Pranab Mukherjee Takes Over as 13th President of India: First Bengali To Become Head of State

Veteran Congress leader Pranab Mukherjee has become  13th president of India. He is the first person from West Bengal to occupy the top Constitutional post and the third MP to be elevated to the office of President after Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed and Zail Singh.

The presidential election was a one-sided affair. Mukherjee — who was sworn in by Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia on July 25 — secured 68.12 per cent of the total 10,47,971 value votes cast by 4,659 members of the State/Territorial Assemblies and Parliament. Opposition-backed candidate PA Sangma, who was supported by the NDA, the AIADMK and the BJD, managed only 30.15 per cent of the votes.

There were a total of 81 invalid votes, to the value of 18,221. These include that of Samajwadi Party president Mulayam Singh Yadav, whose second ballot was invalidated by the Election Commission, for it violated the vote of secrecy.

Among the 748 Members of Parliament (excluding the nominated members who have no voting right) with the total vote value of 5,29,584, Mukherjee polled 527 votes (3,73,116) and Sangma got 206 votes (1,45,848).

There was some cross-voting in favor of Mukherjee in the BJP-ruled Karnataka: he got votes of 117 MLAs, against the BJP’s 103 in the 224-member Assembly. While three votes were declared invalid, one MLA did not vote.

In Kerala, Mukherjee made a clean sweep, polling all 124 votes; one was invalid. Sangma drew a blank. The CPI and RSP MLAs abstained from voting.

Only former President K.R. Narayanan, secured the maximum value votes of 9, 56, 290 (94.97 per cent), when he won in the 1997 election against the former Chief Election Commissioner, T.N. Seshan.

In the 2007 election, the outgoing President, Pratibha Patil, the first woman to hold the office, defeated the then Vice President, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, securing 65.82 per cent of the total valid votes. Shekhawat polled 33.18 per cent.

Career Graph

Born on 11 Dec 1935 in Mirati village, Kirnahar disttricy, Birbhum (West Bengal), Mukherjee will embark on a new journey transcending political affiliations in the high Constitutional job with an ease none of his predecessors may have enjoyed because of his experience spanning 45 years in government and politics.

His election to the President's office today comes as a fitting finale for the veteran Congressman from West Bengal, until recently the troubleshooter of UPA, a task he has handled for the past eight years.

Not a lawyer by training but considered an expert in the working of the Constitution and governance, he was ever seen as the perennial 'No. 2' in government.

Mukherjee was a utility man from the days of Indira Gandhi, when he was the powerful Minister of State for Revenue during the Emergency, and later as Finance Minister in the 1980s.

His rise had been steady and such valuable was his contribution to government that his nomination as a Presidential candidate came after a huge dilemma for Congress party, which heads the UPA coalition that has moved from crisis to crisis in the past eight years.

The veteran leader, known for his photographic memory, had become a Rajya Sabha (upper house of the Parliament) member for the first time in 1969.

Mukherjee was for a long time member of the Upper House before his first direct election to the Lok Sabha in 2004 from Jangipur in West Bengal. He repeated his victory in the 2009 elections but had expressed a desire not to contest elections again in view of his advancing age.

Mukherjee was a top-ranking minister and presided over the Union Cabinet meetings in the absence of the Prime Minister during 1980-85.

Of course, Mukherjee had his own bad days in the Congress which he had to quit in the mid-80s after he had evinced interest in becoming the prime minister after the death of Indira Gandhi in 1984. It took some time before he came back into the party but once he was in, there was no stopping his rise once again.

Mukherjee became finance minister again in 2008 after P Chidambaram was shifted to the Home Ministry in the wake of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks.

Again his importance was seen when P V Narasimha Rao made him Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission as well as Minister of External Affairs. In between he had to quit because he ceased to be a member of Parliament and came back to the Cabinet after reelection.

Mukherjee started his public life in the 1960s in Bangla Congress during the time of former Chief Minister Ajoy Mukherjee of the United Front government when Jyoti Basu was Deputy Chief Minister in West Bengal. He was general secretary of Bangla Congress.

A post-graduate in political science and history, he can recollect any event of historical importance or mundane political and other events, a matter of envy to many of his colleagues.

