Presidential poll: How NDA lost the plot

Saswat Panigrahi

The NDA is a divided house over their choice on presidential candidate.

Both Shiv Sena and JD (U) have declared to back UPA nominee Pranab Mukherjee in the race to Raisina Hill.

The BJP, on the other hand, has decided to back former speaker Purno Agitok Sangma for president. Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), another NDA constituent has chosen to stand by BJP’s presidential choice.

New NDA entrant Janata Party went a step ahead with Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy declaring that “Sangma will emerge victorious”. In fact Swamy is being credited for building an NDA-Sangma alliance.

JMM, which runs a coalition with the BJP in Jharkhand could not but support Sangma in the milieu of his tribal origin.

This is not to dispute that UPA’s presidential candidate Pranab Mukherjee is a tall leader with vast experience in government and Parliament. Moreover, he has a clear edge in the electoral college.

But, in a presidential election, broad consensus could only emerge on an apolitical candidate. Mukherjee is an old Congress man and his candidature was declared by none other than Congress president and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi. Had BJP supported Mukherjee in the presidential race, the party would have to bear the brunt of siding with the Congress-led UPA.

Well, BJP’s decision to shoot down the consensus call on Mukherjee’s candidature by throwing its weight behind Sangma makes some political sense. At least, by doing so the saffron party has underscored its credentials as an opposition party.

But BJP’s support to Sangma was a delayed decision. Indeed, Sangma was part BJP’s plan B.

First, the saffron party had jumped the gun and rushed to own up former president APJ Abdul Kalam in the race for Rashtrapati Bhavan. That was BJP’s plan-A. When Kalam refused to enter the fray, the BJP looked at plan-B.

After all, Sangma was not originally a BJP candidate. He was a preferred choice of BJD supremo Naveen Patnaik and AIDMK patron Jayalalithaa.BJP’s decision to support Sangma has something to do with the 2014 general elections. Party insiders say BJP veteran LK Advani sees Sangma’s candidature as a means to re-cultivate ex-NDA allies BJD and AIDMK, whose support he feels “vital” for the 2014 elections.

Also, it was Advani who encouraged Jaswant Singh to campaign for the vice-presidency, though majority in the party didn’t bother to take it seriously.

The problem was in the whole event. The saffron party didn’t do its homework before making the move and thereby created a mess. But who is to be blamed for the Presidential poll mess in the BJP? Is it the individual leadership or the collective leadership or both?

Now, it is almost clear that the party is not in a fighting mode in this presidential election.

The presidential poll has once again brought the faultiness in the BJP and the NDA to the fore. It is an irony that the principal opposition party of the country could not come out with a candidate of its own. Finally, it had to settle with a presidential candidate imported from the UPA ranks.

The presidential contest this time is a token one amidst clear indications that Pranab Mukherjee is all set to make it to the Rashtrapati Bhavan. In the end, neither BJP nor Sangma would gain anything.

BJD after Naveen-Pyari divorce

Saswat Panigrahi

It was a case of ambition going astray. After his May 29 failed coup to dislodge Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik , it was natural that only reprisal awaited Pyari Mohan Mohapatra. Patnaik generally known for his dithering decisions, for a change took no time in suspending his ‘advisor’.

Today, Mohapatra, who once virtually ruled the state de-facto, is a forlorn man with his so called supporters deserting him like a flock of birds returning home to Patnaik`s camp. Such has been the anger against his ‘audacity’ that people have been openly demanding more stringent action against Mohapatra. Meanwhile, Patnaik is busy trying to purge all the Mohapatra loyalists from his party Biju Janata Dal (BJD).

‘Beimaan’ (traitor) was the word Patnaik used for Mohapatra after the failed coup attempt.

Even as the BJD copes with a post-Pyari chapter, the party stands dazed in Odisha, gripped by a fear of another attempt at dislodging the government. Patnaik is seemingly haunted by the fear of the unknown despite a huge sympathy wave in his favour, largely fuelled by the foolish attempt by Mohapatra to topple him from the hot seat when he was away in UK – incidentally this was Naveen’s first visit abroad in 12 years.

A taste of own medicine

It all started one hot and humid evening when some 30 BJD MLAs, including four senior ministers suddenly flocked to Mohapatra`s A/111, Sahid Nagar residence on May 29. The legislators were asked to put their signatures on paper to choose him as the new leader of the BJD Legislature Party.

Mohapatra had reportedly sought an appointment with the Governor for the next day to stake claim to form the government. But Mohapatra’s plan came be a cropper as he failed to muster the desired numbers to topple the government in Odisha.

