Interesting how two entirely different stories can have
threads of commonality. Kejriwal the joker (oh ok….let me add “in the political
pack”, though really, that’s not required) has accused the BJP of having “fixed
the match” by fielding weak candidates against Sheila Dixit in the past. At the
same time, most people in India (not
including this blogger) feel that the BJP (Jaitley) fixed another match
yesterday – saving Srinivasan’s scalp at the BCCI emergency meeting in Chennai.
Srinivasan has only agreed to “step aside” and not “step down”.
The focus of this post is not on Kejriwal but on Jaitley and
the BJP. But let me clarify something right at the beginning. In choosing
between two evils – BCCI’s/Srinivasan’s defiance/arrogance and media’s extreme methods,
I favor the former. So when Srinivasan managed to retain his BCCI Presidentship,
a part of me said “Good. This should put the media in its place”. The Indian
Express reported that Srinivasan would continue to remain India’s rep at the
ICC. Clearly, the man had cocked a snook at media, accusing it of trying him
with an agenda. Well, Srinivasan had his day, no matter what the nation’s media
thinks. What the nation thinks is anyone’s guess.
But having said that, I want to pose tough questions to Arun
Jaitley. Jaitley knew the media’s mood, and this time around, media was united
in its demand that Srinivasan be removed for good. Jaitley played along; giving
the impression (forget what words he may have used) that he was aghast at the
corruption charges and that sacking Srinivasan was the best solution. The
reason I am saying we should forget the words is because in a politician’s
conduct, words often have lesser meaning than actions. Nothing in Jaitley’s
conduct had indicated that he would try to broker such a “middle of the road”
solution, saving Srinivasan the blushes. All along, Jaitley gave the impression
of being a tough guy, someone who will do whatever it takes to clean the game,
and to make sure that the corrupt are not spared. And yet, when it was crunch
time, Jaitley did the opposite. He did what a politician does best. Speak one
thing to media, do the other thing when it is actual action time.
Jaitley had the media’s backing to demand Srinivasan’s
sacking. He would have emerged a hero (read my post yesterday: in today’s age,
media decides who is hero and who, villain). But Jaitley did an about turn,
becoming the solution provider to ease Srinivasan’s dilemma. He let many down.
In fact, much of the social media expressed its disenchantment with Jaitley. At
the end of the day, Jaitley was just a loud mouth, who delivered little.
But Jaitley is hardly alone in this kind of double-speak. His
party is quite the master at it. At the time when Anna was fasting, the BJP had
made many media-friendly statements about how the BJP completely backed Anna. The
party had also pushed the Congress into agreeing to a special “sense of the house” resolution, in which
it was clearly spelt out that the Lokpal and Lok Ayuktas would be constituted
via the same Act. This had been one of Anna’s key demands. But as soon as the
media heat was off, and Anna had become a bit of a bore, the BJP changed its
tune. It was back to politics. The BJP sensed that many opposition parties (who
were also turncoats) wanted to separate the Lok Ayuktas provision from the
central Lokpal Act and leave that to the state governments to enact. The BJP –
in its political interest, to bind the opposition against the government –
readily agreed to this. It’s commitment to Anna didn’t bother it one bit.
I have always said this. The BJP plays a game in which the
rules keep changing. The party believes in winning. Period. Rules sometimes
become obstructions, and in such instances, they should be given a rest. Worse,
they can even be changed if required. One day, the party supports FDI in
multi-brand retail; another day, it opposes it. One day, it supports the Food
Security Bill; another day, it does everything to block its passage. One day, it
gives an assurance to the SC that the Babri Masjid will be protected; another
day, it’s leaders exhort its followers to pull it down. One day, it opposes the
Congress’s plan to have coal auctions; another day it turns the tables on it. How
can one trust such a party? Who knows what such a party will do when it comes
to power? The Congress is better. It’s viewpoints don’t change. The party may
sometimes appear to be “weak” or “resisting change”, but in each case, it has
proven to be true to its word. Take the CBI reforms. The party appears to be
resisting making CBI fully autonomous, going against the public mood. But it’s
right. The CBI is a police body after all. It has to be under civilian
authority. Just like the Army has to be under civilian authority. The BJP will
perhaps do the same with the CBI; it will make much noise about autonomy, only
to change its colors at the last moment.
One last point. Where is Narendra Modi, the APCO-supported
PM aspirant of the BJP? Why did he not even as much as open his mouth on this
matter? Why did he not demand that Srinivasan step down? Why did he (and
Jaitley) not shut down BCCI like they shut down Parliament for the smallest of reasons?
The truth is that this “chhote sardar” is no sardar. He is just another
ordinary leader concerned about building his own image. Advani is right. Chouhan
is better.
The real truth is that the BJP has done what it is an
expert in. Changed its tune at the last moment. Made the compromise with the “devil”.
Let everyone down, after raising much hopes. Next time the party’s leaders open
their mouth, I won’t be listening….
No comments:
Post a Comment