Son of a senior Congress leader Kinkar Mukherjee from West Bengal, Mukherjee had done MA (history), MA (political science), and LLB, DLitt. He had a brief stint as lawyer, teacher and journalist before he was embedded to his destiny of politics in 1969, when he became a member of the Rajya Sabha.

Mukherjee, who headed 83 GoMs and EGoMs from June 2004 until recently, was Leader of the Rajya Sabha from 1980-85 and later he became Leader of the Lok Sabha. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is Leader of the Rajya Sabha.

When Mukherjee was Finance Minister, Manmohan Singh was appointed RBI Governor in 1982. In what could be described a case of chasing each other's shadow, Singh became Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission from 1985 to 1987, a post Mukherjee later held from 1991 to 1996, when Singh became Finance Minister in P V Narasimha Rao government.

Mukherjee also had a brief stint as Chairman of the Economic Advisory Cell of AICC between 1987 and 1989. Interestingly, Manmohan Singh also held this post, when Congress was out of power between 1999 and 2004.

Mukherjee, who started his career as a college teacher, always carried the traits of a teacher, never hestitating to give a reprimand or two to juniors whether in his party or the Opposition. He was also jocularly called 'GoM Mukherjee' in political circles as he headed 33 Groups of Ministers on various key issues including the recent one on setting up of Lokpal.

The man who headed Joint Committee on Lokpal that included Anna Hazare, Mukherjee has five books published to his credit on political and economic issues and under his editorial guidance, the history of Congress was published in which there was a candid admission of excesses during the Emergency.

Mukherjee was conferred the Best Parliamentarian Award in 1997. Ten years later, he was awarded Padma Vibhushan, the second highest civilian honor.

In Congress Party, Mukherjee became AICC treasurer in 1978. Journalists and AICC media department officials still recall Mukherjee's tenure as the Media Department Chairman of the party. Mukherjee was AICC General Secretary in 1998-99.

In 1984-1991, 1996 and 1998, Mukherjee was Chairman of the Campaign Committee of AICC, besides being a member of the Congress Working Committee and Congress Election Committee.

Mukherjee held all the key portfolios, including Defence from May 2004 to October 2006 and External Affairs from October 2006 to May 2009 besides the Finance portfolio, which he held again in 2009 after a gap of 27 years.

In the past, he also held portfolios like Commerce and Steel and Mines, Revenue and Banking (Independent Charge), Shipping and Transport, Industrial Development, Commerce and Supply besides presiding over a number of Parliamentary Committees.

Mukherjee got married to Suvra on July 13, 1957 and has two sons — Abhijit and Indrajit — and daughter Sharmistha. Abhijit is a Congress MLA in West Bengal.

Challenges in New Role

Mukherjee’s new role in Rashtrapati Bhavan (President’s House) will be quite contrary to the one he has just finished playing. The most critical test for Mukherjee as President will no doubt come in 2014 after the general election to the Lok Sabha (lower house of the Parliament). As in the past couple of decades, no one party is likely to get a majority of its own, and the bigger parties would have to depend on the support of alliance partners or new-found friends.

R. Venkataraman in 1989 and Sharma in 1996 followed the principle of inviting the leader of the single largest party to form the government. Rajiv Gandhi declined the invitation in 1989; Atal Behari Vajpayee accepted the invitation, but lasted as Prime Minister on that occasion for just 13 days. With these examples behind him, Narayanan insisted on letters of support from a claimant party’s allies before extending it an invitation to form the government.

Additional Qualities

Used to working long hours, he may have to find new outlets for his unbounded energy. Though it was apparent that the UPA had the numbers, 76-year-old Mukherjee campaigned tirelessly, moving from state to state, winning the support of even rivals in Karnataka, Bihar, Maharashtra and West Bengal. Reaching out to anyone and everyone who matters is a quality Mukherjee is known for. As president, he is expected to build bridges.

After being in the thick of politics for long years, will it be now Presidential activism for Mukherjee? Will he be able to rise above party politics in 2014 when the general election is expected to throw a split verdict? Since the Constitution is unclear about the formation of a government if no party gets a majority, the President is free to exercise discretion. In 1996 Shankar Dayal Sharma invited the BJP to form a government but it fell in 13 days as Atal Behari Vajpayee could not muster enough support. KR Narayanan, setting a precedent, asked for letters of support from the party staking the claim to form a government. How Mukherjee handles such a situation would be keenly watched. That may well be the defining moment for him.

