ZAKSTER LIVE

MESSAGE FROM MUMBAI

2009-10-26T04:51:00.000-07:00

As a political animal, there’s nothing more fascinating than following the Great Indian Dance of Democracy. Every once in a while, when millions of ordinary Indians put their faith in the power of their vote and pass verdict on their elected representatives. And so it was this past week in Maharashtra, one of India’s largest states. The Indian voter has spoken and this is his message from Mumbai.

RETURN OF THE GOP
I hate to sound like a Khadi-sporting Congresswallah, but the fact is that the Grand Old Party is returning to its heydays in the fifties and sixties. The Congress is slowly but surely going back to being the natural party of governance. Not so much in terms of number of seats, but definitely in terms of its umbrella social coalition. And there are two very good reasons for it. The Muslims and Dalits who deserted the GOP through the politics of mandal and kamandal in the nineties are now returning.

To know the Muslim story in this election, just look at Amravati. Look at how the President’s son won. He was trailing till almost five rounds into counting. It’s only in the next four rounds when the votes of Muslim dominated segments started getting counted, that he emerged winner. It’s symptomatic of what Muslims across Maharashtra have done.

For the Dalit story, look at what happened in Vidarbha. Of the 27 seats won by the Congress and NCP, 24 of them have gone to the Congress. The BSP and the RPI, traditional Dalit parties in Vidarbha have been totally decimated. Behenji has to do more than just flash opulent Louis Vuitton bags if she wants Dalits to back her fully.

Whether it’s the Muslims in Haji Ali road or the Dalits in Khairlanji, they’re willing to go saath saath with the Congress ka haath. And if this happens in Mumbai, it’s quite possible it will happen in Patna and in Lucknow. Watch out for the big two next.

YOU LOSE, THEREFORE I WIN
And contributing in handsome measure to the Congress’ impressive display is the imbecile, spineless and divided opposition. In fact, if not for Raj Thackeray, this election would’ve been as good as a goner for the GOP. Consider this. Apart from the 13 seats the MNS won, Raj Thackeray also turned the tide in 28 other constituencies. Which basically means, his party polled more votes than the margin of defeat of the BJP-Sena candidate. That’s a total of 41 seats. And in those 41 seats lies the story of this election.

What gives this a national dimension, is that this is the exact same thing that Vijaykanth did in Tamil Nadu and what Chiranjeevi did in Andhra Pradesh in the last general elections. Between these 3 states, we’re talking of 130 seats. That’s a quarter of the Lok Sabha. In Tamil Nadu, in the last LS elections, Vijaykanth polled more than one lakh votes in 25 constituencies. The opposition space has never been as fragmented today as anytime in the last 3 decades.

WHITHER BJP?
More than any other party, the BJP has the most to worry about, after this election. The party has lost close to 5 percent voteshare in Maharashtra this time. It has been relegated to fifth place. The message is simple. The politics of mandir has run its course. It’s time for a new beginning. And for that the BJP needs a classic Class IV moment. And it desperately needs a ‘Tony Blair’ kind of figure to lead it into the future. That’s what Labour did in Britain after 15 years of Iron Lady Thatcher. It re-defined itself. And has now been in power for more than 12 years now. The Tories are doing that just now. They’ll reap the rewards for it in next year’s election. Political processes take time and the BJP will have to go through this painful but necessary journey. In the interests of healthy democracy, we need a strong BJP. Life would be so boring without the Jaitleys and Modis of the world. Buckle up boys!

UNDERSTANDING RAJ THACKERAY

2009-10-03T05:17:00.000-07:00

The easiest thing to do with Raj Thackeray is to hate the guy. And there are a large number of Bombay Scottish educated, Colaba-residing Bombayiites who do that. And much of that anger and hatred is justified. But the more difficult thing is to try and make sense of him. Why does he tick? Why is he so popular and who is voting for him?

Let’s just get the bare numbers out first. Because numbers don’t lie. And numbers cannot be partisan. And numbers definitely don’t speak Marathi or Bhojpuri. Numbers will help us understand the Raj Thackeray phenomenon.

In the last Lok Sabha elections, the MNS contested only 12 seats. In each of those, except one, it polled more than one lakh votes. In the Mumbai-Thane region, which accounts for about nine seats, the MNS polled as much as 21 percent of the votes. Meaning, one in five voted for Raj Thackeray. And this in a Lok Sabha election where the chances of his candidates winning is slimmer than what it would be in an Assembly election.

There is clearly a constituency that he’s appealing to. And mind you, as the CSDS post-poll study showed, Raj is not just taking away traditional Sena-BJP votes. That’s the biggest myth floating around. That Raj Thackeray is dividing the saffron vote and hence helping the Congress and NCP. Muslim youths have voted for him. Dalits have. And so have women. These are not traditional Sena constituencies. These are traditional Congress votebanks. How does one explain this?

Interestingly, unlike his uncle, Raj has never positioned himself as a crusader for Hindus alone. He has carefully projected himself to be a pin-up boy for the entire Marathi multitude. And therein lies his political acumen.

There’s a definite vacuum in Maharashtra’s politics today. There’s no political entity or figure that traditional middle-class young Marathis relate to. And by traditional Marathis, I mean the sons and daughters of erstwhile mill-workers, government clerks, teachers and intellectuals. The Sena no longer appeals to them. They don’t figure in the priorities of the Congress and NCP. So who do they turn to? Naturally, it’s this vacuum that Raj has successfully managed to occupy.

And the Shiv Sena has only itself to blame for allowing this Frankenstein to grow. It’s easy to blame the Congress-NCP for feeding and fostering the MNS. But part of the reason for the MNS’ appeal lies in the Sena’s own failings.

The BJP-Shiv Sena has been the worst opposition in the history of Maharashtra. For ten years, they have allowed an absolutely insipid, imbecile government to stumble from one failure to another.

More than 2 million Maharashtrians lost jobs even before the recession. The state languishes third from the bottom in terms of number of people living below the poverty line. Only UP and Bihar are worse. 40,000 farmers have committed suicide since 1995. And to top it all, the state is reeling under a combined debt of 1.5 lakh crores, the highest in the country.
Yet the BJP-Sena’s complete cloddishness has made the Congress & NCP look like angels. And it’s this empty opposition space that Raj is trying to corner. Love him or hate him, the Thackeray cub is here to stay. Jai Maharashtra!

(P.S. By the way, Karan Johar does owe all of us a collective apology. Not for using the term Bombay. But for making such a lousy film. Downright trash.)

SOUMYA

2009-10-01T04:59:00.000-07:00

She was the best among us. The very best. Soumya. Every time I see those eyes, I shudder. Why did this have to happen? Why her?

It’s been a year. And it’s gone in the blink of an eye. Her images keep floating in your head like flashes from an old movie. Those eyes. Aah those eyes. They were the most beautiful any woman had. Those eyes lent an endearing quality to her. People took to her, like moths to a flame.

There’s not a soul I know, who has bad things to tell of her. And that in this bitchy, cut-throat, shameful world is a rarity. I can’t think of another living person I know who could boast of this honour. (My grandfather comes closest. He’s been dead a couple of years now)

As a worker, she was one of the finest. I’ve never heard her say no to work. Never. Not even in the dead of night. Alas, if only she had! On the night she died, Soumya stayed back in office, beyond her call of duty. For what? For an ungrateful employer to earn a few crores more!

No matter what I say and feel, it will not even be a patch on what her folks have gone through in this past year. What can we offer? Only empty words. We can’t and never will be able to fathom their grief, unless we’ve lost an offspring so young. Which is why, it was so refreshing to see the parents of Jigisha Ghosh and Aarushi Talwar at Soumya’s anniversary. Apparently, they’ve been in touch with Soumya’s folks. After all, they’ve gone through the most horrendous of horrors. Losing a child to murder.

She was the last person I bid goodbye to before leaving office on that fateful night. I had just returned after a long marriage holiday. And the last thing she said was, “We should go out over the weekend. I want to see your wife and tell her what a big mistake she just made.” Ann never had the good fortune of meeting Soumya. Life is indeed a bitch.

OF CATTLE CLASS & HOLY COWS

2009-09-20T22:32:00.000-07:00

For all those Congresswallahs who are seething with rage at Shashi Tharoor’s uncharitable comments about the High Command, a reading of his book From Midnight to Millennium is highly recommended. He has criticized, the Holiest of Holy cows in the Congress. The Godmother herself, Indira Gandhi. This is Tharoor on the original Mrs. G.

"Had Indira’s Parsi husband been a Toddywalla (liquor trader) rather than so conveniently a Gandhi, I sometime wonder, might India’s political history have been different?" Heresy, anyone?

This post is not an attempt to justify or decry Tharoor for what he did. Just an attempt to find humour where it scarcely exists. In our politics.

In the whole debate on cattle class and holy cows, everyone seems to have missed out on the obvious. In the end, it’s not Shashi Tharoor who’s emerged a loser. But it’s the Great Indian Chattering Class. They’ve been shown for what they are. Uptight, humourless twits who can’t take a bit of self-depreciation.

In this country we tend to take everything seriously. And you don’t need a Shashi Tharoor to point out the holy cows in our life. From academics to cricket to even our politics. Irreverence is not something that comes naturally to us. We’d much rather worship than question. In our politics, finding an irreverent politician with a sense of humour is like finding a needle in a haystack. Any Parliament reporter will tell you that. Why do you think Lalu is such a media favourite, despite his million failings?

Maybe Tharoor should drive down to 14, Akbar Road to meet his fellow Stephanian Mani Shankar Aiyar. Now, there are a lot of people who hate Mani’s cocky arrogance, but you can’t grudge the man’s wit. Sample this. “Since Sitaram Kesri is all of 31 years younger than the Congress party itself, he has everything it takes to rejuvenate the party.”

But it’s his pet-hate, the BJP, which brings out the secular fundamentalist in Mani. This one’s about Enron and the BJP. “The mystique of unctuous self-righteousness that the BJP assiduously cultivated has been ripped open. They said they would throw Enron into the Arabian Sea. Now they are, metaphorically, in bed with Rebecca Mark.”

But, here’s a disclaimer for Mr. Tharoor. For all his Aiyarisms, Mani will also tell you how utterly boring it is to be an out of work politician in Delhi. Lesson one in politics: never upset the high command.

Each political party has its own set of Holy cows. For the Congress it’s the Gandhi parivar. For the BJP, it’s the Sangh parivar. For the Commies it’s Marx and his parivar. Anyone who dares to question these is cast out as a traitor. It’s a testimony to just how rigid our politics and especially our political parties have become. Did someone say internal democracy?

Our netas need a class in political humour from the Brits and the Americans. Obama can call Sarah Palin a pig who wears lipstick and yet the world doesn’t come crashing down. David Cameron calls Gordon Brown a complete phoney, and there’s still as much water flowing in the Thames. Only in India are politicians revered to the point of puking.

It’s only fitting to sign off with the most irrepressible of British politicians, Winston Churchill. This is a conversation that happened between him and Lady Astor in the British Parliament. After a bout of intense arguments over the war and his government’s handling of it, Lady Astor signed off by saying “Frankly Winston, if you were my husband, I’d mix poison in your morning tea.” To which the razor-sharp Churchill replies “Frankly, Nancy, if you were my wife, I’d drink it.” Imagine Jairam Ramesh saying that to Sushma Swaraj? Can it ever happen in uptight, puritanical India? Your guess is as good as mine.

A YEAR AFTER LEHMAN

2009-09-13T21:56:00.000-07:00

The more things change, the more they remain the same. A year after Lehman Brothers collapsed, what’s surprising on Wall Street is not how much has changed, but how little has.

To be fair with the Ben Bernankes and Henry Paulsons of the world, they did the right thing by bailing out the financial industry. If not, we would’ve not been referring to the events of the past year as just a recession. It would’ve simply been the Great Depression Act 2 Scene 1.

But having said that, what Bernanke & Co didn’t do was reform the system. They just rescued it, that’s all. The fundamental flaw of big banks cutting nine figure paychecks for executives who take irrational risks for short-term profits still exists. Banks are still rewarding bad actors. Only worse, these are the same guys who were bailed out by taxpayer largesse.

Now I don’t belong to the Investment Bankers hate club. I think it’s an honourable profession just like anything else. But my problem with this business is there are too many incentives for irrational risk-taking and too few punishments, if those risks don’t pay off.

And those incentives still exist. At the time of writing this post, Goldman Sachs was preparing to pay its 30,000 employees an average of $700,000. That’s pretty much what it was before the crash. So if I am a taxpayer who’s hard-earned money has bailed out these fattened chicken, then what am I to believe?

