Gratis Mind

Intolerant Malaysia, tolerant faith? - Tarun Vijay

When Hindus gathered courage and protested in an unprecedented solidarity on November 26 in Kuala Lumpur, they were crushed brutally by the Malay police using chemicals in the water cannons. None of those who had put up a united front against a cartoon created in Denmark felt anything bad or condemnable in the injustices meted out to the Hindus in an Islamic country. When it’s a question of Hindus getting unfair treatment in a Muslim majority region, the ‘civil, sophisticated and articulate’ Muslim intellectuals take refuge in the statement that it’s a matter concerning a foreign country. But when it’s a question regarding a cartoon or a fatwa for beheading a writer, they say -we are a global Ummah, anything happening anywhere to Muslims is our common concern! All big lies and a bigger hypocrisy traded in the name of a religion.

Dr Modi & Mr Hyde - Rajdeep Sardesai

On the very day that Lalu Yadav marched to the Prime Minister’s residence demanding Narendra Modi’s arrest in the wake of the Tehelka sting exposé, a small group of Sikh widows were protesting at the capital’s Jantar Mantar on the 23rd anniversary of the anti-Sikh riots. One eye on the TV cameras, the other firmly on the Muslim vote, Lalu was making the headlines. The widows were yesterday’s story. While the 2002 Gujarat riots have become a cause celebre for the secular establishment, 1984 has never quite acquired the same profile.

On the face of it, the anti-Sikh riots were far more horrific than the post-Godhra violence. More than 2,700 people were killed in 1984, as per the official death toll; in Gujarat, it was a little over a thousand. The 1984 riots have seen just 13 convictions; in Gujarat, the fast-track courts have already convicted more than 15 persons in different cases. The 1984 riots occurred in several high security areas in the heart of the national capital; the 2002 violence spread more thinly to parts of rural Gujarat as well. As a powerful recent book, When a Tree Shook Delhi, confirms, senior Congress politicians, including Union ministers, were actually present on the streets, allegedly leading the mobs in 1984; in Gujarat, the direct evidence against Modi’s cabinet members is still based principally on police phone records. While then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee did make some token attempt to distance himself from the Gujarat rioters, it took a Sikh Congress PM in 2005 to finally accept that 1984 was a “national shame”, and that the truth had never come out. Rajiv Gandhi’s statement that “when a big tree falls, the earth shakes” is recorded history; Narendra Modi’s “action-reaction” comment was officially denied.

Why then is Modi such a hate figure today for the secularists while Rajiv Gandhi, then Home Minister Narasimha Rao and the entire top Congress leadership have escaped public censure? The answer might unlock not just the Modi enigma, but also the content of Indian secularism, and perhaps indicate just how much India has changed in the last two decades.

The Adharma Of Coalitions - Rajinder Puri

The lives lost in the Nandigram violence must have shattered many families. Hopefully their grief will pass. Time is a great healer. But will time heal the fatal damage to Indian democracy and Constitution that the Nandigram episode exposed? Nandigram revealed the cancerous rot afflicting the UPA alliance. The UPA alliance in turn exposed the cancerous rot spread by the comforting mantra that a coalition dharma is the answer to India’s prayers for stability. Consider the conduct of the two major UPA partners–Congress and the Left.

For months the Left ranted against the Indo-US Nuclear Deal as a treaty that would destroy India’s independence, sovereignty and security. The Left proposed changing existing law by compelling governments to obtain parliamentary approval for all international treaties. Some Left leaders cited the US example where the American President must get treaties ratified by US Congress. But the US has a Presidential system where governments have fixed terms. India has a parliamentary system. So what happened to the much quoted Westminster model and conventions that MPs invoke whenever it suits them?

If the N-Deal is all that evil the Left had the obvious democratic duty to withdraw support and remove the government to prevent progress on the deal. But the Left couldn’t do that, could it? The coalition dharma was the good old fig leaf to cover its naked opportunism.

For 11 months the Nandigram crisis exposed the Left government’s incapacity to enforce the rule of law in West Bengal. That no hope of law being restored became amply clear from the Chief Minister’s outrageous remarks that betrayed ignorance about the basic norms of democracy. He kept harping on the actions of “our people” and “their people” to justify his government’s failure to impose the rule of law. He implicitly endorsed armed action by CPI-M cadres as an appropriate substitute for police action. Does such a government deserve to hold office? If ever there was need for the union government to dismiss a state government because law and order had broken down, this was the occasion. But the UPA government couldn’t do that, could it? Coalition dharma was the fig leaf for naked abdication of duty.

The Congress offered muted criticism of course. The PM described the Nandigram crisis as unfortunate. The CPI-M responded with threats on the N-deal. No doubt the mutual recrimination will mount. But will any party at any stage ever act according to the norms governing our democratic system? Fat chance! In this entire pathetic opera the most tragic victim will prove to be our democratic system. It is sinking so rapidly that its recovery remains in doubt. Is it not time therefore for searching diagnosis of our system and Constitution?

Dishonest intellectuals of Bolshevism - Tarun Vijay

Cong MP protests Chinese incursions in Arunachal
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi

A day after the BJP raised the issue of Chinese intrusion into the Arunachal territory, the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday expressed grave concern over reports that the Chinese troops had last month damaged a statue of Buddha inside the Indian border.

Raising the matter during Zero Hour, Nabam Rebia from Arunachal Pradesh said a lot of incursions by Chinese troops had taken place in both the States and the Chinese Army had demolished a Buddha statue in Tawang district on October 30.

The member said Chinese did not recognise the McMohan Line and added the people living in Arunachal felt “a lot of insecurity” and wanted to know what the Government was doing in this regard. He also said Arunachal Pradesh was an integral part of India and yet China was claiming a large portion of the State as its territory. Nabam Rebia’s concern was shared by Rajya Sabha member Chandan Mitra (Independent) and several other members cutting across party lines.

In a written reply, Defence Minister AK Antony said incursions were on account of differing perceptions between New Delhi and Beijing on the Line of Actual Control (LAC). He said such incursions could be avoided if the two countries had common perceptions of the LAC.

In order to address the issue, the matter had been taken up at an appropriate level in the Government, Antony said. “Mechanism to address instances of intrusions along the LAC are well established,” he said and hoped peace and tranquillity would be maintained on the border.