On hearing the news, a stunned and panic-stricken Naveen Patnaik made a dash back to Bhubaneswar by cutting shot his London trip and suspended the coup plotter and Mohapatra finally got a taste of his own medicine.

Naveen shoots a sharp shooter

Naveen took no time in denouncing Pyari Mohan Mohapatra as a ‘back stabber’. But let’s not forget that Mohapatra has a history of demolishing his political opponents by pursuing dirty politics, without batting an eyelid.

In the year 2000 Naveen Patnaik sacked BJD founder Bijoy Mohapatra from the party on the advice of Pyari Mohan. Two years later, Naveen withdrew another BJD founder Dilip Ray first from the federal government and subsequently axed him from the party under Pyari Mohan’s influence.

Between October 2008 and March 2009, Pyari Mohan launched a covert operation to convert BJP’s organisational base into BJD’s organisational structure. He ensured that all BJP units in saffron strongholds of the state either transfer their loyalty to BJD or be closed by employing resourceful measures. Observers have not forgotten Mohapatra’s meticulously planned move to dump the saffron party just ahead of the 2009 polls after over a decade-long coalition.

In his twelve-year-long regime, Naveen Patnaik sacked as many as 26 ministers, thanks to Mohapatra.

Naveen’s ex-Man Friday

Pyari Mohan Mohapatra (Pyari babu, Pyari, PM or Uncle as he is popularly known as) is a career bureaucrat, who served as the principal secretary to then chief minister Biju Patnaik between 1990 and 1994.

A 1963-batch former IAS officer, Mohapatra entered politics in 1999, when he joined the BJD as a primary member, two years after the party was formed. Soon he became Naveen’s Man Friday. Patnaik started consulting Mohapatra over every matter of politics and governance.

In 2004, Patnaik sent Mohapatra to the Rajya Sabha on a BJD ticket. By that time Mohapatra had acquired a larger-than-life stature in the party and in the government.

Though he held no important party post, Mohapatra was the first among the equals. He used to decide how the party and government must run. Such was his importance and clout that ministers and bureaucrats used to make a beeline to seek his instructions. Without his nod nothing could move in the BJD or in Odisha. Mohapatra started a unique system of governance in which ministers used to report to secretaries (IAS officers). In fact there was a joke doing rounds in the state - ‘PM’ is in charge of the state, not the CM. 

How the romance went cold?

However, for a while now the Naveen-Pyari romance had gone cold. A crack in their relationship surfaced when Naveen declared the candidature of Pyari’s bête noir Ranendra Pratap Swain for Athgarh Assembly by-poll in February this year. Remember, Swain was disqualified during the 2009 Assembly polls following non-submission of his ‘original’ party ticket. It was Mohapatra, who played a key role in the events that led to Swain’s disqualification.

Naveen snubbed Mohapatra again when he campaigned alone in the Panchayat polls in February.

The split between the two leaders widened further when Patnaik announced the names of three Rajya Sabha candidates in March without consulting Mohapatra.

Finally, their bond ended with a failed coup bid by Mohapatra followed by his suspension.

A vulnerable BJD

Naveen Patnaik’s government might have survived for now. But this is the beginning of a grand battle ahead.

Another political landmine is waiting to explode, when Patnaik will reshuffle his cabinet and axe a few other ministers loyal to Pyari.

It is a fact that a sizable number of BJD MLAs are Pyari Mohan’s own men. While Mohapatra is waiting for an opportunity to strike back, Patnaik may be taking the risk of considering his foes as his friends.

It is no secret that Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik hardly interacts with his MLAs. So Mohapatra is not wrong when he says that the CM can’t even recall the names of his own MLAs. In such a situation, can Naveen maintain his grip over the party and the government?

According to a senior political commentator Pratap Mohanty, “BJD was not created by Naveen Patnaik or Pyari Mohan. It was Bijoy Mohapatra who did it. Both Naveen and Pyari tried to appropriate the party. While Pyari has failed, Naveen is becoming weak by the day.”

There is no doubt that the Naveen-Pyari fight has left the BJD vulnerable. With a mission to split the party having failed, now Mohapatra will either launch his own party or join the Congress. In both the cases he will certainly eat into BJD’s support base.

Also, Pyari’s inevitable exit from the BJD might lead to some new political equations. However, this may not be much of an advantage for the BJD.

With Patnaik’s clean image blown to pieces by a series of scams lately, come 2014 BJD will face the battle of its lifetime. Will the party survive or simply wither away?

Faultlines in J&K interlocutors’ report

Saswat Panigrahi

The much awaited report by a three-member interlocutors’ panel on Jammu and Kashmir - appointed by the Union Home Ministry - is out in the public domain. The report titled ‘A New Compact with the People of Jammu and Kashmir’ claims to have suggested a “roadmap” to address the vexed Kashmir issue.

