Open Letter to Prof Parnal Chirmuley

This open letter is in response to the opinion voiced by Prof Chirmuley in this article. 

(The words in blue are from the original article with those in black, response to them)

Dear Mr Parnal Chirmuley,

You are the Associate Professor, Centre of German Studies, School of Language, Literature, and Culture Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University. By this very designation, you are supposed to be moulding young, impressionable minds about what's right and wrong. However, having read through your entire opinion piece, I find myself, as a tax payer, ashamed that my tax money goes to pay salaries of the likes of you as well as subsidise the education of the students whose lives you obviously are spoiling. This open letter is therefore aimed at highlighting the dangers of your thought process, not for you, of course, not for me, never, but for something I hold dearly and close to my heart (and wish you too did). My motherland, Bharat Mata (There, I just got labelled as a Sanghi bhakt, didn't I? Never mind. Am happy to be called so).

Here is yet another ‘half baked’ piece by an academic you might be tempted to call an anti-national, simply on account of institutional affiliation. This is how Arnab Goswami described the entire spectrum of serious, sober, well informed, nuanced, if anguished engagement by the academia with the present moment of crisis unfolding at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, where student leaders are being arrested, picked up for interrogation, intimidated, as though they were dangerous criminals, because a few ‘anti-national’ slogans were heard on the campus.

If you felt what was happening in the institution you represent was wrong, what have you done about it, Sir? If Arnab Goswami (or any one else, for that matter) described the entire sequence of events which unfolded in the JNU as anti-national and amounting to sedition, I don't see anything wrong in it. What exactly is a “few 'anti-national' slogans”? Like “Down Down, India” and run away? Or softly whispering “India is to be broken into pieces”? By not reacting and opposing it, are you also not party to the act? Did you bother to inform concerned authorities to take requisite action against those “few” when it happened? Collusion to illegal acts is also illegal (that, sir, is the law, not my opinion, by the way). Let me also enlighten you, sir, since you seem to be blissfully aware that the few slogans included “breaking India into pieces, Pakistan Zindabad and Azaadi for Kashmir”, all of which are seditious, and that's putting it mildly.

We are all used to media trials now. Those of us watching things from the ‘inside’, as it were, are watching the disturbing repercussions and consequences of this trial. The social media are awash with calls baying for the blood of innocent students, calling for a shutdown of the country’s most prestigious university, ranked as the best by the State’s own ranking mechanisms. Many are given to an outright dismissal of the news media, but most recognise its vital importance in sustaining a democracy. That is also why there is great alarm at journalism that is not only irresponsible, but an instance of criminal intimidation, using hate speech to incite violence against those who voice their opinions and stand by a progressive politics.

When you say you are used to media trials, you seem to forget that our own beloved (oops my own beloved) Prime Minister has been the biggest victim of media vilification. There was not one single day when 2002 did not flash on my TV screen on at least one of the news channels as if 2002 riots was the only event that happened in India since Independence (and by the way, including Times Now too). Where were you then? Where were the calls for “sustaining democracy”? Why didn't you react against this “criminal intimidation” as you love to call it? While the Congress and other parties hostile to BJP were using hate speech to incite hated, why did you remain silent? That Mr Modi not only lived through it, but also went on to prove to each of those hostile news channels how wrong they were and how people of India knew better is a different story. 282 seats for the BJP itself and 300+ seats for the NDA was as decisive as it could possibly be, in the opinion of voters. Obviously, as a secular JNU professor, this has been the biggest upsetting factor for you. You hoped against hope till May 2014 that opinion polls were wrong and Congress-led UPA would somehow be back in power. Your upset at it not happening is resulting in this outpouring.

Arnab Goswami of Times Now is on the front lines of this parallel war against nuanced thought, against honesty, against intellectual freedom, and against truth. Over the past week since ‘news broke’ (yes, the truth is shattered to pieces when presented by Him), he has used a range of careful strategies to achieve the end of the demonization of public education. It is easy to see these if you put aside the sick froth of vitriol.

First, he asks the wrong questions, deliberately, to mislead the audience. Here is an example: ‘Why did Kanhaiya not try to stop those slogans???’. Absolutely everyone in their right mind knows that the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU) did not organize this program, that Kanhaiya Kumar and other JNUSU members went there in their capacity as elected representatives to alleviate the confrontational situation created by the right wing Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP). Kanhaiya’s speech is ample testimony to this fact. Arnab does not ask why the law on sedition (124[A]) is inapplicable, and what can be done to stem this travesty of justice.

