BJP’s deceit on Muzaffarnagar….

The PM visited Muzaffarngar yesterday along with Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. The BJP promptly called it “secular” tourism. The BJP is good at wisecracks, but if it were to pause and look back at its repeated double-speak and deceit on Muzaffarnagar, it would be shocked. Here are some things that the BJP may want to think about:

What happened to Federalism: Forever, the BJP has argued that law and order is a state subject, and the center must do nothing to enter this domain. In fact, this argument has been used repeatedly to scuttle the creation of the NCTC, and god forbid, if another terrorist attack happens, which could have been prevented had the NCTC been there, then the BJP must be held responsible for it. The center was sensitive about the concept of federalism even when fake encounters were happening in Gujarat. It was only when the courts decided to move the cases outside the state, when Gujarat’s fake façade of federalism was shattered.

So why does the BJP suddenly blame the Congress for the Muzaffarnagar riots? The center had warned 11 states including UP about a possible communal incidents. Isn’t it the UP government’s fault that it did nothing with the information? But one BJP leader screamed that the Center should have sent forces earlier. If I remember right, the center sent forces as soon as the state asked for them. It’s sending even more forces now. As if this was not enough, the party President Rajnath Singh demanded that the Congress sack the UP government and impose President’s rule. Impose President’s rule? Maybe yes, but how does this fly in the face of the BJP’s federalism argument?

Every issue, every point of view, of the BJP smacks of opportunism and nothing else. Federalism was a bogey that was well known since earlier; its only becoming more clear with every passing day.

Abusing the PM’s visit: The PM, Sonia and Rahul went to Muzaffarnagar after the situation had calmed down. They didn’t rush there the day the violence broke, like Ravi Shankar Prasad did (thank god he was denied permission, or the toll could have been higher). Or like Aruj Jaitley did when the Kishtwar riots broke. The PM was mindful of the fact that the state government needed time to get the situation under control. Has the BJP ever been this mindful? Besides, if the PM had not gone, wouldn’t the same BJP have chided the Congress for being insensitive?

In any case, what did the PM say, apart from the usual reassuring statements, that got the BJP to call his trip secular tourism? “Efforts will be made to ensure the strictest action be taken against those behind the communal violence” and “people behind such ghastly violence would be punished and all help extended to the UP government” are the kind of statements a PM is expected to make under such circumstances. But maybe the BJP doesn’t understand decency too much.

Uttering blatant lies on TV: Last night (on NDTV), the BJP’s Meenakshi Lekhi had to beat a hasty retreat after she tried to lie about the BJP MLAs who had been named in the FIRs. She said they had only been named for violating prohibitory orders, not for inciting violence. She would have got away (as happens often on TV), had the SP’s representative Gaurav Bhatia, not pointed out that the charges included giving a provocative speech at the Mahapanchayat, and of sharing an inflammatory video. As soon as she was corrected, Lekhi quickly moved on to another argument. Had she not been caught, she would have gotten away. Why does the BJP conduct itself in such a manner?

Unashamedly communal: As is its wont, the BJP is being unashamedly communal about the entire episode. Rather than trying to calm the situation, the BJP is fanning trouble. As per media reports, the party was planning a rally by Narendra Modi in Muzaffarnagar. Now, if this isn’t plain, naked, dirty communal politics, what is? We know the only think Modi can speak about is aggressive Hinduism and Muslim bashing. His mere presence will charge the atmosphere a few notches higher.

The BJP had also planned a “swabhimaan” rally with Advani and the abusive Varun Gandhi. It was canceled because the state didn’t give permission, and perhaps because of all the tension around Advani’s opposition to Modi. But why was it called Swabhimaan (self respect) at all? Whose swabhimaan? Why swabhimaan?

But forget even this. Just look at Subramaniam Swamy’s tweet and decide for yourself if this is acceptable from a national party? “Did TDK (that’s Subramaniam Swamy’s way of referring to/abusing Sonia Gandhi) visit in Muzaffarnagar only Muslim riot affected houses? That’s what Jats tell me” can only be called evil. Incidentally, this also happens to be a lie, but that’s seldom mattered to the BJP.

