by Shubham Ghosh

Has Rahul Gandhi suddenly come of age? The way the Congress vice president has been launching scathing yet calculated attacks on the Narendra Modi government over the last few months, one is wondering what made the former sound so much mature and sensible? Till now, Rahul Gandhi has mostly been treated as a caricature. But his recent takes – in the US and in India – have started conveying a different message to the saffron camp. And the way the saffron leaders have retaliated against Rahul in his own constituency Amethi, it is certainly clear that the Modis and Amit Shahs are not taking the ‘lightweight’ Gandhi lightly anymore.

Politics, we all know, is a domain of unpredictability but does that sufficiently explain the change we perceive about Rahul Gandhi at the moment? It is not that the man has undergone a qualitative change in these few months. Rather, it is the slide of the ruling party which has given him an opening, a much-needed one. Rahul Gandhi, like the tortoise in that legendary race, is taking full advantage of the lapse which Modi’s BJP has seen because of over confidence.

The Congress vice president’s “Modi will bring moon on earth in 2030” was by far the best attack he has launched on the prime minister’s superman image till date. Till the 2014 Lok Sabha election and after, the utter failure of the UPA II government coupled with the execution of a grand propaganda machinery had put Modi beyond everybody else’s reach. Rahul Gandhi had to fight an iron wall at that time and he was destined to lose it badly. His oratory skills came under question as was his political acumen but the real reason why he looked a distant second to Modi is that he and his party had no answer to the BJP’s grand plan and propaganda then.

But just as every over-confident soul scripts his/her own downfall, the Modi establishment went for demonetisation and after all the debates and discussions, Mr Economics gave the verdict that it was nothing short of a disaster. But the Modi regime was in no mood to acknowledge a failure and it went ahead with the Goods and Services Tax, doubling the blow for the lesser players in the economy. And when one adds factors like Gujarati business community’s dissidence against GST, the outburst of former Union finance minister Yashwant Sinha over the economic slowdown and the manifold jump in the fortunes of Amit Sah’s businessman son Jay, the fragile stage on which Rahul Gandhi was speaking so far found itself cemented. And the 47-year-old leader is in no mood to squander the rare opportunity he has got. Modi still is the No.1 leader in the country no doubt but he doesn’t have a clear maidan to score goals now.

If demonetisation has put Modi’s economic acumen under the lens and cow vigilantism and minority bashing his claims to an inclusive leader, the Jay Shah episode wouldcast a shadow over the BJP’s anti-corruption and anti-dynasty claims.Development, transparency and inclusive democracy have been the resurgent BJP’s claims before and during the last general elections. All these key pillars seem to have received massive blows, in less than three-and-half years since the NDA took over.
In 2014, the strong anti-incumbency against the UPA II coupled with Rahul Gandhi’s flawed political strategies had helped Modi. But three years after that debacle, when Modi himself is getting burdened with the same anti-incumbency despite putting every effort to run the show smoothly and the prime minister’s super image is found trying to deliver as per the massive expectations he had created before taking over, the Congress is looking like the alternative, despite its own predicaments. The situation resembles that of 2004 when Sonia Gandhi had brought the grand old party back to power from nowhere and a popular prime minister in Atal Behari Vajpayee faced a shocking loss.

Rahul Gandhi and his party have done not anything exemplary to show that they are an alternative to Modi at the moment. They are just playing on the same-side goals that the overconfident rulers of the day has scored and to build on this opening that they have got, the Congress has to produce a good performance in Gujarat. A routine annihilation there would throw it back into the dustbin of history while a decent show in Modi’s hometown could be a game changer ahead of the next Lok Sabha elections.
Indian politics is at an interesting juncture at the moment. Though Modi has won the game one-sidedly so far, he is now entering the most critical part of his tenure and with a series of events unfolding over the last one year, the man has to produce real changes on the ground, especially in the economy, to ensure he gets another term in office. Modi’s disadvantage is that he has hurt the economy and to undo it, the BJP-led NDA needs more than glossy propaganda. On the other hand, the Congress has a good advantage since economic slowdown is always a potent weapon for the Opposition to corner the ruler. The BJP has not really dumped the economic policies of the Congress-led government and this boosts the Congress’s confidence all the more to launch a scathing attack on Modi’s economic policies that have failed to impress the experts.
For Rahul Gandhi who many believe is closest to assuming the Congress’s presidency, the next set of elections is key. For Modi who has had major electoral successes since 2014, the stakes are higher in the economic sector now. It will be interesting to see who cracks it first and puts the opponent under a serious challenge.