Who gave you the absolute right to determine what's right and wrong kind of questions? You would prefer that Mr Goswami question why JNU was being attacked for expressing their opinions when those opinions were merely supporting a convicted (and executed) criminal? Of course, you would. Since when did nationalism mean anything to the Left leaning people anyway? If my memory serves me right, the Left parties were in the forefront supporting China against India in 1962 war. Maybe, that is your concept of “free speech”, but, am sorry, sir, it is not mine.

What exactly do you mean by “everyone in their right mind”? Again your opinion of right? If Kanhaiya Kumar went to alleviate the situation created (as you put it, by the “right wing ABVP”, why didn't he utter one word against the open anti-national speeches that were on display in the campus? Am sure you too would have been aware of the event being planned and could have asked you what your contribution was to try and prevent the open adulation of an anti-national terror perpetrator but I will give you the benefit of doubt here, sir.

He uses specific terms repeatedly, ad nauseam: ‘Anti-national’, ‘secessionist’, ‘unpatriotic’ are urgent favourites. In fact, exactly a year ago, when he did the same to civil rights activists protesting the harassment of Priya Pillai of Greenpeace, there was an open letter signed by prominent feminists, lawyers, and civil liberties activists pointing out that this was hate speech, that this was incitement to violence against those who expressed their views. They rightly pointed out that in the current political atmosphere, such figures are subjected to hate crimes, and are even killed. What he does is not to simply wipe out the possibility of nuance in a discussion, but rather use every weapon – be it language, gesture, or decibel – to brand people in order to feed into the imaginations of fear and anger among the viewers. It is always people from minority communities, civil rights activists, prominent voices from women’s and people’s movements, everyone from the Left that are subject to this vitriol. He has never levelled these accusations against the organization whose very emblem (the Khaki Shorts) is said to be an import from Italian fascism. Interesting, isn’t it?

Since you quote Ms Priya Pillai of Greenpeace as an example, let me remind you, sir, that Ms Pillai was intent on going to a foreign nation in an attempt to defame my country. If Ms Pillai had protested in India itself, I would have supported her right to freedom of speech and expression. However, when the aim is becomes only to paint my nation black outside the country, especially when India has been desperately looking for foreign investments to boost development, and the move is likely to affect the investment climate, I would definitely term it as anti-national. Greenpeace, incidentally, was also under the government scanner for illegal foreign funding and not following the laws of the land. That, even if not related, does tend to indicate the slant of the organisation and its members. When you talk about minority communities, you conveniently chose to ignore the fact that in no other nation is the minority community safer than in India. I would request you to refute it with facts, if you can, and I will accept it gracefully. About the Left activists, I have already told you about their stand vis-a-vis nationalism. Equating khakhi shorts with Italian (deliberate?) fascism is laughable and I will deign to comment on something you typed out merely out of frustration.

He uses coercion and intimidation through the means of right wing members on his panel. On Monday night, the only time He was quiet on the show was when Sambit Patra of the BJP shouted at Shabnam Lone, Saba Naqvi, and Waris Pathan and challenged the three to chant Bharat Mata Ki Jai after him. This is extremely dangerous intimidation. And he does this on absolutely every show.

Asking Indians to chant “Bharat Mata ki Jai” is intimidation? Seriously, sir? I don't even have feel the need to comment here! Unless of course, Shabnam Lone, Saba Naqvi and Waris Pathan are not Indians.... unless.....

One other strategy is suggestion: he ‘suggests’ through the apparently casual use of words such as ‘infiltrator’ as he did on the same show, that JNU is not a university, but a space that harbours ‘infiltrators’ from across the border. A baseless, yet devastating allegation. With serious consequences.

As fresh inputs from IB reveal, there have been infiltrators from across the border. One of your dear students, Umar Khalid, has also been identified as having visited Pakistan and having links with the dreaded terror organisation Jaish-e-Mohammed. The IB has also indicated that outsiders frequent the hostels of the JNU and even stay there for lengths, unauthorised. If I were in a position of responsibility in any such university, I would either be angry or upset. You seem upset at having been caught out.

