• Monday, January 20, 2020

Narendra Modi: India's saviour, or sectarian with blood on his hands?-theguardian

Discussion in 'Central & South Asia' started by somnath, Apr 19, 2014.

  1. somnath

    somnath FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    270
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Ratings:
    +0 / 325 / -4
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    The likely new prime minister of India is wildly popular among his supporters, and has a rags-to-riches backstory to warm the hearts of meritocrats, but others fear and distrust him
    Save a single exception – typically, an academic – every person of Indian descent known to me within a half-mile radius of my house wants Narendra Modi to be the next prime minister of India. Admittedly, this is not a large sample: it consists of a few shopkeepers who sell groceries and newspapers in my small part of north London. Nor is it a very balanced sample: like many small shopkeepers in Britain, they have their origins in the state of Gujarat and they are all, I think, Hindu by tradition if not observance. In other words, they share Modi's language, customs and religious identity and, like him, believe that entrepreneurship and hard work will deliver a better future.

    You might well ask, "If people such as these won't support Modi, who will?" But the striking thing is their certainty and enthusiasm. Not only are they convinced that Modi will win, they also believe his victory will re-energise the Indian economy, root out the corruption of politicians and public officials and clarify the country's purpose. I can't remember another politician inspiring such belief among the Indian diaspora; perhaps Mrs Gandhi did during India's triumph in the Bangladesh war, but it was never repeated – not by her or her son, Rajiv, and certainly not by Rajiv's son, Rahul. Rahul is the latest and perhaps last hope of a Nehru/Gandhi dynasty that has produced three prime ministers; very few people expect him to be the fourth. His leadership of the Congress party's campaign has been reluctant and inept and, if recent polls are to be believed, the number of Congress MPs will have shrunk to a record low when the final votes in India's general election are counted next month.

    A comparison of the likely loser and winner in the election should gladden the heart of anyone who believes in upward social mobility. Rahul's ancestry is a mixture of Kashmiri Brahmin, Parsi and Italian; his family has provided India with political leaders since the 1920s; he went to elite universities – Harvard, Cambridge; his mother, Sonia, pulls the strings in the party that appointed him to its hierarchy. Modi, by contrast, comes from a low-caste family in a small Gujarati town and left school to help his father run a tea stall at the local railway station, where he would greet every stopping train with a kettleful of tea, mixed in the Indian way, and call out "chai, chai, chai" as he ran along the platform touting custom. His command of English is poor (though improving), which means the power of his rhetoric is largely lost to a world audience beyond those who speak Hindi. He sounds fluent and forceful – much more so than Rahul, who, at 43, is 20 years younger.

    In a country divided by both class and caste, his is a remarkable story: the chaiwallah who rose to become his state's chief minister and eventually (if the predictions come true) the leader of a fifth of the world's population. Nonetheless, the egalitarian heart isn't gladdened. Modi, in the words of his not unsympathetic biographer, Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, is probably India's "most reviled political leader" – not widely reviled, otherwise he'd be dished by the voters, but deeply so among a particular class. Of course, religious minorities, such as India's 180 million Muslims, might reasonably fear him as a Hindu nationalist, but the loudest revulsion comes mainly from elsewhere, from the Anglophone intelligentsia who think the politics of religious identity will wreck India's fragile harmony as an avowedly secular state. Most of my friends in India come from this class, and who am I, as an outsider, to doubt that their apprehension is well grounded? Not many outsiders to Britain, after all, ever quite understood why Mrs Thatcher was so loathed by a minority. ("What's your problem? She's turned your country around, hasn't she?") But the charge against Modi inspires a much deeper distrust and leads, for example, to his opponents comparing him to Hitler in his mission of national salvation. He is a genuinely polarising figure: the gulf between his supporters and critics seems unbridgeable. Even at book festivals, those generally herbivorous events, there have been bitter rows on and off the platform that eclipse even the arguments of the miners' strike.

    The central question is what Modi as chief minister of Gujarat did or didn't do in the anti-Muslim violence that erupted in his state in February 2002, after a train carrying Hindu pilgrims was set ablaze by unknown arsonists and around 60 passengers died. Hundreds of Muslims were killed in the riots that followed – estimates range between 900 and 2,000 – and the accusations grew that Modi's government hadn't tried hard enough to restrain the rioters; it might even have encouraged them. An investigation by India's supreme court cleared him of deliberately permitting the violence, though an observation in court by one of its judges – that when women and children were going up in flames, Modi looked away like a modern-day Nero – has clung to him ever since. He has steadfastly refused to discuss his role in the riots or express regret, and directs any questioner to the findings in the supreme court's report.

    No compelling evidence has been found to contradict these findings, but with Modi's promotion from a provincial to a national figure, the question has never died away. A recent tactic by his supporters has been to suggest that he's being unfairly picked on. Communal riots are not unique to Gujarat, but the chief ministers of other states have not been blamed when pogroms have erupted on their watch. Most famously – not a chief minister but a prime minister – there is the case of Rajiv Gandhi. After his mother, Indira, was assassinated by her Sikh guards in 1984, mobs roamed Delhi murdering Sikhs in revenge. By way of explanation and excuse, Rajiv said: "When a mighty tree falls, it's only natural that the earth around it shakes a little."

    As a reporter there at the time, I can attest to some of the shaking that went on. In a working-class Delhi suburb called Trilokpuri, for example, a 1,000-strong mob went on hunting Sikhs for 30 hours, beating them to the ground when they found them and then dousing them with petrol and setting them alight. About 350 Sikhs died there in the two days following Mrs Gandhi's death. The police didn't intervene. When I went soon afterwards, the scorch marks were visible on the ground and witnesses spoke of how Congress activists, including two or three MPs, had gathered the mob and provoked it by making fiery speeches and handing out booze.