The impression that’s going around is that no matter what happens at these big banks, the government will always bail them out. So what’s happening is that investors are once again beginning to lend money to these banks and other financial majors on easy terms. That in turn will prompt the banks to take on risky loans. (After all, it’s somebody else’s money). When the going’s good, the banks keep the profits. When it turns sour, taxpayers will swallow the losses anyway. Heads I win, tails I still win.

A small case in point. Even today, even after the cataclysm of the global financial bust, in Goldman Sachs $1 in actual capital supports $14 in loans and investments. This is the same bloody over-leveraging which led to the financial bloodbath of last fall.

There’s simply no question that there has to be more regulation. That’s daft. The question is: is there the political will to do the same. Obama is a transformational politician. Can he also be a transformational President? History will judge his Presidency by what he did to correct the flaws which led to the catastrophe of September 2008. Or what he could have but didn’t do.

REMEMBERING YSR

2009-09-04T23:06:00.000-07:00

In May of 2003, the Times of India carried a very poignant photograph. It showed a bare-chested man, by the side of a highway in Andhra Pradesh, taking a shower from a government water pipeline. The photo would’ve been nondescript, if not for its subject. The man in the picture was YS Rajasekhara Reddy. YSR was then criss-crossing the most backward districts of his state, in what’s now being called his famous padayatra. But back then, it was called a gimmick by the state’s second most powerful politician.

Hundreds of miles away, in Hyderabad, the state’s most powerful politician, the self-proclaimed CEO of Andhra, Chandrababu Naidu was rubbing shoulders with corporate czars and chairmen of global banks. The state was going through one of the worst droughts ever. But Naidu’s worldview was restricted only to the swank IT super-structures of Cyberabad. Poverty, hunger and disease were unknown aliens. Who has time for the starving millions when there are millions to count in Swiss banks?

Well ten months later, the starving millions punished Naidu in the only way they knew. With the power of their vote. Back then too, no one in the media (both national and regional) gave YSR a chance. Naidu was after all the model Chief Minister. Who could dare predict his defeat?

Now as the country comes to terms with the shocking and sudden death of the Tiger of Cudappah, my mind goes back to that one image. It, in many ways defined YSR. The man, the politician and all that he stood for. He was a people’s politician. Always there to lend a ear or a shoulder. It’s this incredible people’s connect that made YSR what he was. In his native village of Pulivendula, people will tell you that YS knew the head of every family by his first name. In contrast, Naidu appeared aloof and distant.

I’ve had the good fortune of meeting YS on a couple of occasions in Delhi during his various trips to meet the high command. The first thing that strikes you about the man is his body language. He was so supremely confident. He would always look you in the eye, even if you asked the most uncomfortable question. And not to forget, the YS smile. He had the most endearing and warm smile you’ll find in any of our netas. It immediately drew you to the man. In the cut-throat world of our politics, it’s difficult to find a politician who smiles from the inside. Chandrababu would pay a million bucks to smile like that.

Unfortunately in our politics, there are no headlines for good governance. All the headlines are reserved for bad governance. What YS managed to prove with the 2009 victory is that people will vote for you purely on the basis of good work. It was incredible, during the campaign you’d run into these extremely poor people, ordinary folk who didn’t know where their next meal would come from, but they’d still be able to name atleast one scheme that YS had started. Arogyasri was very popular. So was the Indiramma housing scheme. The point is that these poor people may not even have been direct beneficiaries of these schemes, but to them, atleast here was a man who appeared to care for them. And that’s all the starving millions in this country ask for. Some compassion. A bit of empathy.

At a time when politicians are taking management lessons to run their constituencies, YS was a misfit. Straight out of the old school. A classical, old-world politician who’s politics was all about caring for the poor and the weak. There was no great rocket science to his politics. Just basic human compassion.

Mass hysteria is not something alien in the melodramatic world of South India. We’ve seen it when MGR died. Then when NTR passed away. And most recently when Annavaru, Dr. Rajkumar bid adieu. But mass hysteria was always reserved for filmstars or for matinee idols turned politicians. Never for an out and out politician. YSR changed that. And that gives you an indication of his greatness. Johar Rajanna. Johar.

KAMINEY: HOW HYPE CAN KILL A GOOD FILM

2009-08-15T02:30:00.000-07:00

If the title of this post is misleading, let me clarify right at the start. Kaminey is not a bad film. In fact it’s a good film. But it just stops short of being a great one.

Especially when you compare it with the regular Bollywood staple, this is like manna from heaven. It’s the kind of film which a Karan Johar, even if he’s twice re-born will not have the skills or daring to make. It takes a man of supreme conviction and craft to put together such a racy, pulsating film.

My problem with Kaminey is that it didn’t sweep me off my feet. It didn’t blow my top off. Like Dev D or Departed did. The kind of film which sends an electric shock through your cerebrum, shaking your system down to the marrow. Kaminey just pretended to do that.

And part of it has to do with the stratospherical hype that preceded the film. The makers of the film and their friends in the media made this out to be our answer to Tarantino and Guy Ritchie. And it falls short only because of this irrational chest-thumping and trumpet blowing.

Not one film reviewer in this country gave it less than four stars. In fact the film critic of the country’s most popular newspaper gave it the same rating as she had given to Love Aaj Kal. There cannot be a greater travesty. It’s like equating Cabernet Sauvignon and horse piss.

It seems to be a bit of a strategy these days with Bollywood films. Go on this publicity blitzkrieg before the release of the film. Send the lead pair (sometimes with the director, to bring that intellectual touch) to do the rounds of TV studios. Hype the movie to such heights that out of sheer curiosity the viewer will go and watch. And if you’ve made it in the opening weekend, then it’s as good as a home run.

But publicity also has its negative side. The audience has already been fed with great expectations. So they expect to see Citizen Kane every time they walk into a movie hall. And invariably, the real thing always feels pale compared to the hyperbole built around it. And that’s what has killed Kaminey, an otherwise perfectly good film.

For three-quarters of its length, Kaminey keeps you engaged. Just like any edge of the seat thriller. But it’s in the climax that Vishal Bhardwaj lets you down. It’s too tepid an end for a movie which promised to take you to the moon and back. In the end, it’s just regular caper fare. Why should good always prevail over evil? Why should both the brothers live and one not die? Why should it always be happily-ever-after?

Funnily I’m reminded of Marlon Brando’s famous line in On the Waterfront. Funny, because Terry (Brando) says this to Charlie (Rod Steiger). “I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender.” This one’s from a fan to our very own Charlie.

FEAR AND FARCE IN LANKA

2009-08-08T01:18:00.000-07:00

During and even before the war, ordinary Sinhalas considered Mahinda Rajapakse, a national hero. Some one who had dared to do what no other President could even contemplate in mere thoughts. Today, after the war, he is revered. Almost saintly. Someone who can do no wrong. And more importantly, even if he does, cannot be criticized.

Mahinda, along with his two brothers, Gotabhaya and Basil have reduced Sri Lanka to a family run business. Their word is the Gospel truth and their will be done. So much so, independent journalists are today either dragged to court in frivolous libel suits or even better, coldly bumped off.

It’s best illustrated by this incident which happened last week. The Sunday Leader, the only paper in Sri Lanka which has a modicum of independence has been dragged to court by Gotabhaya, the Defence Secretary. Apparently an article in the Leader had dared to criticize the President’s brother. This was the response from the Ministry of Defence, posted on their website. “It is traitorous and unethical to oppose a national hero like the Secretary of Defence, with whose unwavering commitment and focus Sri Lanka is a free country today.” Reminds you of a certain German Nazi dictator?

In May, Sri Lanka clung at the cusp of hope, after the defeat of the LTTE. After all, Rajapakse had promised the Tamils the moon and beyond, after the war. Today over a tenth of Sri Lanka’s population is cooped in internment camps. All of them Tamil. Like pariahs in their own land. The government had promised to send them back to their homes soon after they were screened for remnants of the LTTE and after their villages were de-mined. Three months on, nothing has changed. More than 2,80,000 languish like livestock, in the most abysmal conditions.

And it only gets worse. The ICRC, the only international aid agency has now been prevented from entering these internment camps. Four of their offices in Trincomale and Batticaloa in the east, have been shut. And in this background, the government is preparing for elections in the North.

How does one explain this to Mr. Rajapakse? A token election when basics like food, water and shelter are hard to come by is self-defeating. There’s an occupational army, the bulk of the population is in far-away refugee camps, and there are just govt propped candidates in the electoral fray. Is Mr. Rajapakse holding this election, just for his friends who stood by him during the war?

The government has put up Mr. Douglas Devananda, a controversial Tamil Leader in Jaffna. Someone who was staunchly opposed to the LTTE and a stooge of the government of the day. He can hardly be called a true representative of the Tamil people. There’s no visible opposition. Devananda will win this election, hands down.

The government has clearly got its priorities warped. A recent survey by Social Indicator in Jaffna shows that more 40 percent of the population is indifferent to this election. In fact, about one in three feels their condition has worsened in the last one year. So much for military success. Three out of five kids in internment camps are suffering from malnutrition.

Things are eerily similar to 1975, when the EPDP ruled the north with an extra-judicial iron fist. It led to the birth of the LTTE. After 30 years of blood and battle is the government just rewinding Sri Lanka’s history? Has the decimation of the LTTE meant nothing? One can’t escape the sense of déjà vu.

LAST PROPHET OF SECULARISM

2009-08-03T21:04:00.000-07:00

Even as the national media collectively orgasmed over Rakhi Sawant’s engagement this past weekend, a colossus passed away in Kerala. More than a million people braved the rains to pay homage to Panakkad Mohammadali Shihab Thangal, the President of the Indian Union Muslim League.

For the devout, Shihab Thangal was the descendant of the Prophet himself. For the politically attuned, he was the most influential Muslim political leader in Kerala. Not the rabid, chest-thumping, victim playing, regressive kind. But one who was fiercely secular and progressive in spite of the gravest odds.

For more than three decades, Shihab Thangal was the cornerstone of coalition politics in God’s Own Country. The rudder, without whom, the experiment called UDF would never have seen the light of day. For a man who never contested an election and who never held any governmental / constitutional post, Shihab Thangal wielded unparalleled clout. His was the last word for a large majority of the Muslims of North Kerala.

The man was avowedly secular, down to his bone marrow. Imagine a Muslim leader saying this, just days after the Babri Masjid demolition in 1992. “Not one stone will be thrown at a Hindu house. In fact, every Muslim will stand guard at his Hindu brethren’s house.” It takes a man of extreme conviction or plain balls to say that. If God’s own country didn’t flare up after the infamous events of 6 Dec 92, then God has this steadfast disciple to thank. In the face of the gravest provocation, Shihab Thangal did not dilute his own or the League’s fierce secularism. And in hindsight, he was proven right.

But political clout alone doesn’t explain the phenomenon that Shihab Thangal was. He was also a supreme religious head. For the believers of the Word, he was a descendant of the Holy Prophet himself. He was also a great philanthropic. Someone who realized that the truest disciples of Allah are the ones who take care of their brethren.

There’s a fascinating story about the poor people who used to visit Thangal’s ancestral home, Kurappanakkal in Panakkad village. Thangal used to ensure that each one of them was given one proper meal and return bus fares. For him, charity was not a service, it was a solemn duty. Something which every prosperous Muslim owed to his Creator for the blessings he was bestowed with.

What makes his story even more fascinating is when you compare him with other Muslim leaders of his time, in the rest of India. Not one of them can even hold a candle to kind of contributions Shihab Thangal has done for the Muslims of Malappuram. Malappuram wasn’t exactly the most prosperous district in Kerala. In the sixties and seventies, it ranked fairly low in almost all major social indices. Today, Malappuram is India’s first e-literate district. And Shihab Thangal has had no small role to play in this.

Compare this to the Maulvis and Ulemas in UP and Bihar. They have a vested interest in keeping a majority of their community poor and backward. Else, the political relevance of these reverend men diminishes. Agreed that over time, various political parties have treated Muslims as a monolithic vote bank. But Muslim leaders will have to share some of that blame as well. After all you can’t keep playing the victim card all the time.

As the Muslims of Kerala mourn the passing away of one of their favourite sons, let’s also redeem our faith in all that Shihab Thangal stood for. Compassion, humility and decency. He was truly the last prophet of secularism.

UNDERSTANDING BALOCHISTAN, FROM A PAK PERSPECTIVE

2009-08-02T21:43:00.000-07:00

Ever since the PM returned from Sharm El-Sheikh, he’s been pilloried for that ill-fated joint statement. More than the D word, it’s the B word, which has got many hawkish analysts fuming. How could the PM have allowed a reference to Balochistan? Doesn’t this indirectly put both India and Pakistan on an even keel, with both equally guilty of sponsoring terror?