What are these consequences, and are they limited to a few students? No. We have seen that the Delhi Police has begun picking up young people for ‘looking like JNU students’. A woman journalist covering the court proceedings at Patiala House was asked if she is a JNU student, and was told that they would ‘break her phone, and break her bones’. Faculty members present there with legal representation for Kanhaiya Kumar, both women and men, were roughed up and beaten by men dressed as lawyers. A CPI activist was brutally beaten up by BJP MLA O. P. Sharma who was present there.

If indeed men “dressed as lawyers” were present in court, that is illegal and I would whole-heartedly support you in opposing their actions. However, the version I heard was completely different, about how Kanhaiya wanted to incite violence even in the court premises and how the lawyers opposed it in their own way. Well, you are entitled to your opinion on this.

But between Monday and Tuesday, the tide has turned. A journalist was beaten right inside the courtroom, with the police watching. On Tuesday, journalists marched together in protest against the violence unleashed against the Fourth Estate. Lawyers came forth and categorically condemned the condemnable.

We must remind ourselves that journalists are also amongst the bravest, ferreting out the truth at great risk to themselves, from the State, from warlords, from disease, bearing a deep commitment to the voice of the oppressed and the dispossessed. Why go as far as Ken Saro-Wiwa - there are examples closer home. Take note, nationalist Arnab. In 1886-7, Dwarkanath Ganguly set newspapers alight with his expose on the ‘Slave Trade in Assam’ that laid bare the indentured ‘coolie’ system in Assam, that continued even after the abolition of slavery in British dominions. Ganguly went to great lengths, undertook arduous journeys, took great risks to expose this dark history. So much so that this was taken up as an important issue in the nationalist movement. He showed integrity and great bravery, lauded in the history of journalism, that resulted in real change for oppressed people. Arnab is a traitor to that tradition.

The tide has indeed turned with journalists coming on to the streets, except that something similar was prominent by its absence when one of their own was brutally killed just a few days ago. Oh, that happened under a secular government in Uttar Pradesh. My bad, sir. This support against the Modi government is obviously justified. I fully endorse your statement that “journalists are the bravest, ferreting out truth....”. Unfortunately, we no longer have journalists in India. Instead, barring a few, they all have been replaced by news-traders (easier and more apt term would be Presstitutes) who sell their soul to the highest bidder. News as produced by them and shown ad-nausea on channels and printed in newspapers are no longer fit to be called news. Instead, they have degenerated to opinions, something akin to what you have published today, sir. Reporting no longer is honourable and I don't hold a torch for Arnab either. However, you chose to tarnish just one individual here. Just because he refused to subscribe to your opinions on what reality is/was? That's being judgemental, sir.

This needs saying: not only is this form of journalism doing a disservice to society in spreading lies and misinformation, it is taking on the role of fascist propaganda machines that single out individuals for intimidation, coercion, and at times elimination. Do not forget Narendra Dabholkar, M. M. Kalburgi, Govind Pansare. As I write this, we have information that faces of students have appeared on posters put up in parts of this city, urging the public to lynch them. In doing what Arnab does, he is guilty of incitement to violence against an entire academic community, the very foundation of a young nation. Who, I might ask, is anti-national in this case? And a society that targets its young minds is teetering on the brink of fascism. For this, I will lay the blame at the feet of the likes of Arnab Goswami.

Finally, we both seem to have got something to agree upon. Journalism is now restricted to spreading misinformation. I too said the same in the last paragraph. If faces of students have appeared on posters, it is condemnable but why blame Arnab for the same? When face of Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon were put up prominently in your “esteemed” University campus, did you protest against it? Instead of blaming Arnab, thank him for opening eyes of those students who have still not been brainwashed into supporting terror perpertators in the name of free speech. Thank him for preventing more Afzals and Yakubs being born. By the way, Malda too happened to be in India and your knights in shining armour made their reporting prominent by lack of it. Outrage? No, Malda was secular violence!

I am sure no parent sends their children to learn to be anti-national. And, as a professor there, you would be the one accountable, if one of the alumni was found indulging in seditious activities. Would you be able to bring yourself face to face with his/her parents when they question your involvement in preventing such occurrences? I, sir, would lay the blame at the feet of everyone, every professor, every teacher and every citizen, who did not raise his voice against what happened in JNU (and now in Jadavpur University too). If not directly by act of commission, you are indirectly responsible for it by the very act of omission. Think over it.

