The interview also discusses at length how Tharoor as party president would meet the challenge of Hindutva, and Narendra Modi’s seemingly invincible image.
In an interview to discuss what changes he would bring about in the Congress party, Shashi Tharoor, hours after both he and Mallikarjun Kharge filed their nominations, categorically said that he would abolish Congress’s high command culture, adding that it’s the most unfortunate term reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
Tharoor also said that he would make Congress the party of young India, adding that he would make every effort to convince other Congress colleagues, who perhaps are steeped in the older socialist thinking of the Congress, to accept an increasing retreat of the government from the country’s economic life (i.e. privatisation) and to take other steps to enhance the spirit of entrepreneurship and thus meet the ambitions of young Indians.
In a 42-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Tharoor insisted that he was not being naïve in accepting the assurance he was given by all three Gandhis that they would not surreptitiously or unofficially back a favourite candidate.
The interview discusses at length the fact that, despite the assurance the Gandhis gave him, it’s widely believed that Kharge has their backing, a point corroborated by the long list of leaders who accompanied Kharge when he filed his nomination, and the fact that he spoke to the media saying he had filed his nomination “Congress party ki aur se (from their side)”.
Speaking on the role Rahul Gandhi would play if Tharoor becomes the Congress president, he said that this would be jointly decided by him and the Gandhi family. However, he disagreed with Chidambaram’s distinction (made in an interview to PTI and in his Indian Express column) between the president and the leader of the Congress party. Chidambaram’s point was that no matter who becomes president, Rahul will be the leader and by far more important.
Signaling major changes in the running of the Congress, Tharoor committed himself to abolishing the single-line resolution tradition which authorises the Congress president to either choose legislature party leaders or nominate Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC) chiefs and All India Congress Committee (AICC) members. He also guaranteed that under him, elections would be held for 12 members of the working committee, and the Congress parliamentary board, which has effectively ceased to exist, will be revived.
He said that he would seek to energise and breathe new life into the Congress by involving people from the block level upwards in decision-making and also by reviving the old Congress system of providing services which help people obtain rations, licenses, permits, etc.
The interview discusses at length how Tharoor as party president would meet the challenge of Hindutva, and Narendra Modi’s seemingly invincible image.
He also discusses how he will reach out to youngsters, both in terms of the message and how it will be communicated. The interview also discusses how he will seek to amend the stand taken by the Congress on critical foreign policy issues such as India’s relationship with Pakistan as well as India’s stand on the Ukraine crisis.
In some instances, he committed himself to trying hard to change the Congress party’s thinking. In this regard, he stressed that he is the candidate for change and that if elected president, he would be determined to do just that.
‘These outfits are profiting from the sense of insecurity among Muslims caused by Hindutva aggression and allied government measures that seem prejudiced and fuelled by majoritarian politics.’
New Delhi: The Popular Front of India’s banning under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act by the Union government led to spirited editorials in English newspapers, most of which decried the organisation’s proclivity for violence and derided its alleged connections to illegal organisations.
Most editorials also noted towards the end of the text that the atmosphere for such organisations to flourish was created by growing communal polarisation and that efforts were necessary to make marginalised sections feel represented.
‘Profiting from the sense of insecurity among Muslims caused by Hindutva aggression’
The Hindunoted that the PFI has left little doubt about its “true nature” through its “rhetoric and activities” and sought to draw focus on the flash strike called by the group in response to nationwide raids against its leaders on September 22.
“The PFI continuously invokes the constitution, democratic values and rule of law, but all that cannot camouflage the violence in its action and speech as unleashed in Kerala last week…Extremely provocative slogans and speeches formed part of the protest,” the paper said.
Laying out the National Investigation Agency’s charges against the PFI, the editorial also claimed that the PFI and the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) “which acts as its political front” have failed to convince anyone of them being on the right side of law and democracy.
The editorial describes the NIA’s charges of the groups “propagating an alternative justice delivery system justifying violence, instigating vulnerable youth to join banned terror outfits such as al-Qaeda and conspiring to establish Islamic rule in India.”
The Hindu also says that moderate Muslim organisations have resisted the PFI-SDPI’s actions.
Ultimately, it notes the role of Hindutva in exacerbating such proclivities.
“These outfits are profiting from the sense of insecurity among Muslims caused by Hindutva aggression and allied Government measures that seem prejudiced and fuelled by majoritarian politics. The state must act against radicalism of all kinds, rather than being selective in its approach to communal hate.”
The DeccanHerald, in its editorial, observed on the outset that the government is now going to be in a position where it has to validate its charges according to procedure to confirm the ban.
It then observes that bans – used often to deal with organisations that persistently resort to illegalities and pose threats to peace, public order and national security – often fail to tackle these problems. Bans take organisations from public view, it says, but that does not mean that they cease to exist. Many evoke sympathies or go underground.
“The RSS and the communist parties have been banned in the past but they have survived,” it notes, echoing politicians Lalu Prasad and Sitaram Yechury, who have also cited these outfits in the light of the PFI ban.
Like the Hindu, DeccanHerald also notes that the PFI-SDPI operate a politics that “is rooted in the fear of a segment of the Muslim minority over the rise of the majoritarian ideology and the shrinking space for Muslims in national life.”
“These fears have become aggravated with the perceived and real support of the state to the majoritarian idea, and the policies and practices that support it. The best way to deal with the threat posed by the PFI and its associates is to put an end to this divisive and exclusionary politics,” the editorial asserts.
It ends with the question as to why organisations that advocate a majoritarian agenda and pose a threat to public order and the constitution, are “not treated the way the PFI and its associates are.”