Now this is not an attempt to defend the Prime Minister, but just to look at Balochistan, from a Pakistani perspective. To understand why our neighbours are paranoid about a swathe of wasteland, which many in Pakistan themselves call "the dump where Allah shot the rubbish of creation."

Balochistan is critical for Pakistan. Balochistan is to Pakistan what Xinjiang is for China. It’s the jewel in Pakistan’s crown. There are two very simple reasons for this. One, that it has tremendous reserves of natural gas which is critical to Pakistan’s energy needs. Just over the last month or so, there have been bloody riots in Pakistan over the lack of electricity. Delhi’s power woes would seem like a dream when compared to the blackhole ordinary Pakistanis have been putting up with, day after day. Chambers of Commerce estimate Pakistan lost as much as a billion dollars in exports last fiscal, due to power cuts. Its manufacturing has fallen by 8 percent. Even Richard Holbrooke, in his visit there last week, had to pepper his praise for the Pak Army’s fight against the Taliban with the crucial need to tackle power cuts. That’s why Balochistan is critical for Pakistan’s future energy needs. Two important pipelines, one from Turkmenistan and the other from Iran pass through this region. This gas will not reach power generation stations in Karachi and Lahore, if Balochi nationals keep bombing the pipelines which carry them, every other day.

The second reason is that Balochistan, because of its arid terrain and vast swathes of rocky wasteland provides crucial buffer against any invading force. Already India is slowly but surely encircling Pakistan. Now India can attack Pakistan, not just from its eastern flank. We’ve got strategic depth in Afghanistan, in the west. An air force base in Tajikistan, in the north, from where we can fly fighter jets to bombard Pakistan. And reputed American scholars have admitted that the Indian consulate in the east Iranian city of Zehdan is doing more than just issuing visas. India is even engaged in building a world class port in the city of Chahbar in South East Iran. It’s India’s answer to what the Chinese have been doing in Gwadar.

The Pakistanis, and this is not just the military-intelligence establishment, are paranoid about India’s growing leverage in Afghanistan. They’re mortally scared of the day, the favourite benefactor of the Pakistani state and the country which ordinary Pakistanis love to hate, America, withdraws from Afghanistan.

And India hasn’t exactly helped in quelling this paranoia. We’ve been cultivating strategic depth in Afghanistan for a while now. India says we have only 9 consulates in Afghanistan. (That’s more than what we have in the US and UK, by the way). The Pakistanis say we have about 22. In the world of covert intelligence, where nothing can be the absolute truth, I am prepared to believe that the actual number is somewhere in between. From Pakistan’s point of view, you have a neighbour who you’re perennially suspicious of in the eastern flank, with unprecedented clout in your western flank. Naturally any country would be paranoid. That’s just what the Pakistanis are going through.

By agreeing to put Balochistan in the joint statement, Manmohan Singh is directly addressing the intelligence communities on both sides. And this is where the media seemed to have missed the tree for the woods. For the Indian intelligence establishment, this is a wake up call. A clear message from the Prime Minister that you can’t go on forever without any form of accountability. After all, the intelligence community, because of the very nature it’s DNA, is perennially suspicious of peace. They are the first ones to raise the red flag to any peace overtures.

And to the Pakistani intelligence establishment, who are most paranoid about Balochistan, Dr. Singh’s message is clear. Look, we’re willing to talk about your worst fears. And we’re not going to shy away from it. We’re willing to talk about it, like civilized nations. Now it’s upto you to show the same earnestness in addressing what you’re doing in Kashmir and other parts of India. He has directly addressed General Kayani and his gang, the so-called real power centre of Pakistan. It’s upto them to meet us half-way.

In the near-term Dr. Singh is getting plastered for allowing the B-word to slip in. But in the long term, it’s Gilani who needs to be worried. Because, unwittingly now, Balochistan has been internationalized. The spotlight of the international community will start falling on this piece of land, which until now, the Pakistanis have been deliberately loath to discuss about. What happened to Kashmir in 1948, is now happening to Balochistan, sixty years later. It may not seem so on the face of it, but there’s a method to the Sardar’s madness.

IN THE PM'S DEFENCE

2009-07-30T22:07:00.000-07:00

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has had a torrid couple of weeks. Ever since he inked that ill-fated joint statement in Sharm El-Sheikh, Manmohan Singh has been shredded to bits. By the opposition, by the media and worse, by his own partymen. It’s almost as if the genial Sardar has bartered away India’s sovereignty. That all honour and pride were sacrificed, because Pakistan got away with two phrases more.

For far too long, our foreign policy has been guided by narrow mindedness and petty point scoring. It doesn’t really matter where the commas and full stops are in a joint statement. Nor does it matter if India won the Yekaterinburg round and Pakistan made it even stevens with Sharm El Sheikh.

Little men are guided by timidity. Great nations thrive on courage. India is a country standing at the cusp of greatness. We cannot afford to be seen as timid and petty. We need to look at the larger picture. And the larger picture is that India needs to take the initiative in being the dominant player in South Asia. For which we need to ensure a stable South Asia. And that cannot happen if India and Pakistan, the region’s two biggest nations, behave like adolescent fighter-cocks, always at each other’s throats. It can only be achieved by sitting down and talking, through civilized dialogue. We need to think big, think bold.

That’s what Lincoln did. That’s what Gandhi did. And the world remembers them for precisely that. Because in their most difficult moments, they did not shy away. They didn’t buckle. They did not settle for less. India cannot settle for less.

Look at Barack Obama. Here’s a man who’s willing to talk to a country like Iran. A country, which just a few years ago, his predecessor had bracketed in the ‘Axis of Evil’. Today, Obama is not just willing to talk to Iran, he’s even done something that no US President has ever had the spinal cord to do. Apologize for past ills which the US has inflicted on the Muslim world. Because Obama realizes that history cannot bind you from moving ahead. History cannot hinder you from charting a new course. Manmohan Singh knows this too. He knows that India’s path to greatness will only clear if we resolve our disputes with our neighbours. And our dispute with Pakistan tops that list.

Look at China. President Hu Jintao has sorted out every land dispute China has had with its neighbours, (and there are more than 15 of them) save the one with India. Forget about ASEAN and Shanghai Co-operation, where China is the most dominant player already, today there’s talk of a G2. Just China and the United States. India, at the same time, is still stuck in the diplomacy of the seventies.

By de-linking terror and talks, the PM has only done the most sensible thing. That is to not hold the composite dialogue hostage to each and every terrorist attack. It was almost like an on-off button. Every time there was a terror strike, the first casualty would be the dialogue process. Not that suspending the dialogue every time decreased terrorism directed against India. It’s not like we had great leverage with Pakistan in the first place, just because terror and talks were linked.

After the Mumbai attacks, India received a lot of sympathy. And we have used that to the hilt to squeeze Pakistan as much as we can. But there’s only so much sympathy can buy. You can’t keep playing victim all the time. Coercive diplomacy comes with a use-by-date. Civilized nations talk. And that’s all India and Pakistan agreed to do, in Sharm El-Sheikh.

The other big brouhaha was created over the reference to Balochistan. The Leader of the Opposition says, this will haunt us for the rest of time. I don’t know what we’re so afraid of. Great nations don’t run away from the truth, however uncomfortable it may be. They confront it. All that the PM has said is this, “Ok Mr. Gilani, I understand your concerns on Balochistan. Give me evidence of Indian involvement and we are prepared to talk about it.” That doesn’t mean we have readily admitted that we’re fawning terror in Balochistan.

The onus now is on the Pakistanis to prove that India is interfering in Balochistan. And trust me, in the world of covert intelligence these things are as hard to prove as walking on water. Manmohan Singh is a sensible man. He’s not the type who’ll play darts blindfolded.

Yes, agreed there are vested interests in Pakistan that don’t want us to talk. Just like there are vested interests in India which don’t want us to talk. The Army and intelligence establishment in Pakistan are only interested in fanning passions between India and Pakistan. It’s critical to their existence. We need to fight those vested interests. The same interests which are inimical to Pakistan are inimical to India too. The Good Doctor understands this. He wants to break away from 62 years of low trickery and petty pin-pricks. For once, let us give him the benefit of doubt.

WALTER CRONKITE (1916 - 2009). R.I.P.

2009-07-19T22:06:00.000-07:00

Walter Cronkite, the voice of TV news is dead. Thus, screamed New York Times’ lead headline, Saturday morning. It was one of those moments. When you know that the world will be worse off. When you know that an institution had passed away.

When I came to work that afternoon, I asked around in the newsroom on how many people knew of a man named Walter Cronkite. Sadly, but as expected, not many did. A man, who for an entire generation was the only source of news, was today an unknown entity for the Youtube generation.

Yet Cronkite is as relevant today as ever before. In these times of shrill, high pitched reporting and opinionators masquerading as news anchors, Cronkite is the man to turn to. He was the man who America turned to every evening to know what was happening in the world around them. And this relationship between Cronkite and America was built on one fundamental quality. Trust.

No wonder, in 1995, 14 years after he retired from the Evening News, Walter Cronkite was America’s most trusted man. More than even President Clinton, who at that time was at the peak of his powers.

He became something of a national institution. Cronkite’s presence was reassuring. America trusted him with the news, whether good or bad. And for his part Cronkite too stuck to the news. He didn’t need to pilfer news with his own opinion or spiel to make it sound ‘sexy’. He told the news, just the way it was.

“I am a news presenter, a news broadcaster, an anchorman, a managing editor — not a commentator or analyst,” he said in an interview with The Christian Science Monitor. “I feel no compulsion to be a pundit.” He rarely pronounced judgment.

News TV, both in the States and here in India has a lot to learn from Uncle Walter. News television today has been reduced to slam-bang talkathons. It’s so darn predictable. If it’s a political issue, get a Congress guy and a BJP guy. Get both of them to have a go at each other. In between, anchors evangelize their two bits.

And there’s a very simple reason why news TV has been reduced to this dirty theatre. Talk is cheap and talk sells. Talk is also entertaining and lazy. Therefore, there’s so much talk in the news. Anchoring in news TV has been reduced to hectoring and finger-wagging. And often times, I myself, have been guilty of this.

And so as I mourn the loss of such an invaluable soul, let me also solemnly reaffirm my pledge to all that Walter Cronkite stood for. Fairness, objectivity and the pursuit of truth. And that’s the way it is.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF COMRADE VS

2009-07-13T22:08:00.001-07:00

In the legions of Communist struggles, the one revolt which is always cited in almost ‘halo’ey terms is the Punnapra Vayalar agitation of 1946. Almost a 1000 Communist party workers fought a bloody battle with the police on the picturesque beaches of Punnapra. Among them was a young 22 year old, coir factory worker. Velikkakathu Sankaran Achuthanandan. It was the first anti-burgeois battle that he fought. Over the years, he has fought a thousand more.

Today VS Achuthanandan or Comrade VS as he’s fondly called is one of the stalwarts of the Communist movement in Kerala. He’s also an isolated man. His party, the CPI(M), of which he is one of the founding fathers, has decided to dump him. The oldest member of the party’s highest decision making body, the Politburo, no longer has a place in this esteemed club. He has been ‘disciplined’, almost as if VS were a 22 year old rebel. You don’t ‘discipline’ an 83 year old veteran.

When VS along with fellow comrades blew up the Mayithara bridge in Mararikulam, his hometown, it was one of the most fervent challenges to the then Dewan of Travancore, the legendary Sir CP Ramaswamy Aiyar. Prakash Karat wasn’t even born then. Today, 61 year old Karat, guided by pelfs and pimps, has decided to dump the 83 year old VS.

Not that VS is not used to such ham-handed behaviour by the high command. The legendary EMS had censured VS because he offered to donate blood to Indian soldiers in the Indo-China war of 1962. For the Comrades, defying China was sacrilege.

VS’ luck has been awful at times. If he had his way, he should’ve been Chief Minister back in 1996. The party had won a decisive victory. VS was the state secretary and the man tipped for the top job. Unfortunately he lost from his hometown of Mararikulam, for the first time since 1967. He was done in by his own detractors within the party. VS had to make way for EK Nayanar. Five years later he won a handsome victory from Malampuzha. His party though bit the dust.

For the next five years, as Leader of the Opposition, he was at the helm of every major people’s agitation. From Muthanga to Plachimada to Idukki, if there was a people’s cause, VS was always there at the forefront. Come the next election in 2006, he was the most eligible claimant for the Chief Minister’s chair. Unfortunately his party let him down once again.