by Shubham Ghosh

Politics is a funny game. In fact, it is a great leveller. Three years ago, when Narendra Modi stormed the citadel of power in New Delhi, leaving a lot of people stunned as well as amused, it was thought that he could do no wrong. The shrewd politician in Modi also took this opportunity to set up the Bharatiya Janata Party 2.0 in which the old brass was sent into retirement. The process, in fact, had set off even before the 2014 LokSabha elections were fought. The likes of Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Yashwant Sinha, Jaswant Singh were craftily sidelined. Even the great Atal Behari Vajpayee was dropped from the BJP’s Parliamentary Board, its highest decision-making body.

On the face of it, the veterans of NDA I were made glorified extras but in reality, everybody knew they were eclipsed by Team Modi which would only see the current prime minister as its biggest brand. For Modi, the road was clear for him to emerge as a statesman with a legacy.

But this game always ran a risk. We often see in sporting disciplines like cricket a new captain picks the team of his liking and eclipses the old guard. In a sport, the exuberance of youth can make up for its inexperience and the new captain can still get away with the laurels. But in politics, the opposite is the norm. Here, experience has no alternative and sidelining an entire generation of experienced lieutenants is not just naïve but dangerous as well.

The sharp criticism that former Union finance ministerYaswantSinha has come up with against the Modi government’s economic performance testifies this fact. Sinha, who had served as the FM in governments of Chandra Sekhar and Vajpayee (in a way, he is the only finance minister to have served in both pre- and post-liberalisation India other than Pranab Mukherjee), has lashed out at the current Union Finance Minister, Arun Jaitley, accusing him of leaving the economy in a mess. Sinha, who will turn 80 this November, said he felt it was his “national duty” to speak up on the issue and also added that a lot of people in the BJP knew about the facts but were afraid to speak up.

The BJP, as usual, has snubbed Sinha saying everything was okay with the Indian economy. Now, the problem is economics is a science in itself and will not follow what political masters say. A lot of voices have already been heard against the Modi government’s economic adventures – from advisers and of course the Opposition. But when a veteran from the BJP who himself had served as the finance minister speaks out against his own party’s government, there is something seriously wrong.

It is very important for the BJP leadership to sit with Sinha and understand his viewpoints and also seek suggestions from his experience. Denial of the problem is only going to aggravate it and the entire country will have to pay for the blunders.

As an outsider in Lutyens, Modi always had a heavy onus on his shoulders to succeed as the prime minister, especially when he had few friends – in politics and media. He, therefore, needed to take into confidence the old guard which has the experience of running a government in the past so that the same mistakes that led to the downfall of the Vajpayee government in 2004 were not repeated. But Modi headed to the opposite direction. His adventurism in the form of demonetisation seemed more of an act of playing to the gallery without taking into consideration the adversity it could bring. The lack of experience and sound advice was clearly showing. One could also say that Sinha found this an apt opportunity to avenge the snubbing by the current BJP leadership but he can’t really be blamed for it. The Modi government has now more headaches to treat than not.

Arnab’s hold over his fans was formidable enough to get away with his obnoxious style of functioning.

by Shobhaa De

Never thought a day would come when the nation would pity Arnab Goswami, and actually feel sorry for the man! But thanks to Rajdeep Sardesai and his tweets calling out a former colleague for fabricating a dramatic narrative going back to the Gujarat riots in 2002, it has become official — Arnab, the self-styled emperor of prime-time, has no clothes. What a fall there was, my countrymen! Just look at where Arnab stands today! Once he was exposed as a complete liar by Sardesai and others, the dam broke. And it is worth analysing why there was such open and enthusiastic jubilation over this single expose! It established incontrovertibly what a despised man Arnab had become over time. And how, perhaps for the first time in the history of our media, one of their own was gleefully trampled over, his carefully cultivated reputation mangled, and his well-crafted image successfully shredded. Dog definitely and enthusiastically ate dog in this round.

If one examines the myriad jokes and memes that were created within hours of the truth tumbling out, it pointed to a rather sordid development — it does not pay to ride the moral high horse as Arnab had, and emerge a blatant liar. Media games are ruthless and played by cold-blooded professionals. Even going by that yardstick, Arnab’s annihilation has been epic and swift! Suddenly, this pompous man has been reduced to a pretty puny nobody. All the people he once insulted and humiliated on his shows have risen as one to chorus: “Serves him right!”