For the BJP, any communal tension at this point of time is a god-sent. It pushes the party’s Hindutva agenda. It helps position Narendra Modi with the Hindus. It makes Hindus worry about their religion, and makes them bury other differences and aggregate around religion (as happened after the Babri demolition). Media reports from UP indicate that the biggest loser in this conflagration could be the RLD, with Jats likely to migrate to the BJP (exactly what the BJP wanted). By sending Amit Shah to UP, this is what the whole plan was, wasn’t it? So while it cannot be proved the BJP was involved in the Muzaffarnagar riots, the beneficiary of the riots is clearly the BJP. In the past, the BJP has used this “whoever benefits, must be involved” logic to attack the Congress….so why should the same not apply to it now?

The real truth is that the BJP’s actions post-Muzaffarnagar are in line with its election strategy. Escalate communal tensions, make fiery speeches, attack everyone, and make Hindutva the core issue. If this is the path the BJP is taking to get to the 272 mark, that speaks volumes about its fundamental character. It does indeed have the RSS’s genes….

Breaking now! Another massive likely #feku story!

I got this whatsapp message this morning “Narendra Modi has broken the record for the most searched person on Google. Modi entered the record book after his name received maximum number of search on Google in a day. Around 100 crore people searched the keyword Narendra Modi on search engine giant Google. Earlier this record was named after US President Barack Obama. During the US Presidential elections, Barack Obama received 98.77 lac number of search in a single day”. And of course it ended with the punch line “Do you still doubt his charsiam and popularity…..pappu is eons behind him!!”. Do note the multiple exclamation marks, surely added by the Modi-fan who sent me the text!

The first thing I did was search…..what else….Google itself! After watching a Zee TV video over youtube and a story in India Today online, I figured out that the news was most likely bogus. The India Today story titled “Narendra Modi pips Obama to become most searched person on Google” gave a hint of that when it credited unnamed “reports” as its source. Now anyone in the business of journalism knows that when the source is unnamed (another common trick: as per party insiders who didn’t want to be named!), it is most likely suspect. In this case, the fake nature of this news item stands out because it fails even basic scrutiny. The exaggeration is so enormous that it almost looks silly!

Either because the propagandist wanted to show Modi as being “a really, really tall leader”, or maybe even “a leader of the world” (!), or because of his poor grip on numbers, the fake news is embarrassing in its proportion, much like the earlier stories that earned Modi the sobriquet “feku” over social media. In his zest to show Modi’s global stature, the search number hasn’t just “inched ahead” of Obama, it has gone ahead by more than 100 times! Even Rajnikant fans must be really offended now! And to imagine that Modi was reaching out to this icon just a few days back!

There is a strong sense of déjà vu here. Just a few weeks back, Modi had said “16% of China’s GDP is spent on education in that country”. Turned out that the real number was a fraction of that! Also turned out that in reality, the Congress had spent more on education than the NDA government before had done! What’s worse, the media caught it. Suddenly, his trolls had to become creative in defending the goof up. Someone lied by quoting some obscure and/or non-existing Chinese website; someone else gave some creative explanation of “growth over last year” being 16%, not the % of GDP, and the media misquoting Modi! I have a feeling this Google story will go the same way!

In a typically stinky way that Indian media is getting famous for, responsible media outlets like India Today, Dainik Bhaskar, Jagran and Zee News “amplified” this news story, possibly without verifying it. Zee News and Dainik Bhaskar did not even bother to mention any source, unlike India Today which at least said “reports”. Zee News flashed the zingy slogan “Obama ko di maat” or “Obama defeated”! Jagran went a step further of the rest, and made the figure 178 crores (or maybe they got the story a few hours late, and the search number had surged)! It also adds “Modi’s popularity has been rising after his 3^rd election”. Popularity, my foot! Coming back to the stink, source verification is the first step practiced in journalism. Did someone verify with Google? Did someone at least once question the possibility of the 100x number? But then don’t we know how Indian media works. My story yesterday about prominent journalists being colored was in the same context.

Here’s the typical “pattern” that will unfold now. There will be no statement from Modi himself on his remarkable feat! He will remain silent. The tall leader is so humble he doesn’t comment on such small small achievements! Actually, it’s a very nice way to avoid the embarassment when the truth finally comes out. He can simply disown it. In the meantime, his objective would have been served.

