Can Modi and the BJP win the next election?

Modi’s past matters; those who think he can translate the support of his fans into electoral success may be disappointed

Indians vote for parties, not individuals. And the last time Indians overwhelmingly voted for one party was in 1984 in that extraordinary election following Indira Gandhi​’s assassination, giving a huge majority to the Congress. Since then, no party has secured a working majority on its own, and prime ministerial aspirants have been compromise candidates, whom most coalition partners will accept, and equally important, dislike least. There is no reason to think the next election—scheduled for 2014—will be any different.

That’s worth recalling because of the emerging myth, that because on 12 September the Supreme Court “exonerated” Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi​ (it did no such thing), he is now free to pursue his national ambition, if that. Citing his economic track record, Modi’s many fans believe the time has come for him to move to the centre, and lead a Bharatiya Janata Party​ (BJP)-led coalition government. Modi hasn’t made such claims.

And yet, immediately after the Supreme Court verdict, Modi went on a three-day fast to promote amity and harmony—an odd choice, since by his own claim, Gujaratis have been living harmoniously and amicably for the last decade, except for a few troublesome days in early 2002 with which, of course, he had nothing to do and about which he doesn’t like being reminded.

The verdict hasn’t ended Modi’s legal problems, because it was not a ruling on Modi’s guilt or innocence. The riots of February-March 2002, following the burning of a compartment carrying Hindu kar sevaks, continue to cast a shadow over Modi.

In the decade since, prosperity has increased in Gujarat. Modi’s supporters eagerly mention the praise he routinely gets from business leaders for streamlining procedures, enabling quicker business decisions, and highlight the investment in social and physical infrastructure. With the BJP’s leadership unsure about who would lead the party—there is the eloquent Arun Jaitley​, the feisty Sushma Swaraj​, and the still-eager Lal Krishna Advani​ dusting off his Toyota to start a new rath yatra—Modi may feel his time has come, because of disenchantment with the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance. That a US diplomat calls him incorruptible in a memo released by Wikileaks adds to Modi’s stature for his fans, but the US still won’t issue him a visa. (That’s because of Modi’s poor record in protecting minority rights and religious freedom in Gujarat. In the same memo the same diplomat raises these concerns; a bristled Modi responds by complaining about the conduct of the US army in Abu Ghraib—as if anything connects the two, or as if one justifies the other).

Modi’s past matters, and those who think Modi can translate the undoubtedly passionate support of his fans into electoral success may be disappointed. Collective bliss, even if aided by the applause of tycoons and endorsement by The Economist, which likened Gujarat with Guangdong, doesn’t translate into an electoral majority. For that to happen, first, the BJP needs a majority of its own. Its share of the popular vote in 2009 was 18.8%, giving it 116 out of 543 Lok Sabha seats. It needs to at least double that to come anywhere near forming a majority. The highest share the BJP has ever enjoyed was the year it formed the government in 1998—25.59%—but even then its share was less than the Congress at 25.82%.

Besides votes, it will need an acceptable prime ministerial candidate, a condition Atal Bihari Vajpayee​ fulfilled.

If Modi’s fans are vociferous, for his foes, he remains radioactive, and unless he can show that the BJP’s performance in 2014 is entirely his doing, other leaders will see him as a regional satrap. So, the BJP has to win, win big, on its own terms, and Modi has to show that he alone got those votes—more than the party has ever won, to get more seats than it has ever won. For that math to work, the BJP’s other leaders—and those outside, like Nitish Kumar​—would have to rein in their ambitions.

And then remember this: Chief ministers have rarely made effective transitions from the state to the Centre. Of the 13 prime ministers, only five have been state chief ministers—Morarji Desai​, Charan Singh, Vishwanath Pratap Singh​, H.D. Deve Gowda, and P.V. Narasimha Rao. Of them, only Rao completed his prime ministerial term. None necessarily had a great record as chief minister. Think also of chief ministers who were stalwarts in states—Jyoti Basu in West Bengal, Mohanlal Sukhadia in Rajasthan, Sharad Pawar in Maharashtra, Laloo Prasad in Bihar. None made the transition to the top in Delhi.

This means ruling the state and the Centre are different; that the record at the state has little bearing on potential at the Centre; and to succeed nationally, the candidate needs wide acceptance, an ability to compromise, and the skill of forming coalitions with those with whom he disagrees.