Once again Prakash Karat, guided by power mongerers decided not to give a ticket to VS. There was a people’s revolt. Something the Communists had never witnessed before. At virtually every street corner, a VS cutout or a VS poster sprang up. The iron-fisted theorists sitting in AKG Bhavan were hit by a tsunami of people’s power. For the first time, the Polit Buro had to reverse a decision, under popular pressure. VS got a ticket. The LDF won and VS became Chief Minister.

But the same sharks and savagers wouldn’t let go. For three years and some months now, they’ve made life hell for VS. He was Chief Minister only on paper. The real power lay in the corridors of AKG Bhavan, both in Delhi and Trivandrum. At every possible instance, VS was cut down to size. And last week’s decision to drop him from the Polit Buro was the final cut. The unkindest of all.

VS now has only two options. One, to succumb to the party high command and accept it’s decision meekly. The other, to revolt and walk out of the party. Which one will 83 year old, angry young man choose?

CHURCH IN YOUR PANTS?

2009-06-30T04:44:00.000-07:00

I am a practicing Christian. And I am proud of it. I am also a supporter of equal rights for gays and lesbians. And I am equally proud of it. And I don’t see a contradiction between the two.

First, nowhere in the Bible is there any record, no direct quote from Jesus Christ about homosexuality. Either condemning it or condoning it. Not one word. The other important thing to note is that nowhere in the Bible does it say anything about homosexuality as a sexual orientation. It only refers to certain homosexual acts.

And these acts/events/incidents are interpreted by different people at different points in history. But interpretations are always defined by time, place and societal context. And interpretations change with the afore-mentioned variables. Just a couple of quick examples. There are portions in the Bible which view slavery and slave trade as a legitimate activity. Not anymore. Again, in the Old Testament, deliberately withdrawing before ejaculation was equated to abortion. Not anymore. The church has evolved with the times. Things that were taboo are norm nowadays.

At the heart of this debate is viewing homosexuality as a sexual orientation. You can no more deplore homosexuality than you can condemn left-handedness. It’s not a disease. It’s just the way some people are. That’s it. Homosexual affection can be as selfless as heterosexual affection. Gay persons desire and need deep and lasting relationships, just like heterosexuals do. They too are human after all. The Bible only mentions “Love your neighbour as you love thyself.” It doesn’t mention the neighbour’s gender.

The Catholic Church in India has blindly taken this position because Vatican has decreed so. But that’s where the problem lies. In India, the gay rights debate has little to do with whether God is accepting of homosexuals or not. Whether it is anti-Christian or not. It’s about an archaic, asinine law called Section 377. A colonial relic which we should’ve junked along with the British. Instead it continues to discriminate against and criminalize millions of gay and lesbian men and women. Why? Are they the children of a lesser God? Were they not also created by the same God, who created you and me? By opposing homosexuality, the Church is also uncannily supporting this ridiculous law. It’s the only issue on which the Church, the Jamaat e Islami and the VHP are on the same side. Not the kind of company, the Church would like to keep.

This is an appeal to the various denominations in India to come clean on this issue. Supporting homosexuals in their fight for civil rights is equivalent to supporting Dalits in their fight against the caste system. Christianity is pillared on the fundamental of social justice. Everyone is equal in the eyes of God. At its root, this problem is about equality. It’s not as much about ‘them’, as it is about all of us.

NAXALS ARE NOT TERRORISTS, MR. CHIDAMBARAM

2009-06-24T10:13:00.000-07:00

The ability of governments to score self-goals is just phenomenal. The UPA government has done just that by banning Naxal group CPI (Maoist). By equating Naxals with terrorist outfits like Lashkar and HuJI, the government has once again missed the tree for the woods.

Before we get to anything else, let’s get this one simple fact straight. Naxalism is not born out of the flawed interpretation of some religion. Naxalism is born out of hunger. Out of poverty. Out of extreme social and economic deprivation. Naxlism breeds precisely because Mr. Chidambaram and his institutions cannot provide vast swathes of our poor people three square meals a day and a decent life. That’s why poor, famished people who have no other resort, take to the loud bang of a gun. To make a deaf government hear their voice.

WHAT ABOUT STATE SPONSORED TERROR?

It’s funny how when any poor man raises a gun against the state it’s termed as terrorism. But when the state itself raises a gun against its own people, it’s called patriotism. What about extra judicial killings? What about custodial deaths? Doesn’t this amount to terrorism as well? Transparency International says, every year around the world more people fall victim to state sponsored terrorism than to terrorism per se.

DISPROPORTIONATE USE OF FORCE

Just look at the number of troops fighting the naxals. There are 26 battalions, that’s 26,000 men of the Central Paramilitary Forces alone who are dedicated to fighting Naxals. In addition you now have the elite anti-naxal COBRA force which makes up for another 11,000. Apart from this, state governments themselves have special anti-naxal forces. The greyhounds in Andhra Pradesh number about 18,000. Jharkhand has a special force of about 14,000. In all, if you look at the entire red corridor, there are about half a million security men taking on a motley army of Maoists. And has anyone bothered to check the number of Maoists. Deprived men and women whom, the Prime Minister calls India’s enemy number one. All over the country, the cadres strength of the Maoists is just 10,500. If this is not an unequal war, then what is?

And after all this, the number of violent incidents attributed to Maoists has been reported only in 4% of the police stations across India.

WHY A BAN IS FUTILE

The Government had earlier banned the previous avatar of the CPI Maoists, the People’s War Group (PWG). Not that the Maoist movement simply withered away. It assumed a new name and a new form. Bans per se amount to squat. If the government is serious about tackling the Naxal menace, it has to review the way it perceives Naxalism. It’s not just a black and white law and order menace. It has to be treated as a socio-economic problem. These are our own people who are begging for their voices to be heard. But the question is: Is a Van Heusen clad Home Minister listening?

WHY INDIA MUST TALK TO PAKISTAN

2009-06-15T21:25:00.000-07:00

There’s been a lot of chest-thumping over the last few weeks on why India should not talk to Pakistan. Pakistan has done nothing to dismantle the terror infrastructure operating from its soil. Pakistan has allowed the perpetrators of 26/11 like Hafiz Saeed to walk scot-free. And nothing has changed on the ground. All very pertinent arguments, but they don’t answer one basic, underlying question. What do we achieve by not talking? The answer is simple. Nothing.

Let’s get this straight. In the aftermath of 26/11 India had only two choices. Option one was to militarily attack Pakistan and destroy what we believe are terror training factories in PoK. Now, we don’t have either the diplomatic gall or the military guile to do that. More importantly such a response would have only led to a full-blown military conflict. It’s naïve to assume otherwise. Almost a sixth of the world going to war with each other with the prospect of nuclear missiles flying into Karachi or Kolkata isn’t exactly a rosy thought. The only other option is talks.

Students of international relations are always taught this. Military action is always over-estimated. And diplomacy is always under-estimated. Iraq and Afghanistan are two classic examples of how the use of force was grossly exaggerated. And public discourse also has some classic cases of how multi-national diplomacy can bring around some of the most devious nation states. A case in point is Libya.

In the eighties, Libya was a country, much like Pakistan, which used terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy. The most infamous being the Lockerbie bombing of 1988. 270 people were killed. 160 of them Americans. It was the deadliest terror strike on American nationals before 9/11. The masterminds were traced down to Libya. But the government headed by Muammar Gaddafi refused to hand them over. America didn’t thump its chest promising to bomb Libya out of the face of the planet.

Instead, what followed was a superb thesis on carrot-and-stick diplomacy. A calibrated process, which combined multi-lateral economic sanctions with the threat of military action. At the same time, every positive step taken by Libya was matched with concessions. Finally, after ten long years, Libya came around. Both the Libyan suspects were convicted by a court in the Hague. The case was finally settled in August 2003. Libya has now expelled terror groups, closed down terrorist camps and given up using terror as an instrument of foreign policy. It’s a slow process, but it has worked.

We can do the same with Pakistan. But for that we have to start talking. And more importantly we have to bring major world powers on the table for this. I know this is a tricky subject. India has always been wary of third-party intervention in our dispute with Pakistan. And I’m not suggesting that either. But never before has India been presented with such an opportunity. The Americans have more stake in Pakistan than ever before. More than India, it’s America which wants Pakistan to renounce terror against India so that it can fight the bigger war on the Western front, along the Afghan border. India should be able to leverage Obama on this. After all, Indo-US ties have never been as strong. India should be able to convince America to follow the same carrot and stick policy with Pakistan, which they did with Libya.

Which is why when Zardari and Manmohan Singh shake hands in Yekaterinburg, it could mark a new beginning. It’s upto us to make it count.

THE SILENT REVOLUTION IN TAMIL CINEMA

2009-06-11T05:44:00.000-07:00

I’d been wanting to write about this for a long time now. But things sort of galvanized over the weekend. I managed to catch two delightful and out of the box Tamil movies in a short trip to Chennai. Kungumapoovum Konchumpuravum and Pasanga are as different as chalk and cheese. But they have now come to symbolize what’s been going on in Tamil cinema for quite a few years now. They are products of this wonderful silent revolution which is sweeping Kollywood.

In Kungumapoovum, the hero is a debutant, Ramakrishnan. I’ve pasted his pic below. He’s the kind of guy you’d find as a helper in a tea-stall or as a cleaner in a mechanic shop. The kind of guy who’s not worth a second glance, leave alone casting him as a lead protagonist in a 70 mm film.

The look and feel of the average hero has undergone a radical change. The hero has been completely deglamourised. He doesn’t have to be as good-looking and fancy as a Kamal Haasan. He doesn’t even have to bash up the baddies and mouth powerful dialogues like a Rajinikanth. He can be the average, regular guy next door. No six-packs. No dimpled smiles. Just the regular kind of guy who wouldn’t bring the world to a screeching halt, if he went missing for a day.

So you have heroes like Ramakrishnan in Kungumapoovum, or the boys in Chennai 28 or even a Sasi Kumar in Subramaniapuram. None of them fit into your bracket as an average Tamil film hero. Even comedians like Vadivelu and Lawrence have today been cast as heroes. And their movies have done well. It takes some spinal chord to make a movie like Pulikesi and make it work at the box office.

The other defining feature of some of these movies is the caste factor. There’s been a de-Brahminification of cast, plot and setting. Stories like Paruthiveeran which are set in some quaint dusty village in Theni with lower caste lead protagonists have become runaway hits. Kungumapoovum was set in a tiny fishing hamlet in Tuticorin. Pasanga was set in a corporation school in Virachalai.

And the reason for this silent revolution is the phenomenal directorial talent from small towns which is taking Kollywood by storm. A Balaji Sakthivel, an Ameer, a Mysskin or even a Bala for that matter have now come to symbolize this phenomenon. The good thing is that they’re being backed by big banners and established players in the industry, unlike in Malayalam where new talent is seen as a nuisance.

This revolution, which can be called, the post-Rajini Kamal, post Mani Ratnam-Shankar phase in Tamil cinema started with Balaji Sakthivel’s watershed movie Kathal. It marked the beginning of a phase where to make a box-office success, you didn’t need big stars or big banners. All you needed was a solid script. Sine then, the range of stories we’ve seen in Kollywood is just mind-boggling. From the story of two eighties ruffians in Subramaniapuram to the beautiful Mozhi to even a film based on cricket like Chennai 28.

It’s also a tribute to the Tamil cinema audience, the ordinary folk who make or mar these movies. It’s a tribute that the viewer is willing to watch good cinema, shorn of stars, shorn of glamour as long as it tells him a story well. And that’s whole but simple point of any cinema. To tell a good story well. New age Tamil cinema has well and truly arrived.

THE RISE AND RISE OF MK STALIN

2009-06-01T21:43:00.000-07:00

If life played out as per plan, Mu Ka Stalin, the second son of Muthuvel Karunanidhi, would’ve been Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu way back in 2001. After all, Stalin as Mayor of Chennai had changed the face and odour of the city. Stalin’s most famous contribution to the growth of Chennai was the privatization of garbage. A city that’s infamous for the stench of the Cooum, one fine day woke up to the beauties of privately collected garbage. Suddenly there were big green waste bins with ONYX written on them at every street corner. Young men and women dressed in bright yellow and green, wearing caps and gloves used to come home to collect garbage. Chennai hadn’t seen anything like this before. And voters were very enthused to vote positively for the DMK.