Some of the other organizations that amplified the message include an outfit called pardaphash (???), Saharasamay (which also does not mention the source), a curious site called www.defence.pk (which refuses to open!) and www.inagist.com (which only leads you to the India Today link!). I wonder if www.aniruddhasethireport.com is the original source (what’s this??? The site says “we report rumors and hear-say but never create them! How nice!). Rumors? Hell, yes! It’s a matter of time before the more respectable of our media outlets all start flashing this story – again without verifying – on their websites and mass-media outlets.

Modi’s PR skills are legendary. It appears that Modi’s trolls are motivated more by the newsworthiness of a story than its basic truthfulness. Numbers are vastly exaggerated, sometimes in a way that leads to embarassment, like in this instance. Maybe that’s why Modi has become cautious in the last few weeks (since the China comment). But this news starts the pattern again. Like they say in Hindi – Kutte ki dum kabhi seedhi nahin hoti! (meant only as a phrase!).

The real truth is that the exaggeration-prone Modi’s trolls are at it again. This time, at an even more scaled up and bizarre level. Very soon, the story will be all over mass-media. It may be denied later, but by that time, its job would have been done. This is new-age India, and this is the worst of digital media….

Why are so many reputed journalists politically so biased?

I carry this almost saintly belief that journalists are like teachers, informing us about developments, helping us understand them, and showing us the truth. They are people with strong ethics and high standards. Wikipedia talks of “truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability” in the context of journalism. A political journalist must be fair and unbiased, applauding the good, and criticizing the bad work of a politician or a party. But in India today, some of our most reputed journalists are shattering this basic tenet of journalistic ethics. They are politically aligned and biased in reporting.

I am most disappointed with Swapan Dasgupta. I always regarded him as one of India’s foremost journalists. He is one who effortlessly straddles both print and TV. I find his arguments engaging, and I like his dignified conduct, always allowing others to finish their talk, never getting personal or abusive. Unfortunately, he is not objective. I have always seen him singing paeans of Narendra Modi. It doesn’t matter what the debate is about, he will always promote or defend Modi. I agree being pro-Modi is his birthright, but its equally the birthright of his followers that he declare his bias upfront, and not pretend to be a mere “senior journalist”. I guess he knows that if did in fact do that, he would stop being the revered journalist that he is. So he plays along, almost “cheating” his followers. His twitter description “Politically conservative; socially Anglophile; emotionally in 1930s” doesn’t reveal his bias either.

The BJP is popular with many such senior journalists. One wonders if this is a genuine affection for the party, or something else. Ashok Malik (“Twitter agnostic, trying to develop faith. Otherwise a news columnist”), Minhaz Merchant (“Biographer of Rajiv Gandhi and Aditya Birla. Media group chairman and editor”), MJ Akbar, Prabhu Chawla (“Editorial Director, The New Indian Express and The Sunday Standard”) or Tavleen Singh (simply “columnist”) are all big names in journalism, but unfortunately, they cannot be called objective. While the BJP has the larger share, the Congress has its own band of supportive journos. Kumar Ketkar is one such.

I actually appreciate the Chandan Mitras of the world because they have chosen to join a party. When they take their party’s line, there is no confusion in the minds of the reader or viewer. What I mind is when senior journalists do not inform us about their political interests.

It’s the same with our TV anchors. Before a topic is announced, one knows what their views will be. Then there is this other way by which TV anchors play games. They set up panels that suit their point of view, and give more air time to those who speak their type of language. Here is how a famous pro-BJP anchor typically constitutes his panel: One member from the Congress, one from the BJP, one from Shiv Sena, one from SAD, one from BJD and one journalist (typically biased) or activist (usually anti government). And then he gives everyone the same time to speak (see how fair he is)! This channel perhaps draws inspiration from Fox News which calls itself “fair and balanced” but who Larry King accused of being “a Republican brand”. Usually however, the media in advanced countries plays a far more responsible role. In the UK recently, a panel on Sky News had one MP each from the Conservatives, Lib Dems (so two from government) and Labor parties, reflecting the position in their Parliament, and hence the last measured public opinion. They also had a journo who was truly independent.