The interlocutors’ panel - journalist Dilip Padgaonkar, academic Radha Kumar and former civil servant MM Ansari - in its 176-page-long report has recommended reviewing of all central Acts and Articles of Indian Constitution, extended to Jammu and Kashmir after the 1952 Delhi agreement. This has once again brought the complex web of Kashmir issue to the fore.

Before commenting on the interlocutors’ report, let us flip through the pages of history.

Jammu and Kashmir was a princely state, which was acceded to India by the virtue of a constitutional document called Instrument of Accession under the Indian Independence Act, 1947.

Maharaja Hari Singh, then supreme ruler of Jammu and Kashmir and the sole designated authority of the state signed the Instrument of Succession on October 26, 1947.

It reads, “I Sri Hari Singh, ruler of Jammu and Kashmir state in the exercise of my sovereignty in and over my said state do hereby execute this my Instrument of Accession....The terms of this Instrument of Accession shall not be varied by any amendment of the Act or of Indian Independence Act, 1947...I hereby declare that I execute this instrument on behalf of the state and that any reference in this instrument to me or the ruler of the state is to be considered as including reference to my heirs and successors.”

The Instrument of Accession made it clear that there was no dispute in acceding Jammu and Kashmir into India. But, historic blunders were committed by the then interim government. 

Though the format of Instrument of Accession applied to Jammu and Kashmir was the same as was executed for other princely states, then interim Indian government led by Jawaharlal Nehru agreed that “final decision” with regard to the accession would be ratified by the Constituent Assembly of Jammu & Kashmir. In the intervening period “a temporary provision” was made in the Constitution of India.

Article 370 was created in the Indian Constitution to give a “special status” to Jammu and Kashmir. As per that status, except for three subjects - Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communications - the Centre needs the concurrence of Jammu and Kashmir govt to apply all other laws.

Separate constitution and separate flag for Jammu and Kashmir are the by-products of Article 370. The article which was introduced in the Indian Constitution as a “temporary statute” has become a permanent problem. It stands as a stumbling block between Jammu and Kashmir and the rest of India. The article gave birth to the idea of autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir.

The interlocutors’ report advocates further strengthening of Article 370 to ensure "meaningful autonomy" for the state. It suggests upgrading the article from a “temporary provision” to a “special provision”.

I see a glaring blunder in the report – it weakens India’s position on Kashmir by repeatedly referring to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) as Pakistan-administered Kashmir (PaK).

It may be recalled that soon after the division of India, newly formed Pakistan intruded into Kashmir and illegally occupied a large stretch of area - known as Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK). PoK belongs to the state of Jammu and Kashmir and as per the Instrument of Succession it is very much a part of India. The 1994 resolution of the Indian Parliament acknowledges PoK as an integral part of India. However, the interlocutors failed to recognise these historic realities.The report also offers no solution to the ongoing insurgency in J&K. Instead, it suggests a dilution of anti-terrorism steps.

The report recommends a review of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) imposed in Kashmir. It suggests amending the Public Safety Act (PSA). Both the acts give sweeping powers to the armed forces for ensuring security and fighting the terrorists. In addition, the interlocutors’ report advocates decreasing the presence of security forces from the state.

They have gone on to suggest the recreating of the offices of "Wazir-e-Azam"(Prime Minister of the Province) and "Sadar-e-Riyasat (President of the Province)" in place of Chief Minister and Governor respectively, something which will be unacceptable to most people in India.

The report is, thus, filled with controversial fault lines. Besides, the interlocutors have abysmally failed to offer any solution to the vexed Kashmir issue - the very purpose for which it was set up.

Combating Maoist terror, the Odisha way!

The nation witnessed three hostage crises in quick succession -- two in Odisha and one in Chhattisgarh -- in less than two months.

In Odisha, the Maoists took hostage ruling BJD MLA Jina Hikaka for 33 days. Earlier, the left ultras held captive two Italian nationals – Claudio Colangelo and Paolo Bosusco -- for 11 days and 29 days, respectively. In neighbouring Chhattisgarh, the red ultras held hostage the collector of the newly-formed Sukma district Alex Paul Menon for 12 days.

Even as I write this piece, the Maoists abducted a police sub-inspector in Nuapada district of Odisha and later shot him dead.

Now, as the hostage drama is over, let me analyse how the two state governments dealt with the Maoists to secure the release of the hostages. For the record, Chhattisgarh government claims that it entered into an agreement with the Maoists to set up a high-powered committee to secure the release of the Sukma collector. The committee will review the cases of all prisoners locked in state jails, including the cases demanded by the Maoists.