This may appear a childish way to deal with an old foe. But the story is far bigger. And, as it now turns out, Arnab’s biggest enemy was Arnab! I recall a conversation I had in Kathmandu last year, with a loud, crude mediaman. I suspect he had invested in Arnab’s soon-to-be-launched channel, since his entire keynote address to a visibly baffled Nepali media was about the dynamism and greatness of a man called Arnab Goswami. I was pretty puzzled and wondered what that was all about. Later, the same evening, this guy continued to sing Arnab’s praises, much to the irritation of an advertising agency biggie. I was getting bugged as well. So, I asked the loudmouth on what basis was he proclaiming the assured success of the new channel? Wasn’t he making far too many assumptions? He looked at me and asked where Arnab could possibly go wrong. “He is the biggest media star in Asia. His brand value is unbeatable. There is no one else in his league.”

Technically, he wasn’t off the mark. And yet, I was highly sceptical and said so, going as far as to say, “I am willing to bet a hundred bucks Arnab will flop.” The man scoffed and said: “Impossible! Do you know who is backing him?” I said that was a no-brainer. But, despite that backing, I was still on with the wager. He shook his head like men do when they actually want to say: “No point arguing with women. And particularly, this woman.” Suddenly, the adwalla tycoon spoke up. “If she is betting 100 bucks, put my bet down to 10,000.” Mr Loudmouth started to freak out. I thought I saw foam coming out of his mouth. “Both of you are totally wrong! Mark my words, Arnab’s channel will wipe out the rest.”

I would love to meet Mr Loudmouth now and ask him to pay up. In all his calibrations and calculations he had missed out on one important factor: truth. The same “truth” Arnab claimed to stand for. The truth he pretended he and he alone was the custodian of. The truth he successfully peddled to the nation, as he dominated the pulpit and bellowed out his sermons, night after night. Even the mightiest bully is eventually defeated by an unlikely slip.

Arnab could never have imagined that his arrogant lie would be caught and exposed in this manner. All his huffing and puffing has been reduced to a pretty pathetic joke, almost overnight. How could he have thought he’d get away with such a monumental untruth, such a concocted story? This is exactly how and where bullies often trip up. Cocooned by their cowering minions into believing they are untouchable, people like Arnab count on brute force to silence anybody who questions them.

Arnab’s hold over his fans was formidable enough to get away with his obnoxious style of functioning. The reason for his popularity is simple enough to understand: the people who formed his constituency were equally obnoxious!

He said on air what they thought in private. The hatred and contempt for those who didn’t agree with his skewered views he so proudly paraded night after night, were echoed by those people who spewed venom on “libtards” and called the rest “presstitutes”. Arnab’s abrupt political about-turn surprised nobody when it happened. Those who knew his antecedents wondered what had taken him so long to reveal his true avatar.

Well, Arnab’s downfall carries in it an invaluable lesson for all mediawallas. Arnab had antagonised far too many people and tried to destroy innumerable lives. It’s called attracting bad karma. Journalists generally get away with far more than is good for them. But even within this insecure, competitive, aggressive fraternity, there is always space for ideological differences. What there is zero tolerance for is just one thing: lying and appropriating someone else’s story. It’s called theft. And thieves have no business projecting themselves as saints and saviours. The nation is disgusted by the man who claimed to speak on its behalf.

This article first appeared in The Asian Age.

by Tahsin Mohammed

If one is to rephrase Evelyn Beatrice’s quote on free speech apropos right over choice of food, it would go as – “I don’t approve with what you eat but I will defend to the death your right to eat.”

The Centre’s recent move to ban the sale and purchase of cattle in livestock markets throughout the country under the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Rules 2017 speaks of a policy in haste lacking serious introspection and foresight into the economic upshots of the ban that has resulted in a great degree of disharmony – in trade, culture and livelihood of millions of people.

The ruling, in a way appears a final push towards imposing an absolute ban across the country in the long-run, and a unilateral decision that infringes upon a State’s prerogative to formulate laws vis-à-vis the cattle slaughter. With an exception to Kerala, West Bengal and a majority of Northeastern states where cow slaughter stands as legal, the remaining have stern laws with a blanket ban on cow slaughter, though not extending over the entire cattle category. However, the new rules notified under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act, 1960 aimed at regulating the animal markets goes a step further to include bulls, buffaloes, steers, camels in addition to the cow in the cattle list.

