Quitting Rumours

Quitting Rumours
by Seema Mustafa

In South Asia , rumours about the exit of a particular leader reflect his growing weakness to hold the fort as it were. There have been moments in India when 'quitting' rumours flood the grapevine about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. In Pakistan the impact is more lethal, and this is the first time that President Musharraf has been at the receiving end despite his low and quiet profile over the last few weeks.

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, his country's grapevine suggests, is thinking of stepping down. This change of heart has reportedly happened after a particularly long meeting he had with army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and even as the stock market dissolved into chaos, the President strongly refuted the reports.

This story, he said, was being spread by those who wanted to drive a wedge between him and the army. It had caused incalculable harm to the nations economy, he said as in a damage control drive he met Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and at a farewell dinner for General (retd) Khalid Maqbool made it clear that the rumours that had virtually paralysed Pakistan were baseless. Has Musharraf resigned? Has he been removed? Is he on the way to Turkey ? were the various versions as the rumour spun out of control in Pakistans streets.

The story was further fuelled by comments made earlier by PPP's Zardari where he described Musharraf as a "relic of the past." And added to by PML's Nawaz Sharif who ruled out a safe passage for the President, insisting that he would be tried on charges of sedition. Clearly there was also something in the Musharaf-Kayani meeting that added to the rumours that had gripped Pakistan on Thursday, as all does not appear to be well between the two. The army chief, for instance, has transferred known Musharraf favorites out of key position. And while spokespersons for both sides say that relations are fine, the response is devoid of effusive rhetoric. The fact that the meeting lasted over three hours is also interesting, as clearly there were elements that needed to be sorted out between the two. Kayani has taken over the army in real terms, is regarded as a professional soldier, and is seen as a soldiers man, at least for the moment. In other words, the army has not taken long to shift loyalty from the President to the general.

The rumour, thus might or might not have a grain of serious truth. But it is definitely indicative of the new situation, where the anger against Musharraf and the US has not died with the elections, and the people are expecting him to leave or to be made to leave. This might or might not be a good thing. For one, it suggests a state of continuing uncertainty that Pakistan can ill afford. By now those entrusted with the future of the country should have taken a decision one way or the other about Musharraf. Comments such as those by Zardari and Sharif create further confusion and uncertainty, at a time when Pakistan is in dire need of stability. If the decision is to remove the President, this should be done with a certain grace and dignity so that the transition is smooth. If the President is to stay in office, then the institution should be respected and the politicians should censor their own comments.

The differences between Zardari and Sharif are well known, with both aware of their limitations and yet fearful and suspicious of the other. The people of Pakistan , as the turn out and the enthusiasm during the elections demonstrated, have a love for democracy. And after the spate of army rule that brought the war on terror to every doorstep, adding to the insecurity and vulnerability of the people and the nation, the desire for a political break is overwhelming. But the suspicions surrounding Zardari remain, and Sharif despite the good will is still not in a position to spread his wings outside Punjab in any meaningful way. The differences between the two over the restoration of the judiciary---an emotive and important issue in Pakistan ----are well known, and it will need a high level of maturity and sobriety for the leaders to forge lasting links between the PPP and the PML-N.

It is true that Nawaz Sharif has an eye on the next elections, and Zardari is trying to keep in power with reports suggesting links with Musharraf and the US . The Bush administration still sees the President as its best bet, largely because he could control the army and was not accountable to the people. The politicians in power cannot embrace the US in the same manner, as their constituencies are hostile now to Washington and will not condone any underhand deals. The army under Kayani might also not be as pliable, as one he is a soldiers general and does not seem presently inclined to allow the army to suffer losses for another country's war. It is perhaps because of these factors, that the US has had no option but to accept Pakistan 's decision to move for a political settlement with the Swat Taliban, even as various functionaries continue to issue threats of direct US action if this initiative fails.

In the midst of this, the visit by Minister of external affairs Pranab Mukherjee to Pakistan could at best keep the peace dialogue going. Little more could be expected, as Mukherjee has to forge new working relations with the leaders in power even as he continues to maintain good relations with President Musharraf. His was more in the nature of an exploratory visit, and one can only hope he has come back with the right readings that will feed into a sound strategy on Pakistan . Of course, given the UPA governments track record this is highly unlikely but then there can always be an exception to the rule.

In South Asia , rumours about the exit of a particular leader reflect his growing weakness to hold the fort as it were. There have been moments in India when 'quitting' rumours flood the grapevine about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. In Pakistan the impact is more lethal, and this is the first time that President Musharraf has been at the receiving end despite his low and quiet profile over the last few weeks. This is indicative of one, the peoples desire to see him go; two, the uncertain political situation where anything is possible; and three, a possibility that his days now are actually numbered, and he is in office on sufferance. President Musharraf realizes the gravity of the situation as apart from the dinner denial, he has made efforts to meet the political leadership immediately after. He definitely does not want to be in a situation where rumours are able to determine the reality.

