Friday, April 10, 2015

Which Will Be Admired Most: Gujarat, Delhi or Tripura?



Which Will Be Admired Most: Gujarat, Delhi or Tripura?
                                                                          Saeed Naqvi

The embarrassing news that India ranks 101th in the Social Progress Index among 133 countries, lower than even Nepal, may well be the right occasion to narrow the focus on States which might be examined as milestones. This examination will have to be done by serious social scientists. An itinerant journalist can offer no more than a bird’s eye view.


In Human Index, Kerala remains the pioneer but its copy has been blotted in recent years on other counts including that of governance. States like Tamilnadu rule themselves out because they fall short on the corruption criteria. Gujarat is in because the media gives it brownie points. Even so, final judgement must await thorough studies.

Exactly the opposite are the circumstances of the Aam Aadmi Party. The media has turned upon it. But if attendance at the India International Centre for Ashutosh’s book release is any indication the negative images of the past month may fade as a bad memory. In which case it will be worth the while to see what Delhi’s Human Development Index will look like some years from now.

One State, which has been ploughing its furrow diligently with some quite extraordinary results on the Human Development scale is one which no one discusses – Tripura. Is the State with a population of 40 lakhs, not in focus because it is small? Only Sikkim and Goa are smaller. Or is the media squeamish about applauding a State which for 32 of the past 37 years has been under Left Front rule?

Some of its records are amazing. Its 96 percent literacy makes it the country’s most literate State. Literacy rate in Gujarat is 83 per cent.

Life expectancy of 71 years for men and 73 for women too is a record. In Gujarat, it is 64 and 66. Tripura’s Bengali population ruins the absence of gender bias among tribals. Even so, it is 961 as against 918 in Gujarat.

The great genius the leadership has demonstrated is in grasping an essential truth: like politics, good governance too is essentially the art of the possible. Instead of beating its breast and flailing its arm around, the regime picked up all the Central and State schemes, put its head down, called in the officials, party cadres, involved the three tier Panchayati Raj system and gave a sense of real participation to the elected Autonomous District Councils which cover two thirds of the State and all the Tribal areas of Tripura.

This is the key. The basic conflict in the State, one which exploded as the fiercest insurgency in the North East, was on the tribal-non tribal faultline.

Under the Maharajas, who figure in mythology, Tripura was overwhelmingly tribal. But after the creation of East Pakistan (later Bangladesh), Hindu Bengalis from contiguous territories that were once managed by the Maharaja, migrated to Tripura. The tribals, (a total of 19 tribes) became a minority in the State. The 70:30 ratio in favour of the tribals was exactly inverted. Today 70 percent of the population is Bengali.

The Congress, born for power, fell back on the simple divide and rule strategy, pocketing the Bengali vote bank. If ever there was a shortfall, there was always a tribe to be played against the other.

A great tribal, communist leader, Dashrath Deb had seen the future. He launched Jana Shiksha Abhiyan or campaign for education among tribals in 1945 forcing the Maharaja to recognize 500 primary schools, which mushroomed and today saturate the State – a school every kilometer.

It was from this wide base that the tribals gravitated towards communism while the Bengalis were turning towards the Congress. While the Congress was content with sectarian divine, a leader like Nripen Chakraborty accurately gauged the difficult social reality: without tribal support all Bengali agenda would be circumscribed. Likewise, tribals would not advance without Bengali help. The call went out: tribal-non tribal unity was the absolute imperative.

The idea flared up, across the State for two reasons. Tribals, who had taken to communism in the 40s and 50s, grasped the idea instantly. In driblets, Bengalis too came into the fold. So, while the Left slowly expanded its platform of unity, the Congress persisted with its Bengali focus, not without electoral gains. True, the Left Front has 50 seats in a House of 60, but the 36 percent of the opposition vote share must be largely credited to the Congress.