The PCA Act

The Centre’s overnight notification calling for a nation-wide ban on sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter throughout country contravenes the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act, 1960 under which it has been notified. In fact, the PCA does not impose restrictions on the sale of cattle for reasons of slaughter or sacrifices. What the Act mandates under Part 9 is ‘to advise the Government or any local authority or other person in the design of slaughter-houses or the maintenance of slaughter houses or in connection with slaughter of animals so that unnecessary pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is eliminated in the pre-slaughter stages as far as possible, and animals are killed; wherever necessary, in as humane a manner as possible. More, the Act under Chapter V1, Part 28 states that “nothing contained in this Act shall render it an offence to kill any animal in a manner required by the religion of any community.”

The Act explicitly validates slaughter of animals for food under Chapter III, Part 11 (e) that recognizes ‘the preparation for destruction of any animal as food for mankind unless such destruction or preparation was accompanied by the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering.” The Centre has either overlooked the Act or has misread it in a hurry to pass such a ruling.

Cattle Politics Meltdown

The ruling percolates down heavily on the farmers, traders and millions engaged in the livestock industry. The ruling is not reclusive but part of an aggressive and pungent cow politics that has swamped the nation with a string of gruesome incidents while injecting a new discourse throughout the country’s socio-cultural and political framework. A dystopian culture upsetting the socio-economic harmony is in the offing.

Socially it disturbs the mutual-coherence among the communities’ sharing diverse dietary values and traditions by creating a rift on lines that are religio-cultural in nature leading to a deeper schism of mistrust and inclusiveness among people. Several incidents over the past  two years involving assault and lynching of people to death on mere suspension of possessing beef or trading cattle for slaughter by self-appointed cow vigilantes has only added to the bitterness making peace among communities fragile and utopian.

Economically it trickles down greatly on farmers, who are supposed prove their credentials as agriculturalists and provide an undertaking that they would not sell the cattle for slaughter but for the purpose of farming. The question that arises is, what would a farmer do with the cattle that have outlived its usefulness? It only adds to farmer’s miseries and debt with no buyers in market. The trading community, on whom the livelihood of millions rests upon, is faced with a bleak future. For instance, the meats shops faced a crackdown in Utter Pradesh following closure of slaughter houses on grounds of not possessing the required licenses, with the meat retailers alleging lack of accountability on part of the municipality and the government to provide them with legal abattoirs and required licenses. The leather industry is bound to be hit hard by the notification, which uses cattle hides extensively as part of its trade and exports of finished leather that runs into tones. Meat traders allege that the new rules threaten the annual buffalo meat exports and millions of jobs in the meat industry if they are not reversed.

Consumption and Exports Pattern

The consumer expenditure survey 2011-12 conducted by the NSSO under beef/buffalo category showed that more than 80 million people consume beef or buffalo meat throughout the country. Although the Muslim community stands to be largest consumer of beef/buffalo meat, Hindus stands second in absolute terms with more than 12.5 million Hindus consuming it. Meghalaya tops the table as the largest beef/buffalo consuming state. When it comes to exports, Indian currently accounts for 20% of the world’s total buffalo meat and beef export volume, and stands as the largest exporter by quantity overtaking Brazil and Australia in 2015-16, as per ICRA report. It further predicted a surge in the earnings through buffalo meat exports in next five years touching to the tune of Rs.40,000 Cr from Rs.26,682 Cr in 2015-16. The U.S Dept. of Agriculture holds India as the largest exporter of beef notwithstanding the controversy surrounding the cattle trade and a slew of bans in place to the effect.