    How much did Rajiv know of this, had he sanctioned it, and did he choose not to enquire? The question of the Congress party's implication in the killings was pursued half-heartedly for a time and then forgotten. Thirty years have passed. Rajiv is dead. Nobody has gone to jail.

    Perhaps the same oblivion will one day extend to Modi and the Gujarat riots of 2002. Prime ministers have to be worked with, their power acknowledged. The UK lifted its 10-year boycott of him in 2012, followed by the EU a year later. The USA, which has denied Modi a visa since 2005, implied last month that it would welcome him to America "as it has every democratically elected leader of India". By behaving inconveniently, the Indian electorate is forcing Modi's critics at home and abroad to take stock and readjust.

    Narendra Modi: India's saviour, or sectarian with blood on his hands? | Ian Jack | Comment is free | The Guardian
     
  2. Parul

    Parul BANNED

    Messages:
    10,348
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Ratings:
    +3 / 23,254 / -3
    Country:
    Russian Federation
    Location:
    India
    Another Article on Modi from Guardian...:sick:
     
  3. Star Wars

    Star Wars BANNED

    Messages:
    12,451
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Ratings:
    +8 / 19,034 / -22
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Man someone has payed Guardian Royal sums of money to defame Modi/BJP
     
  4. Bang Galore

    Bang Galore ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,685
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Ratings:
    +17 / 22,648 / -5
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    This is a reasonably balanced article. Not like the other bit of rubbish they published.
     
  5. Manvantaratruti

    Manvantaratruti BANNED

    Messages:
    1,764
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,518 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Seriously ? ..... let me re-quote

    Unknown Arsonists ? :cheesy: ...... so what about all those who were arrested, tried and sent to jail for the same crime ?

    Estimate of Sikhs death in India was around 7,000 :cheesy: ...... not 350.

    But for Gujarat riots 900-2000 estimate is correctly given.



    Krantikari......bahut krantikari.
     
  6. Manvantaratruti

    Manvantaratruti BANNED

    Messages:
    1,764
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,518 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Just realized another gem...

    Poojya Rahu JI was kicked our of Harvard for incompetence after just 1 term and there are questions about his degree from Cambridge.

    Rahul JI was in Trinity college, cambridge from October 1994 to July 1995 ( yes, 9 Months :D ), and was awarded an MPhil in Development Economics. :partay:

    Trinity college also provides MPhil "degree" for 'creative writing' (No Joke). :angel: .... .... getting a degree from osmania University is much harder.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2014
  7. Dillinger

    Dillinger SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,103
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Ratings:
    +13 / 14,292 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    MPhil in 9 months!! :o:

    350 Indian Sikhs were killed in 84?!o_O:mad: The figure was not put in there by mistake, anyone with the rudimentary ability use a keyboard and read the data presented on a screen could not have made such a mistake. I desist from ever labeling media houses as being biased or bought out just because I don't like what they write or say. But this is a bit too naked even for me. At least respect our intelligence, don't insult us in such a manner.
     
  8. Manvantaratruti

    Manvantaratruti BANNED

    Messages:
    1,764
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,518 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Funny thing is Cambridge did aware him a "degree" in 9 months :D ......... they do sell these certificates to gullible people from "third world" nations, who then go on to brag about studying in Harvard and Cambridge. :lol:

    They en-cash their brand name for a bit of influence and money. If tomorrow these idiots go on to become rulers of nations they can then claim most world leaders studied in cambridge thus increasing their reputation further.

    A nice " you scratch my back, I scratch yours" setup. A win-win for everybody except the gullible public. :angel: ...... the famous British "fair play" at work.
     
  9. Bang Galore

    Bang Galore ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,685
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Ratings:
    +17 / 22,648 / -5
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    You have a point but you can't blame any foreign source when a pathetic judge here, in a commission set up here, calls it an accident. In any case, I was speaking of when compared to the previous articles.


    You got this one wrong. He spoke only of a particular area in Delhi(Trilokpuri) where he was present, not the figure for the whole carnage.
     
  10. Manvantaratruti

    Manvantaratruti BANNED

    Messages:
    1,764
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,518 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Yes, that commission does provide a nice clean burqa to cover up the hideous act of burning alive women and children, for all those who want to hide facts under that burqa.

    No I understood the clever word play here :lol: ..... he chose to conveniently focus on the deaths in Trilokpuri by claiming he was present then. Nice trick that makes the mandatory reference to the Sikh genocide to pretend neutrality but also cleverly makes it appear much smaller to the Gujarat riots. Real Nice :angel:


    But I don't consider it balanced ......... in fact more dangerous because it pretends to be balanced while pushing an agenda. Insidious is the world that comes to mind.
     
  11. kurup

    kurup ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,566
    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2012
    Ratings:
    +5 / 12,801 / -6
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    [​IMG]
     
  12. Dillinger

    Dillinger SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,103
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Ratings:
    +13 / 14,292 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Knowing Baba, he probably ran to mommy screaming in glee!
     
  13. Dillinger

    Dillinger SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    6,103
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Ratings:
    +13 / 14,292 / -0
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    So was he present in each and every corner of Gujarat which was afflicted by the riots so as to ensure the absolute fidelity of his figures like in the case where he specifically limits the figures in the 84 riots to the casualties in Trilokpuri, I mean talk about honest journalism, he only reported what he could claim to have seen with his eyes..oh wait he isn't omniscient..must have learnt to teleport if he's maintained the same standards while referring to 2002.
     
  14. arp2041

    arp2041 BANNED

    Messages:
    10,406
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2012
    Ratings:
    +5 / 27,152 / -14
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    The Guardian, Just TWO words from the people of India - F*** YOU!!! :)