‘Now, all governments need to ensure vigilance’
Hindustan Times, in its editorial, wrote that serious charges have been slapped on the PFI and its office bearers and expresses the faith that “proof of such alleged wrongdoing will be placed before the courts”.
It says that the PFI is alleged to have committed illegal activities and direct violence, and also of encouraging radicalisation by reaching out to the marginalised.
“National integrity, security, and sovereignty cannot be compromised at any cost and tough action to secure these goals welcome,” the editorial says.
Then, it adds that two things should be kept in mind.
“One, while PFI members were pushing an insidious agenda, hate speech and belligerence by fringe Right-wing groups have proliferated and need to be acted upon to dispel any sense of insecurity and fear,” it says, appearing to echo the above two editorials as well.
The second thing, it notes, is that a ban has to be implemented on the ground by freezing assets and ensuring that ground-level workers aren’t absorbed into sibling organisations.
“As previous experiences with the Indian Mujahideen and SIMI show, terrorism and radicalism are dangerous beasts that can quickly morph into newer shapes and need constant and determined vigilance,” it says.
‘Mainstream politics and media must help in improving social cohesion’
The Times of India’s editorial is titled, ‘PFI has been banned. But the sections that it appealed to need more effective outreach from the state’.
It notes that though the PFI is accused of violent crimes, including “targeted killings of political activists, and the chopping of Prof TJ Joseph’s hand in 2010,” the SDPI has not been banned.
In the last paragraph of the three-paragraph editorial, TOI notes that, “the bottom line is that religious fundamentalism has not served the cause of any religion,” citing the under-representation of Muslims in the Sachar committee report.
It then says that it is the need of the hour to work “on a constructive socioeconomic agenda that can help the backward section of the community join the mainstream.”
“Now that the ban has been imposed, police forces across the country have the onerous responsibility to ensure that PFI doesn’t morph into another organisation and shifts its activities further underground as happened in the past with other outfits. More importantly, mainstream politics and media must help in improving social cohesion,” it observes.
The very fact that Mohan Bhagwat is concerned with who or what an acceptable Muslim looks like speaks volumes about whether the RSS has changed its position or just adapted to the times.
Karl Lueger was the mayor of Vienna between 1887 and 1910 and is credited with building much of the modern city.
A Catholic, Lueger openly used antisemitism in his political speeches. His antisemitism was of the homespun, flexible variety which in German has been also referred to as gemütlich (cosy, in a kind of familiar way). However, this garden-variety – often instrumental – prejudice did not prevent him from having Jewish friends. When he was questioned about this, Lueger replied, “I decide who is a Jew.”
Today, the quest for the ‘acceptable Muslim’ has driven political narratives across the world. For the past few years, this debate has animated and driven the strategies of various political parties in India.
Since coming to power in 2014, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological progenitor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), have been active in moving from a position where all Muslims are seen as anathema to the Indian body politic, to a stand wherein certain kinds of Muslims are deemed to be more Indian because of their cultural practices.
Incidentally, these very practices are also the target of intra-sectarian polemics by other Muslims who see them as Hindu cultural accretions that must be purged in order to restore ‘authentic’ Islamic practice. Thus, ghar-wapsi, or reconversion to Hinduism aside, Shias and Sufis in particular have been singled out as being more acceptable Muslims because of their practices.
Additionally, ‘caste’ divisions within Muslims are now also used to advocate the position that the vast majority of Muslims are the descendants of indigenous converts. In other words, their ‘Indianness’ is established by the fact that their ancestors were Hindu. This change in policy from outright antagonism to selective engagement has been catalysed by international and, to some extent, domestic political exigencies.
For the past 8 years, the BJP and RSS have been conducting an outreach program to try and create inroads in these communities. The RSS is part of this outreach through its affiliate, the Muslim Rashtriya Manch (MRM).
The MRM was founded by erstwhile RSS chief K.S. Sudarshan in order to change the image of the RSS as fundamentally antagonistic to Muslims and bring Muslims closer to Hindus. Since then, the BJP and RSS have been trying, at various junctures, to give the impression that they are engaging in and encouraging dialogue with certain Indian Muslims, including organising international Sufi conferences.
The most recent effort was a trip made by RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to visit Umer Ahmed Ilyasi on the death anniversary of his father, Jameel Ilyasi, who famously visited Israel to meet Shimon Peres. Bhagwat was accompanied, amongst others, by Indresh Kumar, a senior functionary of the RSS and the current patron of the MRM.
Ilyasi Junior’s website says that he inherited the stewardship of the All India Imam Organisation which claims to be the “legitimate voice of the half a million Imams of India who happen to be the religious and spiritual guide of 210 million Indian Muslims.”
The second article refers to another meeting Bhagwat held with prominent Muslims, to which I shall return later.
Now, readers of both the Hindustan Times and the Times of India would be forgiven if they were to think, from these very vague headlines, that the outreach to Muslims is genuine and it is the Muslims that are constantly complaining of maltreatment. Essentially, the visit to a mosque and a madrassa to meet a ‘prominent’ Imam is good optics at a time when the international community is increasingly critical of growing religious intolerance in India.
It is also perhaps no coincidence that the timing of the meeting with Ilyasi as well as the release of the news regarding the dialogue with Muslim intellectuals took place at the same time as raids on leaders of the Popular Front of India (PFI) were being carried out all over the country. Importantly, the meeting with the Muslim intellectuals actually took place a month earlier.