State win and a Capital Dream

State Win and a Capital Dream
By Mubasshir Mushtaq

One might term this ludicrous but I firmly believe that four pillars of UPA government have played a pivotal role in BJP's victory: Sharad Pawar, P Chidambaram, Manmoham Singh and Sonia Gandhi.

Change is the only constant factor in the Indian politics. Political parties are not winning by chance but by the slogan of change. From Mayawati to Malegaon, change is the only constant noun voters are keen to pronounce. This seismic change-flow has the potential to change a young man's dynastic dreams! After Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh in North, change is threatening to travel to a dreaded territory: Southern India.

BJP's impressive and historic delivery in Karnataka was a result of a clever conception. BJP planned a political pregnancy much ahead of Congress party. Congress would love to get politically pregnant but it does not know the time of its conception. In-vitro-fertilization does not work in politics. Congress thought November to be an auspicious month of delivery while BJP delivered a full-grown baby in the last week of May!

Five months' delay in a political delivery can make you wait for another five years.

Rahul Gandhi, "the future Prime Minster of India," had planned to impregnate Karnataka in five hours. He visited Karnataka for a day and dedicated barely five hours to woo (campaigns, of course) its voters. Even a Romeo would not be so harsh for his Juliet!

For Janata Dal (S), Karnataka election was a total dejection. Haradanahalli Doddegowda Deve Gowda's political career has been eclipsed by 30-seat loss. Deve Gowda considered Karnataka as his mother-in-laws' house where he will only be pampered by votes but the verdict proved to be totally different. You can't fool the same set of people again and again. Before Deve Gowda could outdo BJP by playing caste card; BJP wrote a political obituary of Janata Dal (S). Voters don't forget politicians who don't honour their words. Public memory is definitely not short. Deve Gowda must always remember one thing: In politics, loyalty can turn lethal if you don't distribute royalty!

What brought saffron party to power is an interesting question. It portrayed itself as the only "alternative." A party whose fate has suffered "backstabbing" and "betrayal" can expect public healing. It was the wave of change that worked in favour of the BJP. Public believed in BJP but yet Rajnath Singh did not believe in himself. "BJP is an all-India party now," he said. That statement lay between excitement and hysteria. Nobody said that BJP is a regional party.
One might term this ludicrous but I firmly believe that four pillars of UPA government have played a pivotal role in BJP's victory: Sharad Pawar, P Chidambaram, Manmoham Singh and Sonia Gandhi.

Sharad Pawar, who has a penchant for cricket (its no longer cricket, it should be called moneytainment), does not have time for agriculture ministry. He only believes in politics and not policy. All of a sudden he wakes up from his deep slumber and declares total ban on the wheat export. Is that policy? That's the politics of next general election to control the monster of inflation. Our union finance minister, who wears a sophisticated dhoti, does not know a thing or two about the inflation. Does he know that 19 lakh power loom weavers across the country are incurring losses because of the inflation? When his ministry could not contain inflation, all he did was to threaten steel and cement companies. To him, inflation is like a desert storm which comes all of a sudden with no prior warning. Manmohan Singh, India's gentlest Prime Minister, believes in delegation but not in responsibility. He keeps himself in mute-mode and perhaps considers assertion a sinful indulgence. Even if he tries to assert himself, our Finance Minister does not care. Sonia Gandhi, a woman of conscience, observes but still keeps her cool. Where is the power of authority?

Mismanagement at the Centre had an impact in Karnataka. It's high time that Congress learns from sins of omission and commission. In an era of coalition politics, Congress is still searching political partners in order to get pregnant in the second half of 2009. Conception depends on the right match. Will Congress find one or many? Ground is fertile but Congress does not have a conception plan yet. BJP has just won a state; it can win entire India if Congress continues its policy of indifference.

Medvedev makes his mark

Medvedev makes his mark
By Susenjit Guha

Russian President Dmitry Medevedev’s China visit should be an eye-opener to the US Presidential hopefuls that nearly two decades of untrammeled power with blatant unilateralism in the last decade may be on the wane. With more powerful consumers than ever for scarce and fast depleting global energy resources, alternative power structures and alliances may finally threaten the so - far - unchallenged ‘Great American way of life’.

The world has traveled a long way since Henry Kissinger’s secret visit to China in 1971 in a bid to contain the Soviet Union. Now, a fractured Russia and China are coming together to contain United States’ irresponsible interventionism displayed by George Bush.

And there is no surety that pathological hatred of some of US’ enemies---fallout of Bush’s actions--- will not lead to terrorist strikes on its global interests and not get the next President mired in the mess.