Cycle of Violence and Despondency

A culture of violence has been unleashed across the country in the name of cow protection by self-appointed cow vigilante groups, which on most occasions involves elements form the extreme-Hindu right groups and Sena’s, which no longer constitutes the fringe but have become the center. The disturbing aspect of it is the victims of their violence are being treated as suspects in the violence against themselves. The latest being the assault on railway staff of Kochuveli-Guwahati Express in Bhubaneswar over suspension of cattle smuggling, and one on a student from IIT-Madras for participating in a beef fest organised to protest against Center’s unilateral cattle ban ruling. The cattle-related violence is not new, but has gained momentum over the past two years, from the horrific mob violence against Mohammed Akhlaq and his family in Uttar Pradesh’s Dadri in 2015 to the lynching of Dalits in Gujarat’s Unna in 2016 to the gruesome murder of a 55-year old Pehlu Khan in Rajasthan’s Alwar, a dairy farmer from Haryana by self-appointed Gaurkashaks in April-2107. The bone-chilling assaults and brutal killings in guise of cattle/cow protection have only grown louder in measure given the glorification of assaulters and persecution of the victims by the State machinery and authorities who look the other way. This is the case across several States in the country, particularly in the BJP-ruled ones – where the administration and authorities willfully look the other way emboldened by the vilifying statements of those wielding power. What is worrisome is the indifference if not the connivance of the government and the cynical apathy of the civil society in addressing the growing insecurities and despondency of the victims, and the people at large.

The Way Forward

The Allahabad High Court’s recent observation about ‘choice of food and trade in foodstuff being part of right to life’ needs to be ensured and safeguarded as guaranteed under – Art 21 and 19 (1) (g) of the Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution that stands supreme. The States needs to tread the constitutional path given the onus of guarding its citizens’ life, property and their right to livelihood.

The States needs to devise and formulate stern laws in dealing with the self-appointed Gaurakshaks as called by the Prime Minister in August, 2016 who had described them as ‘anti-socials’ at night, who otherwise if left unchecked will prove a dire threat to State’s law and order and societal harmony.

We ought to be a society free of fear with peaceful coexistence, as Tagore aptly calls it out in his rhyme –

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high

Where knowledge is free

Where the World has not broken up into fragments

By narrow domestic walls….

Tahsin Mohammed is a student of journalism at Manasagangotri, University of Mysore.

Expressing shock over the hate campaign, false allegations and media trial against him in the wake of recent terrorist attack in Dhaka, Dr Zakir Naik, the most sought after Islamic orator, has issued a written statement to the press reiterating that he never supported terrorism or violence in any form whatsoever.

Dr Naik had earlier planned for a press conference on Skype from Saudi Arabia. However, after a few major India TV channels tried to twist his recent statements, the 51-year-old orator, who founded the Islamic Research Foundation in 1991, changed his mind and released the written statement.

Read Dr Zakir Abdul Karim Naik’s full statement below:

“According to me, the media is the most important weapon in the world. It can convert a hero into villain or even a villain into a hero.

I’m shocked at the media trial on me regarding the recent terrorist attack that took place in Dhaka Bangladesh on 1st July 2016. Most of the clips shown on the television of myself are either out of context, half statements or doctored. So are my statements in the print media.

I would have loved to give interviews whether for television channels or for the print media, but I fear that most of them will not publish it unedited or without twisting it. I came to this conclusion after I had given a few interviews, most of which were unfortunately mutilated and misutilised to serve the vested agenda of the channel or the newspaper.

If time permits, God willing, in the next few days I will give replies to some of the major allegations on video and give it to the media as well as put it up on social media as well as other public platforms so that the original answers are also available if the media misutilises it.

So far not a single official Indian government agency has contacted me for any clarification regarding this issue. It would be my pleasure to cooperate with any official Indian government investigation agency for any information they might require from me.

In conclusion, I repeat what I have always maintained –   I DO NOT SUPPORT TERRORISM OR VIOLENCE in any form whatsoever. I have never supported any terrorist organisations and have mentioned this over and over again in thousands of my public talks worldwide. I STRONGLY CONDEMN anyone taking my statements out of context and using it for VIOLENCE OF ANY FORM.”

Yours Sincerely,

Dr Zakir Naik

Whenever we start criticizing the way BJP is running the central government, we are accused of being anti-national or a traitor. BJP and its leaders do not know how to talk to people who may even be their well wishers and they react with ferocity.

As a citizen of India, we consider it our duty to point out when the government is making a mistake. When these mistakes can cause serious harm to the country, we try to stop the government from pursuing that harmful course.

We would like to point out five blunders that have been made in the time the NDA government has been in power.

1. Make in India

Make in India is an invitation to foreigners to come and make in India. It tells the world that we Indians are idiots; our businessmen are too stupid to set up businesses; we need outsiders to do manufacturing in this country.

“Oh, you white people! You are the superior race; we beg you to come and teach us how to make stuff in India.”