The meeting with the five prominent Muslims – S.Y. Quraishi, Najeeb Jung, Zameeruddin Shah, Saeed Shervani and Shahid Siddiqui – became a matter of controversy and consternation. Quraishi modestly described the five as a “motley” group of concerned and retired community members.
A former election commissioner; a former lieutenant governor and former vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia; a retired general who is also the former vice-chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University; a prominent businessman; and a politician cum newspaper editor can hardly be described as a motley crew. Details of the meeting remained hazy until Quraishi and Jung appeared on Karan Thapar’s show on The Wire and then the former wrote an op-ed for the Indian Express.
Here, it is important to point out that this kind of outreach by the RSS has taken place before, most notably in 2019 when Bhagwat met Maulana Arshad Madani, head of the Jamiat Ulama-e Hind, another apex body of Muslim scholars in India. However, the years following those meetings have been marked by two trends.
The first is what Hilal Ahmed calls ‘Hindutva constitutionalism.’ In other words, the BJP and RSS are legislating Hindutva into being by co-opting and using the constitution rather than trying to replace it.
Thus, since Jung’s last meeting with Bhagwat in 2019, the Babri Masjid judgment was pronounced, the Citizenship Amendment Bill was ratified and the intention to create a National Register of Citizens was declared.Of course, the reading down of Article 370 of the Constitution, the amendments to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, and the Triple Talaq bill had already been brought earlier that summer.
The second trend is that the communal pot has been kept boiling by central, state and local BJP politicians because of its electoral benefits. The last two years have been witness to calls for the socio-economic boycott of Muslims and there have even been open calls for their rape and genocide. Clearly, even if there was engagement at a high level, members of the BJP still feel incentivised to use anti-Muslim rhetoric for electoral gain.
The five-member delegation did bring up the fact that Muslims are called jihadi and Pakistani, but Bhagwat lamented that the Muslim population is increasingly too rapidly, that Muslims don’t respect Hindu sentiments about the sacrality of the cow, and that they use the word kafir for Hindus. It speaks volumes that a figure in power still felt compelled to paint himself and the community that he claims to represent as victims while speaking from a clear position of power.
Importantly, none of the major issues, including, most importantly, the UCC and the CAA, seem to have been brought up in the conversation with Bhagwat, who incidentally gave a disclaimer that he had limited influence on the ground (see, the Thapar interview). In fact, Quraishi in his op-ed seems to have believed Bhagwat’s assertion that the ‘Constitution was sacrosanct’, despite the fact that it is precisely the Constitution and its attendant structures which are being used as tools for creating a Hindu Rashtra.
In this atmosphere, it is important to remember that the BJP and RSS will seek to create their version of a civil society amongst Muslims whom it will then treat as interlocutors. An organisation called the Indian Muslims for Progress and Reform (IMPAR) has already been doing the groundwork for this and some of the recent delegation members have participated in its various events.
As it happens, one of the founders of IMPAR was also a founding member of the Peace Party in Uttar Pradesh and is alleged to be close to powerful members of the BJP. Incidentally, IMPAR has been doing commendable relief work on the ground as well but its future credibility will depend on whether it is seen simply as a proxy. In its press statement on the Bhagwat visit, it welcomed the move while appealing to the prime minister to reign in communal forces. In other words, individuals and organisations that engage with the powers that be will need to avoid that infamous label which was applied to those Muslims who toed the Congress’ line: sarkari (official) Muslims.
Bhagwat’s statement in the meeting – and subsequently in Shillong – that all Indians are Hindus echoes in a sense what Lueger said in Vienna. The delegation resisted this labelling and instead, the term ‘Bhartiya Muslim’ was agreed upon.
The very fact that Bhagwat is concerned with who or what an acceptable Muslim looks like speaks volumes about whether the RSS has changed its position or just adapted to the times.
Ali Khan Mahmudabad teaches at Ashoka University and regularly writes for the Urdu and English press. He is the author of Poetry of Belonging: Muslim Imaginings of India 1850-1950 (OUP). He is a member of the Samajwadi Party. Twitter @mahmudabad.
The state government had denied permission for the right-wing organisation to organise marches on October 2, citing security issues.
Chennai: The Madras high court on Friday directed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to hold its ‘route marches’ and public meetings in 51 places in Tamil Nadu on November 6, instead of the originally proposed October 2.
Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, who gave the direction to this effect, while entertaining a contempt application from the RSS, also directed the state government and the police to give the permission and inform the court on the same by October 31.
If no decision is taken or permission is not given, the court will take up the contempt application and proceed to pass orders, the judge warned.
“Your concern is with regard to October 2, which happens to be Gandhi Jayanthi day. In that case, the event can be allowed to take place on November 6,” the judge said.
The court also said all the conditions stipulated in its September 22 order for taking out the rallies and holding public meetings will hold good for the November 6 event also.
Earlier, state public prosecutor Hasan Mohammed Jinnah told the judge that about 52,000 police personnel were on the roads after September 22 to protect the life and liberty of the citizens due to issues such as NIA raids and the petrol bomb attacks and the ban on the Popular Front of India (PFI).
Senior advocate N.R. Elango, representing the state, said the government had received intelligence inputs from the Centre with regard to the possible law and order problems, in view of the ban order on PFI, the recent NIA raids against it and petrol bomb attacks on certain BJP and Hindu outfit members.
The lives of the members of the general public are foremost important and the State cannot take any risk on their safety.
Senior advocate G. Rajagopalan and advocate B. Rabu Manohar, representing the RSS, citing a Supreme Court ruling, told the judge that law and order problems can never be a reason to deny permission. The SC had made it clear it was for the authorities to maintain law and order.
