12-30-2006, 01:26 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Analyze this</b>
Link
The winners and losers of 2006.
29 December 2006: News quiz for 2006. Who's up, down, or plateaued out?
<b>Mamata Bannerjee: </b>Up. Twenty-five days ago when she began to fast against the Singur Tata small car project, everyone was smirking at her save the BJP. The West Bengal chief minister, Buddhadev Bhattacharya, was adamant about the project. He expected Mamata to give up after a week of protest. But he doesn't know the first thing about the lady. In matters of governance, she may appear backward. She is the opposite of style. And most Calcutta politicians think her a joke.
Well, she has turned the tables. Within a month, the CPI-M has lost its image as being pro-poor, pro-farmer. It is willing to side with industry and go to any length to protect its interests. Clearly, if the Tatas were so keen on West Bengal, they could have done their own scouting and land purchase, without getting the government in the middle. The Tatas, unfortunately, used the coercive force of government to get the project land. Mamata has just made that difficult. Is her victory anti-industry, anti-development? Not at all. You hit at food security when you seize large swathes of fertile, multi-crop agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. Reliance's land bank needs government investigation too. We cannot have a new zamindari system under cover of development or industrialization.
<b>Buddhadev Bhattacharya:</b> Down. He was always sophisticated. Now we know he is a smooth thug. CPI-M cadres persecuted the revolting farmers of Singur. Buddhadev misused the police force. He and the CPI-M hoped that NGOs and civil rights activists would somehow ignore the ground realities and support his government. Medha Patkar was initially two faced, not coming out openly against the CPI-M. But seeing the way the wind was blowing, she quickly got on to the bandwagon.
<b>Lucky for Medha</b>. Or else her credibility would have run out. She is not the winner though. It is Mamata. She is every bit deserving. But the opposition of Medha & Co tells that the CPI-M heavily miscalculated their support. They thought they could exact loyalty on the principle of, "My CPI-M, Right or Wrong." They couldn't. On Singur, the CPI-M has lost credibility. In West Bengal, it will take years for the party to repair the situation. In the country though, there is a break. The CPI-M will no longer be trusted by the farm sector.
<b>Manmohan Singh: Nowhere man.</b> We have really three PMs now. There is the super PM, Sonia Gandhi. There is an external affairs prime minister, Manmohan Singh. And there is a PM for home, Pranab Mukherjee. Examine this trend. On his own, without consultation, as one reader pointed out the other day, Manmohan Singh takes policy decisions which have either to be modified or revised/ remedied, and which in any case need extensive defense by the party, the government, in Parliament, outside. The PM's unilateralism has seriously embarrassed his own government.
In Havana, he made extraordinary concessions to General Parvez Musharraf. He virtually whitewashed Pakistani terrorism. Faced with uproar, Pranab Mukherjee, as his new foreign minister, had to bail him out. He sent tough messages to the Pakistanis. He ensured that the foreign secretary-level talks resulted in no setbacks for India. And we published that the army chief, General J.J.Singh (Commentary, "Glory hunter," 17 November 2006), had to seriously persuade the PM against a Siachen withdrawal.
The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement represents the worst escapade so far. The 18 July agreement came out of the blue, the result of American push-push. At every stage, the nuclear scientists and opposition had to employ all means against blundering government commitments. The PMO advertised the Henry Hyde Act as a major achievement, glossing over pernicious clauses relating to, among other things, no testing, no fuel commitments, fissile materials' cut-off requirements, no export of enrichment or reprocessing equipment or technologies. Once again, the nuclear scientists and opposition had to campaign against the deal.
The PM was too chicken to face Parliament. He preferred addressing the Japanese Diet which asked no questions. When he did return to Parliament, Pranab Mukherjee took the floor, received the flak for the PM, and virtually conceded that the Henry Hyde Act needed extensive re-tailoring. Was the PM somnolent as this choking legislation was passed? Did he lose sight of India's strategic interests in pursuit of nuclear energy? Can one be at the cost of the other? Manmohan Singh appears more and more distant from the political realties of India. It is Pranab Mukherjee who is filling this role within the country. Who is, therefore, better suited to lead the government?
<b>Sonia Gandhi: Plateaued out.</b> The lady is in decline, although TV polls will tell you differently. You would believe them if you would believe anything. Sonia is subject to the law of diminishing returns as anybody else. Her high point was the 2004 election victory. A victory comprising, yes, one hundred and forty-five Lok Sabha seats. That's our new definition of victory. Since 2004, her political record is patchy. She has brought no vision to the Central government. She is unable to enthuse her party any longer.
Conventional wisdom says she will lose Punjab and Uttaranchal. In this case, conventional wisdom may be right. She believes UP is lost. Which is why Congress leaders say she is insulating her son and herself from a crushing UP defeat. She may use the security threat against her to limit the campaign. On Singur, the Congress party followed the Trinamool Congress-BJP too late. Sonia remains pre-eminent in the Congress and in the UPA coalition. But she has been unable to make strategic changes in the coalition or plan its future. Sonia Gandhi is wedded to the status quo. The Congress has become a status quo party under her.
