India doesn't need 'Bechara' like Kumaraswamy: Jaitley

Agencies
July 16, 2018

New Delhi, July 16: Union Minister Arun Jaitley on Monday noted that India's leader cannot be a 'Bechara' (weak person).

Jaitley's comment came days after Karnataka Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy broke down expressed his unhappiness at holding the Chief Minister's position in the Congress-Janata Dal (Secular) coalition government in the state.

"Listening to these statements of an Honourable Chief Minister, my memory took me back to the dialogues of the tragedy era of Hindi cinema. If this is the consequence of a two-party coalition, what is it that a disparate group of parties with no ideological similarity offer to India? India's Prime Minister and his Government have to overcome the challenges that India faces today. He cannot be seen like the Chief Minister of Karnataka as a tragedy king. If such a coalition is a cup of poison, why even dream of inflicting it on the nation? The leader of the world's fastest-growing economy cannot be a 'Bechara'," he wrote in a blog post.

Continuing his attack at the Karnataka government and the Opposition parties, Jaitley stated that developments in Karnataka were an obvious consequence of a non-ideological opportunistic alliance with no positive agenda, the basis of which, he said, was to 'Keep Modi Out'.

"Such non-ideological opportunistic coalitions always get trapped within their own contradictions. Their only object is survival and not service of the nation. Their longevity is a suspect. If the Prime Minister of such a coalition has to weep before the cameras with an only wish of how to exit from office, it will be a scenario worse than the policy paralysis of UPA II. The Congress firmly believes that only members of one family can rule India. If anybody else gets a chance, he should be pushed to the desperation of throwing his hands up and weeping publicly," he noted.

With regards to the formation of a third front ahead of the general elections in 2019, Jaitley opined that stable politics was far from the political track record of the "ideologically flexible political groups."

"A group of disparate political parties are promising to come together. Some of their leaders are temperamental; the others occasionally change ideological positions. With many of them, such as TMC, DMK, TDP, BSP and the JD(S), the BJP has had an opportunity to share power. Some amongst this disparate group have an extremely dubious track record of governance. Some leaders are maverick and others include those who are either convicted or charged with serious allegations of corruption. There are many whose political support base is confined to either a few districts or to a particular caste," Jaitley noted.

He continued, "To rule a large country like India through coalitions is possible but the nucleus of a coalition has to be stable. It must have a large size, an ideologically defined position and a vested interest in honest governance. A federal front is a failed idea. It was experimented under Shri Charan Singh, Shri Chandrasekhar and by the United Front Government from 1996-98. Such a front with its contradictions, sooner or later, loses its balance and equilibrium."

Jaitley also noted that if vote bank politics takes precedence over crucial matters of national interest, such as growing terrorism, rising crude oil prices and a possible trade war, such a government would be a liability.

"We need, for the next one decade and more, a high trajectory growth. To confront these challenges, India needs a strong and cohesive Government. More so, it means a decisive political leadership. It needs a Government which is able to resist unfair pressures of either allies or regions. It is the high growth rate, investment into rural India and the social sectors, credibility and strength of the Indian economy which will help us to be domestically strong to meet these challenges. A leadership unsure of itself meets the challenge of eliminating poverty and transforming the world's fastest growing economy into a developed nation?" he asked.

Addressing an event on Saturday, a teary-eyed Kumaraswamy claimed that he was swallowing the pain of a coalition government in Karnataka.

"People are standing with bouquets to wish me, as one of their brothers became Chief Minister and they all are happy, but I'm not. I know the pain of coalition government. I became Vishkanth (Lord Shiva) and swallowed pain of this government," he said.

Kumaraswamy further said he wanted to become the Chief Minister of Karnataka to solve the problems of the people and fulfill the unfinished agenda of his father and former prime minister, H D Deve Gowda.

Comments

Well Wisher
 - 
Tuesday, 17 Jul 2018

Dear Mr. Jaitley,
Kannadigas can tolerate this single bechara. no problem. But all Indians are no longer can tolerate bunch of becharas. They are just waiting for 2019

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 13,2020

Jan 13: For the first time in years, the government of India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi is playing defense. Protests have sprung up across the country against an amendment to India’s laws — which came into effect on Friday — that makes it easier for members of some religions to become citizens of India. The government claims this is simply an attempt to protect religious minorities in the Muslim-majority countries that border India; but protesters see it as the first step toward a formal repudiation of India’s constitutionally guaranteed secularism — and one that must be resisted.

Modi was re-elected prime minister last year with an enhanced majority; his hold over the country’s politics is absolute. The formal opposition is weak, discredited and disorganized. Yet, somehow, the anti-Citizenship Act protests have taken hold. No political party is behind them; they are generally arranged by student unions, neighborhood associations and the like.

Yet this aspect of their character is precisely what will worry Modi and his right-hand man, Home Minister Amit Shah. They know how to mock and delegitimize opposition parties with ruthless efficiency. Yet creating a narrative that paints large, flag-waving crowds as traitors is not quite that easy.

For that is how these protests look: large groups of young people, many carrying witty signs and the national flag. They meet and read the preamble to India’s Constitution, into which the promise of secularism was written in the 1970’s.

They carry photographs of the Constitution’s drafter, the Columbia University-trained economist and lawyer B. R. Ambedkar. These are not the mobs the government wanted. They hoped for angry Muslims rampaging through the streets of India’s cities, whom they could point to and say: “See? We must protect you from them.” But, in spite of sometimes brutal repression, the protests have largely been nonviolent.