Some concessions could have been made by the Chhattisgarh government, though Chief Minister Raman Singh denies any “trade off”. But that is in sharp contrast to Odisha government’s shameful capitulation before the Maoists to secure release of the BJD MLA and two Italian nationals. Bowing to the Maoists, Naveen Patnaik government agreed to free five left ultras to facilitate the release of two Italian nationals.

To obtain the release of the BJD MLA, Naveen government bent further before another Maoist group. The BJD government decided to release as many as 25 left rebels, which includes eight Maoists and 17 members of the Maoist-backed Chasi Mulia Adivasi Sangh after “significant negotiation (as a BJD leader puts it).”

The story didn’t end there, the ruling BJD MLA was “prosecuted” in a Kangaroo court (read ‘people’s court’), where the Maoists played the judge. Hikaka reportedly told the Kangaroo court that he would resign as MLA, snap all ties with the BJD and live as an ordinary citizen, after which the ‘court’ pronounced its order to free him.

The twin hostage crisis in Odisha took place exactly a year after Maoists abducted the then Malkangiri collector R Vineel Krishna. The state government had negotiated a swap deal with the Maoists to secure the release of the collector. As per the deal, Odisha government freed a dozen of hardcore Maoists, apart from agreeing to a 13-point charter of demands set by the left ultras.

Hostage crisis followed by a craven surrender by the state government has become an annual event in Odisha.

Odisha has emerged as a soft state when it comes to dealing with Maoists. So far Naveen Patnaik government has done nothing to rein in the left ultras and thereby making the state a sanctuary for the Maoists.

Italian hostage crisis: A staged drama!

It is learnt that Italian national Paolo Bosusco -- who was running a travel agency in Puri -- was a member of Italy based ultra-Left outfit Party of Committees to Support Resistance for Communism (CARC). It is further learnt that Bosusco had enjoyed the hospitality of the Maoists on several occasions. 

BJD on a tightrope

As Jina Hikaka’s possible resignation is doing the rounds, the ruling BJD is in a tight spot over its exposed nexus with the Maoists. It is revealed that the abduction of the Laximipur MLA was the result of a secret pact – done by BJD with Maoist-backed Chasi Mulia Adivasi Sangha (CMAS) during the election for Koraput Zila Parishad president in March -- gone wrong. Remember, it was the same CMAS, which was banned by Odisha government in 2006.

Hikaka along with Koraput MP Jayaram Pangi, Jeypore MLA Ravi Nanda, Koraput MLA Raghuram Podal, beside 14 Zilla Parishad members of Koraput district reportedly signed a tacit agreement with CMAS, whose elected members in Panchayats held the deciding vote. Reports say Maoist interlocutor Dandapani Mohanty played a key role in sealing the deal with the BJD.

The agreement was sent to Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik in the form of a letter. The letter clearly stated that the BJD agreed to a charter demands made by the CMAS. The demands include leniency against CMAS members locked in prisons, halting operation Green Hunt, action against “police excesses” in Naxal-hold areas of Koraput district among others. In return, the CMAS members voted for the BJD.

When the BJD government could not afford to keep its promises made to the CMAS, the Maoists abducted Hikaka to arm twist the government.

“Our elected members voted for the BJD in the Zilla Parishad presidential elections. After we made them win, the BJD government didn’t honour the agreement,” convenor of CMAS Nachika Linga had said. Linga, who features in the most wanted list of Odisha police faces as many as 60 cases ranging from murder to waging war against the state. He is currently on the run.

Maoists all set to enter electoral politics

It’s now official. Maoists, for the first time in India, want to debut in electoral politics. They want to field CMAS convenor Nachika Linga from Laxmipur Assembly constituency. Jina Hikaka’s possible resignation from the state Assembly could pave way for Linga to taste his electoral victory. If that happens, it will bring a million dollar trouble for Naveen Patnaik government.

Maoists– A divided a lot

The hostage drama in Odisha has brought out the sharp differences between the two Maoists group -- Andhra Odisha Border Special Zonal Committee (AOBSZC) and Odisha State Organising Committee (OSOC) – operating in the state.

The leaders of AOBSZC don’t see an eye to eye with the secretary of OSOC Sabyasachi Panda. Reports say AOBSZC leaders are hounding for Sabyasachi’s blood and could encounter him at any moment. It is learnt that Panda, who many say is nurturing a political ambition, is desperately looking for a way out for surrender.

But despite fissures among Maoists over their areas of authority and operation, their Red Corridor remains intact.