Your sincerely,

One concerned Indian

JNU, Headley and Siachen - Symbols of sickularism

      Three major news dominated 11 Feb 2016. All unrelated to each other directly, but indirectly, they were all linked. The day started off with JNU trending on twitter for reasons which were unsavoury, to put it lightly. Next came the Headley disposition where he declared that Ishrat Jahan was indeed a suicide Fidayeen, thus laying to rest loads of conspiracy theories that had been floating around till date. Last, and by no means the least, was the sad demise of Lance Naik Hanumanttappa who had miraculously survived six days under snow and ice in Siachen and been recovered alive, yet finally gave up his life in R&R hospital in New Delhi, despite the best efforts of doctors. These three news were unrelated because, independently, there had nothing to do with each other. Each happened hundreds of miles from each other and did not influence the other in any way. So where was the relationship? The link was in the way so-called Liberals looked at how things should happen in India. 

JNU - Hotbed of Communism

         Jawaharlal Nehru University, better known as JNU, was established in 1969 by an act of Parliament and was named after India's first PM, Mr Jawaharlal Nehru. The University has ten schools, each of which have several centres and four independent special centres. However, it has grown over the years to become the hotbed for communist and even Naxalite (liberally called as left of centre) thinking. Anything even remotely Right was frowned upon. This is in part due to the strong prevalence of Left-Centric student politics and the existence of a written constitution for the university to which noted Communist Party leader Prakash Karat contributed exhaustively during his education at JNU. Stories are abound about how studies has been the last resort here and everything from sex rackets to home grown naxalism pandered to, within the University, with connivance of the governments in power (which barring exceptions), has always been the right-hating Indian National Congress. Much as the Left wing parties (CPI, CPIM etc) would love to describe themselves as opposed to the Congress, they thrived upon its patronage and grew in strength merely because the INC preferred to hobnob with the Left parties rather than being even remotely linked with the (as they loved to call it) "communal" BJP. This could also have to do with the basic premise that the Left could never cause demise of the Congress the way BJP was capable of doing, 2014 proving this point way beyond doubt. 

        It therefore did not cause much surprise when students of the JNU decided to organise a protest against the execution of Afzal Guru, despite the fact that his case was 'waging war against the state', a crime which automatically gets awarded the death penalty or that he had been convicted by the highest court in the country. Fighting against a perceived wrong doing is always acceptable and has to be encouraged. However, in case of Afzal Guru, all legal methods had been exhausted before the terror perpetrator was hanged for his crime. The case had been examined at length and it was established beyond doubt that Afzal had indeed committed a crime which made him fit to be labelled a traitor. Despite this, support for the terrorist from a section of students within the JNU happened. Not only did these students plan to organise a cultural evening in support of Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon, they also shouted anti-India slogans against India's “occupation” of Kashmir. 

If this is not sedition, then legal documents certainly need to be amended! JNU in fact, was only following on the footsteps of other colleges and universities in India where seditious activity had been happening but political support from parties keen only on vote-bank politics ensured they were given other hues be it caste or religion. Case in point was the recent regrettable suicide of Rohith Vermula in Hyderabad. The student was an ardent supporter of Yakub Memon who too had been convicted and hanged by the Supreme Court. It finally came to the fore when the Delhi government acted on complaint of the ABVP and pressed anti-national and sedition charges while arresting the president of the JNU students union. While this should have been cheered by those interested in India's welfare and security, it was actually treated as high-handedness of the cops by #Presstitutes and opposition parties who were quick to accuse the Modi government of attempting to stifle freedom of expression.

           Freedom of expression is certainly desirable but it cannot be a one way street nor can it be selectively applied. If you are not permitted to question Mohammed or Allah and any comment even questioning the claims of Islam as supreme gets treated as blasphemy, FOE questions are never raised by these same set of people. However, FOE is cited as reasons for students to be permitted to openly side by terror perpetrators. Hatred for BJP led by Modi has blossomed into hatred for anything remotely Indian and especially Hindu.