<b>L.K.Advani: Surprise performance.</b> As a carryover of last year, he was finding it hard to keep his feet anywhere. He lost the party presidency to Rajnath Singh. He became a self-admitted consultant to the BJP. But in the last Parliament session, he soared as the leader of the opposition. He spoke his mind to the PM against the nuke deal. He pinned down Pranab Mukherjee on negotiations with China and Pakistan. By the year-end, A.B.Vajpayee was supporting his PM candidature for 2009, even though Advani may not be the RSS candidate. End-2006 redefined Advani as a consummate parliamentarian fit to provide government leadership.
<b>Prakash Karat & Sitaram Yechury: Same boat as Buddhadev. Sinking.</b> Karat was tasked to provide new political direction to the CPI-M. He has failed. The CPI-M is going in all directions. Kerala is headed one way. West Bengal its opposite. The CPI-M central leadership, on the other hand, is going round in circles. Singur has damaged Karat and Yechury's credibility as well.
<b>George Fernandes: Down after Tehelka</b>. Jaya Jetly may ruin him.
<b>Laloo Prasad Yadav: </b>Looks good after acquittal in the disproportionate assets' case. <b>But he is finished in Bihar</b>. Smart people see through his so-called railway success. He probably doesn't understand how the railways have succeeded or been turned around.
<b>V.P.Singh: The spoiler has had a new lease of life</b>. But he is not getting to be the Congress's equal partner against Mulayam Singh Yadav in UP.
<b>Mulayam Singh Yadav: On a slippery slope.</b> He hopes some deft "minorityism" and Amitabh Bachchan will carry him through. He could be surprised. 2007 does not look good for him or Amar Singh.
<b>Mayawati: The BSP leaderene disappeared towards the year-end</b>. Her party did not officially contest the UP local bodies' elections which the BJP won to her dismay. To get upper caste votes, she seeks reservations for them. 2007 may be a good year for her election-wise. But the Supreme Court has also got the CBI chasing her on the Taj Corridor scandal. It's up and down for Mayawati.
<b>Sharad Pawar: Down.</b> More farmers have perhaps committed suicide under his watch as agriculture minister than any other. But Pawar is supremely unconcerned. He is busy getting apologies from abusive Australian cricketers and railroading Jagmohan Dalmiya out of the BCCI. It is mistaken to assume that just Laloo & Co are tainted in the Union cabinet. Pawar is a blot on this government. In some ways a bigger blot. But you won't catch anyone saying this in this cricket-obsessed country. A good start for 2007 would be to sack him from the cabinet for culpable homicide. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Link
The winners and losers of 2006.
29 December 2006: News quiz for 2006. Who's up, down, or plateaued out?
<b>Mamata Bannerjee: </b>Up. Twenty-five days ago when she began to fast against the Singur Tata small car project, everyone was smirking at her save the BJP. The West Bengal chief minister, Buddhadev Bhattacharya, was adamant about the project. He expected Mamata to give up after a week of protest. But he doesn't know the first thing about the lady. In matters of governance, she may appear backward. She is the opposite of style. And most Calcutta politicians think her a joke.
Well, she has turned the tables. Within a month, the CPI-M has lost its image as being pro-poor, pro-farmer. It is willing to side with industry and go to any length to protect its interests. Clearly, if the Tatas were so keen on West Bengal, they could have done their own scouting and land purchase, without getting the government in the middle. The Tatas, unfortunately, used the coercive force of government to get the project land. Mamata has just made that difficult. Is her victory anti-industry, anti-development? Not at all. You hit at food security when you seize large swathes of fertile, multi-crop agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes. Reliance's land bank needs government investigation too. We cannot have a new zamindari system under cover of development or industrialization.
<b>Buddhadev Bhattacharya:</b> Down. He was always sophisticated. Now we know he is a smooth thug. CPI-M cadres persecuted the revolting farmers of Singur. Buddhadev misused the police force. He and the CPI-M hoped that NGOs and civil rights activists would somehow ignore the ground realities and support his government. Medha Patkar was initially two faced, not coming out openly against the CPI-M. But seeing the way the wind was blowing, she quickly got on to the bandwagon.
<b>Lucky for Medha</b>. Or else her credibility would have run out. She is not the winner though. It is Mamata. She is every bit deserving. But the opposition of Medha & Co tells that the CPI-M heavily miscalculated their support. They thought they could exact loyalty on the principle of, "My CPI-M, Right or Wrong." They couldn't. On Singur, the CPI-M has lost credibility. In West Bengal, it will take years for the party to repair the situation. In the country though, there is a break. The CPI-M will no longer be trusted by the farm sector.
<b>Manmohan Singh: Nowhere man.</b> We have really three PMs now. There is the super PM, Sonia Gandhi. There is an external affairs prime minister, Manmohan Singh. And there is a PM for home, Pranab Mukherjee. Examine this trend. On his own, without consultation, as one reader pointed out the other day, Manmohan Singh takes policy decisions which have either to be modified or revised/ remedied, and which in any case need extensive defense by the party, the government, in Parliament, outside. The PM's unilateralism has seriously embarrassed his own government.