Dealing with hostage crisis

All the recent hostage crises show that the hostages choose to ignore the standard operating procedures and the Maoists took advantage to it.

I don’t see any justification in negotiating with those who are waging a war against the state. Its time the government makes it clear that there will be no negotiation with hostage takers. National Security Guards (NSG), those who are trained to deal with such situations, could be deployed to deal with hostage crisis.

The centre in tandem with the states should put in place a uniform national policy to deal with the hostage crisis the earliest. If needed, the state should be prepared to lose hostages. But the retaliatory strike should be swift and deadly.

It’s an all out war

Maoists are terrorists. This is non-negotiable. Even if the cries of jholawallah ilk get shriller.

The left ultras are waging a war against the nation. They ruthlessly snuff out the lives of countless men in uniform and civilians to satiate their narrow goal. They mock at the Constitution of India.

It is a fact that successive governments have failed to reach out to the Tribals. But, the red ultras’ claim that they are fighting for the cause --tribal rights is nothing but hogwash. The Maoists terrorize the innocent Tribals for whom they claim to fight for.

It is a matter of fact that the Maoists want no development to take place in the Tribal areas. Why else would they routinely blow up schools and hospitals?

The left ultras are unleashing havoc in as much as 160 districts of eight states. They are expanding their strongholds by cocking a snook at the elected governments.

Maoists seek to destroy our republic, the fabric of our democracy and our rule of law. They are a curse to the society and a scar on the face of humanity. The state must defeat them.

Naveen Patnaik for Prime Minister, really!

Saswat Panigrahi

Politics has an uncanny knack of springing surprises. Did you notice Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik's ‘Third Front’ blabber? In a tone matching new found wisdom, Patnaik went to the media dubbing the Congress-led UPA as ‘discredited’ and ‘corruption ridden’ and BJP-led NDA as ‘communally-tainted’ - thereby justifying the need for a fresh political formulation, maintaining equidistance from the two existing ones.

Patnaik’s statement came amidst the chorus against UPA’s pet project National Counter-Terrorism Centre (NCTC) as non-Congress CMs claimed that it was “a dangerous attempt to destroy the autonomy of the states".

Wild prediction for Naveen

But surprisingly a section of the media projected Patnaik as the new leader on the block and suggested that he could head an upcoming third political alliance. Some imaginations bordered on the wild, predicting Patnaik's pivotal role as the future kingmaker or possibly the king, post 2014 elections.

Well, I know one should not write off anyone in politics. But at the same time the prospect of Patnaik turning out to be the leader of the new front or he becoming the Prime Minister in the process looks outrageous to me at the moment. Having said that let me explain why?

Sample this - Odisha is not the only state to oppose NCTC. There are several states who have opposed any sort of encroachment on the federal structure of our polity. And the list includes BJP CMs too.

Who will go with Naveen?

Patnaik is said to be emerging as the leader of regional political parties on the mere basis of their opposition to NCTC and these include Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, Tamil-Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa and former Andhra Pradesh CM N Chandrababu Naidu. Except for Naidu, none of the CMs has said anything on the formation of a third front and the possible leader of such a front.

In an era of coalition politics, the role of regional parties, with the right kind of presence in Lok Sabha, will be important in the next elections. Well, if at all Naveen Patnaik is acceptable as the leader of the regional bloc; the question arises as to who will go with him?

Let us examine possible scenarios. First, the names of players who could make or break the third front - If Mayawati-led BSP joins the Naveen-led bloc, Mulayam Singh-led SP would be automatically excluded. In the fifteenth Lok Sabha, the SP has 22 MPs followed by 21 of BSP, whereas the BJD has 14 MPs. (Remember, Odisha has only 21 Lok Sabha constituencies). The numbers may increase or decrease. But in politics numbers decide the rules of the game.

Nitish Kumar’s JD(U) cannot think about going with Naveen Patnaik (despite both sharing good vibes), because the JD(U) needs BJP to run the government in Bihar and this equation is unlikely to change in 2014. If the possibility of JD(U) joining the Naveen camp does not materialise, then there are two other regional players in Bihar - Lalu Prasad Yadav’s RJD and Ram Vilas Paswan’s LJP - who could join the Naveen bloc. Lalu maintains his proximity with the Congress. For Prasad, who has been enduring ‘political unemployment’ for long, it won’t be a bad idea to jump on to the Naveen bandwagon. Ram Vilas Paswan, better known for party hopping, will be more than happy to join the Naveen bloc, hoping for a berth at the Centre.

AIADMK chief Jayalalithaa, an astute politician, is better known as a ‘NDA bird’. But under compulsions, if she decides to join the supposed Naveen-led third front , her political rival M Karunanidhi and DMK would be excluded and vice versa. In a way, BJD-DMK alliance will look good as both are neck deep in scams.