Before suggesting the alternate date, the judge also concurred with the state government and said he was watching the ground reality and the threat due to the ban on PFI, NIA raids and petrol bomb attacks.
The court was hearing a contempt plea by the RSS against the Tamil Nadu home secretary Phanindra Reddy and state police chief C. Sylendra Babu, among others, over the issue of granting permission to the saffron organisation for holding the route marches on October 2.
The RSS moved the plea on Thursday after the government refused permission for its October 2 state-wide events citing possible law and order issues.
Meanwhile, the court suggested to Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) founder-president Thol Thirumavalavan, to approach the Supreme Court with his plea to recall its September 22 order granting permission to the RSS to take out route march on October 2.
The apex court is the right forum to deal with the issue, Justice Ilanthiraiyan said when the writ petition from the Lok Sabha member came up for hearing today.
The prime minister also inaugurated the first phase of the Ahmedabad Metro rail project on the second day of his two-day visit to Gujarat, where assembly elections are due by the year-end.
Ahmedabad: Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday flagged off the Gandhinagar-Mumbai Vande Bharat Express semi-high speed train and inaugurated the first phase of the Ahmedabad Metro rail project on the second day of his two-day visit to Gujarat, where Assembly elections are due by the year-end.
Modi also travelled in the express train and the metro train before addressing a rally in Ahmedabad, where he said cities will shape the destiny of India and ensure that it becomes a developed nation in the next 25 years.
Modi flagged off the train from Gandhinagar Capital railway station around 10.30 am before boarding the train.
“PM @narendramodi is on board the Vande Bharat Express from Gandhinagar to Ahmedabad. People from different walks of life, including those from the Railways family, women entrepreneurs and youngsters are his co-passengers on this journey,” the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO India) said in a tweet.
In the photographs attached with the tweet, the prime minister is seen interacting with railway officials, women entrepreneurs and others on board the train.
The train, which connects the capital cities of Maharashtra and Gujarat, is the third Vande Bharat Express in the country. The first such train was started on New Delhi-Varanasi route, while the second one on New Delhi-Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Katra route, an official said.
The train will provide passengers aircraft-like travelling experience and advanced safety features, including Kavach technology, an indigenously developed Train Collision Avoidance System, he said.
“This train will offer world-class comfort and facilities to passengers. The fully air-conditioned Vande Bharat has several modern features, such as sliding doors, personalised reading lights, mobile charging points, attendant call buttons, bio-toilets, automatic entry and exit doors, CCTV cameras, reclining facility, comfortable seats,” a release said.
Modi then disembarked from the express train at the Kalupur railway station. At the Kalupur metro rail station, he inaugurated the first phase of the Ahmedabad metro rail project between Thaltej and Vastral. After that, he then took a ride in the metro train till Thaltej station. Gujarat chief minister Bhupendra Patel and party MPs C.R. Paatil and Kirit Solanki accompanied him during the journey.
With the inauguration, the 21-km corridor of the project between Thaltej and Vastral with 17 stations became operational. This corridor has a 6.6 km underground section with four stations, the Gujarat Metro Rail Corporation (GMRC) said in a release.
Addressing a rally at Ahmedabad later, Modi said cities will shape the destiny of India and they will ensure that it becomes a developed nation in the next 25 years.
Stating that new cities are being built in the country as per the global business demand, he also made a pitch for modernising cities as per the changing times and called for the creation of twin cities.
“India of the 21st century is going to get new momentum from the cities of the country. With the changing times, it is necessary to continuously modernise our cities with the changing needs. So much focus is being given and investment being made on the cities in the country because they will ensure the creation of a developed India in the coming 25 years,” he said.
“Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara, Bhopal, Indore, Jaipur – these cities will shape the destiny of India in the next 25 years. These investments are not limited to connectivity alone, but smart facilities are being put in place in dozens of cities; basic facilities are being improved and suburbs are being developed,” he said.
On twin cities, he said, “Gandhinagar-Ahmedabad is an excellent example of how a twin city is developed. Base is being prepared for development of many twin cities in Gujarat. So far, we have heard about the New York-New Jersey twin cities. Our India cannot lag behind.”
Twin cities like Anand-Nadiad, Bharuch-Ankleshwar, Valsad-Vapi, Surat-Navsari, Vadodara-Kalol, Morbi-Vankaner and Mehsana-Kadi will strengthen the identity of Gujarat, he added.
“Along with the focus on improving and expanding the existing cities, new cities are also being built as per the global business demand,” he said.
Calling for the need to modernise the transport systems in cities, he said, “There should be seamless connectivity. One mode of transport should support the other. This is necessary…”
Modi said that serious efforts were not made earlier to avoid road jams and to increase the speed of trains.
“But today’s India considers speed as important and a guarantee for rapid development. This request for speed is also visible in today’s Gati Shakti National Master Plan, National Logistics Policy, and campaign to increase the speed of railway,” he said.
The new Vande Bharat Express train flagged off from Gandhinagar Capital railway station will reduce the travel time between Ahmedabad and Mumbai from eight hours to five-and-a-half hours and make the journey comfortable, he said.
With two hopefuls Ashok Gehlot and Digvijaya Singh deciding not to file nominations, the contest will be fought by leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, Kerala MP Shashi Tharoor, and surprise entrant K.N. Tripathi.
New Delhi: With nominations for the post of Congress president now closed, the final candidates contesting the party’s organisation election are now set. The election will be contested by leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, Thiruvanantapuram MP Shashi Tharoor and Jharkhand Congress leader K.N. Tripathi.