What keeps the electorate, indeed the population persistently in the Left’s thrall is the universally accepted incorruptibility of the leadership. Congress MLA Gopal Roy shook his head in agreement “personal incorruptibility cannot be denied”.

The first Left Front Chief Minister Nripen Chakraborty (1978 to 88) entered and left the official residence with same two tin trunks – full of clothes, books, and a shaving kit. Grocery purchases for the CM’s household were made on a ration card. Modern capitalism would probably consider him a pariah because he never had a bank account.

His disciple, Manik Sarkar, Chief Minister for 17 years without a break, is equally austere. He is known to have walked to the office on occasion. His wife, a school teacher, goes to work on a rickshaw.

Incredibly, the CM finds time to review all major Central and State schemes. He had completed an implementation review of the National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme when I met him in his spartan office, decorated with a Tagore photograph.

“We have already distributed 85 days worth of work out of the 100 for the year mandated under MNREGA” beams the CM. “Maharashtra is the next best and it has not yet completed 50 days.”

In efficient implementation of schemes, the State has no parallels. Clinics, schools, anganwadi, infant and mother care, electricity distribution and, above all, building roads, connecting the remotest areas. All of this has created an atmosphere for general tranquility. Director General of Police K. Nagaraj leaves you quite stunned. “There is very little crime in the State – negligible.” This is a miracle in a State where people were afraid to leave their homes three years ago because of the insurgency. “Perfect co-ordination between the police and the politician is the only explanation.”

Heaven knows what feedback Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, has on his Swatch Bharat or clean India mission, but if he were to send his officers to some of the more remote parts of Tripura, they would rub their eyes with wonder at what has been achieved in such a short period.

The road from Agartala winds around Longtarai hill range to Ambassa, about 80 kms away. A measure of the administration’s reach is Kumardhan Para, at a forbidding height.

A few years ago, folks at the village walked 18 kms to reach grocery stores in Ambassa. Today the Kumardhan peak has been conquered; a motorable road has been laid right upto the village centre. Little wonder Milind Ramteke, IAS, Collector of Ambassa (Dhallai) and his Block Development Officer, Amitabh Chakma, are local heroes, village after village.

Implementation of the Prime Minister’s toilet scheme has not escaped supervision of the Chief Minister’s office. Kumardhan village was provided with pucca toilets along with small, underground water tanks. The peer pressure of the entire village on each other, visible cleanliness, has made the scheme a success in a short period.

The problems of Tripura, in a sense, begin now. The King of Bhutan floated the idea of Gross National Happiness. That, roughly, has been Tripura’s trajectory. But it is now on an efficient welfare plateau. What next? It has an inimitable school network. But very little by way of college and technical education. There are no openings for the educated youth. The State, surrounded on three sides by Bangladesh looks admiringly at Shaikh Haseena. Indo-Bangla friendship will give it access to Chittagong port, 70 kms away.

The regime is not paranoid, but it is aware that the Church networks affect both college and post college job scene. A middle class so created is inherently anti “Left”, says a CPM leader. Moreover, further penetration of the Church would provide an opening to Hindutva forces to enter the scene with a sectarian agenda.

#          #          #          #

Friday, April 3, 2015

Action In Yemen To Inflate Saudi Esteem But At What Cost?



Action In Yemen To Inflate Saudi Esteem But At What Cost?
                                                                                  Saeed Naqvi
 
A week ago, the Houthi rebels, backed by Iran, had a free run of Yemen. In Tikrit, Iraq, Shia militia, led by Iranian officers, and helped by the largely Shia Iraq army, had cornered the ISIS in Saddam Hussain’s palaces. The fall of Tikrit would add to the halo on the Iranian led Shia fraternity.

In the Syrian North, Bashar al Assad’s army was scoring victories. This development also favoured the Iranians.

Soon, the US would sign a nuclear deal with Iran. That would crown Iran as a legitimate player in the new West Asian balance of power. Viewed from, say, Riyadh, Iran was becoming too big for its boots.