Now, also look at the possibility of some national players joining Naveen’s camp. Naveen Patnaik shares good relationship with the Communists. After Patnaik left the NDA, just before the 2009 elections, CPI(M) politburo member Sitaram Yechury and CPI general secretary AB Bardhan rushed to Bhubaneswar to ink a poll pact with the BJD. The Communists are giving outside support to the BJD government in Odisha despite opposing Patnaik’s mega-industry plank. The Communists would be more than comfortable in joining the Naveen bloc, but that is under ceteris paribus condition. The Left do not see eye to eye with Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress. So if Banarjee joins the Naveen bloc, Communists would be excluded.

Don’t forget that Mamata is a woman for all seasons and can join the block - even at the last minute – if it has the capacity to form government in New Delhi. There could be the possibility of another national party - Sharad Pawar-led NCP – of joining the Naveen-led front. BJD entered into an electoral alliance with the NCP in Odisha during 2009 Assembly elections. The NCP is in coalition with the Congress at the Centre and in Maharashtra. So for instant political benefit, the NCP cannot just risk its relationship with the Congress.

Among the rest of the regional pack, currently out of work TDP chief Chandrababu Naidu could support Naveen. Then there is Ajit Singh-led Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD), which Patnaik is likely to welcome to garner some support.

Naveen’s anti-communal bubble

Now comes the question - Will Naveen Patnaik’s ‘anti-communal’ plank cut ice with the people? Remember, the BJD made its political debut with the BJP. And together they ruled Odisha between 2000 and 2009. Even while blasting ‘communal’ BJP, sources indicate that Patnaik has been in constant touch with top saffron leaders for a possible realignment in Odisha and his re-entry to NDA.

Naveen as PM!

While I agree that every citizen with the right kind of support can become the Prime Minister of this country, let’s find out Naveen's chances (as a section of media insists) for the top job.

There is a famous saying – ‘A tree is known by its fruit; a man by his deeds’. Naveen is enjoying the chief ministership for the third term in a row. So what? JB Patnaik was CM of Odisha thrice. Lalu Prasad Yadav ruled Bihar for fifteen-long years. I don’t think winning election is really an index of popularity.

A product of pedigree politics, Naveen achieved political heights overnight. After his father Biju Patnaik’s demise in April 1997, when Janata Dal sought a candidate for Aska Lok Sabha constituency, it was party strategist Bijoy Mohapatra, who brought him from pen to politics. Patnaik retained his father’s citadel with a huge margin, thanks to the sympathy wave blowing in the state in favour of the legendry leader. To cash in on that wave, BJP’s strategist late Pramod Mahajan also met Biju loyalists. They were more than willing to merge the Odisha unit of the Janata Dal with the BJP. But it was Mahajan who proposed the idea to float a party in the name of Biju babu and its alliance with the BJP to bring down the Congress in Odisha, a suggestion the Janata leaders could not but accept.

The Biju Janata Dal (BJD) was formed in December 1997 and its alliance with the BJP was forged in February 1998. It is said that all formative support for the BJD was provided by the BJP. Again it was Mohapatra, who proposed Patnaik’s name to lead the party.

Odisha voted en bloc for the BJP-BJD coalition as the state was waiting for a chance to pack-up the ‘corrupt Congress’. Riding on an anti-Congress wave, BJP-BJD coalition swept the state elections and Naveen became the CM.

The first thing he did after becoming the CM was fire his mentor Bijoy Mohapatra - the man who could have been the king himself. Then Naveen withdrew another BJD founder Dilip Ray first from the union cabinet and then axed him from the party.

Friends of Naveen say that he suffers from paranoia. After over a decade-long coalition with the BJP in Odisha, he ditched the saffron party on the eve of the 2009 polls. The decision was ruthless and surprised many.

With a track record of deception and pretence, Patnaik will always be a suspect among his allies willing to form a third front.

Naveen’s image - Anything but clean

Now, let me touch upon the image Patnaik has. He was once credited with a clean image. But his squeaky clean image was blown to pieces once the mining scam broke. As the Pandora's Box opened, it became evident as to how his government had allowed mineral smugglers to plunder Odisha to the tune of Rs 3 lakh crores, giving birth to the biggest scam in independent India’s history. Soon more skeletons tumbled out of the closet.

