Thursday, November 12, 2015
Monday, November 9, 2015
A Rebuke to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi - By THE EDITORIAL BOARD - The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/
Nitish Kumar, chief minister of Bihar, greeted supporters after victory in state elections on Sunday.Aftab Alam Siddiqui/Associated Press
In the months leading up to the Bihar election, hard-liners in the B.J.P. and organizations affiliated with the party stoked India’s long-simmering sectarian tensions. The party’s lawmakers pushed for beef bans around the country ostensibly to protect the cow, which many Hindus consider holy, but really as a ploy to divide Hindus and Muslims, some of whom eat beef.
The New York Times
The Opinion Pages | EDITORIAL
A Rebuke to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi
By THE EDITORIAL BOARDNOV. 9, 2015
During a national election in India last year, Narendra Modi promisedDuring a national election in India last year, Narendra Modi promised “development for all.” As prime minister, he has yet to deliver big economic improvements, but in the meantime, members of his government and political party have shredded his promise of inclusion by inflaming sectarian tensions. Now, voters in the country’s third most populous state have sent Mr. Modi a message: Put an end to the hatemongering.
Poisoning politics with religious hatred is bound to squander the country’s economic potential at a time when India should be playing a bigger and more constructive role in South Asia and the world. India’s history is filled with examples of religious and caste-based violence that set the country back. Those conflicts subsided during India’s rapid economic growth, but many Indians now fear a resurgence.
On Sunday, Mr. Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party lost a legislative election in the northern state of Bihar, which has a population of more than 100 million. A “grand alliance” of secular parties united by their antipathy to the Hindu nationalist B.J.P. won 178 constituencies in the 243-member legislative assembly to the B.J.P.’s 53. Many political analysts see the loss as a repudiation of Mr. Modi because he and his top aides campaigned vigorously in the state and many ads carried his image, rather than photos of local politicians.
In the months leading up to the Bihar election, hard-liners in the B.J.P. and organizations affiliated with the party stoked India’s long-simmering sectarian tensions. The party’s lawmakers pushed for beef bans around the country ostensibly to protect the cow, which many Hindus consider holy, but really as a ploy to divide Hindus and Muslims, some of whom eat beef.
Mobs riled by the anti-beef crusade have killed four Muslims suspected of slaughtering, stealing or smuggling cows in the last seven weeks. And in August, unidentified attackers shot and killed Malleshappa Madivalappa Kalburgi, a scholar and vocal critic of Hindu idolatry. Hundreds of writers, filmmakers and academics have protested the growing intolerance by returning awards they received from the government-supported bodies.
Mr. Modi has not forcefully condemned the beef-related killings, despite pleas by Muslims and other minorities. He has tolerated hateful and insensitive remarks by his ministers and by B.J.P. officials.
RECENT COMMENTS
Thomas Zaslavsky
2 hours ago
Prediction for the Times' editors (and commenter Arun Gupta): Modi cannot and will not stop playing the sectarian card because his party...
Arun Gupta
3 hours ago
Right, vanquished by a casteist alliance, the Prime Minister is divisive. Would the NYT Editors wake up and stop believing their own...
Nancy
4 hours ago
https://research.stlouisfed.
- SEE ALL COMMENTS
- WRITE A COMMENT
During a campaign stop in Bihar, Mr. Modi tried to exploit sectarian divisions by telling voters that the secular alliance would reduce affirmative action benefits for lower-caste Hindus and tribes in favor of “a particular community” — an apparent reference to Muslims. And the president of the B.J.P., Amit Shah, one of Mr. Modi’s closest advisers, told voters that a victory for the alliance would be celebrated in Pakistan, the Muslim-majority neighbor that has fought several wars with India since 1947.
Voters in Bihar saw through the B.J.P.’s attempts to divide them. They, like most Indians, are looking for leaders who will improve their standard of living. Bihar is one of the poorest states in India but has grown fast in the last 10 years under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who is credited for cracking down on crime, building roads and increasing the enrollment of girls in schools.
Mr. Modi and the B.J.P. secured a majority in the lower house of Parliament last year with promises of economic reforms. Now, to push through those reforms, the party needs to win the control of the upper house, which is elected by state assemblies. It won’t win those elections unless Mr. Modi gets rid of the officials in his government and party who are fueling sectarian culture wars.
Meanwhile, there are things Mr. Modi could do administratively to improve the economy, like investing in education and health care and building infrastructure. Voters in Bihar have sent the B.J.P. a clear message. Mr. Modi should heed it.