Fortunately for us, there are many journalists who remain proudly unbiased. Foremost is Shekhar Gupta, who is my favorite. I have always seen him argue for or against an issue, never a particular party or politician. My second favorite is Barkha Dutt, who firstly, conducts her show with extreme decency, allowing everyone to speak and never allowing anyone to abuse, and secondly never takes a side that she doesn’t genuinely believe in. Then Vinod Mehta, Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyer, Siddharth Varadarajan (Hindu), Vir Das (he hardly ever writes), Rajdeep Sardesai, Prannoy Roy (whenever he does make an appearance), Karan Thapar are all fair and unbiased, while still retaining their razor sharp demeanour.

I have this feeling that TV audiences have seen through this deceit. That’s why English news channels viewership has fallen off the cliff in the last two years. Not that the viewership numbers were very high to begin with, what is left today is just a quarter of that. English TV news viewers are sticking to morning newspapers, which have done a far far better job of fair and unbiased reporting.

Media is considered the fourth pillar of a democracy. If media cannot remain honest, and apolitical, then democracy will crumble. If all communication we get from these news pundits is tainted, then how do we separate right from wrong? It’s a serious problem.

One last point. If these seasoned journalists have political biases, that’s perfectly fine. Like I said earlier, its their right. But then, they should become bloggers. By definition, bloggers express their personal – even biased –  views, and seek out followers who agree with them. But when journos appear on mass media, they are duty bound to be unbiased and apolitical.

The real truth is that some of our seniormost, most respected journalists are making a mockery of their trade, harming our democracy even more than some of our politicians do. Such biased, colored balderdash has to stop….

Modi’s nomination anything but a US-style Primary….

So Narendra Modi is the BJP’s PM nominee. That should bring down the curtains on a sordid saga of personal egos and ambitions, opaque internal politics, remote controlled decisions and an obvious crushing of dissent. The BJP possibly sees this as a US-style primary, and the forthcoming 2014 General elections as a US-style Presidential election. But honeslty, this internal struggle was hardly anything even remotely similar to a US primary. Here’s why:

First: The US primaries are decided by a secret vote amongst party members held over a period of several months. Primaries are held state by state, with leaders and members of the party in each state getting a chance to vote. The decision on which candidate goes forward is based not on some amorphous “wave” or non-descript “popularity” or some sponsored “poll” but on genuine, secret voting. Out here, no one got to vote, maybe for fear that the real picture may emerge.

Two: Most importantly, there are 3-4 candidates who fight it out in a primary. Out here, while we know there were many in the race, they were simply not there in public view. Maybe no one wants to challenge the “wave”. In that case, this represents a stifling of democracy; not the exemplary practice of democracy. In the US, the ones who lose, lose fairly and squarely, leaving no ill-will. Out here, there is solid ill-will. Forget Advani, who has virtually gone public. Wait for dissent from Swaraj, Joshi, Sinha, Sinha and co.

Third: The US primaries are all about putting forward an agenda. One candidate’s plans and vision compared to the others’. It’s a constructive debate. It’s a squaring off between alternate ideologies. What is Narendra Modi’s ideology? For that matter, what is the BJP’s ideology? While nothing has been spelt out, one can glean out a few patterns a) an aggressive pursuit of hindutva, with concomitant marginalization of muslims/Christians/everyone else. There may be no more riots in the country alright, but that will because of oppression, not joyous integration. And oh yes, there will be many more unreported encounters b) an aggressive relationship with neighbors, with attendant conflagrations at the borders, souring of relations with even peaceful ones like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and the welcome to China to enter them and surround us even more. God forbid, if this style leads to a needless provocation of China, then we’ll be pushed back by a few decades c) More subsidies: Modi prefers more grains to the poor at cheaper prices, hence higher food subsidy. He’s not spoken of cutting any other subsidy, neither fertilizer, nor LPG, kerosene or anything else (even though he has abused the Congress for this!) d) No Lokpal, Anna please note. Or even if there is one, an even more diluted one than that proposed by the Congress. And Lok Ayuktas? Heavens no! Even Gujarat has not had one for the last ten years. Institutions like the RTI will also be given a short shrift e)  Forget inclusiveness. This government will work for industry and industry alone. Land will be given off easily. Environment will be given the go-by. The R&R burden will be light. Dissent in any case will not be tolerated. This is the sole reason why industry is cheering for Modi.