Kharge appeared to be a clear favourite for the Congress presidential election as a galaxy of leaders were present by his side when he filed his nomination papers at the AICC headquarters here.
“I thank senior leaders from all states for supporting me in the Congress presidential election,” Kharge told reporters at the AICC office after filing his nomination.
Earlier, it was thought that MP Digvijaya Singh would be the one to contest against Tharoor, however, after Kharge’s candidature came to be known, reportedly as the “official” candidate after being told to do so by the party’s high command, Singh pulled out of the race and proposed Kharge’s nomination instead.
Apart from Singh, Kharge’s nomination was proposed by Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Gehlot, earlier considered to be the favourite to win before the Rajasthan political flashpoint, as well as Pramod Tiwari, P.L. Punia, A.K. Antony, Pawan Kumar Bansal, Mukul Wasnik and G-23 leaders Anand Sharma and Manish Tewari, according to news agency ANI.
In addition to Tharoor and Kharge, Jharkhand Congress leader K.N. Tripathi was a surprise late entrant into the race, who filed his nomination Friday afternoon.
The polls are slated to take place on October 17.
After filing his nomination, Tharoor called Kharge and emphasised to reporters that the contest between them will be a friendly one. “We are not enemies nor rivals,” Tharoor said.
On talk that Kharge was the “official” candidate of the Gandhis, Tharoor said, “I am not surprised that the establishment is rallying behind the status quo. If you want the status quo, I think you should vote for Mr. Kharge. If you want change and progress with an eye to the rest of the 21st century, then I hope I will stand for that change.”
According to the sources cited by NDTV, Kharge emerged as the party high command’s “official” candidate, as All India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretary K.C. Venugopal reportedly told Kharge last night that the top brass wanted him to join the contest.
Tharoor, however, junked the claim, repeating that the Gandhis are “neither directly nor indirectly” supporting any one candidate.
In an ostensible attempt to establish his Hindi credentials, Tharoor also spoke at length in Hindi. Given that both Tharoor and Kharge are from the South, this emphasis may be needed to woo the many party members who will vote in the election coming from India’s Hindi-speaking areas.
Gehlot was being considered the favourite to become the next Congress national president. However, in line with the party’s ‘one person, one vote’ policy, he would be required to step down from his post as Rajasthan chief minister.
Sachin Pilot, a long-standing rival of Gehlot’s was thought to be the favourite to succeed him as chief minister, but MLAs loyal to Gehlot were against the move.
On September 25, party observers Kharge and Ajay Maken were in Rajasthan to attend a Congress Legislature Party (CLP) meeting convened for passing a resolution authorising the Congress chief to appoint a successor to the chief minister. However, 82 MLAs refused to attend this meeting, participating in a parallel meeting at the home of Rajasthan assembly speaker C.P. Joshi instead.
At the parallel meeting, the MLAs put forth conditions for the selection of the next chief minister, noting that the decision should be left until after the Congress organisational election, that Gehlot should have a say in the matter, and that the person selected should be someone from Gehlot’s camp.
While the CLP meeting was attended by Pilot and his camp, it was a washout and the observers had to return to Delhi without conducting the meeting. This earned disciplinary action for three of the rebel MLAs, however, no action was taken against Gehlot who, at the time, said the events were not in his hands.
Thereafter, on Thursday, after a meeting with interim party chief Sonia Gandhi, Gehlot took moral responsibility for the rebellion and announced that he would not be contesting the polls for party president.
Gehlot also said that the decision on whether or not he would remain as the chief minister of Rajasthan will rest with Gandhi, following which Venugopal noted that the decision will be taken in a day or two.
Following this, Pilot too met with Gandhi. According to a report in the Indian Express, Pilot said that the Rajasthan situation was discussed in detail during the meeting, and noted that the party’s success in next year’s assembly polls in the state remains the top priority.
Thursday also saw Singh collect the nomination forms for the organisational election, after which he met fellow contestant Tharoor who said that the contest will be “not a battle between rivals but a friendly contest” among colleagues.
Tharoor had already announced his decision to contest the polls earlier.
Meanwhile, a meeting also took place among the G-23 leaders of the party, and sources cited in the Express report said that they had not ruled out the possibility of one of them contesting the election either, in the event of the party leadership fielding a “proxy” candidate.
This story, first published at 10.20 am on September 30, 2022, was republished at 5.34 pm on the same day with details on the three candidates.
The ban deflects attention from the issues that the opposition parties have been raising persistently, some of which have also become topics of public discussion in many parts of India.
New Delhi: Speculations had been rife that the Narendra Modi government, which turned its anti-Muslim plank into a reason for euphoria among a large section of Hindus, will surely act against the Popular Front of India (PFI) – an organisation that can best be described as the Muslim counterpart of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh but much smaller in its scale of operations.
Given how several civil resistance movements – the anti-CAA demonstrations or the protests against the hijab ban in Karnataka’s educational institutions, for example – were sought to be dismissed as agitations sponsored or patronised by the PFI over the last few years, it is rather surprising that the sudden raids on the organisation’s offices, arrests, and the eventual ban have come after eight years of the prime minister in power.
A PFI office is sealed after the organisation was banned. Photo: PTI
However, for the Modi-led BJP which revels in setting the political agenda through its sophisticated PR machinery and a pliable media, the timing of the ban couldn’t have been more rewarding. For almost three months now, the BJP has struggled to take control of the political narrative.