---
Friday, November 6, 2015
Muslims can't be booked for polygamy: HC - Indian Express, Mumbai
A court judgement that is so diametrically different treated by English media. Indian Express focuses on the final verdict, where court expresses its inability to punish the defendant for 'bigamy' as the Muslim is allowed polygamy by Muslim Personal Law. Other English media has gone to town harping that this is discrimination and sooner Muslims are brought under Uniform Civil Code, the better. How can Muslims be denied their constitutional right of freedom of religion. They have full right to abide by their religion, both in law and in spirit. The state law has no jurisdiction in their religious affairs. Period.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Readwhere <noreply@readwhere.com>
Date: 2015-11-06 18:30 GMT+05:30
Subject: Ghulam Muhammed shared a clipping of Mumbai
From: Readwhere <noreply@readwhere.com>
Date: 2015-11-06 18:30 GMT+05:30
Subject: Ghulam Muhammed shared a clipping of Mumbai
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
RAJAN-DAWOOD RIVALRY: THE PAST AND THE FURIOUS - By S. Hussain Zaidi, Mumbai Mirror
HOW INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES COURT, SUPPORT AND PROTECT CRIMINALS AS IF THESE CRIMINALS ARE PART OF THE ESTABLISHMENT AND THEREFORE LEGIT
RAJAN-DAWOOD RIVALRY: THE PAST AND THE FURIOUS
By S Hussain Zaidi, Mumbai Mirror | Oct 27, 2015, 12.21 AM IST
After falling out with Dawood Ibrahim, Rajan carefully cultivated image of 'patriotic gangster' for survival.
Chhota Rajan is a survivor. From being nearly bumped off at a yacht party that he was invited to in 1993 by Chhota Shakeel to the brazen attempt on his life in September 2000 in Bangkok, the gangster from Chembur knows how to get out of a sticky situation. It is this survival instinct, rather than any newfound love for India, that made Rajan get into a strategic deal with the authorities.
Till early nineties, Dawood Ibrahim and Rajan were thick as thieves. Rajan worshipped Dawood. He had risen from being a black-marketer of tickets at Chembur's Sahakar cinema in the late eighties to Dawood's right-hand man. And none of Dawood's lieutenants liked the proximity and trust that the two shared.
Cracks began to appear between the two in July 1992 with the daylight murder of Ibrahim Parkar in Nagpada by Arun Gawli's men. Ibrahim was Dawood's brother-in-law; husband to Haseena Parkar, the sister that Dawood used to dote on. Dawood had a sprawling empire, unmatched muscle and fire power; yet the hit on Parkar was not avenged. Rajan was the eyes and ears of Dawood at the time, but he did nothing - instead of planning a counter hit, Rajan was enjoying life with wine, women and song. The seeds of mistrust between Dawood and Rajan had been sown.
Dawood's trusted lieutenants, Chhota Shakeel and Sunil Sawant, smelled blood. They tried to convince Dawood that they could take out Gawli's men and avenge his brother-in-law's death. In the process, they would discredit Rajan as well. An elaborate plan was drawn up.
Taking out his enemies while they were under police protection was a fetish of sorts for Dawood. In order to avenge his brother Sabir Kaskar's murder, Dawood had ordered a hit on Amirzada in the sessions court in 1983.
September 6, 1992, witnessed the most daring operation in Mumbai gangland's history. Sawant and his men stormed into JJ Hospital to finish of Gawli's men, Shailesh Haldankar and Bipin Shere. The two were under police protection but the posse of constables could do nothing. While Haldankar died, Shere escaped. Three policemen were also killed in the operation. Dawood had sent out the first in a series of messages.
With the hit, Dawood had managed to prove a point to his rivals, placated his sister and sought solace in the fact that at least his brother-in-law's killers were eliminated. Rajan had forgotten the age old adage in the Mumbai mafia: 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer'. Dawood promoted Shakeel and Sawant as his number two and three. The alienation of Rajan had begun.
One fine evening in 1993, Rajan was on his way to the yacht party organized by Shakeel. Chhota Shakeel and his cronies had plotted to kill him and dump the body in the sea. Just in the nick of time, Rajan got an alert about the impending attack and changed his plans. He also realized that Shakeel could have never taken the decision to bump him off unilaterally. The plan had to have Dawood's blessings.
Rajan then reportedly fell on Dawood's feet and asked for forgiveness. Dawood agreed to give him one last chance to prove his loyalty.
The opportunity came soon after. After the blasts of 1993, Dawood was getting a lot of bad press. The carefully cultivated image, thanks to the generous portrayals in Bollywood, had taken a massive beating.