It was Naveen’s BJD government which illegally allotted as much as 6,000 acre of three-crop agricultural land - including 1,300 acre belonging to Lord Jagannath Temple - for the proposed dubious Vedanta university project in Puri-Konark marine drive. Odisha Lokpal indicted the Patnaik government for illegal land allotment. The biggest land grab scam in independent India was waiting to happen in the state. Thanks to Orissa High Court, the project was shelved. Then Vedanta’s proposed bauxite mining project in Niyamgiri was cancelled, following NC Saxena report. The report indicted the BJD government again.

The saga of corruption in Naveen Patnaik government does not end here. Apart from mining scam and the two Vedanta scams, the BJD government is involved in dal scam, coal scam and rural job scam - the list goes on.

Patnaik government is highly unpopular for its ‘mega industry’ plank. By allowing industries at the cost of livelihood of the people, the BJD government has made industries the beneficiary and the state a looser.

Odisha has not forgotten the Kalinganagar massacre of January 2006, where poor Tribals demanding compensation for their lost land received bullets in return.

From Kalinganagar to Kandhamal, Tribals are being squeezed out of their ancestral land. Patnaik is being branded as anti-famer, anti-poor and anti-tribal.

Recently the state witnessed a hooch tragedy, which claimed 40 lives ahead of the Panchayat polls. Those who died after consuming the toxic ‘election brand’ liquor were the poorest of the poor. But this did not affect the electoral performance of Patnaik’s BJD as the party swept the Panchayat polls, thanks to the poor opposition forces in Odisha.

Patnaik might have won few elections in a row, but I must say that as a CM he has totally failed to address the gap between Odisha’s potential and performance. The people of Odisha are now bored with his perennial ‘central apathy’ rhetoric.

As if Manmohan Singh isn’t enough, do we need another non-performing PM?

Post script: Patnaik is also opposed to the proposed amendment by the Centre of the Railway Protection Force (RPF) Act. He is again being projected as the one leading the attack against the Centre. It should be noted that Naveen’s opposition to RPF Act came days after Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi registered his opposition.

It seems unlikely that a man who could not learn the language of the state he rules will be acceptable by the heavily rooted Nitish Kumar, Jayalalithaa, Mamata Banerjee...

Appeared in my blog ‘The Right Way’ in Zeenews.com

http://zeenews.india.com/blog/66/blog732.html

Verdict Uttarakhand is full of surprises

Saswat Panigrahi

The seesaw battle in the hilly state of Uttarakhand ended in a photo finish. Finally, the Congress was narrowly ahead of BJP, but still failed to get a simple majority.

The Congress has won 32 seats and BJP won 31 out of the 70 Assembly constituencies. Three seats went in BSP’s kitty and others won 4.

In this case, the picture is still unclear who will form the next government in the state. At this point in time, it looks like government formation is within the grasp of the Congress. Out of the four independents, three are Congress rebels. If Congress manages to win over the independents, the party is still falling sort of one seat. In that case it has to take the support of BSP to stake claim to form the next government. In addition, Uttarakhad has the provision of nominating one MLA from the Anglo-Indian community by the party which forms the government.

But at least the picture is clear – Uttarkhand has voted for a hung Assembly.



This election has thrown up a number of surprises. The biggest surprises came from the BJP. Chief Minister BC Khanduri lost Kotdwar Assembly constituency to SS Negi of the Congress by 4,632 votes, thanks to the sabotage from within the party. Remember Exit polls conducted by five news channels projected Khanduri as the most popular Chief Minister in the poll-bound states. Doesn’t matter. Honest people always find it difficult in politics.

The election outcome has proved all Exit poll predictions wrong. A majority of the Exit polls had shown that Congress has an edge over BJP in Uttarakhand. Out of the five Exit polls, four had predicted that the Congress as the clear winner. Only one Exit poll projected the BJP as the winner. But not a single Exit poll turned out to be true.

But what went wrong for the BJP? Under General Khanduri’s leadership, Uttarakhand enacted two landmark anti-graft legislations – the Lokayukta Bill and the Right to Public Services legislation. Uttarkhand is the first state in the country to bring a strong and effective Lokayukta Bill. But the anti-graft legislations could not converted into desired number of votes to win the Assembly elections.


In this Assembly election, the BJP was not only fighting against Congress, but it was a “fight within” for the saffron party as well. It may look little difficult to decipher, in case of BJP, there was a tough fight between Khanduri’s anti-corruption agenda and Nishank’s corruption saga. And finally it was the Nishank’s corruption saga which was the winner.

It was Khanduri who had led the party to victory in the 2007 Assembly elections and was subsequently chosen as the Chief Minister. However, he was booted out after the party performed poorly in the 2009 general election. Marred with internal dissent, amid the growing ‘Remove Khanduri’ chorus, he quit taking responsibility for the poll debacle.