That’s not how Modi is usually described.

If Gujarat were really Guangdong, none of this would have mattered.

We did it. How dare you take away this credit from us?

Al-Qaida has sent a message to the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, asking him to stop spreading conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks.

Iranian media on Wednesday reported quotes from what appears to be an article published in the latest issue of the al-Qaida English language magazine, Inspire, which described Ahmadinejad's remarks over the 11 September attacks as "ridiculous".

In his UN general assembly speech last week, Ahmadinejad cast doubt over the official version of the 2001 attacks.

"The Iranian government has professed on the tongue of its president Ahmadinejad that it does not believe that al-Qaida was behind 9/11 but rather, the US government," the article said, according to Iranian media. "So we may ask the question: why would Iran ascribe to such a ridiculous belief that stands in the face of all logic and evidence?"

Read more

If Novartis wins, cancer patients lose

It’s a battle, cancer patients across India are watching with bated breath. Losing this case in Supreme Court will make a potent anti-cancer drug Glivec® almost inaccessible to poor patients of blood cancer. A Division Bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Mr. Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Mr. Deepak Verma on September 6, 2011 transferred this case to another bench of the court. This is the latest happening in the case which has held the nerve of cancer patients and activists alike since 1999.

So, why is Glivec®- an anti-cancer drug whose patent is with Swiss pharmaceutical giant Norvartis, so important? And what will be the ramification of SC’s judgment? Let’s first understand what this wonder drug is– Imatinib mesylate is a new crystalline form of anti-cancer drug which Novartis sells under the brand name Glivec®. The original molecule of this drug is patented out of India. Companies like Natco, Ranbaxy and Cipla produced and sell Glivec (Imatinib mesylate) to myeloid leukemia patients for about Rs.8,000 per month, affordable, to some extent. But this was stopped in 2004 when Madras High Court stayed local firms from selling Glivec® copies. Novartis sells the same drug for about Rs.1.2 lakh per month.

Novartis claims that it should have an exclusive right on production and sale of this drug as it holds the original patent in the United States. The company in 1999 filed for the patient of this wonder drug at Chennai regional patent office. Further in 2004 Madras HC stayed in local companies from selling this drug.

The turning point in the whole episode came in 2005 when India amended its product patent law to comply with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement and consequently, Chennai patent office rejected Novartis’s claim of exclusive patent in 2006.

While refusing the patent, the Controller General of Patent office sighted Section 3(d) of India’s new patent law that doesn’t permit any modified form of an invention that was known prior to 1995. Patent right can only be given if the claimed modification results in increased “efficacy.” The same year Novartis challenged Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent law in the Chennai High Court which was dismissed in 2007.

Between 2007 and 2009, the case was hanging with the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) and finally landed in the Supreme Court. Having lost its case in the lower court, Novartis is now asking the Supreme Court to interpret “efficacy” clause in Section 3(d) of Indian patent law in a way that will allow it exclusive patent.

Interestingly, the one reason cited by Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in not giving the exclusive patent to Novartis was “excessive pricing” of the drug. The IPAB felt that the high price of life-saving drug Glivec® will make it almost unaffordable to ordinary cancer patients. It was perhaps for the first time that the tribunal used the price of a drug as a reason to reject a patent appeal.

There are approximately 2 lakh chronic Myelogenous leukemia or blood cancer patients across the country with 40,000-50,000 people getting affected each year. A patent on the new form could give Novartis a 20-year monopoly on the drug, thus “ever-greening” the patent. This could be dangerous.

A report published in Mint on July 5, 2009 quoted Novartis’ view point on the issue. Defending the company’s claim it said, “Novartis has provided Glivec at no cost to more than 37,000 patients in 80 countries.

In India, more than 11,000 patients currently receive their medicine through this program.” But this cannot be an excuse for high price of this life prolonging drug. Even if the apex court rules against Novartis, the company has the option to move to the international judicial bodies. Until then, fingers are crossed. Hope, patient will prevail upon the patent.

But, why are the titans clashing?

Rajiv K Mishra

The reasons for the Chidambaram-Mukherjee fued are difficult to fathom.

Everybody knows Chidambaram was rather reluctant to relinquish finance but the UPA leadership needed a strong, efficient mascot for the home ministry in the aftermath of 26/11 and Chidambaram was the choice of both Sonia Gandhi and the prime minister. Rahul, too, is favourably disposed towards Chidambaram and is understood to have approved his move to the home ministry.