“Make in India” is the anti-thesis of swadeshi! The Swadeshi Jagran Manch, a sister organization of BJP and RSS, is hiding its head in the sand somewhere far away.

We have made rapid strides in technology and manufacturing capabilities since independence. Our engineers have the capabilities to make practically anything and everything; all they need is the opportunity to do so. They have proven it again and again, whether it is making a nuclear weapon or sending a spacecraft to Mars or something as simple as a car. We are one of few countries in the world with the capabilities of designing and manufacturing automobiles. The biggest stumbling block for Indian engineers and entrepreneurs has always been its bureaucrats and politicians. With BJP at the helm of affairs this stumbling block has become larger and more menacing.

BJP came to power on the promise of supporting Indian entrepreneurs, engineers, and businesses; however, the opposite has happened. All over the country, entrepreneurs and industrialists are frustrated; their businesses are sinking, and the Government of India has no time to listen to their woes. GOI has no empathy for our local entrepreneurs. Ask someone who is going through the pains of running a factory in today’s India. I can assure you that he will tell you stories that are so horrible that it will either make your blood boil or curdle. Some public sector banks, following the dictates of the present government, do not even care about their own written commitments and are doing all that is possible (legally or illegally) to throw local businessmen out of business, businesses that were nurtured for decades. The atmosphere for Indian entrepreneurs, industrialists, and businesses has never been more hostile and depressing since independence.

This is an anecdote given by a prominent businessman who desires to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.

“In October 2015, IIT Bombay Alumni Association organized Global Business Forum (GBF) at Goa. Manohar Parrikar, Defence Minister, was present at the GBF. I saw him. No, I did not meet him. My friend, S, who is a batch-mate of Manohar and is a significantly more accomplished engineer and technocrat than Manohar, was also present at the GBF. S put in a formal request for a one-to-one meeting with Manohar. The appointment was granted and S went to meet Manohar. Later I asked S about his meeting. S was furious. He said that he is not stupid enough to discuss strategic technological ideas for national defense in the presence of foreigners. When S went to meet Manohar, there were three foreigners representing global corporations sitting besides Manohar. Apparently, the message that Manohar wanted to convey to all IIT alumni present at GBF was that, look, if you want to do business with Ministry of Defense, you will have to go through one of these white guys first. Manohar, apparently, believes that in the new environment when Modi government is going to outsource defense manufacturing lock-stock-and-barrel on a long term basis to multinationals, the best he can do for alumni of his alma mater is to act as a liaison between the alumni and the new colonial masters. I also attended the Special Interest Group of Make in India at GBF where the loud-and-clear message was that Indian entrepreneurs should learn to pick up small mercies thrown their way by the large global corporations as part of their local content commitments under Make in India.”

Like any Indian, I am aghast, ashamed, and angered by “Make in India.” The insult to the abilities of Indian engineers, entrepreneurs, and businesses is galling and too big to swallow. The red carpet that the Modi government is rolling out for foreigners is in sharp contrast to the treatment that it is giving to Indians. It pains to be treated as a second-class citizen in one’s own country and more so by people who claim to be ultra-nationalists. Surely, nationalism is much more than just singing Vande Mataram, shouting Bharat Mata Ki Jai, and putting up gigantic flags across the country?

2. Startup India

Most people wrongly equate startups with business ventures. There is a difference between being an businessman and being a promoter of a startup. The concept of “startup” is basically an American concept.

In India, the traditional system is a family-based entrepreneurship model. The idea of an investor-controlled startup model is foreign to us. Indian businessmen build businesses with their blood and sweat with dreams of handing it all over to the future generations. The American startup model is based on making a quick buck, converting x to 10x in short time, and retiring (or running away).

GOI has released Startup India Action Plan dated 16 January 2016. The Action Plan defines Startup as follows: “Startup means an entity, incorporated or registered in India not prior to five years, with annual turnover exceeding INR 25 crores in any preceding financial year, working towards innovation, development, deployment, or commercialization of new products, processes, or services driven by technology or intellectual property…provided further that a Startup shall be eligible for tax benefits only after it has obtained certification from the Inter-Ministerial Board, setup for such purpose.”

Without getting involved with all the legal jargon, we can be clear that most new ventures started across the country every year will NOT be eligible to be classified as “startup.” GOI is going to set up a centralized Inter-Ministerial Board (IMB), which will certify a venture as startup or not a startup. No prizes for guessing the hidden under-the-table costs involved for getting the certificate from IMB. For a country of the size of India having a central body for such a certification seems a sure recipe for corruption.