The man at the forefront of whipping Dawood was then Shiv Sena supremo, the late Bal Thackeray, who was lashing out at him through the party mouthpiece, Saamna. The tide was turning against Dawood and his men. Rajan realized that if he wanted to save himself, he should his boss's image. Audaciously, and unexpectedly, Rajan stooped to the level of a telephone operator and began calling and shooting faxes to various newspaper offices. Through their offices, he asked Thackeray to mind his political business and also told him that Dawood did not need a certificate of patriotism from the Sena chief.
And it worked.
In those days, nobody had the guts to take on Thackeray. Rajan's temerity earned him brownie points with Dawood. Perhaps this also managed to ward off the proverbial Damocles' sword hanging over his neck. Dawood might have given him a second chance but his lieutenants were in no mood to forgive and forget.
Rajan had tried his best to appease Dawood and reclaim his position as his Man Friday, but in vain. By 1994, he realized he could be bumped off in Dubai. The only recourse left for him was to escape and save his life.
Rajan sought help from the Indian Embassy. Since Rajan's passport was in the custody of a kafeel (local sponsor), he got another passport made in a jiffy and in the process sold his loyalty to the intelligence agencies. The association was to prove mutually beneficial in the time to come.
Once Rajan survived, he decided to get back at Dawood. However, Rajan's main objective was to destroy Shakeel's stronghold on the gang and show the men who was boss. With confusion in the ranks, most hitmen in Mumbai and Bengaluru could be easily made to switch their allegiance to Rajan as he was leading the pack until recently and the transfer of oath of fealty seemed easier.
So with some of his trusted aides like Sadhu Shetty, Avdhoot Bonde and Vilas Mane, Rajan launched a violent assault on Shakeel's men in Mumbai. And a parallel assault on Dawood's empire in Dubai. This resulted in Dawood relocating to Karachi from Dubai.
Due to his proximity to Dawood, Rajan knew most of his loyalists in Bollywood, construction czars and other businessmen. Rajan systematically began targeting them.
Rajan had seen the power of public opinion once; and he wanted to capitalize on it. Overnight, he became a self-proclaimed patriotic don and started floating stories that Dawood was a traitor and anti-India as he had orchestrated the serial blasts of 1993. For some, this worked and caused a vertical split in the gang and its sympathizers.
To drive his point home, Rajan started picking out serial blasts accused who had been granted bail by the TADA court. The message was loud and clear - people who had committed a crime against the country would not be spared.
In fact, 1998 turned out to be Mumbai's most violent year, when over 100 shootouts were reported in the city.
The animosity between Dawood and Rajan had scaled such heights that Dawood's other rivalries -- with the Pathan syndicate or with Arun Gawli --paled in comparison.
Rajan could have successfully continued and may have even succeeded in his quest until he got almost killed on September 15, 2000, in an assault on him in Bangkok by Shakeel's men.
Chhota Rajan is a survivor. From being nearly bumped off at a yacht party that he was invited to in 1993 by Chhota Shakeel to the brazen attempt on his life in September 2000 in Bangkok, the gangster from Chembur knows how to get out of a sticky situation. It is this survival instinct, rather than any newfound love for India, that made Rajan get into a strategic deal with the authorities.
Till early nineties, Dawood Ibrahim and Rajan were thick as thieves. Rajan worshipped Dawood. He had risen from being a black-marketer of tickets at Chembur's Sahakar cinema in the late eighties to Dawood's right-hand man. And none of Dawood's lieutenants liked the proximity and trust that the two shared.
Cracks began to appear between the two in July 1992 with the daylight murder of Ibrahim Parkar in Nagpada by Arun Gawli's men. Ibrahim was Dawood's brother-in-law; husband to Haseena Parkar, the sister that Dawood used to dote on. Dawood had a sprawling empire, unmatched muscle and fire power; yet the hit on Parkar was not avenged. Rajan was the eyes and ears of Dawood at the time, but he did nothing - instead of planning a counter hit, Rajan was enjoying life with wine, women and song. The seeds of mistrust between Dawood and Rajan had been sown.
Dawood's trusted lieutenants, Chhota Shakeel and Sunil Sawant, smelled blood. They tried to convince Dawood that they could take out Gawli's men and avenge his brother-in-law's death. In the process, they would discredit Rajan as well. An elaborate plan was drawn up.
Taking out his enemies while they were under police protection was a fetish of sorts for Dawood. In order to avenge his brother Sabir Kaskar's murder, Dawood had ordered a hit on Amirzada in the sessions court in 1983.