The problem was compounded when Pranab was made the finance minister. Like Chidambaram, Pranab Mukherjee had also held the finance portfolio more than once in the past. Both think of themselves as some kind of finance whiz kids and brook little interference in their ministries. After Chidambaram’s exit, most of his chosen officials were also shunted out. Worse, Mukherjee also made sure that none of the ex finance minister’s suggestions and recommendations got accommodated in his regime, either in successive budgets or any other policy initiatives and key appointments.

It is common knowledge in the finance ministry that the surest way to get a proposal shot down in north block is to somehow attribute the same to Chidambram.

There were other reasons for the mutual mistrust and dislike.

Mukherjee has always been a little resentful over Chidambaram’s better rapport with the Gandhi family. It’s no secret that Mukherjee has never been able to score as highly on the loyalty test as a Manmohan Singh and a Chidambaram with the first family of the Congress. The finance minister’s detractors ensured that the Gandhi’s never forget the momentary spark of ambition he had shown in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi’s assassination when he was indiscreet enough to let his ambition of becoming the prime minister get the better of him.

That one false move has been like an albatross around his neck ever since, used by his detractors to pull him down whenever Mukherjee looks destined for better things.

Mukherjee’s supporters also suspect Chidambaram of getting the finance minister’s office bugged. Chidambaram was also blamed by the finance minister’s supporters for his embarrassment in the Baba Ramdev fiasco and Mukherjee’s exclusion in the early rounds of negotiations with Team Anna last month.

Mukherjee also suspects the home minister and people close to him as targeting one of his close aides through the media. (Read Omita Paul)

In short, there are a number of personality issues between the two, which is quite a pity really because there’s no turf war between Chidambaram and Mukherjee who come from Tamil Nadu and West Bengal respectively. Their interests don’t clash other than their common passion for the finance ministry.

Mukherjee was itching to get even with Chidambaram and the 2G scam seems to have provided him with an opportunity.

The government and the Congress will not desert Chidambaram in a hurry because if the home minister goes, the next target is the prime minister himself. So Chidambaram will be defended almost to the last man unless the Supreme Court takes a contrary view.

But the real worrying factor for the government and the Congress is that there’s nobody who can probably act as a stern referee in this issue and if need be call the warring ministers and read them the riot act.

The Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, is a curious bundle of contradictions. There are times when he simply looks disinterested. On other occasions he comes across as powerless. He certainly does not have the political authority and clout required to effectively intervene in a fight which involves heavyweights like Mukherjee and Chidambaram.

So Manmohan Singh can’t play a decisive role in ensuring a much needed truce at this stage.
The Congress president, Sonia Gandhi, is the only person who could have made a meaningful intervention. But with nobody (outside the family) in the know of her health status, it’s anybody’s guess whether she is in a position to mediate.

It all looks very gloomy from the UPA’s and the Congress’ perspective. Already crippled and under attack on the issue of corruption, lacklustre governance and weak leadership, the ruling alliance has now to face the trepidation of two of its giants sparring like suicide bombers in a meaningless ego tussle.

It's Nitish vs Rahul in 2014

This statement was on the expected line, with script well written in advance at 1, Anne Marg. JD(U) spokesperson and Rajya Sabha MP, Shivanand Tiwari’s criticism of Narendra Modi’s fast came as no surprise to political pundits. Tiwari cleverly chose the same phrase which former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee used on April 4, 2002 suggesting Modi to follow the ethics of governance. Tiwari said, “Modi had failed to discharge raj dharma in Gujarat.” He further questioned the partisan approach adopted by the Modi government in delivering justice to the 2002 riot victims. “When he can't do justice to five crore people in a state, how can he do justice to 125 crore in the country?", said Tiwari. JD(U) president Sharad Yadav also took a dig on Modi’s fast by saying that, "it has become a fashion for people to go on fast."