But Stalin made one small but costly mistake. He underestimated his opponent. In 2001, Jayaraman Jayalalithaa had more than 30 criminal cases against her. She had just finished a stint in jail and was disqualified by the Election Commission from contesting. No one, not even the staunchest of Amma loyalists gave her a chance. She did the one thing Stalin will never be able to. She spread out her palloo, went from constituency to constituency, and begged for people’s votes, in the name of her mentor Puratchi Thalaivar MGR. The image moved the melodramatic Tamil electorate. MGR’s chosen heir had become a woman wronged. A professional actor, Amma played victim to the hilt. When the votes were counted the AIADMK alliance won 196 out of 234 seats. Stalin was left waiting.

But his moment arrived last week. After an eight-year hitch Stalin was named Deputy CM. But it has been a long and hard grind for the DMK scion. Stalin shot to fame in 1976. He had just passed out after studying history at the Madras Presidency college, all of 23. Indira had put India was under emergency. His father’s government got dismissed. And Stalin found himself in jail under the notorious MISA. He spent a year confined in an 8 by 10 prison cell. Even today he shows you marks on his body and proudly proclaims them as the scars of democracy.

In 1984 he fought his first election from the Thousand Lights Assembly constituency. He lost by a narrow margin. Then there was a long hiatus in the wilderness. Stalin even tried his hand at acting. He acted in two serials, one for Doordarshan and the other for the family owned Sun TV. In fact, some people even today recognize him as Soorya, the lead actor in a serial by the same name.

But 1989 changed all that. The DMK rode on the anti-Rajiv storm across the country and won by a handsome margin. Stalin too won from Thousand Lights. He became a youth icon and got the title Ilaya Thalapathi or Young Lieutenant. It’s stuck with him ever since. Even today when he’s 56 years old.

As always the political purple patch was short lived. The DMK got decimated in the Rajiv Gandhi sympathy wave of 1991. Only 2 DMK MLAs won. And Stalin was not one of them. Five more years in the wilderness. Only to come back with a bang in 1996. Stalin got elected as the Mayor of Chennai defeating the formidable VS Chandralekha by well over four lakh votes. That’s when Stalin started being groomed as Karunanidhi’s heir-in-waiting. Apart from the garbage bins, Stalin also rechristened Chennai’s infamous public transport system. From PTC (Pallavan Transport Corporation) it became MTC (Metropolitan Transport Corporation). The city also saw the mushrooming of a dozen odd flyovers and mini-flyovers. But none of this was good enough for victory in 2001.

In the 2011 elections, Stalin will finally emerge out of the shadow of his legendary father. His opponent though will remain the same. The Regent of Poes Garden. He made the mistake of under-estimating her in 2001 and paid the price for it. Ten years later, the Young Lieutenant will hopefully be wiser.

MADE FOR TV ELECTION

2009-05-10T21:30:00.000-07:00

Elections 2009 are being fought on two fronts. One, on the ground through campaigns, rallies and speeches. The other, inside television studios. This election is the first one to be fought under the intense glare of television cameras. And that’s why some people are calling this a made for TV election.

Look at every single issue that has dominated this campaign. Varun Gandhi’s hate speech, the shoegate scandal involving journalist Jarnail Singh, the tu-tu main-main between Advani and Manmohan Singh, Karunanidhi’s breakfast to lunch fast… every single issue has been shaped by TV. It’s almost as if elections 2009 are the biggest reality show of this season.

And there’s a very simple reason for this. The airwaves are crowded like never before. In the last elections in 2004, there were less than 50 news channels in the country. Today that figure has tripled. There are almost 150 news channels, English, Hindi and vernacular put together. That’s 300 million news watching viewers. That’s 300 million votes at stake.

So much so, today some Hindi channels, like Aaj Tak, our sister channel for example, has TRPs that can match General Entertainment channels like Star Plus and Sony. This was unthinkable some years ago. And this has happened bang in the middle of the IPL season. I think the entire TV news industry can take a collective bow for that.

For the urban audiences, TV has replaced the election rally. TV is where election issues are being debated, dissected and given shape. TV has become the single biggest source of first-hand information and opinion for urban India. And politicians being smart people have latched onto it. Today you’ll find a Congress spokesperson and a BJP spokesperson in every single debate show on TV, every single night. Even parties that have an aversion to TV have gotten smart. The Comrades of the Left who always thought TV to be ‘bourgeoisie’ have got well-spoken, made for TV leaders like Sitaram Yechury and Brinda Karat. Even the BSP which brandished TV news media as ‘manuwadi’ has found an articulate spokesperson in Shahid Siddiqui.

But does that mean elections are won and lost on the idiot box? Not at all. If that were the case Arun Jaitley should’ve been Prime Minister of the country by now. TV in India hasn’t reached a stage where a debate can cost Nixon his presidency. But we’re getting there. And fast.

There are some viewers who complain that news TV has been reduced to a bunch of talking heads. The same old faces, the same boring issues. I agree with that partially. It’s not as if Indian elections don’t offer interesting stories. Muslims of an entire village in Etah boycotted Mulayam Singh because he joined hands with Kalyan Singh. But that story never made it to the nine o clock news. Dalits in a village in Solapur decided en masse not to vote for Power Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde because their village hadn’t seen electricity in five years. Again that didn’t feature in any prime time bulletin. TV is guided by what sells and what doesn’t. What gets more eyeballs and as a consequence, TRPs. But then again, that’s the nature of the medium. TV news is less than 20 years old in India. It’s still evolving. Give it some more time. Maybe by Elections 2014, it will get more altruistic. But till then, let’s have more of the Ravi Shankar Prasads and the Abhishek Manu Singhvis.

DEFENDING THE DEVIL

2009-05-04T02:30:00.000-07:00

Two-thirds of India has already voted. Yet, it’s still an open house. But one thing’s clear. None of the three fronts, in their existing form, UPA, NDA and Third Front will be able to form the next government. There’s going to be a fair amount of churning, after the elections. And no secular government can be formed without the Left. Which is why, the possibility of a third front is now far more real than it was at the start of the elections.

Ironically though, the one thing you’ll hear, whether it’s from hard-nosed political reporters or paanwallahs on the street is that a third front government is bad for the country. Jo bhi sarkar aaye, third front ki nahin aaye, that’s a common refrain. It’s almost as if the third front will ruin all the gains made in the last ten years under the NDA and UPA. It’s almost as if the third front is the devil incarnate. If that is the case then here’s my attempt at playing devil’s advocate. Here’s why I think, the third front is not such a bad idea after all.

First, we need to clarify a few historical wrongs. The so-called third front governments in the past have all been either at the mercy of the Congress or the BJP. In effect, they were susceptible to blackmail and pressure. Readers will surely remember the trauma of the 1989 National Front Government and of the 1996 United Front Government. One was toppled by the BJP and the other by the Congress. They fell, not because regional satraps couldn’t do business with each other, but because of the sheer greed and manipulation of the national parties. In the first instance, the BJP realized the potential of the Ram Janmabhoomi agitation and dumped the Third Front. In the second, a wily old Sitaram Kesri used low trickery and political skullduggery to pull the plug. The national parties should share as much blame, if not more, for the failure of Third Front governments as the men and women who comprised it.

The very idea of the Third front is aligned to the genius, diversity, and contradictions that make up this fascinating thing called Indian politics. The third alternative, at least in theory, comprises forces that have historically fought the status quo. Look at all the social justice movements in India. Whether in the North or in the South, the Lalus, Mulayams, NTRs and Karunanidhis have empowered entire communities who were historically treated as backwards. Today a Kurmi in Nitish’s Bihar knows the value of his vote. A Jatav in Mayawati’s UP can make or mar the fortunes of a Brahmin candidate. Power now flows bottom-up and not top-down. And regional parties have played a substantial role in that by empowering backward castes. In that sense, they have made our politics more federal.

The other myth that’s being propogated is that the Third Front is anti-development. Let me give you a couple of examples to show why that’s just a lot of bunkum. The surface transport ministry has been with the DMK for the last ten years or so. As a result, Tamil Nadu today has the best roads in the country. NHAI reports and other independent studies on roads, vouch for that. It wasn’t the case ten years ago. Same’s the case with Bihar and the Railways. A Bihari has been the Railway Minister for the last decade. Today, Bihar is one of the best connected states in India by rail. In the last five years alone, Bihar has had 52000 crores worth of rail projects and 52 new trains.

There are some people, especially those in Dalal Street who say India’s economy will be in the doldrums if the Left were to be part of any future dispensation. They will ruin the fruits of liberalization that this country’s middle-class has come to love over the last decade and a half. Well, I am all for free markets. But the numbers that make up the India story tell a different tale. Less than 2 percent of India has investments in the stock markets. More than 30 percent can’t invest in two square meals. That's the fascinating story of the two Indias. May the more important one win on the 16th of May.

LANKA WITHOUT LTTE

2009-04-24T18:04:00.000-07:00

So after 25 years of blood, gore and destruction, the war in Sri Lanka is drawing to a close. Many Sri Lankans are likely to breathe a sigh of relief on the prolonged bloodshed coming to an end. The war, for the past two and half decades, has brought immense suffering and misery to all the people of all Sri Lanka, whether they are Sinhalese, Tamil or Muslim. Every single family in this small island has been affected by the war, in one way or another. Soldiers, civilians, doctors, journalists.. they’ve all died in this war. Falling victim either to artillery shells or to suicide attacks or sometimes to state-sponsored extra-judicial killings.

But does the end of the war mean, end of all problems? Let’s get this straight. Prabhakaran is not the fundamental problem. He’s only a symptom of the problem. Some would say the most vocal, potent manifestation of the problem. The fundamental problem is the legitimate aspiration of the Tamil people to a life of dignity, equality and autonomy. That fundamental problem doesn’t end, with or without Prabhakaran. You cannot have a Sri Lanka where 3.5 million Tamils feel they’re treated like second class citizens. They have every right to demand a Sri Lanka where they are given the same rights, opportunities and freedom as the Sinhala majority. And if by consensus, regional autonomy is the only way of doing that, then so be it. How far the Sri Lankan state can convert military success into lasting and durable peace will depend on how fast Mr. Rajapakse can come up with a devolution package for the Tamils.

Usually, one-sided military victories in ethnic conflicts are not followed by major political reforms. It hasn’t happened in Bosnia. It hasn’t happened in Darfur. Sri Lanka cannot afford that to happen. In the long run, the Sinhalese political establishment might learn that regional self-rule under unarmed, non-secessionist and integrationist Tamil political parties might not be such a bad idea after all. Anything would be better than 25 years of bloody battle with 70,000 lives lost.

Here’s where the problem is. Mr. Rajapakse is dependent on hard line Sinhalese nationalist parties and groups. They have a disproportionate influence on the policy agenda of his administration. According to hardline Sinhala parties like the JVP and JHU, Sri Lanka does not have an “ethnic problem”. What exists is a “terrorist problem”. For them, this terrorist problem is spearheaded by the “fascist” LTTE. And a military victory is adequate to resolve that problem.

And what’s aiding them is that 9/11 has completely obfuscated the difference between terrorism and armed rebellious insurgency. In George Bush’s world view everyone’s a terrorist, whether it’s a Mullah Omar, an Osama bin Laden, an Isak Muivah or a Velupillai Prabhakaran. America’s ubiquitous War on Terror has destroyed all nuances and subtleties. The LTTE has not been fighting this war based on some distorted interpretation of any religion. They’ve been fighting for the legitimate political aspirations of the Tamil people. You may disagree with the method, but you cannot ignore the message. Branding the LTTE’s insurgency as terrorism and crushing it is fine. But it should not obviate the fact that the secessionist rebellion, despite its defeat, represented the voice of almost a fifth of Sri Lanka.

For the Tamil people, Prabhakaran’s legacy will hang around their necks like an albatross. The Tamils, as a community will be compelled to accept that defeat was the only major outcome of these 25 years of armed struggle and suffering. That’s how history will remember this war. As a non-resident Tamil, it makes me cringe.

PROF VIJAYAN AND THE DIGNITY OF DEATH

2007-10-04T10:30:00.000-07:00

Sometimes, television journalism sucks. It's filled with inequalities, disasters, corruption, malice and viciousness that men are capable of. But there's one cardinal rule that no journo breaks. And that has to do with death. Everyone, absolutely everyone, has the right to a dignified death. And that's exactly why Professor MN Vijayan's death and the coverage of it was such a sham. It was treated like a television spectacle by the national media. With headlines like "Camera par maut" and "Aakhri saas, camere par", the Hindi channels threw out of the window any semblance of decency that has to be given to a dying man. Leave alone a renowned intellectual like Vijayan Maash.