Fourth: The US primaries may be an internal affair of the party but they are fought in the public. Like someone pointed out on TV the other day (was in Pawan Varma, advisor to the JD(U)?), the public comes to know what the differences are within the party. That brings transparency and honesty to the process. The transparency also helps people decide whether they want to vote for that party or not. It may be an internal power struggle, but its also a constant communication with the public. Out here, we have no clue why Modi’s opponents were opposing him. Is it because they are also aspirants to the top job (nothing wrong with that)? Do they have a softer line on Hindutva than Modi (Advani’s Jinnah moment)? Do they disagree with Modi’s growth agenda, if there is one shared internally? No one knows anything. All that we know is that power politics is being played out.

The only commonality if any with the US Presidential system is that the opponent (the “Grand Old Party” as it were) is sitting pretty waiting for the other side to fight it out (and watching in glee!). The Congress has no leadership struggle, no doubt about who the leader is, no public spats, and a proven record of what it stands for – good and bad. The Congress’s poll planks are mainly two as expostulated by Shashi Tharoor in recent times a) a Rights-and-entitlements based focus on the poor and disenfranchised and b) “pluralism” (he prefers this to secularism) of ideas, cultures, religions, viewpoints…..as opposed to the monochromatic (saffron) hegemony of a single ideology (RSS’s). This pluralism can also be called “inclusiveness”. Or what we were taught in school: Unity in diversity. The Congress’s economic record has been exemplary, inspite of the last two years. Ten years of the highest growth ever recorded by India (8.2%+). It includes retrieving the economy from doom (6 years of NDA rule were those of the lowest growth since 1991), raising India’s stature globally (G-20, BRICS, nuclear/space programs, poverty alleviation, Obama’s repeated references to Bangalore, even making it a verb…..). What I also found refreshing in Tharoor’s points was an acceptance that corruption has become a scourge, but the party was determined to clean it all up. The BJP pretends to be clean and honest, forgetting Karnataka (Modi will tie-up with Yeddy all over again) and the fact that they back-tracked on creating Lok Ayuktas along with the Lokpal in spite of assurances given in Parliament to Anna.

The real truth is that Modi has won the internal battles as was expected. Advani was unceremoniously thrown into the dustbin (Why couldn’t they wait for 2 more months?). Whether Modi’s elevation makes or breaks the party remains to be seen. Whatever happens, please lets not fool ourselves by comparing the BJP’s sordit internal battles with US primaries….

Four out of five “topmost” BJP leaders against Modi….

Narendra Modi’s extensive and efficient PR machinery has created the impression that there is a “wave” running across the country in his support. Well, we’ll have to wait and see if that is true. But in the meantime, while Rajnath Singh and his bosses at RSS push ahead to make Modi the party’s PM candidate, a quick check at the top leadership of the party shows just how much support Modi has.

Take the five seniormost leaders of the party. There is the tallest of them all, Advani. Tallest, because even today, he is the one leader in the party who can unify the entire party. He’s the one – and not Vajpayee- who made the party what it is today, even though by pursuing a Hindutva agenda (read: Babri demolition) that he cannot be too proud of. That’s why partymen still refer to the time gone by as the “Advani-Vajpayee” era. Well, Advani is the biggest opponent of Modi. As per a story breaking now on ndtv.com, Advani has apparently cautioned his party that Modi will be a “disaster” if made the PM nominee.

Take the 2^nd seniormost leader of the party, Sushma Swaraj. I am rating her ahead of Arun Jaitley, because she is an “elected” leader, elected by the people directly…..And of course because she is the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha. I am also pitching her way ahead of Rajnath Singh, who everyone knows is a lightweight, a paper-pusher for the RSS. Well, Sushma is clearly opposed to Modi as well, going as far as to say that she wont be able to even perform her duties as the Leader of Opposition.

Both Advani and Sushma Swaraj fancy their chances at becoming the PM in case the BJP/NDA were to get even a half-decent score in 2014. Well, they are right. Both have a better chance of attracting allies, including importantly JD(U), than Modi has. And besides, for Advani, this surely has to be the last time he can take a shot at the top job. Besides, its not as if Advani is in frail health. He is alert physically and mentally, and capable of taking on many younger than him in the party!