September 6, 1992, witnessed the most daring operation in Mumbai gangland's history. Sawant and his men stormed into JJ Hospital to finish of Gawli's men, Shailesh Haldankar and Bipin Shere. The two were under police protection but the posse of constables could do nothing. While Haldankar died, Shere escaped. Three policemen were also killed in the operation. Dawood had sent out the first in a series of messages.
With the hit, Dawood had managed to prove a point to his rivals, placated his sister and sought solace in the fact that at least his brother-in-law's killers were eliminated. Rajan had forgotten the age old adage in the Mumbai mafia: 'keep your friends close and your enemies closer'. Dawood promoted Shakeel and Sawant as his number two and three. The alienation of Rajan had begun.
One fine evening in 1993, Rajan was on his way to the yacht party organized by Shakeel. Chhota Shakeel and his cronies had plotted to kill him and dump the body in the sea. Just in the nick of time, Rajan got an alert about the impending attack and changed his plans. He also realized that Shakeel could have never taken the decision to bump him off unilaterally. The plan had to have Dawood's blessings.
Rajan then reportedly fell on Dawood's feet and asked for forgiveness. Dawood agreed to give him one last chance to prove his loyalty.
The opportunity came soon after. After the blasts of 1993, Dawood was getting a lot of bad press. The carefully cultivated image, thanks to the generous portrayals in Bollywood, had taken a massive beating.
The man at the forefront of whipping Dawood was then Shiv Sena supremo, the late Bal Thackeray, who was lashing out at him through the party mouthpiece, Saamna. The tide was turning against Dawood and his men. Rajan realized that if he wanted to save himself, he should his boss's image. Audaciously, and unexpectedly, Rajan stooped to the level of a telephone operator and began calling and shooting faxes to various newspaper offices. Through their offices, he asked Thackeray to mind his political business and also told him that Dawood did not need a certificate of patriotism from the Sena chief.
And it worked.
In those days, nobody had the guts to take on Thackeray. Rajan's temerity earned him brownie points with Dawood. Perhaps this also managed to ward off the proverbial Damocles' sword hanging over his neck. Dawood might have given him a second chance but his lieutenants were in no mood to forgive and forget.
Rajan had tried his best to appease Dawood and reclaim his position as his Man Friday, but in vain. By 1994, he realized he could be bumped off in Dubai. The only recourse left for him was to escape and save his life.
Rajan sought help from the Indian Embassy. Since Rajan's passport was in the custody of a kafeel (local sponsor), he got another passport made in a jiffy and in the process sold his loyalty to the intelligence agencies. The association was to prove mutually beneficial in the time to come.
Once Rajan survived, he decided to get back at Dawood. However, Rajan's main objective was to destroy Shakeel's stronghold on the gang and show the men who was boss. With confusion in the ranks, most hitmen in Mumbai and Bengaluru could be easily made to switch their allegiance to Rajan as he was leading the pack until recently and the transfer of oath of fealty seemed easier.
So with some of his trusted aides like Sadhu Shetty, Avdhoot Bonde and Vilas Mane, Rajan launched a violent assault on Shakeel's men in Mumbai. And a parallel assault on Dawood's empire in Dubai. This resulted in Dawood relocating to Karachi from Dubai.
Due to his proximity to Dawood, Rajan knew most of his loyalists in Bollywood, construction czars and other businessmen. Rajan systematically began targeting them.
Rajan had seen the power of public opinion once; and he wanted to capitalize on it. Overnight, he became a self-proclaimed patriotic don and started floating stories that Dawood was a traitor and anti-India as he had orchestrated the serial blasts of 1993. For some, this worked and caused a vertical split in the gang and its sympathizers.
To drive his point home, Rajan started picking out serial blasts accused who had been granted bail by the TADA court. The message was loud and clear - people who had committed a crime against the country would not be spared.
In fact, 1998 turned out to be Mumbai's most violent year, when over 100 shootouts were reported in the city.
The animosity between Dawood and Rajan had scaled such heights that Dawood's other rivalries -- with the Pathan syndicate or with Arun Gawli --paled in comparison.
Rajan could have successfully continued and may have even succeeded in his quest until he got almost killed on September 15, 2000, in an assault on him in Bangkok by Shakeel's men.