Despite the mess that the Congress is grappling with because of its internal conflicts, it has managed to capture headlines. First, the Udaipur Chintan Shivir earlier this year sent strong signals that the grand-old party was looking ahead to reform itself and lead the opposition in the future. Then, the party prepared itself to have a non-Gandhi president after a gap of more than two decades.
More importantly, the pan-India Bharat Jodo Yatra has been grabbing attention for its all-out attack on the Sangh parivar and the Modi government. With its focus on rising inequality, over-centralisation of power, and growing social polarisation in the Modi regime, Rahul Gandhi has led the long march with unforeseen passion until now. The BJP’s anxiety was reflected in the way it manoeuvred to poach Congress MLAs in Goa, or engaged in verbal duels on insignificant matters with the Congress almost on a daily basis, and even carried out a campaign against Rahul Gandhi’s T-shirt in the Yatra. However, none of these attacks stuck or had the intended effect. The Yatra has only been going from strength to strength.
At the same time, other opposition parties have also fuelled the saffron party’s anxieties. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) launched its “Make India No 1” around the same time as the Congress’s Bharat Jodo Yatra. It showcased the teachers and health workers whom it apparently empowered through its “Delhi Model” as the campaign’s spearheads. In a way, Arvind Kejriwal’s campaign indirectly focussed attention on the neglect that the education and health sectors have faced during the Modi regime.
AAP’s strident growth in two poll-bound states – Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat – was also noticed over the last few months. Taking a leaf out of the BJP’s rulebook, AAP leaders constantly circulated confrontational videos with officials in these BJP-ruled states, effectively highlighting the downsides of the states’ functioning. When the BJP responded by hurriedly implicating some of the top functionaries of AAP in the Delhi liquor policy case, the AAP only reacted with increased aggression, leaving barely any occasion to allege that the Union government’s actions against its leaders were an attempt to stop the party from putting up a good fight against the saffron party.
In the build-up to the Telangana assembly elections next year, the BJP has found another foe in the K. Chandrashekar Rao-led Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS). The Telangana chief minister, over the last year, has made it a habit to hit out at the Union government and the BJP. The CM has been holding marathon press conferences to point out the Centre’s failures on different policy issues and holding Modi as the chief culprit behind Telangana’s problems. Its leaders haven’t missed a single chance to lash out at the BJP. Be it the embarrassment India has had to face because of the (now suspended) BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma’s Islamophobic comments or the Centre’s failures to stem growing unemployment and inflation, the TRS leaders were at the forefront of mounting the sharpest attack on the saffron party’s rule among opposition parties.
Even as the BJP faced such parallel attacks, its biggest setback came when ally Nitish Kumar joined hands with his arch-rival Lalu Prasad Yadav in Bihar. The fall of the National Democratic Alliance government in Bihar left the BJP out of power. The Nitish-Lalu combination is such a formidable challenge for the BJP in the 2024 general elections that the party’s top leadership hurriedly formed committees to target 144-odd seats where the BJP lost the polls in 2019. It hopes that the probate losses in Bihar can be compensated with a better strike rate in the seats they lost. But it is easier said than done as a majority of these seats are in southern India, while a significant number are placed in states like West Bengal, Odisha, and Bihar – where the BJP’s chances are increasingly becoming feeble in comparison to 2019. That the wily and experienced Nitish Kumar is roving around the country to unite smaller regional parties against the BJP isn’t making things any easier for the saffron party.
Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad after their meeting with Congress interim President Sonia Gandhi, in New Delhi, September 25, 2022. Photo: PTI/Kamal Kishore
The debate pivots
Against such a backdrop, the PFI ban appears to be a last-ditch attempt to pivot the current political debate back to the one that the BJP enjoys – that of Hindu-Muslim polarisation. Had the BJP been serious about containing fundamentalist tendencies in India, it would have dealt similarly with organisations like the Vishva Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, whose members have been implicated in multiple episodes of lynchings and attacks on Muslims. For that matter, the BJP is conspicuously silent about associations like the Hindu Janjagruti Samithi or Sanathan Sanstha which have been implicated in a series of assassinations and bomb blasts in the past decade and before.
However, the PFI has become an easy target to deflect attention from the issues that the opposition parties have been raising persistently, some of which have also become topics of public discussion in many parts of India. The ban on PFI is a tried-and-tested – albeit repetitive and unimaginative – political formula that the BJP has again put into effect to beat the anti-incumbency sentiment that is likely to surface in the upcoming state and general elections.
More importantly, by resorting to the polarisation tactic, the saffron party has also defined the ideological contours of the 2024 elections. While the opposition parties will raise issues of a stagnant economy, increasing communal disharmony, and centralisation of power, the BJP will fall back upon its Hindu consolidation strategy. It may work for it yet again, but not without a visible scar on Modi’s pro-development perception.
The widespread waves of protests that have swept Iran in the past few weeks suggest the meltdown of the theocratic ideology in Iran.
Thirteen years ago, the world watched in admiration the peaceful, non-violent protests of young Iranians in the aftermath of Iran’s fraudulent presidential elections of June 2009 that re-elected Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as president.
Today, a new generation is challenging the ideological structures of the Iranian theocratic regime. In the past several weeks, people around the world have witnessed the courage and the resolution of young Iranians who have transformed their fear of the Iranian dictatorship into a social anger. This anger has revitalised the Iranian civil society and motivated politically all Iranians around the world.
Unsurprisingly, this time the Iranian people are not fighting to rescue their votes in a presidential election or to protest against unemployment, inflation and economic hardship, but they are supporting the young Iranian women to win their basic rights against the mandatory wearing of hijab.