Then take Yashwant Sinha, Finance Minister in the NDA government, head of the Standing Committee on Financial matters, and a strong voice in the party. For reasons which look specious (Modi’s appointment will take attention away from Congress’s corruption problmems etc), Yashwant Sinha also doesn’t want Modi’s candidate pre-announced. Why? Is he just being prescient about his party’s prospects if that were to happen, or is he also in the running in the PM’s race?

Then there is Murli Manohar Joshi, the veteran Parliamentarian and the head of the Parliamentary Accounts Committee. Given his stature in UP, Joshi has to be taken as one of the five seniormost leaders of the party. Given his aggressive Hindutva stand, its surprising he is opposing Modi. But the reason could well be a matter as simple as Modi wanting to contest from Varanasi, Joshi’s constituency. It could also be that Joshi looks at Modi as someone who’s out to usurp his Ayodhya and Babri credentials. Whatever the reason, Joshi is reportedly not keen to have Modi’s elevation announced now.

The only leader from the top five who supports Modi to the hilt is Arun Jaitley. But lets be honest here. Jaitley is a Rajya Sabha member, and whatever one may say, a Rajya Sabha leader has only that much power in the party.

Most of the leaders supporting Modi vociferously are lightweights like Ravi Shankar Prasad, Venkaiah Naidu (the party doesn’t even have a chance in his home state of AP), Nitin Gadkari and the likes. But they really don’t matter politically.

The real support for Modi comes from the RSS. Had it not been for the RSS, there would have been far more visisble opposition to Modi. But once the RSS passes a diktat, its pretty much considered done. We know what the RSS’s ideology is. Aggressive Hindutva, front opposition to the minorities, an exclusivist agenda, a focus on Brahmins and other upper castes, and an urban bias…..fits in perfectly with Modi’s persona.

So Rajnath may well ride roughshod over his seniormost colleagues, at the behest of the RSS, but he runs the risk of splitting the party. Think that’s not possible? Think again. Remember even the Congress, the party unified by a single family as the BJP alleges, has split several times in the past. Whether the party splits or not remains to be seen, but it has to be taken as a possibility. Suddenly, the “galaxy of leaders” that the BJP was so proud of, looks instead like just a bunch of self-serving power brokers. Suddenly the internal competition looks like an internal civil war. A split is eminently possible.

The real truth is that Modi will surely be appointed his party’s PM candidate. And soon at that. But this will be only done to tow the RSS’s line. It’s surely not reflective of the mood of the party….

Narendra Modi’s A for Abuse, B for bunkum….

In yet another speech yesterday, Narendra Modi A for Abused the Congress (his “ABCD of corruption” jab) and sputtered out more B for Bunkum. In every speech he delivers, he does the same. Makes me wonder if this really is the limit of his oratory and politics, or if he is even capable of dreaming up a vision for India.

I have not heard one constructive word from him ever. Since he (or his party) has shown a preference for the US-like Presidential system of elections, in which opposing candidates face off with each other, why doesn’t he follow the core ideology of that system? And tell us what his vision for India is? But Modi runs away from such things. Is it because he doesn’t even have a vision for India? A mock website created some time back bearing his name as its URL asked the visitor to click on a button “For more on my vision” – when the visitor tried doing that, the button would jump to some other place on the screen. It was impossible to know Modi’s vision! It appeared a little premature then, but now I am convinced Modi really doesn’t have a vision for the country.

I know Modi’s supporters will jump up in extreme anger and point to the “Gujarat model” as being his vision for India. Modi will make all of India like Gujarat…..blah blah blah. But what exactly has been Gujarat’s success? What is a stronger achievement – a state that has grown at some 10% per annum over the last 10 years – impressive surely – or a country that has grown at 8%+ over the same period? Even the most ordinary person knows that the country’s growth rate is the “average” of the high performing states and the low performing ones. By mathematical certaintly, the country’s average growth will be lesser than that of a good performing state’s. To prove this point – and only Modi’s strongest supporters need such proof – even if Modi became PM, the country would grow slower than Gujarat. If that happened, would Modi be called a bad PM? Or the CM better than the PM? Besides, Gujarat is hardly alone when it comes to fast growth. Maharashtra, Haryana, TN, AP, Delhi, from amongst the bigger states, that have all been growing rapidly. Gujarat’s position still remains 5^th in terms of GDP. What about social indicators? We know the sad story here – whether it is about HDI or women’s health or child issues – Gujarat fares poorly. So what is this Gujarat model really?