Although Medevedev and the Chinese President Hu Jintao condemned terrorism in all forms believing its ideological expansion cannot be de-linked from global crimes and drug-trafficking, they emphasized combat should be within the ambit of UN’s multi-lateral frameworks and principles of international relations.

Dmitry Medvedev said Russia and China would work to shape global security even at the cost of disapproval by other powers and enhance cooperation in Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, ASEAN regional Forum and APEC on the way.

And it is anybody’s guess why Medvedev wanted cooperation to be enhanced in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

Set up by in 2001 with Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan to combat terrorism, the SCO has also become the stage for Russia and China to offset US’ influence in the Central Asian energy hub.

SCO’s decision to bring in Iran as observer in 2005 perhaps set Bush mulling about missile defenses systems in EU nations which were part of the former Soviet Union. Several Chinese quake victims--- middle and primary school children--- were invited to recover in Russia. Not only Russian aid flowed in out of the way for quake victims, a $1 billion deal was struck for supplies to China’s nuclear power industry. Orders worth $500 million for supply of semi-enriched uranium and construction of a fuel enrichment plant were also inked.

Future diversification into myriad areas of IT, space, energy, forestry, tourism, aircraft building and hi-tech between the two countries are also on the agenda. During Vladimir Putin’s time, trade between Russia and China had already galloped fivefold to $48 billion and is expected to reach $80 billion by 2010.

It was no wonder why Medvedev chose Beijing for his inaugural foreign tour and why the US should be concerned about slow erosion of American power.

Thomas Friedman was only echoing popular fears when he wrote in the New York Times “The failure of Mr. Bush to fully mobilize the most powerful innovation engine in the world — the U.S. economy — to produce a scalable alternative to oil has helped to fuel the rise of a collection of petro-authoritarian states — from Russia to Venezuela to Iran — that are reshaping global politics in their own image.”

Bush’s experiment with alternatives like ethanol has already created a global food scarcity---the blame for which he passed on to the burgeoning Chinese and Indian gluttons.

Power with increasing wealth is not only bound to follow as Friedman felt, it has already started following. And the counter balance to US by nations clubbed together can give the necessary fillip to the EU to finally wriggle out of a trans-Atlantic alliance rendered long redundant with the end of the Cold war.

Barack Obama’s idea of friendship with China, not competition, may be visionary, but then again, will it be possible to “ask the American people to drive 55 miles an hour, buy more fuel-efficient cars or accept a carbon tax or gasoline tax…..”, as suggested by Thomas Friedman?

Another visionary US President Jimmy Carter tried, but drew flak from Americans not willing to settle for half a loaf when they craved for the entire bakery produce. And didn’t Ronald Reagan play on the American psyche of ‘more the merrier’ to ride to power after Carter had to do a re-think when US interests were harmed?

But this is the most challenging era for the US. Faced with a Presidential election, it is no mean task for the next White House occupant to steer clear of a clear and present danger of having to play second fiddle to stumbling power blocks not willing to shy away at using similar tactics used so far by the US only to maintain global supremacy.

Former chairman of the state run behemoth Gazprom, Medvedev, an economic liberal, believes ‘freedom is better than non-freedom’. He is not Hollywood’s comic Russian character. It was a dream fulfilled for him---as was buying jeans, records of Pink Floyd and Deep Purple--- when the rock group Deep purple played at the Kemlin last February to mark the 15th anniversary of Gazprom.

And counter balance with not only the requisite power but freedom and obviously moves towards more accountability and democracy in Russia and China---some of it displayed by the nine member Chinese politburo standing committee during the earthquake---will sustain the firewalls to any future US imperial Presidency revival.

The Nuclear bloat

The Nuclear Bloat
By Seema Mustafa

The government knows that the Left is clear cut about its opposition to the nuclear deal. Despite briefings to the contrary, the Prime Ministers Office and Congress party managers are fully aware that they will not be given a green signal to conclude the IAEA safeguards agreement as long as the US deadline has not run out.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh does not want to give up. There is a great reluctance to officially declare the India-US civilian nuclear energy agreement dead. So every now and again just when talk of it not happening gains ground, a well placed government functionary from the prime minister to any other, lets it be known that the nuclear deal is still very much on the cards. And that the dead line has not run out as the agreement has bipartisan support in the US Congress that will be more than willing to pass it till the 9th day.

The assertion is usually accompanied with off the record speculation about the role of the Left, and the usual 'they will eventually agree because of Russia canard that appears to make sense to some sections in government and outside. The government knows it, but plays on the peoples ignorance about the one crucial fact in understanding the current CPI(M): that the present general secretary Prakash Karat does not do back door deals, and is not known to say one thing and do another. So the best way to understand the Left is to listen to what its top leadership is saying. And when Karat says that the safeguards agreement cannot be delinked from the 123 agreement and the Hyde Act, he means it, and this will determine the course of Left action.