Ishrat Jahan and David Headley

           Next was the deposition of David Headley, the Pakistani turned American who was in US prison for terror activities. Much hue and cry had been made over the way a “innocent” girl Ishrat Jahaan was killed in cold blood by the Gujarat cops and attempts were made to link this to Modi and Amit Shah to tarnish their images ahead of the 2014 general elections. Modi's growing clout and the sway he managed to bring for the BJP over voters was the overpowering reason why his wings had to be clipped. And if a dead girl killed because she had terror links could be used, so be it. Here too, everyone from journos (#Presstitutes is a much easier word to use), Congress leaders, Communists, AAP leaders, in fact everyone who was a someone and not linked to BJP was sympathetic towards the killed girl. Everyone, of course, conveniently chose to ignore than the intelligence inputs towards her links were provided straight from the Home Ministry headed by P Chidambaram of the UPA itself. She was even adopted as Bihar-ki-beti by JDU leader and CM Nitish Kumar as he eyed 'secular' votes in the LS elections. He had previously snapped ties with the BJP even though Bihar had been progressing wonderfully well under the party combine, again for the same reason. NCP took it a step ahead, starting an ambulance service in her name.

          The hue and cry over Ishrat Jahaan however could not prevent Modi from climbing the highest steps in Indian democracy and taking over as PM in May 2014. Within 18 months, the Indian courts were granted permission by the US authorities to interrogate Headley, albeit with lots of riders and conditions including an unconditional no-arrest clause, thus making him almost a prosecution approver from accused. His testimony shook the very foundations of the story that seculars had managed to concoct when he admitted openly in camera that Ishrat Jahaan had been indeed a terrorist and that she had been recruited to carry out terror strikes on extremely valuable assets (read Modi himself). With wind swept out of their sails, everyone was found floundering for a way out of their self created secular mess. While some continued to hold on to their beliefs and instead ridiculed the Indian government for believing a terror perpetrator over a poor innocent girl, others tried to sideline the entire issue and instead questioned the manner of her death, supposedly a fake encounter instead of being killed while trying to escape. The tweets of seculars below would have been amusing if they did not deal with something so serious as anti-national activities and its support.

Bhakts now swallowing Headley as gospel are upholding cops right to kill with impunity on street! May the Great Humanist save India.

— Sagarika Ghose (@sagarikaghose) February 11, 2016

So anyone who doesn't toe the ruling party's line is anti-national, terrorist, jihadi, naxalite and deserves sedition charges? Tanashahi!

— Sagarika Ghose (@sagarikaghose) February 12, 2016

Lawyer for Ishrat Jahan family Vrinda Grover argues that David Headley comments on Ishrat based on "double hearsay" & have "no legal value'

— barkha dutt (@BDUTT) February 11, 2016

The Ishrat Jehan case now seems more about politics than principle. On both sides of the trenches.

— barkha dutt (@BDUTT) July 3, 2013

Uff Doval fanboys, so you believe #Headley over CBI, Justice Tamang, supreme court judges, gujarat cops who stuck their neck out. Got it

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) February 11, 2016

And this is the brilliant line of questioning by our Padmashri Ujjwal Nikam which 'proves' ishrat a terrorist. pic.twitter.com/mNexuteU5P

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) February 11, 2016

And this is the brilliant line of questioning by our Padmashri Ujjwal Nikam which 'proves' ishrat a terrorist. pic.twitter.com/mNexuteU5P

— Rana Ayyub (@RanaAyyub) February 11, 2016

Is Ishrat a 'terrorist' an 'inconvenient truth' and should we be trusting Headley more than CBI/MHA/'witnesses'? https://t.co/qXFOmne5A8