Despite his personal religious observances — which are perfectly in consonance with India’s Constitution —Mukherjee is also a secular politician. One cannot imagine him chuckling with glee while the Babri Masjid was being vandalised or turning a blind ear to the cries of Muslims being massacred in Ahmedabad. As President, he may not be in a position to do either, but this is where a conversation with the late Giani Zail Singh, and what it revealed of British precedents, comes in.

Positive Points

* Constitutional expert: A Constitutional and governance expert, Mukherjee has always been seen as the perennial 'No. 2' in the government.

* Utility man: From the days of Indira Gandhi, Mukherjee's has been her trusted aide. He was the powerful Minister of State for Revenue during the Emergency, and later as Finance Minister in the 80s. For the past eight years, Mukherjee has been the Mr Troubleshooter for UPA.

* Photographic memory: The veteran leader is known for his sharp memory. He can recollect any event of historical importance or mundane political and other events, a matter of envy to many of his colleagues.

* Vast experience: With four decades of active life in politics, Mukherjee knows the Indian political system inside out.

Assessment

It can be said that in Mukherjee, India will have a knowledgeable and pragmatic President who is well-versed in constitutional procedures and practices, and who was, until his nomination as a candidate by the ruling coalition, an active politician and senior Union Minister.

Mukherjee will be a President who could just as easily have been prime minister. There have been presidents who have come straight from the Union Council of Ministers, but none has carried the political weight and executive experience of this man from small-town Bengal. We have little doubt he will dignify the office he is about to step into and leave little room for narrow partisanship.

Unlike Pratibha Patil, who was out of active politics long before she became president, APJ Abdul Kalam, who was a genuinely nonpolitical person in the best sense of the term, and KR Narayanan, Shanker Dayal Sharma and R Venkataraman, who served as vice president before they entered Rashtrapati Bhavan, Mukherjee is making the switch from active politics and governance to the office of President in next to no time.

From the moment Mukherjee’s name was formally proposed by the UPA for the presidency, there was little doubt that the veteran Congress leader would sail through even in the event of a contest. As such, the result of the presidential poll between Mukherjee and Purno A. Sangma, who was backed by some regional parties and the BJP and some of its NDA allies carries no surprise. Given Mukherjee’s standing in public life, everyone expects him to be correct and proper in discharging his duties.

Undoubtedly, the former federal minister for finance, defense and external affairs has not only been one of the country's most important policy-makers in recent times but also that his long career in Government has allowed him to gain a deep understanding of the functioning of the Indian polity. This — an invaluable trait in today's era of coalition politics and tenuous political ties — naturally made Mukherjee the perfect choice as a firefighter of the UPA regime. Over the years, particularly in its second term, as the Congress-led UPA slid into an inert state of policy paralysis, becoming a sitting duck for the Opposition, it was Mukherjee who reached out to the critics, addressed their concerns and built the much-needed consensus.

It is hoped that Mukherjee will keep his promise to the nation and preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Good luck Mr President!