IMB certification is not the only hurdle that a venture has to jump before being certified as a startup. It has to be funded or supported by either a private equity fund or venture capital or some specified government agency. If a technocrat puts in his own or family funds and starts a venture, he/she will not be eligible for being called a startup, thus ruling out the indigenous family-based business model in one stroke.

The Action Plan announced by the Government of India is crafted to ensure Indian businessmen to sell a significant part of their company equity to one or the other sharks (read, Private Equity/Venture Capital Funds). Government will fund the sharks to buy the equity of such startups and to make money from the innovation strengths of Indian innovators. The government support to the sharks is announced to be of the order of about Rs. 10,000 crores.

Why has the government decided to extend the support to various funds which are known sharks and not found it worthwhile to trust public sector banks for this purpose? The government is setting up a “Fund of Funds” to provide financial support to “daughter funds.” There are too many unanswered questions that such a concept throws up. As it appears, in the name of startups, the government is providing budgetary support to a private financial sector outside the nationalized/public sector banks. Since the Action Plan itself acknowledges that startups are prone to failure, this may well finally turn out to be a grand racket, whereby public money lands up in private hands with no accountability and no gains for the country as a whole. There is also the question of regulating the relationship between the sharks and the poor promoter of a startup. Why fund the sharks without any protection of actual innovators and technologists?

According to the champions of the “Startup scheme,” no venture in the history of independent India is eligible to be classified as a startup. Just imagine! Reliance, TCS, Infosys, Wipro, Mahindra, Kirloskar, and Nirma DO NOT QUALIFY to be classified as startups according to the definitions and criteria stipulated by government. On the other hand, major e-commerce giants like Flipkart, Snapdeal, etc., did not have any innovation content when they started. All of them are clones of e-commerce companies in USA.
What gets classified as innovation and what gets rejected will be a matter of discretion which will lie at the hands of foreign-owned funds who will say whether they have found the idea worth investing in or not. In other words, we are heading towards East India Company Version 2.0.

Most developing countries have grown their industry on the basis of reverse engineering and small steps in the fields of technology. India is no exception. Instead of innovation, if the government had emphasized technological relevance for the country, it would surely have made more sense. Most technological innovations are small smart steps taken in the course of a long journey. By supporting smart, educated entrepreneurs, government and banks can create an eco-system where innovation flourishes. Instead of the grand Start-up Action Plan, government could have applied its mind to change the mindset of bankers who look only at collaterals and refuse to look at the capabilities of entrepreneurs. Of course, that is not as easy as handing over Rs. 10,000 crores to hungry foreign sharks.

Is the Startup Action Plan based on lessons learnt from global experiences? The concept of startup comes from the USA which is going down in terms of industrial growth. Germany, China, Japan, Israel and South Korea have entirely different entrepreneur eco-systems with no focus on startups. Is it not strange that India is copying a falling giant instead of learning from successes of the rising stars?

There can be no denying the fact that the USA has followed policies which have led in the past 50 years of the rich becoming richer and the poor becoming poorer. It is a fact that 1% of USA owns more than 95% of the wealth of USA. This level of inequality has on one hand led to social tensions and on the other is leading to stifling of industry and entrepreneurship of that country.

The Startup Action Plan has gone almost unnoticed by the media which is more concerned on covering sensationalist headlines. Even Indian banks have taken no notice of the Action Plan. Will this blunder be corrected before it destroys us?

3. Smart City

Bhopal is one of the twenty cities chosen for Smart Cities Mission (SCM). No native Bhopali is happy about this. Within the city of Bhopal, opposition to the Smart City Scheme is already building up. Though there is no clarity about what is meant by the SCM, it is seen as an attempt to create islands of ultra-superior infrastructure within the existing cities; thus, we will have ultra-modern islands in a sea of underdevelopment or no development at all. Imagine skyscrapers next to slums.

Creating islands of prosperity with first world quality infrastructure is meaningless. Modi came to power proposing that each Member of Parliament (MP) chooses one village to develop as a model village using his MP Local Area Development (MPLAD) Fund. A few MPs did follow Modi’s proposal, but most MPs soon realized that creating one village with far superior facilities (than all the other villages within one constituency) will be politically disastrous due to reactions from other villages. If a constituency has 2000 villages, a MP who develops only one village risks losing votes from 1,999 villages. No wonder most MPs refused to go with the suggestion of developing a model village and ignoring all others. Translate this model village idea to model city and you get the picture.