I am now also convinced that Modi only delivers “one-way speeches”, in which he can say anything and run away without having to answer tough questions, but never gives any “one-on-one interviews” in which he can be questioned on specifics. Apparently, Modi has only given three interviews so far. One of those was to Karan Thapar, who everyone knows brooks no bunkum from anyone, in which Modi walked out because he couldn’t handle the questions! If Modi is half as much of a leader as he pretends to be, why would he walk out of a tough situation? The BJP mocks the PM for not speaking much, but everyone knows that he is one of the foremost economists in the world, respected even by leaders of the G-20. But what about Modi, who otherwise speaks so much, but never gives one-on-one interviews?

In fact, I am now convinced that Modi knows very little of what people from his state are famous for – business. When he said “China spends 20% of its GDP on education” to a bunch of Fergusson college students, it wasn’t just a casual mistake. No Gujarati would make such a fundamental blunder. Modi made it because he simply doesn’t understand %, or maybe GDP, or education, and most certainly the three together. Equally when he makes illiterate comments on the Rupee, he cannot even begin to scratch the surface of the complex economic theories that determine forex values. His shallowness comes right through.

This is why Modi focuses on only two things. The first is to Abuse the Congress. That’s easy to do. Abusing comes easily to politicians, especially those without any positive agenda of their own. Modi is just better at oratory and so his abuses sound nattier, but they are, at the end of the day, just abuses. Why, Modi has even abused Nehru, forgetting even basic courtesies to leaders of that era (what’s courtesy?!), for guess what…..the falling rupee (http://tinyurl.com/o5l3wpa)!

The second is to do Bunkum, especially around religion. He is exceedingly comfortable with this. For when he refuses to integrate Muslims (and Christians and others) into his politics, it is bunkum. When he refuses to acknowledge and appreciate their culture, even refusing to wear their symbolic skull cap, its bunkum. And when he calls himself a Hindu nationalist, not an Indian nationalist, ignoring the diversity of India, its bunkum. When he uses Sardar Patel’s name, ignoring the great leader’s views on the RSS, its bunkum. And when he refuses to apologize for Godhra and the riots that followed in his state, its again bunkum. His entire politics is about bunkum.

So here is a fervent appeal to Modi. Keep doing the two things that you do very well. We want to hear more of both, sir. That way, we get to know you better. When we heard you on the Food Security Bill for example (for which you abused the Congress), we learnt that in fact, you would like to give more, and cheaper than the Congress gave. The protests were all bunkum! And when you spoke on India’s border skirmishes with Pakistan and China, we came to know that you would take a hard line, meaning we should prepare ourselves for a conflagration at the borders during your tenure. And when we heard you at Fergusson college, we understood that every number you dish out is bunkum. The more you speak sir, the more we get to know you. So please do speak more.

The real truth is that forget the Congress’s vision expostulated as ABCD by Modi yesterday. This may or may not be true but what is definitely true is Modi’s A and B – Abuse and Bunkum. That’s become the defining features of the BJP’s presumptive PM candidate….

Vinod Rai must be squirming over TRAI recco on 2G reserve fees….

The man who many say destroyed India’s telecom sector – with brazen intrusions into policy making and bizarre claims of “notional” loss – must be squirming upon reading today’s newspapers. TRAI has recommended a further cut in 2G reserve fees – the starting point for auctions – by up to 60% compared to the March 2013 levels in a desperate bid to start auctions and allocate spectrum. At the newly recommended levels, the reserve fee is now just a little over half of the Rs 14000 crores for 5 MHz of spectrum in the 1800 Mhz band set for auctions first held in Nov 2012.