As it is, Jerusalem and Riyadh had been throwing a ginger fit even at the prospect of a deal looming in the distance. Now, that it was about to be signed, there was panic in Jerusalem, Riyadh, Cairo, Ankara. Each one of these regional powers had for a while been fretting on another count: they were visualizing life without the US which had given notice of its pivot to Asia, where China’s rise would be its primary focus. An overextended superpower which no longer had the capacity to remain engaged in several theatres, would encourage regional powers (proxies) to manage the new equilibrium. A sense of being abandoned was in the air. Saudis needed their shattered self esteem to be restored.

With this intent, the restless but rich Saudis were allowed to lead the attack on the poorest country in the Arab world. This one fact – along with so many others – will plague the Saudis.

The Monarchies, Sheikhdoms and dictatorships in the region have not yet digested the cardinal truth: the Arab Spring was an expression of popular resentment with Arab rulers. This anger will not go away by assertive state power. And the superpower which helped maintain the status quo is eager to disinvest and depart.

In the immediate aftermath of the Yemen airstrikes, the Saudis, at the head of a “Sunni” coalition, may momentarily look muscular for having thwarted Shia Iran in the region. But at what cost?

Likewise, Iranian officers and Shia militia were stopped by the Americans from “finishing” the Tikrit operations against the ISIS. Apparently, the Saudis wanted some of their assets embedded with the ISIS to be given safe passage.

Also, the US and their Arab coalition partners were keen that Iran and Shia militia not be in the frontline of victors. In fact pressure was brought to bear on Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi in Baghdad to “chose between the US and Iran” to conclude the endgame in Tikrit.

It must have been an incredible operation, a mixture of serious military operations and an open competition in trophy hunting between the Americans and the Iranians.

The Wall Street Journal reported: “Iraq began its attack without alerting the US or its partners. Instead, Iran played a leading role, commanding Shia militia and providing weapons.”

Beyond this point, there are two versions to the story.

The American version says the Shia advance on the ISIS got stalled prompting the Iraqi government to seek US aerial help.

The Iranian version blames the US for bringing pressure on Baghdad that they withdraw the Shia militia from Tikrit. Only then would the US launch airstrikes.

A senior US defense official gave the game away: “Iraq is going to have to decide who they want to partner with. We’ve been demonstrating all across the country and now in Tikrit, that we are a good and able partner.”

Was this hands on action by the Americans designed to reassure Arabs who feared that Americans may cut and leave? There is a more sensible reason why the Americans inserted themselves just when the Iranian led militia was about to capture or kill ISIS soldiers: a Shia victory over the ISIS would aggravate Arab Sunni anxieties.

The third balancing act the US and its allies performed was to check Bashar al Assad’s successful drive to recover territories lost to the opposition during four years of the civil war: the provincial capital of Idlib was allowed to fall into the hands of the opposition consisting of Al Qaeda linked Nusra Front. Great liberal, democratic victory?

The Syrian accusation that Turkey helped the opposition front occupying Idlib is credible because the town is barely 20 miles from the Turkish border.

At a time when Iran is on a high, inching towards a nuclear deal, the effort is to deflate it somewhat. This is supposed to give heart to states who see a threat in Iran’s rise.

That is why actions in Yemen, Tikrit, Idlib, were launched simultaneously to calm nerves in the region about Iran’s rise. In doing so, the Americans may have encouraged the Saudi gerontocracy to go a little over the top in Yemen.

#          #          #          #

Friday, March 27, 2015

Scale Of AAP’s Victory Too Much For Friend And Foe



Scale Of AAP’s Victory Too Much For Friend And Foe
                                                                     Saeed Naqvi

The stunning victory of the Aam Aadmi Party on February 10 in Delhi coincided with the global liberal order in disarray.

Far left Syriza had come to power in Greece. Southern Europe was likewise threatened. Gone was the Berlusconi tamasha in Italy. The Nordic North was taking to racism like duck to water. Britain and France, liberal citadels, were besieged and may fall. Western economies are in such disrepair that Chinese slowdown is, to the protagonists, heartening speculation.