Friday, October 23, 2015
Saturday, October 17, 2015
President’s Opening Act - Written By Nicolas Blarel - The Indian Express, Mumbai, INDIA
The Indian Express
My Comments:
This article in Indian Express should be regarded as the first salvo across Modi's bow, for not recognizing Israel's undeclared terms of engagement. Zionist Israel is very possessive, demanding and domineering and it will require Modi's all reserves of guile and diplomacy to carry Israel and Arab world on each of his two shoulders. A difficult task indeed! India needs heavy investments in its infrastructures that may come on much easier terms from Gulf oil states. On the other side, Israel is promoting its defense hard gear by creating panic psychology to divert India's scarce resources to its defenseless defenses in terms of armaments. Money may come in and money may go out and India's people will remain with their begging bowl. Modi must realize which side of his bread is buttered.
a few seconds ago
We must note how the incensed writer has branded our President's first visit to Israel as 'opening act of a stand-up comedy'. That had set the tone of this garrulous diatribe against India's hyphenated policy .
a few seconds ago
---
(0) · (0) reply (0)
President’s Opening Act
Pranab Mukherjee’s Israel visit reconfirmed Delhi’s deliberate policy ambivalence
92 7
About Author
Nicolas Blarel
- Nicolas Blarel is assistant professor of International Relations at Leiden University, the Netherland
Pranab Mukherjee’s visit could be interpreted as an additional guarantee from Narendra Modi’s government that India will stay the course.
The opening act in stand-up comedy or music concerts is arguably the hardest as it involves warming up a “cold” audience. To some degree, President Pranab Mukherjee faced this thankless task by becoming the first Indian president to visit Israel. Traditionally, presidential visits don’t attract much attention. But the six-day tour of Jordan, Palestine and Israel is seen as a prelude to the much-anticipated Narendra Modi visit to Tel Aviv. How can we interpret his visit in the broader context of Modi’s policy?
The contours of the Modi government’s policy towards West Asia are still undefined. Because Modi has never explicitly articulated any grand strategy towards the region, others have ventured into the vacuum. Building on sporadic glimpses like Modi’s much publicised meeting with Binyamin Netanyahu at the UNGA in September 2014, India’s abstention on a UNHRC resolution that condemned Israel, and the announcement of a visit to Israel, some have argued India had broken with the traditional hyphenation of Israel and Palestine. While appealing to certain audiences in India, the narrative of a paradigmatic shift in India’s position is complicated by empirical realities.
In fact, the effective de-hyphenation happened in January 1992. In 1950, India recognised Israel and initiated discussions towards the exchange of embassies while refusing to recognise the All Palestine Government. However, India indefinitely deferred formal diplomatic ties following Israel’s participation in the operation to regain control of the Suez Canal in 1956. Hyphenation only began when New Delhi recognised the Palestine Liberation Organisation in 1974 and, thereafter, conditioned rapprochement with Israel on progress in the Israel-Palestine dispute. It’s in the context of the renascent peace process in the early 1990s that India established diplomatic relations with Israel.
Since then, India moved to a policy of engagement of both. Defence and economic relations between India and Israel have thrived despite India’s enduring support to Palestine. While Israel became India’s second-largest arms supplier, Delhi continued to be one of the most important aid donors to the Palestinian Authority. Modi also met with Mahmoud Abbas on the sidelines of the UNGA in September 2015. During his visit, Mukherjee confirmed the de-hyphenation process by restating that India’s relations with Israel were “independent” of its ties with Palestine.
The Mukherjee visit could be interpreted as an additional guarantee from Modi’s government that India will stay the course. Anticipating criticisms of his upcoming visit, Modi has refrained from giving a specific timetable. He also surprised many by making his first West Asian stopover in the UAE. While declaring explicit designs in other regional contexts (“Act East”), the government has seemingly opted for pragmatic ambivalence on West Asia.
Yet, deliberate ambivalence can lead to misperceptions. Mukherjee went beyond symbolical gestures of support to the Palestinian cause. Prior to the visit, he referred to Gandhi’s 1938 statement about Palestine belonging to the Arabs. He also specified “East Jerusalem” was to be the capital of an independent Palestine. Some Israeli media finally highlighted the president failed to address terrorism in his public addresses in Ramallah. The presidential visit revealed varying domestic interpretations of India’s position.
Given the stakes, it’s unlikely these declarations will decisively affect Modi’s visit.
But it’s clear that the Indian government needs to be upfront about its policy. Partly articulated positions create a vacuum of interpretation. If the current government is sincere about de-hyphenation, it should clearly spell out its ambition to reinforce cooperation with Israel while also actively supporting an independent Palestinian state. Some opening acts leave lasting impressions and Mukherjee’s performance could be more influential than initially expected.
The writer is assistant professor of International Relations at Leiden University, the Netherlands, and author of ‘The Evolution of India’s Israel Policy: Continuity, Change, and Compromise since 1922’
- See more at: http://indianexpress.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)