This is what happened with me. And I am still cringing in shame. I was called by a producer from my sister channel with the seemingly innocuous question. "Zakka, do you speak Malayali." I had half a mind to tell him, “uh..it’s not Malayali, it’s Malayalam mate.” But you can’t do much about other people’s ignorance, can you? But this was just the beginning of the dark hole of incapacity that I was being led into. I reached the PCR from where the show was being directed. It had the top editorial brass of the channel giving directions to the anchor. Not a soul, not one, knew who this man was or why his death would leave such a void. From my limited knowledge of the man, I had to tell them that this guy deserved more respect than what he was being subjected to.

Later a friend called up from Kerala and said the Malayalam channels didn’t fare too better either. They too treated it more like a tamasha, for a large part of the afternoon. It was only after viewers started calling in and started heaving abuses that better sense prevailed.

The man maybe gone, but the relevance of the issues he raised still lives on. In fact it lies at the heart of the ideological divide within the CPM. Professor Vijayan cried hoarse at the foreign money that was being bombarded into God’s Own Country in the name of development. With his death, the voice of dissent within the Left has become feebler. And less reasonable.

Prof Vijayan was a hounded man in his last days. He had a slew of defamation cases filed against him after he was thrown out as Editor of Deshabhimani, the CPM’s mouthpiece. But there was a façade of justice, as the Kerala High Court had acquitted him in one such case, just a week before his death. He was addressing his first press conference after the acquittal, when death came calling. A quote of George Bernard Shaw became his famous last words. Fitting, for a man who started his career as a literary critic. Rest in Peace Vijayan Maashe.

THE THREE-HOUR DYNAMITE

2007-09-30T18:22:00.000-07:00

Now that the Twenty20 world cup has been pocketed, the victory rallies ended and the champagne stopped flowing, it’s time to sit down and think. Think about what this shortest format of the game is all about and what it holds for the future. It’s also time to destroy some long held myths about this three-hour cricketing dynamite.

Myth # 1 – This is a batsman’s game. If there’s one thing this T20 world cup has exposed, it’s this. This is as much a bowler’s game as it is a batter’s. India won its last three matches, the ones against South Africa, Australia and Pakistan, not because they posted ungettable targets, but because they took wickets at regular intervals. And unlike in the fifty over game, in a Twenty20, every time a wicket falls, the pressure on the incoming batsman increases manifold. And this is at all stages of the game. In the final, if Pakistan were say, six down, as opposed to nine down, they would have won the match, hands tied and eyes closed.

Take the entire tournament, for instance. There were a total of 348 wickets taken in 27 matches. That’s an average of one wicket, every 19 deliveries, which is damn good. The better ones picked up a wicket, once every twelve deliveries. Also, on ten occasions bowlers returned with four-fors. That’s a fair indication that T20 is not a batsman’s game after all.

Myth # 2 – This game is for the big-hitters and the sloggers. Two of the top three run getters in this tournament, Gautam Gambhir and Misbah-ul-Haq, are not the biggest hitters of the cricket ball, by any reckoning. The highest run-getter was Mathew Hayden, who before the World Cup didn’t play a single Twenty20 game. And Matt too is more a clean striker and less a slogger.

Myth # 3 – This game is only about fours and sixes. In the final against Pakistan, out of a 157 that India made, only 76 runs were made in fours and sixes. Take away five extras, and you’ll see that more runs were made by running between the wickets, than by crashing the ball into the billboards. Take even the highest scoring game of the tournament, India versus England. 418 runs were scored in that game. A total of 184 runs were scored in ones, twos and threes. That’s about 45 percent of the total runs, which is ample indication that this game is as much about the grafters, as it is about the butchers.

Myth # 4 – This game is for youngsters. Youth rules. The sight of a victorious young Indian team may re-instate the fact that this is a game for the Gen X-ers, but there are some sporadic old fogies who shone through. Sanath Jayasuriya at one point in the tournament was the highest run getter. He’s 38. The man who eventually became the highest run getter, Mathew Hayden will be 36 in a month’s time. The man who got Pakistan, so near yet so far, Misbah-ul-Haq, is 33. The second highest wicket taker in the tournament is Stuart Clark, who’s just turned 32. Like Mark Twain said “age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter.” And cricket my friend, is as much brain as it’s brawn. So here’s to the new baby in the cricketing fraternity. May you live a thousand lives and die a thousand deaths.

BATTLE OF THE MYTHS

2007-09-27T03:01:00.000-07:00

The old fox is at it once again. You may or may not agree with Karunanidhi's world view of things, but you cannot grudge the man for an innate sense of time and place. No one in my experience of covering politicians and their ilk, plays to the galleries as often and as well as this man. So for most people, on this side of the Vindhyas, Kalaignar's statement attributing Ram to a drunkard and questioning his engineering capabilities, could amount to heresy. But for me, it's just a reflection of the man and his politics.

This is not the first time that Ram has been used as a punching bag. For proponents of the Dravidian movement, like Karunanidhi, Ram was a symbol of Aryan dominance over the native Dravidian. In fact in the forties and fifties, there was a very popular drama doing the rounds of towns in Tamil Nadu called Keemayana. It was an interpretation of the sacred epic that turned everything in it, on its head. So Ram became a drunkard, Sita became a wanton woman and Ravana was celebrated as a Dravidian Hero. It was thrashed by the Brahmins and lapped up by the lower castes.

But this interpretation by EV Ramaswamy was not iconoclastic. There were numerous interpretations of the Ramayana, which celebrated Ravana as a hero. The most notable among them is by a Tamil Rennaisance saint named Ramalingaswami who denounced Valmiki's interpretation of Rama as the do-gooder and Ravana as all evil. There are even Jain interpretations of the Ramayana in their Prati Puranas, which question the central premise of the epic. EVR's Keemayana though, ended up being the most popular.

A politician's audience defines his politics. Karunanidhi's audience will lap up every bit of the Ram-trashing that he's indulging in. Not that the average Tamilian is not religious. In fact, Tamil society is one of the most visibly religious parts of India. You'll find more men sporting the vibudhi and more women donning the kungumam in Chennai or Coimbatore than in any other city in India. But the Tamilian's idea of Hinduism is different from the mainstream Hinduism, defined by the BJP. For him, Ram is not a deified incarnation of Vishnu. Instead, he's a twice born Kshatriya who was an upholder of Brahminical caste norms in society. Someone who killed Sambuk the Sudra, because he did penance. This makes him a figure of resent for the average non-Brahmin Tamilian who's idea of Hinduism is built on a strong dose of anti-Brahminism. Moreover, Dravidian politics has always thrived on a mid-level-lower caste identity rather than a monolithic Hindu identity. Therefore it's only natural that a Tamilian is suspicious of the BJP's idea of a homogenous Hindu ethos.

Moreover, the Sethusamudram iself is seen as a symbol of Tamil pride. Forget, the developmental aspects of the project. The Tamils believe that their Golden Period, which is known as the Sangam period, was under a unified landmass that comprised of the Deccan plateau, Ceylon, Madagascar, Australia and Antartica. And this piece of land is described as Kumari Kandam. Two massive floods are believed to have sunk the Kumari Kandam. The two Sangams, Mudhal Sangam and Idai Sangam are believed to have been written in between these two floods. For the Dravidians, Kumari Kandam or the cradle of civilization is the origin of human languages in general, and Tamil, in particular. For the Dravidianists, the construction of the Sethusamudram Canal comes closest to a modern realisation of the myth of Kumari Kandam. Thus, it’s this politics of nostalgia and the loss of a golden past that Karunanidhi is trying to stoke. Ironically, it’s one myth versus another. The BJP is attacking Karunanidhi for debunking their myth of the Ramar Sethu, even as he propagates his own myth of Kumari Kandam. As always, the old fox has the last kill.

CAPTAIN COURAGEOUS

2007-09-18T00:03:00.000-07:00

There are a few myths regarding the resignation of Rahul Dravid that need to be cleared. If anyone (most notably, sports journalists) comes up to you and says, I saw it coming; then you know he’s fibbing. Fibbing through his teeth because no one saw this coming. Not even the selectors. Not even the mandarins of the BCCI. Not even Rahul’s own agent Lokesh Sharma. Such is the man that Rahul Dravid is. Intensely private. A thorough gentleman.

Just a day before the resignation, the BCCI had this star studded affair announcing the launch of it’s new Twenty 20 league. And there were about 200 odd journalists who descended upon that PC. Not a soul there, knew this was coming. Isn’t this ample proof that Rahul Dravid was not interested in the media. If the man wanted to, he could have gone to press first and then informed his bosses in the BCCI. And take my word for it, a lot many Indian captains have done that in the past. The Board was almost invariably, the last one to know. Typical of the man, Rahul makes his decision known to the Board President and goes off on a holiday to the jungles. Thank God for places where cell phones are still unreachable!

The other myth that needs to be busted is this. That he resigned because of differences within the members of his team. Now proponents of this theory will cite the examples of Sourav Ganguly and Zaheer Khan in England speaking in direct contrast to their captain. Why don’t we get this straight? The Indian cricket team is like a private company with eleven employees. You don’t have to love everyone in office nor do you have to agree with each of them. But, all eleven work towards the profit of the organisation. At the end of the day, it’s just a job. Zaheer and Sourav were stating their personal choices. That, in no way makes it, ‘irreconcilable differences’ within the team.

So why did Rahul resign? Well I’m not an expert on this, nor am I close confidant of his. But being a self-confessed fan of Rahul’s, I think it has something to do with the word ‘Legacy’. Those who know Rahul, know that he’s a stickler for history. Twenty years from now, will we remember Rahul Dravid, the batsman or Rahul Dravid, the captain? Chances are, we’ll remember him as a great batsman. And I’m sure Rahul would not want anything to tarnish that reputation. It is true that his batting had been affected because of his captaincy. From the early sixties it had come down to the mid forties in tests. But that’s happened even to the greatest of the greats. Sir Viv, Steve Waugh and Sachin Tendulkar. For all his Bradmanesque achievements, Dravid too is human after all.

There’s an old saying in Malayalam. "Swaram nanaayi irikumbam pattu niruthenam." Meaning, you have to stop singing when your voice is at its peak. Rahul Dravid is one of the few Indian captains who’s resigned after a high, leading the Indian team to a series victory in England after 2 decades. Most of them are sacked ignominiously. Which leaves us with the one positive development to come out of this whole fiasco. It will give us back, Rahul Dravid the batsman. So here’s to more Kolkatas(180*), Adelaides(233) and Headingleys(148). Welcome back Rahul ‘The Wall’ Dravid.

CONFESSIONS OF A TV ANCHOR

2007-09-15T06:58:00.000-07:00

It’s always a nice feeling as a television anchor, if you manage to piss off a guest so badly, that he walks out of your show. It’s a television moment. Something of that sort happened last week, when the guardian of right wing Hindutva, Dr. Praveen Togadia walked out of my show. Apparently, Doctor Saheb (sorry for the politically incorrect reference) was irked at the aggressive questioning of the anchor, that he found it difficult to defend his stated public position.

This is not the first time it’s happened to me though. As far as I can remember, the first person to walk out of my show was a retired Air Force Commodore. I think it was the Air Force day or something. We had a special show on it. And just two days prior to that, another MiG 21 had crashed. As usual, I rubbed it in to the Commodore, that the Indian Air Force needed to get its act right. Being the force ka aadmi that he was, he took offence to my questions. The repartees lasted for about five-seven minutes, after which I ended the chat. And this is an old trick. Whenever you’ve pissed off a guest, the best way to end it is by saying.."Mr.X, you have defended yourself very well. It was a pleasure talking to you." And you extend a handshake. At this point, most guests mutter something under their breath and quite limply offer their hand for a shake. Not Commodore Saheb. After all, he was a force ka aadmi. With the straightest of faces, he says.."I’m afraid it was not such a pleasure talking to you, young man." And in one clean motion, rips his lapel mike off his coat, and walks away, huffing and puffing.

Then there are times, when you don’t exactly come out victorious. Like the time Pooja Bhatt made shredded mincemeat out of me, when I interviewed her, on the day of release of one of her movies. The mistake I made (and I promised myself that day, I’ll never do it again) was that I didn’t watch her movie. I still remember my panel producer say to me after the chat.."Arre, yeh tho tumhe seven course meal banakar kha li." Well, that’s the way life is. Sometimes you feel like an emperor, sometimes you end up feeling like shit. Life is a great leveler. And sometimes, a bitch.

A lot of people have asked me, why do you be so aggressive with your guests. I guess the answer lies in what the great BBC anchor, Jeremy Paxman, once said about the guests on his show. “I know this guy is a lying bastard. Why is he lying to me and how do I show the world that he is?” Although I don’t think of my guests in the same slanderous terms, it’s a method of interviewing I have followed. And not everyone likes it. I don’t expect them to either. Sorry Togadia Saheb.