The electorate in Delhi administered such a double fisted punch on the established order, as to leave it dazed. Never in the history of free and fair elections had a party won more than 90 per cent of the seats – 67 seats in a House of 70. This in the metropolis of Delhi, the capital of India. That too, at a moment when India was being enlisted in the global grand design against the rise of China. This market of 1.25 billion must be insulated from turbulence. At such a moment, AAP has come riding a bolt from the blue. Ideas have legs and for this reason this idea, tried out in Delhi with brilliant success, had to be killed.

Prashant Bhushan, Yogendra Yadav and Prof. Anand Kumar are without doubt the finest men in AAP but they have not set the popular imagination on fire. Arvind Kejriwal has.

Nothing quite as magical has happened in Indian public life. As a communicator he has no parallel. I have not seen him strike one false note in the hundreds of interviews, and off-the-cuff comments in the course of a campaign which was a seamless media show.

Narendra Modi in his historic victory of May 2014 had come to power riding the world’s most expensive media campaign. He gained a thousand fold from the listlessness of the Congress. Modi harvested the unspeakable disgust with Sonia, Rahul and Manmohan Singh.

The timing of Kejriwal’s victory placed a huge question mark on Modi’s performance. AAP exposed the potential for early disenchantment with Modi.

AAP was not just a local aberration it was a threat to patterns of crony capitalism. India Inc had bought up the media, lock, stock and barrel. Any journalist pitting himself as a conscientious objector to AAP should unburden himself of the grand delusion that he is driven by his inner voice. He is owned by interests who, in a manner of speaking, own Modi too.

That is why it is sad that Prashant Bhushan, Yogendra Yadav and now even Prof. Anand Kumar have allowed themselves to be used by that instrument of the establishment called the media. Photographs of these gents have adorned the front pages of the nation’s newspapers for the past month. These have been accompanied by news of rebellion within AAP. The issues hinge on the personality of Kejriwal which appears to have bruised the egos of his think tank. How the party should structure itself? What position would Bhushan and Yadav have in it?

There has been an incipient tussle between left inclined welfarism favoured by Kejriwal and Lohia socialism. Free thinking is in the DNA of Lohiaites, which is what Yogendra Yadav and Anand Kumar primarily are. It would always have been problematic to fit them into hierarchies as also to ignore their ideas.

What is astonishing is that instead of sorting out issues within the party forum, the dissidents have possibly unwittingly played into the hands of the establishment. Even if there were serious charges against Kejriwal, could the dissidents not have raised them in good time, once the AAP government had found its feet?

In this instance, too much success appears to have been the party’s bane. Remember when the Modi campaign was in full swing, important BJP leaders were whispering their own assessments of the electoral outcome. They were called the 160 club. The implication was that Modi with a small margin would need the club to form the government.

Likewise, a relatively modest victory for AAP would have been more to the liking of those who now find Kejriwal unmanageable in his exceptional success.

If possible, Kejriwal must walk the extra mile to retain old comrades. His other cadres are very raw and untrained. Alternatively he will have to dedicate himself unwaveringly to good governance which was his original theme song.

In Prashant Bhushan, the dissidents do have in their ranks, the high minded Brutus. What Kejriwal requires is a Mark Antony who will turn the argument around.

#          #          #          #

Friday, March 20, 2015

How Will Netanyahu’s Victory Affect Iran Deal And Palestinian Future?



How Will Netanyahu’s Victory Affect Iran Deal And Palestinian Future?
                                                                                                   Saeed Naqvi

Just when the United States thought it would mop its brow, having tried hard to tame the West Asian rodeo, the Israeli horse has kicked up dirt. Americans, like everyone else, were waiting for Benjamin Netanyahu to lose the March 17 elections, before proceeding with their script of a nuclear deal with Iran towards some conclusion in the coming weeks.