Vinod Rai – the CAG who brought out the 2G “scam” – could still argue that the reserve fee itself is higher than the Rs 1651 crores final fee the government decided to take from telcos in 2008. True, but does he realize how the higher spectrum charges have changed the contours of the telecom industry? Telecom tariffs have grown by anywhere between 20-50% since the new auctions policy came about. The price of expensive spectrum is being paid by the subscriber. So in effect, assuming that spectrum auctions succeed now, the government is raking in the moolah, at the cost of the subscriber. Now there is nothing wrong in this model per se, but should policy be decided by the government of the day, or by the CAG?

When successive auctions in Nov 2012 and March 2013 failed, Vinod Rai said something to the effect that the big telecom companies had formed “cartels” and decided not to bid so as to pressurize the government into lowering reserve fees. That’s a convenient argument, without Rai offering any proof of the same. But it’s quite a desperate argument really, because if anything, telecom companies are the most worried today about renewing their current licenses, with their expiry date – Sept 2014 – fast approaching.

Vinod Rai’s arguments were always flawed. First, he benchmarked the 2G loss on 3G, knowing fully well that 3G is an advanced technology used to ferry data at high speeds, for which consumers would be willing to pay higher rates. That aside, what has the 3G experience been? India has somewhere around 35 million subscribers of 3G (900+ million on 2G). Data accounts for less than 7% of telecom revenues (global average: 20% or so). Indians – some 150 million of them – are condemned to use slow-speed 2G to fulfill their data needs because they cannot afford 3G. Clearly, 3G spectrum rates were too high; it was a flawed auction. Yet Vinod Rai made that one of the benchmarks. Second, he used an even more bizarre benchmark for calculating the loss. He claimed that since Swan, Unitech and Tata had sold off stakes in their companies at much higher valuations after acquiring cheap spectrum (Swan: 45% for Rs 4200 crores; Unitech: Rs 6200 crores for 65%), this higher amount reflected the true value of the licenses. This is plain silly. Everyone knows that spectrum is only one of the ingredients in telecom. There are thousands of crores of equipment to be procured, another few thousands of operational expenses to be incurred, and many more thousands of crores of losses to be borne in the initial years (which can extend to more than 15 years, as in the case of Vodafone). Where are all these expenses going to come from? The higher valuations that Rai used led to capital inflows into the company, so that it could be deployed for all this. The promoters of Swan or Unitech did not take any money home. They didn’t make any profits, forget windfall profits. The auditor – a Harvard educated man I am told – did not understand this simple thing? And third, Vinod Rai used a loose offer made by Singapore Telecom (which it later withdrew) to the PM apparently (is this how this country does business) to value 2G higher.

Vinod Rai is now safely retired. He is a hero for many, most certainly for the BJP which spun his notional loss into a “national” loss. Imagine the legacy of Vinod Rai. First, as auditor, he didn’t understand basic accounting. Then he inspired othes, including the likes of – believe it or not – CBI to become accountants and put their own estimates of loss out. Then his pathetic report provided the germ of the idea for Anna Hazare’s “my way or the highway” April 2011 fasts/farce. And later, he virtually compelled the Supreme Court to take one of its worst economic decisions ever – canceling all 122 licenses issued by Raja. What wrong had they done in following the country’s policy? Collectively, the CAG, CBI, Anna and the SC hit at the very credibility of this government. Why it could not defend itself more strongly is something I can’t understand. Why they could not back Kapil Sibal who said “no loss” because the government “wanted to keep spectrum cheap” is something only they can explain. The government cowered under the attack, giving the impression that it was guilty. Our insane, illiterate and irresponsible media feasted on all this, amplifying the “tamasha”, forcing PCI Chairman Markandey Katju to comment (maybe in a different context) that journalists in India were “mediocre” and they should take qualification tests before being entering the profession. And our people, fed on a daily dose of Ekta Kapoor’s hyper-sensational dramas, lapped up the gossip without understanding one word of it. The telecom sector in the meanwhile crashed. Airtel’s net profits have plummeted from some Rs 7744 crores in 2008-9 to Rs 5096 crores in 2012-13; its market capitalization has been dented more than an accident-hit car.

The real truth is that TRAI has made a sensible recommendation of lowering reserve fees significantly. Should reserve fees – the starting point for bidding – have been set even lower? I believe so, since a low fee would attract more bidders and help determine final prices more realistically. But even with what it has done now, TRAI will restore some sanity – which Vinod Rai destroyed – to the telecom sector….