Ramesh Pokhariyal ‘Nishank’ was inducted as the Chief Minister. But Nishank’s tenure had pushed the saffron party to the wall amid allegations of a series of scams. A couple of months before the Assembly elections, the BJP central leadership replaced Khanduri as Chief Minister in a tearing hurry to salvage the party’s sagging image in the state.

Khanduri tried to clean up the mess done by his predecessor. After taking over as the Chief Minister for the second time, Khanduri had done enough for BJP to bring it back in a fighting mode. Thanks to Khanduri, the BJP managed to salvage its prestige by giving a tough fight to Congress. But that did not work to the hilt of winning the election.

It is the BJP which needs to be blamed for its own defeat. It was wrong to remove Khanduri as the Chief Minister in the first place. Second, it was a blunder to induct Nishank as Chief Minister. Third, it was too late to re-induct Khanduri. It was the dithering attitude of the BJP central leadership which proved to be a bane for the saffron party. The saffron party has to do a lot of atma chintan (introspection).

But why did Congress manage a water-thin edge over the BJP? Can the anti-corruption babble against Nishank regime be attributed for making Congress the single largest party? Don’t forget that as a matter of fact, as many as 70 scams from the ND Tiwari rule are still haunting the Congress. Or it is the internal squabbling in the state BJP which indirectly benefited the Congress?

-- Appeared in Zeenews.com

http://zeenews.india.com/state-elections-2012/uttarakhand/verdict-uttarakhand-is-full-of-surprises_762491.html

Will Khanduri prove poll pundits wrong?

Saswat Panigrahi

A majority of the exit polls conducted by various television news channels show that Congress has an edge over BJP in Uttarakhand. Out of the five exit polls, four have predicted that the BJP could win between 22 to 30 seats in the Uttarakhand Assembly elections. Only one exit poll projected the saffron party as the winner, predicting 39 seats for it.

If the result goes the majority way, it will be a huge setback for the saffron party.

But how was BJP placed in the last elections? Let’s flip through some quick electoral statistics.

Uttarakhand has 70 Assembly constituencies. The state has witnessed two Assembly elections so far. In the 2007 Assembly elections, the BJP won 36 seats, whereas its main opponent Congress managed to win 21, thanks to the ant-incumbency factor against the ND Tiwari-led Congress government. In the 2002 Assembly elections, BJP had won 19 seats and Congress 36. The BJP had lost power because of the anti-incumbency against Bhagat Singh Koshiyari-led interim government.

Uttarakhand has voted out incumbent governments in the two Assembly elections is has had so far.

But this time there was widespread speculation that General BC Khanduri would scrape through despite anti-incumbency. Many said it was a battle, not so tough for General Khanduri.

It was Khanduri who had led the party to victory in 2007 elections and was subsequently chosen as the Chief Minister. However, he was booted out after the party performed poorly in the 2009 general election (the BJP had lost all five Lok Sabha seats to Congress). Marred with internal dissent, amid the growing ‘Remove Khanduri’ chorus, he quit taking responsibility for the poll debacle. Ramesh Pokhariyal ‘Nishank’ was inducted as the Chief Minister. But Nishank’s tenure had pushed the saffron party to the wall amid allegations of a series of scams. A couple of months before the Assembly elections, the BJP central leadership replaced Khanduri as Chief Minister in a tearing hurry to salvage the party’s sagging image in the state.

Khanduri tried to clean up the mess done by his predecessor and put BJP back in a fighting mode. Within two months of taking over as the Chief Minister for the second time, he enacted two landmark anti-graft legislations – the Lokayukta Bill and the Right to Public Services legislation. The BJP tried to cash in on the “clean image” of Khanduri to sail through the Assembly elections.

With Khanduri back in the saddle, BJP made fight against corruption a major poll plank in this election. But the corruption from Nishank’s tenure was also haunting the BJP in the polls.

The reality was that in this Assembly election, the BJP was not only fighting against Congress, but it was a “fight within” as well.

There were two factors -- Khanduri’s anti-corruption agenda and Nishank’s corruption -- which had to decide BJP’s fate in Uttarakhand.

Congress’ anti-corruption babble against BJP won’t be much of a factor. As a matter of fact, as many as 70 scams from the ND Tiwari rule are still haunting the Congress.

So, will Khanduri’s anti-corruption agenda win over Nishank’s corruption saga? And if that happens, General Khanduri will certainly prove the poll pundits wrong. So wait for March 06 for the final verdict. And if it goes the other way it is the BJP which needs to be blamed.

-- Appeared in Zeenews.com

http://zeenews.india.com/state-elections-2012/uttarakhand/will-khanduri-prove-poll-pundits-wrong_762133.html