Old rivals
It is not that Narendra Modi is ignorant of the fact that he has a tough competition or to say only competition from Nitish Kumar. From time to time, Modi has shown conciliatory gesture towards Bihar CM but Nitish has remained unmoved by such moves. Immediately after the devastating Kosi floods of 2008, Gujarat was the first state to send aid to Bihar. But after an advertisement published in Bihar dailies purportedly by Modi, claiming Gujarat had donated liberally to Bihar after Kosi floods, Nitish quickly signed a Rs. 5 crore cheque returning aid to Gujarat with full media hoopla. The second controversy added more fuel to the already existing fire with the publication of Kumar’s photograph with that of Narendra Modi in another advertisement. Nitish got irked and canceled the dinner party he had thrown for the BJP’s leaders at his residence. Nitish in no way wanted to be seen along with Modi so much so that he said strict “no” to Narendra Modi’s campaigning in Bihar during the 2010 state polls.

Advantage Nitish
More than the personal rivalry it’s Nitish’s compulsion not to be seen standing along with “communal” Modi. Though not enough numerical strength in the House, but Lalu Yadav’s RJD is still a force to reckon with. RJD’s Muslim-Yadav combination formed bulk of the vote bank on which Lulu directly or by proxy ruled the state for 15-years. In spite of being an alliance partner with the BJP, Nitish during his six-year rule has kept his secular image intact and further has dented RJD’s Muslim votes. The Bihar chief minister has successfully projected himself as a moderate, secular and progressive leader who believes that any association with Modi would adversely impact his secular appeal and further his ambition for the top job at South Block.

Now coming back to Shivanand Tiwari’s jibe, let’s enquire into what actually prompted the statement at this juncture when elections are 3-years away. Modi’s fast in no way was hurting Nitish’s secular credentials. Nitish by avoiding Ahmadabad had already sent strong message to the minorities that he by no means supports Modi and his fast. But that was not enough. Spin masters in Patna must have realised that mere abstinence won’t help much. A strong and open missive to secular forces was need of the hour, so that no doubt remains that, who stands where. In short, Nitish wants to see himself as a rallying point for non-congress forces in a post election scenario in 2014. Anti-BJP clamour is also growing in JD(U) with some senior leaders suggesting Nitish to snap ties with the BJP.

Where Modi looses
Firstly, Modi’s Prime Ministerial ambition will not go unchallenged within his own party. 84-year-old, L.K. Advani is still nurturing Prime Ministerial ambition. This octogenarian is still rocking and will very soon embark on a new Rath yatra. Then comes Sushma Swaraj, Jaitley, Ananth Kumar and Venkaiah Naidu, collectively called the Delhi Four ( D4). Though, a Sanghi at core, Gadkari also adds to distance between Modi and his PM candidature within the BJP. Modi is distant six in the list of PM candidates in his own party. For a moment let’s assume that RSS will vociferously push Modi’s candidature, but will it do at the cost of antagonising other senior leaders in the list. Further, even if under RSS’ pressure Modi is projected as the candidate for the top job, will the already depleted NDA’s composition be the same as we see it today? JD(U) which after BJP will bring the maximum number of seats will be the first party to dump the alliance. Many others will follow for sure.

Nitish the PM
Like US, in India we don’t have approval rating mechanism. So let’s rely on the “most definitive” mood of the nation survey conducted by India Today during August this year. The India Today poll reflects, “corruption to be the single biggest reason for the erosion in support of the UPA government.” The finding of the India Today poll gives 29% votes to the UPA, 27% votes to the NDA and 44% votes to the others if elections take place today. UPA is still 2% above the NDA despite “earth shattering” allegations of corruption against the incumbent. The situation will more or less remain the same in 2014 as experts feel that worst is over for the government and spin masters are out in damage control mode. Or even if the government’s fortune goes further down it won’t add to NDA votes. This situation will give impregnable lead to Nitish Kumar, the favourite poster boy of development and secularism.

Migrants influx in Delhi - But where are they coming from?

Click to enlarge.

How US newspapers remembered 09/11

Let’s stop worrying..!

Starting afresh has always been a challenge to me. Be it relationship, writing, job or any other thing I think of. Life is accustomed to a particular way of living, loving and moving. The challenge from the days of Adam’s remains the same. Over the time we have been programmed to act in a particular way we call lifestyle. The style sheet I follow barricades new ideas & inventions. Of late status quo has become my obvious definition. In short, I fear change!! Stagnation is the buzzword.

Practice does not always make perfect. Practice does make permanent. In a way practice though good, plateau our lives. After certain time in a particular job we need motivation, time and know-how to move up the ladder. Getting all three essential components at a particular instance is tough and there lies the challenge. Some have motivation and know-how but no time. Others have plenty of time but in the absence of motivating factor they get dumped.