One, in Shaheen Bagh in a Muslim-dominated sector of New Delhi, began simply as a set of local women in a square, armed with hot tea and blankets against the chill Delhi winter. It has now become the focal point of a very different sort of resistance than what the government expected. Nothing could cure the delusions of India’s Hindu middle class, trained to see India’s Muslims as dangerous threats, as effectively as a group of otherwise clearly apolitical women sipping sweet tea and sharing their fears and food with anyone who will listen.

Modi was re-elected less than a year ago; what could have changed in India since then? Not much, I suspect, in most places that voted for him and his party — particularly the vast rural hinterland of northern India. But urban India was also possibly never quite as content as electoral results suggested. India’s growth dipped below 5% in recent quarters; demand has crashed, and uncertainty about the future is widespread. Worse, the government’s response to the protests was clearly ill-judged. University campuses were attacked, in one case by the police and later by masked men almost certainly connected to the ruling party.

Protesters were harassed and detained with little cause. The courts seemed uninterested. And, slowly, anger began to grow on social media — not just on Twitter, but also on Instagram, previously the preserve of pretty bowls of salad. Instagram is the one social medium over which Modi’s party does not have a stranglehold; and it is where these protests, with their photogenic signs and flags, have found a natural home. As a result, people across urban India who would never previously have gone to a demonstration or a political rally have been slowly politicized.

India is, in fact, becoming more like a normal democracy. “Normal,” that is, for the 2020’s. Liberal democracies across the world are politically divided, often between more liberal urban centers and coasts, and angrier, “left-behind” hinterlands. Modi’s political secret was that he was that rare populist who could unite both the hopeful cities and the resentful countryside. Yet this once magic formula seems to have become ineffective. Five of India’s six largest cities are not ruled by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in any case — the financial hub of Mumbai changed hands recently. The BJP has set its sights on winning state elections in Delhi in a few weeks. Which way the capital’s voters will go is uncertain. But that itself is revealing — last year, Modi swept all seven parliamentary seats in Delhi.

In the end, the Citizenship Amendment Act is now law, the BJP might manage to win Delhi, and the protests might die down as the days get unmanageably hot and state repression increases. But urban India has put Modi on notice. His days of being India’s unifier are over: From now on, like all the other populists, he will have to keep one eye on the streets of his country’s cities.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 25,2020

Agra, Feb 25: The architectural grandeur of 17th century Taj Mahal and the story of its construction by Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan left US President Donald Trump "impressed" during his visit to the famed mausoleum, according to the guide who accompanied him.

Nitin Kumar, an Agra-based guide, said the first word the president said after laying his eyes on the marble marvel was "incredible".

He and First Lady Melania Trump visited on Monday the iconic Taj Mahal in Agra, the second stop on his little less than 36-hour-long trip of India, and marvelled at the Mughal-era mausoleum built as a monument of love.

After Dwight David Eisenhower (1959) and Bill Clinton (2000), he became the third US president to visit the architectural icon.

"I told them the story of the Taj Mahal, the construction, and the story behind it. President Trump got very emotional after knowing the story of Shah Jahan and his wife Mumtaz Mahal. How he was kept under house arrest by his own son Aurangzeb, and buried here at Taj, next to Mumtaz's grave, after his death," Kumar told reporters.

The couple was left speechless on the first sight of the monument, and showed interest when they were told about the history and architecture of the dome, and the design details, Kumar said.

"Melania Trump asked about the mud-pack treatment and was amazed when she got to know the details of the process," he said.

One of the most photographed sites in the world, it is always high on the itinerary of head of states visiting India.

The monument was built over a period of nearly 20 years by Shah Jahan in memory of his wife after her death in 1631.

"The Taj Mahal inspires awe, a timeless testament to the rich and diverse beauty of Indian Culture!' Thank You, India," the US President and First Lady jointly wrote in the visitors' book before signing it.

According to Mohammed Zafar, who lives close to Taj Mahal complex, Nitin has been conducting guided tours for many years. "He was selected for this VVIP visit," he said.

"Many people were taking selfies with him, after the end of the visit. So, many media persons interacted with him. He has got some instant fame of sorts," Zafar said.

Authorities at Archaeological Survey of India had "advanced the dates" for mud-pack treatment for the graves of Shah Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal at Taj Mahal in view of the US President Trump's visit to Taj, a senior official had earlier said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 11,2020

New Delhi, Mar 11: A doctor in Kerala on Tuesday alleged that she was sacked by the management of the private clinic she was working with for informing authorities about a non-resident Indian (NRI) patient who reportedly declined to undergo the mandatory check for coronavirus.

Dr Shinu Syamalan said the patient had come to the clinic recently with suspected symptoms of the virus.

"When he was asked whether he had visited any foreign countries, he said he was coming from Qatar. But he had not reported to the Health department about his foreign trip," she said.

When he was directed to inform about his foreign travel to the state Health Department, which has been monitoring people coming from abroad for the virus, he refused and said he was going back to Qatar, she told reporters.

Concerned over the health of the person who had high fever, Ms Syamalan informed health and police authorities.

"Officials who let the patient go abroad do not have any problem, but I have become jobless," she posted on social media.

She alleged she was sacked by the management of the clinic for reporting the matter to police and informing the public about the incident through social media and through television.

"The argument of the management is that no one would turn up for treatment in the clinic if they come to know that it was visited by patients with suspected symptoms of Coronavirus," she said.

There was no immediate reaction from the management of the private health clinic.

Official sources said the District Medical Officer (DMO) at Thrissur has complained to the collector against Shinu Syamalan accusing her of defaming health officials.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.