The government knows that the Left is clear cut about its opposition to the nuclear deal. Despite briefings to the contrary, the Prime Ministers Office and Congress party managers are fully aware that they will not be given a green signal to conclude the IAEA safeguards agreement as long as the US deadline has not run out. "After that we will see," a senior Left leader said pointing out that the objection was not to getting nuclear power, but to get this through an agreement framed to compromise Indian sovereignty. The government, thus, is well aware that if it goes ahead with the agreement it will have to face the electorate earlier than scheduled.

The current argument is that if the government falls in June-July, the process will take the mid term poll to February 2009. And since this is just a few months before the scheduled time, the UPA allies who were protesting earlier will have no objections. True, but the real problem for the Congress is not this any longer, but its ability to face the electorate as a virtually isolated entity. Regional parties like the RJD and DMK are currently swearing their loyalty not just to the Congress but to the Dynasty but these are at best fickle parties, and can change direction with the weather vane. Price rise with the nuclear deal (read pro US policy), inflation with dismal failure to implement basic promises on education,,health, minimum job guarantees, inability to address the growing problems of the tribals and the minorities - it is an endless list - are worrying the Congress that is not fully convinced about the so called popularity polls being carried out by corporate owned agencies. After all similar polls before the last general polls had pointed towards the supposedly unwavering popularity of the BJP and the NDA.

There is a certain hesitation within the party to face the forthcoming Assembly elections this year as a minority government that has lost the confidence of Parliament because of its insistence to conclude the nuclear deal with the US. And that instead of staying in power and taking measures to control inflation and the spiraling prices, it has preferred to align with the US and risk the withdrawal of support. Remember, that it will not just be the Left saying this, the BJP too has decided to campaign against the government on this issue. The 'loyal' regional parties will nottake time to desert a sinking ship, regardless of the dinners and breakfasts, being hosted for them by the Congress leadership. Z class security might silence Amar Singh but he will risk losing complete support in his party if he persuades the seemingly captive Samajwadi party chieftain Mulayam Singh Yadav to take an unpopular stand.

The Left will continue the dialogue with the Congress on the nuclear deal for as long as it takes to ensure its natural death in Washington. This could take the talks into July, depending on when the Bush administration finally throws up its hands and admits that it no longer is in position to get the deal through the US Congress. There are problems within the NSG and reports suggesting that the draft for waivers is not as Indiafriendly as envisaged by the negotiators here are now making the rounds. The safeguards agreement too does not appear to recognise India as a nuclear weapon state, and till date it is not clear whether this has been negotiated by the IAEA under the existing rules in which case there is no question of a special status, or whether a new India specific framework has been evolved. Only parts of the agreement have been shown to the Left parties that areprepared to discuss each point as the days go by. As in the Hyde Act and the 123 agreement the devil is likely to be in the undisclosed details.

The Congress has to remember, even if its supporters outside do not, that it has lost every Assembly election since it came to power. It is in trouble in Andhra Pradesh, Haryana and Maharashtra where it is currently in power. In Uttar Pradesh its leaders are divided between Mayawati and Mulayam Singh although currently the Delhi top brass are favouring the latter. In Karnataka it is unlikely to emerge as the party in power. And even the anti incumbency factors in states like Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh is, spoken of these days with a question mark. The party came to power with the pledge to revive itself in states like UP and Bihar, but it has spent the four years riding piggy back on the regional satraps. In Bihar, the confusion was most apparent when one election was fought with the Congress seeking to isolate Lalu, and the other with him in firm alliance.

Its allies, even if they stay with the Congress, are not expected to do as well in the polls. The DMK had defeated Jayalalitha in Tamil Nadu, a feat it is not likely to repeat now. The Congress had trounced TDP in Andhra Pradesh, but the latter now is reset for a comeback. Lalu has not gained ground in Bihar and in UP, both Mayawati and Mulayam are at best uncertain commodities. Those convinced of a certain invincibility, it always comes with power, will do well to pause for a reality check. And inthe process realize that somehow the Congress has lost touch with the masses. Its top leaders, in all seriousness, insisted that they were winning Gujarat while those working on the ground were positive that Modi was still in command. The same leaders were equally confident of winning Tripura, with the results in fact giving them even a lower tally than the last polls. Clearly in their desire to please, Congress leaders and workers in the states have stopped even trying to make real assessments. "We will win" is the mantra that brings them temporary relief.

Even so there are some in the party who are not heard in its corridors of power, but are aware of the developments on the ground. And they point out that the clamour for the nuclear deal is heard mainly from the Congress MPs in the Rajya Sabha for whom the corridors are more significant than the streets. There can be no other explanation for the governments continuing insistence to go ahead with an agreement which has been opposed by the majority in Parliament, and is regarded with deep suspicion by the nation.