A TALE OF THREE CITIES

2007-08-30T23:45:00.000-07:00

Yet another Southern city has been attacked. And the media has gone on its familiar old lament of how the South is becoming a soft target for terrorists. Frankly, as somebody who comes from the South, this reading of the twin blasts in Hyderabad, is not only stale and redundant, it’s yet another classic case of how the media missed the tree for the woods. If only we looked more carefully we would’ve spotted a rather interesting sociological phenomenon emerging within Hyderabad itself. It has to do with the contrasting responses to the Mecca Masjid blasts and the twin blasts on August 25th. But first, you need to know what makes Hyderabad unique to understand it’s differing responses to the two blasts.

Hyderabad is a tale of three cities. Nowhere in India can you see the past, present and future as starkly as you can in Hyderabad. There’s the old city, which is living on the romantic notion of a glorious past. It has the beautiful Charminar and other minarets. Then there’s the present, in ample display in Secunderabad with its cantonment area, the plush malls and also the commercial district. And then there’s the future in Cyberabad, with its gigantic steel and glass IT offices, which represent the contours of an imagined future.

The contrast in these three cities is integral to the definition of Hyderabad. The new city is always in a hurry, on the move, building a future full of possibilities. The old city is stuck in a time warp. Old timers lament about the good old days, when the Nizam used to rule Hyderabad. For them, nothing came closer to utopia than the King’s reign. So while the new city races ahead at Kbps speeds, this part has been largely untouched by the fruits of liberalisation. In these bylanes, you’ll probably hear more Deccani Urdu, than you’ll hear Telugu, Hindi and English put together. You’ll see more practioners of Unani and Ayurveda, than allopathic doctors. Women here wear burqas and not churidars or sarees.

And this is precisely why the responses to the two blasts have been different. When the Mecca Masjid blasts happened, for most Hyderabadis living outside the Old City, it was like any other terrorist attack. It could have happened in Mumbai, Malegaon or Kashmir, for all they cared. But when Lumbini Park and Gokul Chat were attacked, it was like terror had hit home. Suddenly Mana Hyderabad was under attack. These two spots in many ways epitomise the easy going and laidback spirit of the Hyderabadi. And it was this spirit that was attacked. For most people in the Old City, this was the much needed, rude wake up call, to those on the other side that anybody could be a victim to the dogma of terror. That they don’t have to be lone sufferers in this meaningless and misguided battle.

The Muslim community of the Old city has a distinct regional identity. Their food, their dress, even their language sets them apart from fellow Muslims in any other part of the country. When the state of Hyderabad was trifurcated, soon after independence, the Muslims of Marathwada joined the then Bombay state. But they counted for little among the Muslim elite of Bombay who boasted of the likes of Mohammad Ali Jinnah within their ranks. The same happened to those who joined Karnataka. On the other hand, the Muslims of Hyderabad remained in Hyderabad, the seat of their rule. But they remained concentrated in the Old City in a ghetto environment. Their strength in the capital city, and their marginal presence elsewhere in the state, made them convenient pawns in the games politicians played. As a result a Muslim leadership arose in the form of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen or the MIM. The MIM established itself as a right of center party and soon started acting like the guardian of the Old City Muslims. It ran schools, hospitals and even community centers. But soon the MIM started being perceived as an elitist party by the poor Muslims. Today there’s a power struggle happening in Hyderabad to control the Muslim mind space. And that has made the politics of the city, shriller. This provides for a perfect cover for anti-national elements owing allegiance to Pakistani or Bangladeshi terror groups to operate behind the veil of patriotic and well meaning Muslims of the Old City. Fact is that Hyderabad is a perfect symbol of how selective the fruits of liberalization have been. Unless the disparities between a majority of the Old City residents and those in the newer parts are reduced, Hyderabad will continue to be a hapless victim to terror.

Fortunately though, there are signs of hope. The walls of the walled city cannot block the winds of change. Today, young Muslim boys and girls of the Old City are eager to have an English education so that they can get good jobs. They want to be in Cyberabad, in plush IT and BPO companies. They want to own houses, buy cars and lead a good life. And for the first time, they can realistically think of doing that without having to migrate to the Gulf. The wheel has come full circle. The Muslims of the Old City have to choose once again between pride in their history and hopes for their future. Question is, will their leadership stand up to the test?

P.S.: A certain Congress MP was overheard in the corridors of Parliament seeking cold comfort from the number of Muslims killed in the twin blasts (nearly half of them are from the minority community). At least, Hyderabad will be spared of riots.

ARABIAN TALES FOR THE COMRADES

2007-08-28T02:44:00.000-07:00

At a time when the Communists in Delhi are threatening to pull the plug on the central government, a movie is not the first thing that comes to mind. But then, this past week, I caught a refreshing flick on the travails of a self-confessed Commie. Arabikatha is a hardcore political film and a bloody good one, at that.

It’s the tale of Cuba Mukundan, a dyed in the wool Communist party worker. As is evident from his name, the protagonist is a lover of all things Cuban. His role model is Fidel Castro. He also oozes admiration for a Chinese girl. But before that, a combination of circumstances in his hometown Chemanoor forces him to migrate to the Gulf (or gelf as we Mals call it). And he’s forced like millions of his Mallu brethren to do hard labour and earn a living. The thinking-debating Communist gives way for the toiling-slogging manual labourer. He learns life’s hard lessons, the only way they can be learnt. The hard way.

Sreenivasan as Mukundan is not at his best, yet I can't think of any other man pulling off this role. Not even the so-called mega stars of Mollywood, Mammootty and Mohanlal. It says something about both the actor and the industry he works in, that a comedian like Sreenivasan can carry the weight of an entire film on his shoulders. I can't think of too many parallels in Indian cinema, except maybe Nagesh when he paired with KB for films like Edhir Neechal and Server Sundaram.

It's inevitable that comparisons will be made to Sreenivasan's other famous Commie movie, Sandesham. But then Kotapalli Prabhakaran and Cuba Mukundan are as different as cod and caviar. Prabhakaran is a manipulative, conniving, fair-weather Communist who prefers to be a think tank, as opposed to going through the rigours of organised labour. Mukundan on the other hand, is a dedicated Communist who believes in everything the party stands for, including its pet hate, Coca Cola. Sandesham as a movie had much more lighter moments than Arabikatha. It was far more irreverential and precisely for this reason, entertaining. Arabikatha is a whole lot more heavier, yet at the same time, it doesn't get preachy.

It’s a must watch though for Comrade Karat and his friends. The message is simple. Ideals and ideologies are fine. But it takes a lot more to navigate through the cross roads of life. It requires a very essential ingredient called pragmatism. Politics after all is not a JNU debate.

FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS

2007-08-12T06:33:00.001-07:00

It’s the silly season in politics. The Presidential election is over. The Bombay Blasts verdict has concluded. And the nuclear deal has been signed, sealed and delivered. So when someone asked me the other day what the next big political story is going to be, I had to wreck my brains quite a bit. And I came up with one. Narendra Modi’s electoral defeat. That to me is going to be the next big story in the Great Indian political jamboree.

Imagine the amplitude and resonance, such an event would have. The poster boy of the Sangh Parivar’s Hindutva philosophy is made to eat crow at the hustings. For the jholewallahs and the so-called secularists, it would be a reason to celebrate from the rooftops. For the tens of thousands who were affected by the riots, it will be cursory justice. But for people like me it will be the ultimate affirmation of the efficacy of our electoral system. That after all, there’s no place for despots in a democracy.

Here’s why Narendrabhai’s days in the hot seat are numbered. There has been open rebellion against him. Five of his MLAs, including his one-time Home Minister have been suspended from the party. Two major communities of Gujarati society, the Koli Patels and the Patidars are highly disillusioned with Modi and his government. And the final cut. His own brethren in the VHP and Bajrang Dal have sworn that they will not campaign for him.

But more than any of these, Modi’s defeat will be caused by simple electoral dynamics. The 2002 election result was an abberation. Something that was facilitated by the riots. At first look, it may seem like the BJP scored a landslide. After all, 126 seats, a two-thirds majority in an assembly of 180 is an avalanche of sorts. But there’s more to it than meets the eye. If you break Gujarat into the four regions of Saurashtra, South, North and Central, you’ll notice that the BJP had gained largely in Central and North. It has a vote swing of 17 and 8 percent in these two regions. Contrast this with South and Saurashtra, where the party’s vote share went down by 8 and 3 percent. So what explains the BJP’s phenomenal success in North and Central Gujarat?

Central and North Gujarat were the worst affected by the riots. Districts like Ahmedabad, Baroda, Mehsana, Dahod, Panchmahals, Anand and Kaira fall in this region and that’s where the impact of the riots was felt most. There were a total of 65 riot-affected constituencies in Gujarat. Of these the BJP won more than 50. And that is what will make the difference between the Gujarat of 2002 and the Gujarat of 2007. The bell tolls for Mr. Modi.

HAS SOUTH INDIAN CINEMA ARRIVED?

2007-08-03T00:04:00.000-07:00

The title of this post may seem a bit tenuous. When was south Indian cinema lost for it to be discovered? When was it relegated, for it to be brought to the foreground now? It's easily the most visible and popular form of culture in any of the four southern states. It’s ingrained in the people’s consciousness. Just like masala dosa or Kanjeevaram silk.

Then again, South Indian cinema was always considered a poor cousin to Bollywood. I reckon this was largely due to better marketing by filmmakers in Bombay. Bollywood has this great hype machine working for it. And thanks to all this hype, a false impression has been gaining ground, especially among foreigners taking an interest in our cinema. That Bollywood is Indian cinema and Indian cinema is Bollywood. Malayalam Mega Star Mammootty raised a stink at last year's IIFA awards and rightfully so. Bollywood represents Hindi cinema. And that is only one part of Indian cinema.

On an average around a thousand odd movies are released in India every year. Of which, Hindi cinema makes less than 300. South Indian cinema makes close to 700. How about the number of theatres? India has just under13000 movie halls. Andhra Pradesh alone has about 3000 of them. Tamil Nadu has another 2500. The technical quality of an average South Indian film is far superior to an average Bollywood flick. And here I mean things like cinematography, editing and effects. These are universal and not subjective. Some of the finest cameramen and editors in Bollywood have come from the Deccan. Yet, South Indian cinema is consigned to a lesser existence.

But now within the space of a month, two big-ticket releases have changed that perception. Sivaji and Shankar Dada Zindabad. It’s perhaps the first time that the national media has taken such a huge interest in cinema from beyond the Vindhyas. And it’s purely because of the hyperbole built around these films. The images of Rajni fans bathing his posters in milk or Chiru fans throwing confetti in the theatre, does make people in this neck of the woods, sit up and take notice. Rajnikant and Chiranjeevi didn’t have to lift a finger for the publicity of their films. They are learning the same tricks that their Bollywood cousins have mastered. That fine art called marketing.

Bollywood has for long assumed an infallible superiority over cinema from other languages. But if Sivaji eats into the revenues of a YashRaj production like Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, then you know the equations are being tilted. Like noted columnist Sadanand Menon puts it..'We may not have created Deewar, lekin hamare paas Rajnikant hai.'

DOCTORED DETENTION

2007-07-24T01:33:00.000-07:00

"Would you lend a SIM card to a cousin of yours?" It seemed like an innocuous question, coming from my panel producer. "If you were leaving a country and if there was plenty of talk time left in it?", he continued. "Why not?", I retorted. "And if your cousin went on to plot a terror attack, with you having no clue about it, would that also make you guilty of terror?" I knew what he was getting at. Whichever way you look at it, that's all Mohammad Haneef is guilty of. Of lending a SIM card to his cousin just before he left the UK for Australia, thanks to a new job. Does that make him a terrorist? And does that warrant solitary confinement for 23 hours a day in a dark prison cell? I'm not so sure.

There are a couple of myths about terrorism that are being bandied about in the aftermath of this botched up attack.

One of the most oft-asked questions is this. How can educated Muslims do this? After all don't most terrorists fall under the blanket of misguided youth from conflict prone regions who have no access to education? Aren't they the ones who become easy pawns for evil terror mongers? Nothing could be further from the truth than this. Osama bin Laden, the world's most dreaded terrorist is himself a civil engineer. His number two man Ayman al-Zawahiri is a doctor from Egypt. Some of the main conspirators and exponents of 9/11 studied in Hamburg University. In fact they were referred to as the Hamburg Cell, which constituted the core of the perpetrators, Mohammad Atta, Marwan al-Shehi and Ramzi Binalshibh. Education was and will never be an insurance against terror. Terrorism of the Al-qaeda variety is a clash of two different worldviews. It's an ideological battle. Not a battle of deprivation.