Goals we choose must be very specific. We should be clear in mind and heart about what we really want to achieve and improve. The target we choose must be broken down into baby steps, logical as well as achievable. Choosing a goal too high is risky and fraught with possibilities of failure. Giant leap might prove lethal in achieving our target.

The next challenge is to get a genuine and accurate feedback. Beating around the bush won’t help. Imagine practicing calligraphy blindfolded. No feedback and worst wrong feedback is fatal. One traditional source of feedback is Guru or master or a coach. The important feature that distinguishes between a good and a bad coach is the ability to give exact feedback. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to find a good Guru.

After you start getting accurate feedback about your improvement in a certain area, it’s time to identify the ‘next-step’.

So, let’s stop worrying. Take action! Set ourselves a goal; let’s find a Guru who can give us accurate feedback.

Delhi Police has a lot to answer for

The deadly Delhi High Court blast on Wednesday morning is a clear indicator that indigenous terror groups, or so-called remnants of Indian Mujahideen, have re-grouped. They have overcome difficulties with improvised explosive device (IED) hardware, and they now have the capability to strike at regular intervals all over the country. The national capital is no stranger to terror attacks and a large number of them are still lying unsolved with the Delhi Police. This question the Delhi Police must answer now that innocents have been killed and scores injured by a brief case bomb on Wednesday.

Notwithstanding the claims of Delhi Police, key perpetrators are at large in the following cases: Diwali bomb blasts on October 29, 2005; Jama Masjid bomb blast on April 14, 2006; Mehrauli blast on September 27, 2008; Jama Masjid firing and car bomb blast on September 19, 2010 and explosion outside Delhi High Court on May 25, 2011.

Unsolved terror cases embolden terrorists to take chances with the law enforcement agencies. It is not without reason that the Home Ministry handed over the investigation of the latest blast to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The Mumbai police could take cover after the blast on July 13 by saying that it had got no prior intelligence, but the Delhi Police does not have that convenient excuse.

The fact is that the Intelligence Bureau had alerted Delhi Police once the National Security Guard’s (NSG) final report in July on May 25 Delhi High Court explosion indicated that it was no crude bomb but a lethal device. The NSG found the device contained nearly 1.5 kg of ammonium nitrate, which was mixed with PETN explosive and diesel fuel oil. The device had a timer with two detonators. Delhi was fortunate that the detonators caught fire and the exploded but not the core charge. At that point, top Home Ministry officials alerted the Delhi Police that the incident could be a dry run for future attacks in Delhi.

Either the Delhi Police’s special cell, which is in charge of investigating terror cases, did not take this advice seriously or they simply had no clue about the culprits. It does not take a rocket scientist to predict that Delhi is a top target for terrorists in the sub-continent after Mumbai. Even the Jama Masjid car bomb on the second anniversary of Batla House encounter was enough to give sleepless nights to security though in this incident the detonator had caught fire too. The 13/7 Mumbai blasts showed that indigenous terrorists may have had overcome the detonator difficulty and the Delhi High Court blast on Wednesday only confirms it.

It is entirely possible that forces across Indian borders either helped them technically through Skype calls or even supplied them with detonators through sleeper spy modules. However, the response of the Delhi Police was predictable after the May 25 incident: teams were sent out to Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh to find out whether friends of deceased terrorist Atif Ameen were still active and technical inputs were used to scan through call data records. While one hopes that the NIA nails the culprits behind the heinous attack in Delhi, the Madhya Pradesh police did teach a lesson to our law enforcement agencies this June in how to fight terror.

The arrest of 10 Students’ Islamic Movement of India men, who were out to target the three Allahabad high court judges who gave the Ayodhya dispute judgment, was done on the basis of manual intelligence and pavement thumping, not stand-off software and technical intelligence. The arrest of Abu Faisal alias Doctor, who ran Alpha Medical Store in East Andheri, Mumbai, along with his mentor Izzazuddin of Karneli in Madhya Pradesh revealed that Abdus Subhan Qureshi, the key Indian Mujahideen mastermind, module was still alive. This self-help financed module was found to have linkages with a cleric in Saudi Arabia with Izzazuddin as the link man. The NIA will have to think de novo if they have to solve the latest carnage in Delhi. The Delhi Police model does not work anymore.

Why I trust Team Anna...!

You can sleep on railway platforms with a reynolds pen in your pocket to become an agent of change.