In Havana, he made extraordinary concessions to General Parvez Musharraf. He virtually whitewashed Pakistani terrorism. Faced with uproar, Pranab Mukherjee, as his new foreign minister, had to bail him out. He sent tough messages to the Pakistanis. He ensured that the foreign secretary-level talks resulted in no setbacks for India. And we published that the army chief, General J.J.Singh (Commentary, "Glory hunter," 17 November 2006), had to seriously persuade the PM against a Siachen withdrawal.
The Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement represents the worst escapade so far. The 18 July agreement came out of the blue, the result of American push-push. At every stage, the nuclear scientists and opposition had to employ all means against blundering government commitments. The PMO advertised the Henry Hyde Act as a major achievement, glossing over pernicious clauses relating to, among other things, no testing, no fuel commitments, fissile materials' cut-off requirements, no export of enrichment or reprocessing equipment or technologies. Once again, the nuclear scientists and opposition had to campaign against the deal.
The PM was too chicken to face Parliament. He preferred addressing the Japanese Diet which asked no questions. When he did return to Parliament, Pranab Mukherjee took the floor, received the flak for the PM, and virtually conceded that the Henry Hyde Act needed extensive re-tailoring. Was the PM somnolent as this choking legislation was passed? Did he lose sight of India's strategic interests in pursuit of nuclear energy? Can one be at the cost of the other? Manmohan Singh appears more and more distant from the political realties of India. It is Pranab Mukherjee who is filling this role within the country. Who is, therefore, better suited to lead the government?
<b>Sonia Gandhi: Plateaued out.</b> The lady is in decline, although TV polls will tell you differently. You would believe them if you would believe anything. Sonia is subject to the law of diminishing returns as anybody else. Her high point was the 2004 election victory. A victory comprising, yes, one hundred and forty-five Lok Sabha seats. That's our new definition of victory. Since 2004, her political record is patchy. She has brought no vision to the Central government. She is unable to enthuse her party any longer.
Conventional wisdom says she will lose Punjab and Uttaranchal. In this case, conventional wisdom may be right. She believes UP is lost. Which is why Congress leaders say she is insulating her son and herself from a crushing UP defeat. She may use the security threat against her to limit the campaign. On Singur, the Congress party followed the Trinamool Congress-BJP too late. Sonia remains pre-eminent in the Congress and in the UPA coalition. But she has been unable to make strategic changes in the coalition or plan its future. Sonia Gandhi is wedded to the status quo. The Congress has become a status quo party under her.
<b>L.K.Advani: Surprise performance.</b> As a carryover of last year, he was finding it hard to keep his feet anywhere. He lost the party presidency to Rajnath Singh. He became a self-admitted consultant to the BJP. But in the last Parliament session, he soared as the leader of the opposition. He spoke his mind to the PM against the nuke deal. He pinned down Pranab Mukherjee on negotiations with China and Pakistan. By the year-end, A.B.Vajpayee was supporting his PM candidature for 2009, even though Advani may not be the RSS candidate. End-2006 redefined Advani as a consummate parliamentarian fit to provide government leadership.
<b>Prakash Karat & Sitaram Yechury: Same boat as Buddhadev. Sinking.</b> Karat was tasked to provide new political direction to the CPI-M. He has failed. The CPI-M is going in all directions. Kerala is headed one way. West Bengal its opposite. The CPI-M central leadership, on the other hand, is going round in circles. Singur has damaged Karat and Yechury's credibility as well.
<b>George Fernandes: Down after Tehelka</b>. Jaya Jetly may ruin him.
<b>Laloo Prasad Yadav: </b>Looks good after acquittal in the disproportionate assets' case. <b>But he is finished in Bihar</b>. Smart people see through his so-called railway success. He probably doesn't understand how the railways have succeeded or been turned around.
<b>V.P.Singh: The spoiler has had a new lease of life</b>. But he is not getting to be the Congress's equal partner against Mulayam Singh Yadav in UP.
<b>Mulayam Singh Yadav: On a slippery slope.</b> He hopes some deft "minorityism" and Amitabh Bachchan will carry him through. He could be surprised. 2007 does not look good for him or Amar Singh.
<b>Mayawati: The BSP leaderene disappeared towards the year-end</b>. Her party did not officially contest the UP local bodies' elections which the BJP won to her dismay. To get upper caste votes, she seeks reservations for them. 2007 may be a good year for her election-wise. But the Supreme Court has also got the CBI chasing her on the Taj Corridor scandal. It's up and down for Mayawati.
<b>Sharad Pawar: Down.</b> More farmers have perhaps committed suicide under his watch as agriculture minister than any other. But Pawar is supremely unconcerned. He is busy getting apologies from abusive Australian cricketers and railroading Jagmohan Dalmiya out of the BCCI. It is mistaken to assume that just Laloo & Co are tainted in the Union cabinet. Pawar is a blot on this government. In some ways a bigger blot. But you won't catch anyone saying this in this cricket-obsessed country. A good start for 2007 would be to sack him from the cabinet for culpable homicide. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->