The other recurring question is this. How can boys from Namma Bangalore be involved in this? How can a city which symbolises the best that globalisation and what the western world can offer, produce advocates of terror? Honestly, the Bangalore bit in this case is just incidental. These boys could have been from Gumidipoondi or Bagdogra or Dharamsala. Territorial boundaries cannot stymie the flow of terror. The global jihad does not recognise local identities and cultures. The unifying force is just a distorted vision of religion. How else can a boy brought up in Bangalore empathise with a war-torn Palestinian or a battered Iraqi? He probably won't even be able to identify Palestine on a map of the world.

The only way that terror can be stopped is by winning the war of ideas. Today the al-Qaeda is not just a dreaded terror machine. It's much more than that. It's a powerful idea that's prompting hundreds of thousands of young Muslims to give up all, and walk into the throes of death. The problem is that the so-called torch-bearers of the western world are bankrupt of ideas.

Eighty years ago, there was a similar battle of ideas. At that time it was against colonialism. A frail, be-spectacled, old man, wrapped in a loincloth and with a walking stick in hand, found an idea that could take on imperialism. Maybe therein lies the answer.

A REQUIEM FOR THE GARDEN CITY

2007-07-15T11:35:00.000-07:00

A lot has been said and written about the plight of Bangalore. Crawling traffic, infrastructure bottlenecks, an apathetic government, Bangalore represents the worst of our civic governance failure. So I shall not go on another all-too familiar diatribe on all the infrastructure ills of India’s silicon valley. That's not what irks me. What I am bothered about are the people. Because people lend character to a city. They define a city. And that's where Bangalore has changed. Just like every other city, I guess. In some cases, irrevocably. It’s no longer that sleepy little town, which was a pleasure to visit. If you were an outsider like me, you went to Bangalore only for two reasons. Either for a holiday or to settle down. Today people come there with stars in their eyes, to ride the great Indian tech boom.

Today, six out of ten persons in Bangalore are from outside. Bangalore has become a city of outsiders. Like an brand-man and an old Bangalorean, Harish Bijoor says, "there are two kinds of Bangaloreans these days. The ones who came here twenty years back, and the ones who’ve come here two to five years back." The problem is Bangalore’s increasingly getting taken over by the new comers. Flashy, yuppie and frankly sometimes, garish. The old Bangalorean’s mild-mannered nature just gets submerged in this collective new-world clamour.

What irks me is that a large number of people (atleast the ones who are most visible and vocal) in Bangalore, have become pseudo. They want to be seen hanging out at certain places simply because it is a hip thing to do. It’s ‘cool’, in their lingo. People pretend to have fun. They’ve become image-conscious and have the money which they need to spend in style. There are too many wannabes hanging around Forum and Garuda. In short, it's what I call the Delhi-fication of Bangalore.

Gone are the days, when hanging out meant eating crispy dosas at MTR or steaming Bissibelle baath at Udupi Krishna Bhavan or simply strolling aound Lal Bagh or Cubbon Park. You could call me a sucker for old world nostalgia, but we went there to eat or stroll and generally have a good time. Not to be seen to be eating or seen to be strolling around. Today, eating out is a lifestyle statement. Going for a movie at PVR is a status symbol. What’s important is where you are eating and what you eat. Not whether it fills your stomach.

I went to a place called Opus when I was in Bangalore. Not a bad place, I must admit. Nice ambience, decent food and way better music than anything you'll get to hear in Delhi. But the people who came there were more Delhiite and less Bangalorean. Fake accents, designer clothes and a swanky attitude to go with it. A friend of mine (an old Bangalorean at that) has a wonderful term that describes these people. 'Fu fu-Shi shi'. Which basically means ‘wannabes’. Bangalore, I'm afraid has become a city of pretenders.

I maybe making too much ado about the natural changes brought to a city’s demography with time. And no city, least of all Bangalore, is immune to the winds of change. But there are larger sociological implications to this growing phenomenon. And sometimes it’s led to violent clashes in a bid to re-territorialize the city. Most recently, when Dr.Rajkumar died, violence engulfed parts of Bangalore. It was as much for the loss of a great cultural icon as it was an assertion by unemployed local youth that they don’t want to be left out of the great Indian dream. That explains the symbols they chose to target..software offices, corporate buildings and government installations. The overall damage to property/business far outweighed the loss of lives. Eight people killed. Forty million dollars of business lost. The same holds true of the 1991 anti-Tamil riots. As much as it was a protest against the Tamils, in the aftermath of the Cauvery tribunal’s interim order, it was also a remonstration at the lack of educational/economic opportunities for indigenous Kannadigas. Consider this. 21 people killed, 15 of them in police firing. On the other hand, the damage to property, 20 crores. And that in 1991, was an astronomical sum.

For all its bluster, the IT industry, the so called jewel in Bangalore’s crown has created just about six lakh jobs. A majority, sixty percent of them indirectly, as allied services. Under 2 lakh are employed directly in the IT and BPO sectors. And that in a city of seven million is quite minimal, considering the pre-eminent position IT claims in the city’s scheme of things. Even today, three and half million people, that’s half of Bangalore’s populace lives in ‘shadow areas’, a government coined euphemism for poverty. But no one writes or reports about it. Almost as if, the poor of Bangalore simply don’t exist.

In essence, Bangalore’s is a tale of two cities. One, living on pretensions, the other in poverty. One, savouring the delights of a good life. The other, struggling from one meal to another. Islands of prosperity in an ocean of poverty. The garden city may yet tide over, what maybe considered a temporary phenomenon. But for old timers like me, Bangalore will never be the same again.

SMALL IS BIG

2007-07-13T00:21:00.000-07:00

There are very few nice things to say about the current presidential election campaign. It’s been malicious, slanderous and frankly below the belt. Simply not befitting the country’s first office. But one of the positive fallouts of this vicious exercise has been the genesis of the UNPA. Or should we say, the resurrection of the third front in a new name.

A wise old politician once said that "third front dreams are pipe dreams. It exists only in the fantasies of out of power Chief Ministers." Agreed that Chandrababu Naidu, Jayalalithaa, Mulayam Singh and Om Prakash Chautala are all out of power Chief Ministers who are lurking to get back. But their ambitions are not a pipe dream. I believe, come 2009, these regional satraps will hold the key to the corridors of power in Delhi. And here’s why.

First, if one were to go by the simple thumb rule of anti-incumbency all the constituents of the UNPA are likely to benefit in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. Even by the most conservative terms, the seven party alliance should be able to notch up about 80 to a 100 seats. Which would mean that for either the NDA or the UPA to come to power, they will need a little bit of help from friends within the UNPA.

Neither the UPA nor the NDA seems to be in a position to storm back to power on their own. The backbone of the UPA is its allies comprising of the Left, DMK, RJD and NCP. All these parties stand to lose in the 2009 elections because of the cyclical nature of anti-incumbency. But none of the NDA partners are in a position to capitalise on the UPA's losses. Hence this should go to the UNPA's kitty.

Gone are the days when the road to Delhi passed through Lucknow. Today it passes through Chennai and Hyderabad. Both the NDA and UPA managed to come to power because of a substantial number of seats from Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. Hence the importance of being Amma or Babugaaru.

But does that mean a third front government is going to walk the famous path up Raisina Hill? Not quite. The famous Indian Express Editor Shekhar Gupta had written in one of his columns that for a stable polity at the center, the combined strength of the Congress and the BJP has to exceed 300 seats. The Congress and the Jan Sangh/BJP have outnumbered the regional players in every single Lok Sabha since 1952. To put that same point in another way, a non-Congress, non-BJP government can come about only when the combined strength of prospective third front constituents exceeds the combined tally of the Congress and the BJP. Which is why the Mulayams and Lalus and Naidus of the country will always be kingmakers and can never become King.

The fallout of this has been that successive third front governments have been at the mercy of either the BJP or the Congress. The Janata party in 77, the National Front in 89 or even the United Front in 96 and 97. But, unstable as it may seem, the third front is the ultimate manifestation of India’s federal polity, which enables smaller regional parties to call the shots at the centre. So here’s to the political baby in the cradle. In the big bad world of Indian politics, small is big.

BACK TO BLOGGING. THANK YOU SUPERSTAR.

2007-07-12T00:58:00.000-07:00

Writing is an addiction. So here I am, back to the enticing world of blogs after a hiatus of more than two years. Funny, the point of provocation to get back to the clicker-clacker of the keyboard also had to be an addiction. Something I have been hooked to since I was five. Something I’ve grown with. Something that is an inherent part of my South Indian psyche. The phenomenon called Rajnikanth.

Funny again, that the reason I am writing this is a blog of a fellow media person, terming Sivaji the boss of crap. Fair enough. She has every right to be entitled to an opinion. Like an old firend says.."Opinions are like certain orifices in the human body. Everyone has one." But opinions have to be based on facts, logic and closeness to reality. Sadly, hers wasn’t.

First things first, Sivaji is not Rajni’s best movie. Nor is it his worst. It’s not even a yardstick to measure the range or depth of his work. It’s just another Rajni film. Entertaining and in relative terms I place it above the last two movies he’s done, Chandramukhi and Baba. Chandramukhi was too much of a safe script. Proven successful in Malayalam and Kannada. Even the superstar needs the security of a safe bet, once in a while. Chandramukhi was a safe bet. As for Baba, I don’t even want to get started. Arguably, the most forgetful fare from the superstar’s stable.

Sivaji on the other hand is Rajni in his elements. Not quite vintage Rajni. It’s more a Shankar movie than a Rajni one. Shankar’s scripts, whether it’s Muthalvan, Indian, Gentleman or even Anniyan could have had Rajni in the lead. He in fact had gone to Rajni with the Muthalvan role. Word is that Rajni refused because if he did that movie, it would be impossible for him to stay out of politics. (The protagonist in Muthalvan goes onto become CM of Tamil Nadu). Because when you have him as the hero, the entire setting becomes larger than life. And that’s what Rajni is. Larger than reality. An extraordinary escape window for our mundane everyday existences. He does, what we all aspire to. Beat up the baddies, court the beauties and cleanse the system. And do it in style.

It’s a tad dubious that an actor should be judged, just by one work of his. Imagine judging Amitabh after having seen only films like Mahaan or Sharaabi or Mard. And that too by people who haven’t seen Rajni grow over the years. And worse, still by those who don’t understand a word of Tamil. That’s plain unfair. It’s like me trying to judge Almodovar or Kurosawa. I’d never be able to appreciate the nuances as much as a Spaniard or a Japanese.

There’s another myth about Rajni that I’d like to blow. That he’s a bad actor. He’s just a man of antics and a sub-standard actor. I beg to differ. Anyone who’s seen Rajni in Thappu Thalangal, Gayatri, Aval Appadithan or Sri Raghavendra wouldn’t call Rajni a bad actor. It’s a pity that the actor in him has been buried under the superstar. And Tamil cinema shall be the lesser for it.

But there are these two incidents which put the Rajni phenomenon in perspective. Everytime I meet an outsider who asks me about Rajni, I tell them these two incidents. Just as an indicator of where the man began and where he is now. The first one involves Rajni and the legendary Kannada director Puttana Kanagal who gave him one of his first breaks in Katha Sangamam. During the shooting, Rajni walked upto the legendary director and told him..”Sir, I don’t know the ABCD of acting. I was a bus conductor before this.” To which, the witty Puttana replied “Son, don’t worry I was a two-wheeler mechanic before this. So I think we’ll make a good team.”

The second incident happened many years later. In 1992, after Rajni’s superstar status had hit stratosphere. Jayalalithaa was CM of Tamil Nadu in her first term. Brash, arrogant and new to power. Rajni was leaving his home for shooting one morning, when he noticed a huge traffic block outside. Upon enquiring he found out from Jaya’s PSO that the road was blocked because Madam was leaving her residence. The wily Rajni gets off his car, walks up to a nearby tea stall and starts having his regular fare of tea and Wills Navy cut. Within minutes, a huge crowd surrounds him and the whole street becomes a sea of people. The all powerful CM can’t get out of her house. The same PSO comes back to Rajni and says.."Sir you please leave first. Madam cannot move if you don’t leave first. I am sorry for the trouble." Few actors in the country could thumb their nose at a Chief Minister. Least of all, at the all powerful Amma.

Finally it’s only appropriate that I sign off in Rajni style, with the much-publicised (and may I add ridiculed by some) dialogue from Sivaji. “Pigs go in herds. The lion walks alone.” Keep walking Superstar. We’ll never get enough of you.