— Rajdeep Sardesai (@sardesairajdeep) February 11, 2016

Siachen - World's highest battlefield

              Amidst all this secular v/s communal debate, the Army has always continued to ensure that the nation remains safe from external threats. While many a slur has been raised and much muck has been thrown upon the Armed Forces for doing their best to preserve the Union of India, including talks of repealing of the much maligned AFSPA (even though it has the SC's explicit approval), an avalanche cut short the life of ten unfortunate Army jawans whose only contribution to their own deaths was just being present there. Siachen has always been a disputed territory and India has held the upper hand by controlling the glacier and thus retaining the advantage of height while facing “enemy” Pakistan. Many have vociferously argued on how the highest battlefield, that has claimed more lives due to weather, than due to enemy action, should be demilitarised and they have wanted that India and Pakistan shift to lower locations and maintain the Siachen as free from soldering activities. They cited that this would be treated as Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) which would eventually result in their version of Utopia, India and Pakistan living as bhai-bhai. What they failed to state was how moving down was exactly what Pakistan desired as that would ensure Pakistan easy access to those same heights and nothing would prevent them from occupying them in violation of all treaties inked. Kargil taught us a very painful lesson on how Pakistan can't be trusted beyond a limit since the nation thrives on anti-India sentiment and anyone seen less sympathetic to that cause is treated as an infidel. So, while demilitarising Siachen might seem to be an extremely wonderful option both for the government and especially for the Indian Armed forces, it actually is not one at all.  

           

Summing up

               As stated above, none of these incidents are individually linked. But reading between the lines, just goes on to prove how much the anti-India sentiment has become an industry, a hotbed for anyone who just has to prove his seditious credentials, to be easily funded by forces looking to destroy the very fabric of Indian society, more so since this government has taken over. It could be because this government has cracked down on corruption and black money like no other. It could be because access to government offices is no longer an option. It could be because this government believes in governance, a term alien till now. It could also be because this government does not encourage unscrupulous to flourish under its watch. What the heck, it could just be all of them combined. Whatever be the case, if true nationalists do not take up cudgels now and fight, this nation would become mere history, to be read up in books, and in a not too short while from now.   

This one image by Satish Acharya sums up aptly the entire issue

Anti-Modi or plain Anti-National

Godhra and aftermath.

Flashback to 27 Feb 2002. Godhra. When communal riots broke out over burning of a compartment containing Karsevaks returning from Ayodhya, by anti-social elements of a particular community. The Modi government in power swung into an action hitherto unseen from political classes and quelled them within barely 48 hours. Other parties hoping to cash in politically on the riots and re-establish themselves were left disappointed. Attempts to discredit started almost immediately with BJP in power both in centre and state. Statements of reminding of ‘Raj Dharma’ by the then PM, Mr Vajpayee to CM was reported widely even though there was is no clear evidence to that effect. Number of deaths of the Muslim community too were over-reported disproportinately. Hundreds became thousands and even ten-thousands and 2002 became symbol of Hindu violence against peaceful Muslims for many, both within and outside the country. Journalists could not have enough as report after report threatened to almost destabilise the state and nation. This was despite riots being controlled in a record time and police being allowed almost a free hand to suppress rioters, regardless of political or religious affiliation.

Role of Sanjiv Bhatt.

            Sanjiv Bhatt, IPS became the hero of those seeking to expose Modi for his actions / inactions during the 2002 riots as he willingly volunteered damning evidence. His statement of being present in a meeting where the CM asked police to “go slow” on rioteers and allow them to vent their anger came as a shot in the arm. His word was treated as gospel truth while those of others who stated with equal conviction that Mr Bhatt was never present in any meeting and therefore could not have had access to any of Modi’s statements was treated with the contempt they felt it deserved. They were called using the choiciest epithets. After all, could anyone who willingly supported Modi’s actions be anything but biased?

Two Commissions of enquiry – varied outcomes.

            In the meanwhile, UPA came to power and Lalu Yadav became Railway Minister. He set up an inquiry committee headed by Justice UC Banerjee to look into the train fire. Mr Justice Banerjee’s report stated that the compartment was never set on fire and instead happened to self combust as a result of either combustible material being carried by the Karsevaks catching fire automatically or accidently. This report was tomtommed by the seculars who rubbished the theory of the bogie being burnt. That the Gujarat government had set up the Justice Nanavati Commission on 6 Mar 2002 to probe the riots including the train fire and that the Gujarat police had come to the conclusion of arson did not bother them and instead, treated it as attempts of a hateful leader to whitewash own sins. The findings of Justice Banerjee were challenged in Gujarat HC by Mr Neelkanth Bhatia one of the injured. The HC not only quashed the commission findings but also state unequivocally that the report was not to be tabled in Parliament. 

Teesta Setalvad.