A newspaper with a cover picture of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic’s “morality police” is seen in Tehran, Iran September 18, 2022. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
This is a point of no return for the Islamic regime in Iran for two reasons.
First, even if the Iranian authorities succeed in repressing the protests which are taking place in more than 100 cities of Iran, they will be incapable to re-organise the regime politically and solve its legitimacy crisis. The truth is that the political evil is inherent in the nature of the Iranian regime. This does not mean that democracy is around the corner in Iran, but it does mean that young Iranians are bringing a change to the future of their country, which once looked a dream to their parents and grandparents.
The second reason is that that the civic movement in Iran is happening now at the national level, and the public removal of the hijab has since become a universal sign of rejection of the regime, uniting Iranian women and men of all faiths and ethnic identities across the country.
The truth is that the Islamic regime of Iran has been sitting on a powder keg for nearly three decades and the death of Mahsa Jina Amini was the spark that created a giant explosion. The backlash to Mahsa’s death was stronger than what anybody could think of, though this was not the first time that an Iranian woman was killed in custody.
But with Mahsa’s death an age ended and the soul of the Iranian nation, long time suppressed, found an expression.
This time, not only the Iranian women, but every Iranian inside and outside Iran is struggling against 43 years of human rights abuses.
People light a fire during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic’s “morality police”, in Tehran, Iran September 21, 2022. Photo: WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
This is why the recent protests in Iran cannot be portrayed easily as the continuation of the demonstrations that emerged in Iran in 2019. However, the huge difference between today’s struggle of young Iranians against the Islamic regime and the previous civic movements is that it has neither an apparent leadership, nor a well-defined ideology. In that sense, we are not talking about a revolution, in the classic sense of the term, but of a general rebellion.
On a broader level, we need to note the significance of the youth movement in Iran and underline the fact that the growing generational gap between the Islamic state and the Iranian youth, particularly young women, has never been wider.
As a matter of fact, the explosive growth of the young population combined with urbanisation, an increasing unemployment rate and the rapid expansion of university education has produced new sociological actors in Iran, mostly women, in fact, who are essentially educated but with no political, economic, or social future.
For the past three decades, the Islamic regime has continuously tried to cope with the challenge of governing the Iranian youth, but it would be an understatement to say that political fragmentation within Iran has never been more evident, and the clerical elite have never been challenged more clearly at the domestic level.
A police motorcycle burns during a protest over the death of Mahsa Amini, a woman who died after being arrested by the Islamic republic’s “morality police”, in Tehran, Iran September 19, 2022. Photo: WANA (West Asia News Agency) via Reuters
Truly speaking, the widespread waves of protests that have swept Iran in the past few weeks suggest the meltdown of the theocratic ideology in Iran.
Also, these protests have seriously put into question the moral status of the theological sovereignty in Iran and its legitimacy among its last supporters inside and outside the country.This is due to the fact that the protest movement in Iran is more civilised than the Iranian government when it comes to methods of creating social change in Iran, while seeking an ethical dimension to Iranian politics.
This implies that Iranian youngsters are ready to make a distinction between two approaches: searching for truth and solidarity versus lying and using violence. Even if, today, the young generation of Iranians are incapable of changing the Islamic establishment of Iran,the near future of this country will no more be theological. If this happens, it will likely affect Muslim societies far and wide.
Ramin Jahanbegloo is the director of the Mahatma Gandhi Centre for Peace at Jindal Global University.
According to the list released by the US Department of Treasury, India-based petrochemical company Tibalaji Petrochem Private Limited has purchased millions of dollars worth of products for onward shipment to China.
Washington (US): The US on Thursday imposed sanctions on several companies including those based in China, Hong Kong, India and the UAE for facilitating financial transfers and shipping of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products.
The US is taking further action to disrupt efforts to evade sanctions on the sale of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.
Specifically, the Department of State is imposing sanctions on two People’s Republic of China (PRC)-based entities: Zhonggu Storage and Transportation Co Ltd, which operates a commercial crude oil storage facility for Iranian petroleum that provides a vital conduit for the Iranian petroleum trade, as well as WS Shipping Co Ltd, the ship manager for a vessel that has transported Iranian petroleum products, he said.
The Department of the Treasury is also designating eight entities for their involvement in Iran’s petrochemical trade. These entities are based in Hong Kong, Iran, India, and the United Arab Emirates, Blinken said in a statement.
In a statement, the Department of Treasury said these entities have played a critical role in concealing the origin of the Iranian shipments and enabling two sanctioned Iranian brokers, Triliance Petrochemical Co. Ltd. (Triliance) and Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industry Commercial Co (PGPICC), to transfer funds and ship Iranian petroleum and petrochemicals to buyers in Asia.
According to the list released by the Department of Treasury, India-based petrochemical company Tibalaji Petrochem Private Limited has purchased millions of dollars worth of Triliance-brokered petrochemical products, including methanol and base oil, for onward shipment to China.
“As Iran continues to accelerate its nuclear program in violation of the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), we will continue to accelerate our enforcement of sanctions on Iran’s petroleum and petrochemical sales under authorities that would be removed under the JCPOA,” Blinken said.
The JCPOA, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, is an agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme reached in 2015 between Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States—plus Germany and the European Union.
Under its terms, Iran agreed to dismantle much of its nuclear program and open its facilities to more extensive international inspections in exchange for billions of dollars worth of sanctions relief.
Former president Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the agreement in 2018. The US and Iran’s indirect talks to revive the pact have broken down.