Does the Netanyahu fourth term throw a monkey-wrench in the works John Kerry has been pursuing with such dedication?

His primary strategic goal is to sign a nuclear deal with Iran. Since a military option was just not feasible, keeping Iran out of regional balance of power was impractical for the US. Without Iran in the regional solar system, the US would have to be ready for intervention to keep the regional equilibrium. This doesn’t serve a useful American purpose anymore.

Riyadh, Cairo, Ankara are regional power centers Jerusalem was comfortable with. In this galaxy, Jerusalem, and to a lesser extent Riyadh, had relied even on a recently reluctant Washington. Jerusalem was a special case. It was more equal than others.

With new legitimacy about to be conferred on Iran, Tehran will automatically become an important power for regional balance.

This amounts to a relative decline in Israel’s regional status and Israel will resist it until Israeli lobbies around the world including the US see the writing on the wall. Unfortunately for Israel, Netanyahu has manufactured victory on such an uncivilized platform – no state for Palestinians, and racist venom for Israeli Arabs – that the international community would have difficulty engaging with him. Ofcourse, he will turn, but then he will be a proven turncoat.

Even the Saudis who in recent years made common cause with Israel against Iran, will have difficulty resuming with an Israel so configured.

The new balance of power the US has finally persuaded itself to create in the region is attended by a paradox. Riyadh, Cairo, Ankara, Israel – no one wants the status quo to be altered. And get the situation on the ground is slowly eroding the status quo.

In shaping the new balance of power, Washington does come across on occasion as playing a double game. Take Washington’s reluctance in launching air strikes against the ISIS when it had just begun to menace the region. Barrack Obama let the cat out of the bag. Airstrikes against the ISIS at that stage, he said, would take the pressure off Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki in Baghdad who had lost US confidence. Maliki had to leave. To that extent the Americans played the ISIS hand in helping shape a local situation.

Likewise, during the siege of Kobane US power helped Kurds, not the Turkish hegemon. So pressure here, tinkering there all, to avoid anyone becoming too powerful.

An abridged version of recent history can begin with the mess left behind by Prince Bandar bin Sultan, given total charge of the Syrian operations by the late Saudi King. The most macabre cruelty was perpetrated on world TV by forces financed from outside and supported by the West. Hillary Clinton, the then Secretary of State and a possible Democratic Presidential candidate, demanded with an imperious wave of the hand. “get out of the way, Assad.” Years later, John Kerry sees no future for Syria without Bashar al Assad being part of the solution. But isn’t this what Iran and Russia have been saying from the day a gameplan was designed to break the Iran, Syria, Hezbullah, Hamas chain by, first, bringing about regime change in Damascus?

After four years of exertion, there is no regime change. Someone has eaten crow but the world didn’t see it. Meanwhile, the ISIS continued to menace all and sundry including the Saudis whose General, incharge of the Northern Border with Iraq became a recent casualty.

The Sunni-Sunni tussle intensified when the ISIS virtually took over Tikrit, once Saddam Hussain’s stronghold. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif flew to Baghdad to sign an agreement which removes visa requirements for Iranian citizens (troops). Flushed with reinforcements Iranian troops broke the back of the ISIS in Tikrit. Obviously, the regime in Baghdad is beholden to Iran. Likewise, the Houthis and Shia Zadidis of Yemen have trusted Iranians as overseers. Can Iran be kept out of a regional balance now?

This exponential growth of Iranian influence is anathema to Israel, Cairo, Ankara and Riyadh but they have to lump it because the alternative is for the US to remain directly engaged in Arab-Arab squabbles much to the neglect of more urgent business in the Pacific where China and a Sino-Russia axis are sources of anxiety. An unexpected source of comfort to all those supporting a two state solution in Israel is Netanyahu’s last minute denial of a Palestinian state. Nothing will help the Palestinian cause more.

#          #          #          #