from families of hostages. One can'tdefend the release of terrorists under any circumstance. It was indeed a black spot on NDA government'sotherwise clean record. Equally reprehensible was the Congress government'ssurrender to five terrorists who had taken shelter in Charar-e-Sharif and were allowed to cross over to Pakistan.
Dr Singh is protesting too much. The Prime Minister says he was not informed about CBI'sclean chit to Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar accused of leading mobs that massacred Sikhs during anti-Sikh pogrom of 1984. Nor, he says, he was consulted in nominating these accused as Congress candidates in parliamentary elections. What sort of Prime Minister who is not consulted while the extra-constitutional authority takes major decisions! Advani is absolutely right to dub Dr. Singh the weakest Prime Minister India had. He is in office but not in power. Why not face the stark reality, Mr. Prime Minister? You are a stop-gap arrangement to keep the seat warm for the crown prince. You are so weak you never claim you are in command. You are Prime Minister at the pleasure of the Madam. You are a gentleman. How would you react if one were to retort that your only achievement is to allow Pakistani terrorists to travel by sea and attack Mumbai on 26/11 and that your government took 60 hours to eliminate ten terrorists? And what about the remaining five terrorists who remain untraced till today?
Comments