Iran has long denied it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons while saying it has a right to civilian nuclear infrastructure.
“These enforcement actions will continue on a regular basis, with an aim to severely restrict Iran’s oil and petrochemical exports. Anyone involved in facilitating these illegal sales and transactions should cease and desist immediately if they wish to avoid US sanctions,” Blinken said.
“The United States is committed to severely restricting Iran’s illicit oil and petrochemical sales,” said Under Secretary of the Treasury for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Brian E Nelson.
“So long as Iran refuses a mutual return to full implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the United States will continue to enforce its sanctions on the sale of Iranian petroleum and petrochemical products,” Nelson said.
The Treasury said these economic sanctions, which are reversible in the event of Iran’s return to JCPOA compliance, follow the designations imposed last week against the so-called morality police and other law enforcement organisations and individuals responsible for the custody death of Mahsa Amini and the violent repression of the protests that have followed.
“We remain concerned about a wide range of Iranian policies, from their nuclear programme to abuses perpetrated against their own people, to supporting Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine with drones and military training, and destabilising activities across the region, and we will continue to respond to these dangerous policies with sanctions and other tools,” it said.
There is a growing murmur that the internal affairs of the Army are being controlled by others, raising questions of a seeming decay of the military trait of standing up and being counted in all matters.
Indians hold their Army in very high regard. What they admire most about it is the integrity of its officer corps. If an Army officer says something, it usually clinches the argument and, conversely, doubting the argument will see you labelled as ‘unpatriotic’, ‘Pakistani’ or ‘Jihadi’.
If that trust gets eroded even a bit, we citizens should be very concerned.
Unfortunately, there is a growing murmur that the internal affairs of the Army are being controlled by others, and that the Army leadership is not objecting to it. One specific example is the case of the Twitter handle of the Army’s Chinar Corps.
This year, Instagram and Facebook suspended the official account of India’s XV Corps, known as the Chinar Corps, and restored them some 12 days later. At the time, the Indian Express had reported that both accounts were banned due to ‘coordinated inauthentic behaviour.’ In a similar incident in June 2019, Twitter, too, suspended and later restored the official handle of the Chinar Corps.
In an article in The Wire, Shakir Mir noted that, “US-based Stanford Internet Observatory, which studies the abuse of internet technologies worldwide, discovered an unidentified online network running influence operations, with a legion of bot accounts disguising as Kashmiri users posting pro-Indian Army propaganda.”
The article further adds that Shelby Grossman, a researcher at the Stanford Observatory had told The Wire, “The network wasn’t just about the fake persons. There was dangerous stuff as well.”
“These networks are problematic because they are pretending to be someone they are not and can make it appear like Kashmiris have certain political opinions when, in fact, they are fake personas,” Grossman had said.
Further, the article notes, “The investigation also found that accounts linked to the network claimed to be Kashmiri users but displayed profile pictures sourced from elsewhere on the internet. In one case, the analysis found that an account used a picture that was already available for a different user on freelancing website Fiverr.”
Since these allegations come from the Stanford Internet Observatory and not from the Opposition or some disgruntled veteran, the nation must feel concerned. The very integrity of the mouthpiece of a renowned Corps of the Indian army has been questioned.
It is as if a cheque issued by a Lieutenant General has bounced.
Perhaps the handle of the Chinar Corps had been hijacked and someone was creating mischief in their name. But since this happened on multiple occasions, the probability of this being the case is very low.
If it indeed were the case, the Army would have held a Court of Inquiry when the handle was suspended in 2019, and would have found the scammer. But the incident happened again in 2022. With this, you may draw your own conclusions.
What is even more worrying is that the nature of mischief is the same as what the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is known for.
The BJP is infamous for the activities of its IT cell, which trolls in a big way.
This makes it a real possibility that senior army officers are brooking interference in what are purely internal affairs of the Army. Beyond the case of allowing misuse of the Twitter handle of a Corps, there is a larger question – one of a seeming decay of the military trait of standing up and being counted in all matters, particularly when it comes to matters in your domain.
The Indian Army has not been like this since the beginning.
Indians widely talk of the incident where then Army Chief, General Manekshaw, practically refused then prime minister Indira Gandhi’s directions to start the offensive against Bangladesh in March 1971, stating that it was militarily not prudent to do so at that time. He wrested nine months from the prime minister.
In an earlier case, Lieutenant General Harbaksh Singh, the Western Army Commander during the 1965 war, refused verbal advice by the then Army Chief to pull back to the line of the Beas river, since he felt that advice came from a wrong reading of the situation on the ground.
It is being widely reported that the Indian Army is looking to shed its colonial past vis-à-vis uniform, ceremonies, names of regiments and buildings dating back to pre-Independence times. Indeed, it is the prerogative of the Army and there can be no objection to it. However, whatever the press may report, there is little evidence to suggest that this move has come from within the Army itself. Why would the Army want to do away with the lanyard?
And if these suggestions have come from politicians, the Army must stand up and be counted, not allowing the gun to be fired from its shoulders. If it agrees with all that has been ordered, it should provide its rationale.
One aspect of shedding colonial baggage is the acceptance that the Indian Army is no longer the Army of the rulers, but an Army of the nation.
Col Alok Asthana is a veteran. He can be contacted at alok.asthana@gmail.com.
Note: A reference to The Wire’s Tek Fog findings has been edited out as the stories have now been removed from public view pending the outcome of an internal review, as one of its authors was part of the technical team involved in our now retracted Meta coverage. More details about the Meta stories may be seen here.