Even as Sanjiv Bhatt was running amok, the opposition got a shot in the arm in form of Ms Teesta Setalvad, a self styled supporter of the riot victims. She stepped forward to challenge the clean chit which Modi had supposedly given himself and set up an NGO to look after rights of riots affected, even though it finally meant only those from the Muslim community. Media again played its role in raising her to super-woman status and her fight compared to David v/s Goliath. Within a few months, truth started trickling out about how Teesta had been misappropriating funds accumulated and spending them on herself, including business class air travels and such personal stuff like sanitary pads, all of which were reflected as business expenditure. Teesta now has her back to the wall as cases of cheating and misappropriation reaches its natural conclusion with only SC standing between her and prison. That she was granted a last minute reprieve against implementation of a NBW of Guj HC by an unusual urgent telephonic hearing by SC also speaks volumes of the hold she has.

Cut to 2014, with Sonia Gandhi led-UPA II reeling under charges of corruption and the Modi-led BJP making a strong pitch for winning general elections. The desperation seen on the faces of journalists was extremely evident and report after report, tweet after tweet revealed it for the world to see. They warned of how the very concept of India would be destroyed if Modi came to power. 2002 was quoted in plenty to show how minorities would suffer greatly as a result of Congress being voted out. Corruption, which had been on the front pages for a long time suddenly was delegated to the backburner. The press even highlighted with extreme glee the differences of opinions among the BJP of making Mr Modi the Prime Ministerial candidate for the 2014 elections including so-called opposition from Advani, Joshi and Sushma to buttress their case.

Having failed miserably to even make a dent in Gujarat BJP prospects despite all out efforts, this attempt was seen as a last ditch effort to ensure that they succeed in at least restricting Mr Modi to Gujarat. The absence of even a whiff of corruption which would stick was excruciating news to these presstitues. 2014 elections was seen as a watershed in Indian politics as Mr Modi, who had, by then been elevated to PM candidate by the NDA, appeared like a Tsunami, flattening his opponents one by one. His election rallies created a buzz unseen for a long time with other leaders’ rallies appearing drab in contrast. Rahul Gandhi’s attempts to campaign provided more laughs than anything else and to be fair to him, he too contributed his bit in strengthening NDA’s campaign trail.

16 May 2014 saw the NDA romp home with a majority which even the most generous exit poll did not predict. Such was the impact of ‘TsuNamo’ that Congress was wiped out in most states and ended up with not even being eligible for Leader of Opposition status in the LS. Mr Modi, who was widely predicted immediately after election results were declared as someone might tackle domestic affairs but would fail miserably when it came to foreign affairs surprised one and all with his tactical move of inviting SAARC leaders for his swearing in ceremony. The grand affair was attended by all of them, including the Pak PM, and was agreed as an unqualified success, even amongst his detractors. 

His detractors however were not expected to remain silent especially since assembly elections which were held thereafter also established the credentials of BJP as the leading national party while the Congress got wiped out in almost all. Maharashtra, Chattisgarh and Rajasthan followed each other in quick succession with the BJP proving that the 2014 win was no flash in the pan. Delhi, which had seen a near crisis with the Congress withdrawing support for the AAP and the BJP not staking its claim, went for fresh elections thereafter. Media, which had been rendered quiet after the various BJP victories went into overdrive in an attempt to stop the Modi juggernaut. They adopted the axiom of “All is fair in love and war” and declared open war on the PM. Suddenly, a spate of attacks on churches got highlighted all around the country, in states that were bound for elections. If it was church attacks which helped AAP romp to victory, it was the Dadri incident which helped Lalu & Co in their quest for victory in Bihar. With everyone including Congress and even AAP pitched against Modi, defeat was more or less inevitable.

Defeat in the Bihar elections suddenly resulted in the opposition becoming resurgent. The Congress which had been licking its wounds after the mauling in 2014 elections seemed to have found its feet once more. Both houses of Parliament were stalled for reasons which were outside the domain of either house. Bills which would have ensured greater ease of governance were stalled merely to satisfy Madam’s desires. The media too played along as channels climbed over each other to prove how bad BJP leaders were. If it was Lalit Modi’s alleged links with Rajasthan CM initially, DDCA corruption was the next. AAP proved its credentials of throwing muck without evidence and media lapped and played and replayed every word. Not one reporter found it worthwhile to even question the allegations. Why would they when being anti-Modi was so lucrative. 526 crores certainly was well spent by Mr Kejriwal!

End of Part I