A similar situation is likely to unfold in twenty cities of India with SCM. In Bhopal, it is proposed to develop about 2% of the city in the style of Singapore or Paris. It is foolish to think that 98% of the city that is not developed will applaud the development of the 2%. As persons who believe in the politics of taking care of all sections of society, the whole idea of SCM is abhorrent is abhorrent to us.

4. Smriti Irani

The damage done to field of higher education in India by this lady is too enormous to ignore.

While the lady pleases the die-hard BJP loyalists with her fiery speeches and aggressive gestures, on campuses across the country, a significantly large percentage of the students (and even faculty members) refer to her in such insulting words that are largely unprintable. The hatred is, of course, mutual. She has never failed to insult and hurt the most respected of the academic community at every public and private forum. She believes that this country’s education system has been ruined by all those who were stupid enough to get educated beyond secondary school. She believes that the God has chosen her to kick, punch, and be the messiah of this bunch of idiots with PhDs, DLitts, and such other fancy degrees, and if they do not prostrate before her and accept her divine authority, she is fully justified in delivering more kicks and punches.

Let us take one example. From the days of Jawaharlal Nehru, the process of selection of Director for an IIT was carried out in a set pattern.
1. A selection committee chose four or five famous professors. Being shortlisted by the committee was a matter of honour.
2. The shortlisted professors were called to Delhi in a respectful manner.
3. Each professor was called in at a different day and time without anyone of the selected few knowing the other selected ones.
4. Initially, Jawaharlal Nehru himself used to be present in these personal discussions (not called interviews, keeping in view the VIP status granted to the selected professors).

The proud Smriti Irani found the whole system of treating learned professors with dignity and respect, highly objectionable. She insisted that there should be a shortlist of twelve professors for each IIT and the process of selection of directors for three IITs should be combined. At her direction, 36 professors were called for personal discussions all at the same day and time. The earlier respectful approach was dumped and replaced by treating the whole bunch of 36 senior-most professors of the country as a herd of sheep. It would have been easy to stagger the discussions with them over one or two days and call each of them at a separate time. But, that would have deprived Smriti the sadistic pleasure of making them wait whole day looking at each other’s faces with an expression of an embarrassment. To make it worse, the interviews were cancelled twice AFTER everyone had assembled.

The above is just one instance. One has to sit with academicians at any of the reputed institutions of the country to hear similar sad stories of insults and embarrassments. There is no doubt that Smriti is having a great time kicking everyone with a respectable degree. Stories of this sadistic fun are being passed on from senior professors to junior faculty and then to the students. In the process the damage that she is doing to higher education and to the morale of the faculty is enormous.

5. Arun Jaitley

Arun Jaitley has done nothing. Arun Jaitley can be accused of no wrong except that he has done nothing whatsoever and has only continued in the tracks set by his Congress predecessors.

Arun Jaitley was a nondescript and mediocre lawyer till he was lucky to be picked up to be a Cabinet Minister in the Vajpayee Government. As a politician, he is an expert in playing his cards well. He has always been close to the top guns in the BJP. While he is an expert of knowing which side of the bread is buttered and on keeping the bosses in good humor, his arrogance and egoistic nature will prove to be his own undoing. Is it any wonder that he has never won an election so far?

Arun manages to camouflage his lack of intellectual depth and mediocrity with his impeccable language, style, and mannerisms. Unfortunately, language, smartness, and style can help one only to some distance. In the long run, one needs to perform.

Performance comes from capabilities, knowledge, ability to build and carry a team, creativity and, in politics, by being in touch with ground realities. Almost everyone who has been watching Arun Jaitley for past two years is convinced that he lacks all these qualities.

Modi came to power on the promise of a new economic model and all round economic development leading to prosperity for all. Instead, the country has landed up with a finance minister who has zero knowledge of economics, one who is pushing the earlier government’s anti-poor economic agenda, one who has no new ideas, and one who is not even ready to even listen to new ideas.

The businessmen who funded Modi’s campaign in 2014 would, today, rather not discuss about Modi or politics. They are disappointed, hurt, and feel cheated. Even Indian capitalists feel that the country has been sold out.