Post-Godhra Massacre Case: Narendra Modi, Others Get Clean Chit

The Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) has given Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi a clean chit in the post-Godhra Gulberg massacre case and sought its closure as it found no evidence against him. Modi’s clean chit was revealed by a trial court in Ahmedabad on April 10, which said that the SIT had said “it did not find any prosecutable evidence against Narendra Modi and 69 others” in the massacre. Putting a spanner in the works for Modi and others, however, are independent findings by amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran on the Gulberg killings.
The SIT was headed by former CBI Chief R.K. Raghavan and probed the Gulberg Society riots of 2002. It is believed to have said its findings should be treated as a “closure report.”
Though magistrate M.S. Bhatt did not pronounce the court's decision on the closure report, he ordered the SIT to give a copy of it, within 30 days, to the complainant, Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, who was among the 69 killed in the massacre.
In his order on a batch of petitions seeking a copy of the report, including the one filed by Zakia Jafri, Bhatt said the investigators had filed a closure report, having found no evidence to justify the filing of an FIR against any of the persons named in Zakia Jafri's complaint in the Supreme Court, accusing Modi and 62 others of direct or indirect involvement in the communal riots.
The court stated: “According to the SIT, no offence has been established against any of the persons listed in Zakia Jafri's complaint. Therefore, as per the Supreme Court's order and the principle of natural justice, the complainant has to be given a copy of the report and related documents.”
No notice was needed to be issued to Zakia Jafri as she had already approached the court for a copy of the report. But the court did not make any reference to the copetitioners who sought a copy, including the Mumbai-based Citizens for Justice and Peace, which has been helping the riot victims in the legal battle.
That the SIT had given a clean chit to Modi and others was known in official circles for some time. But it was officially being confirmed by the court for the first time.
Supreme Court’s Monitoring
The SIT, whose investigations into Zakia Jafri’s complaint were monitored by the Supreme Court, has come to the conclusion that no case is made out against the accused. Hence, it has recommended a closure of the case that has already dragged on far too long and achieved nothing apart from slandering Modi and others. In normal circumstances, there would have been no need for a Supreme Court-appointed (and monitored) SIT. But these are not normal circumstances since the Congress, its stooges masquerading as ‘human rights’ activists and a biased media are intent upon pinning blame on Modi for the sheer vicarious pleasure of maligning him as also to demonstrate their ‘secular’ and ‘liberal’ credentials. Also, in normal circumstances this particular case would have come to a closure with the SIT’s report setting aside the allegations.
However, those who have scavenged on the grief and misery of the families of the victims of the 2002 violence for a decade and converted activism into a profitable business will not allow that to happen. They sought to tar the SIT soon after it was set up, fearing their campaign of calumny would be exposed; they have now shown no hesitation in maligning the SIT for telling the truth which is clearly unpalatable to them, not the least because it strips them of their mask.
SIT First Report
Earlier in May 2010, SIT gave a ‘clean chit' to Modi when it submitted to the Supreme Court its first report on the complaint of Zakia Jafri, whose husband Ehsan Jaffri, former Congress MP, was among the 69 persons killed in the Gulberg Housing Society riots in 2002.
The SIT, in its report, said: “In spite of the fact that ghastly and violent attacks had taken place on Muslims at Gulberg Society and elsewhere, the reaction of the government was not the type that would have been expected by anyone. Modi had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. However, this utterance by itself is not sufficient to make out a case against Modi.”
On the allegation that there was undue delay in requisitioning and deployment of the Army though anti-minority violence had broken out on February 27, 2002 afternoon itself in Vadodara and Ahmedabad, the report said, “The deployment of the Army commenced with effect from 11 a.m. on March 1, 2002 and the Army [personnel] had taken up their position[s] after being flown in from the forward areas within 21 hours of requisition by the State government.” The allegation that there was undue delay was therefore not established.
It was alleged that Modi did not visit the riot-affected areas in the initial days, though he visited the Godhra railway station on February 27, 2002 itself. The report pointed out that Modi himself admitted having visited the station the same day and that he visited Gulberg Society and other affected parts of Ahmedabad only on March 5 and 6, 2002. “This possibly indicates his discriminatory attitude and the allegations stands proved.”
Advantage Modi
The SIT report giving a clean chit to Modi in the Gulberg Society massacre during the 2002 Gujarat riots could not have come at a more appropriate time for Modi, who, by all accounts, has started nursing national ambitions now.
The court ordered that a copy of the SIT report and related documents be given to Zakia Jafri within 30 days giving her the right to pursue her private criminal complaint against Modi and others.
For sometime now, BJP supporters here have been insisting that there is no alternative to projecting Modi as the party’s prime ministerial candidate.
The Gujarat Assembly elections are scheduled for the end of the year, which the supporters firmly believe Modi would win for the third time.
The term of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President Nitin Gadkari is also coming to an end at almost the same time.
Initially, there was a view that Gadkari would be given a second term. But recent events that brought Gadkari in the news for all the wrong reasons have sealed his fate.
At the same time, it is also common knowledge in BJP circles that the RSS, which eventually decides who should take command of the BJP and which had been backing Gadkari earlier, is also averse to promoting any of the D4 leaders (Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, M Venkaiah Naidu and Ananth Kumar).
The Sangh has been wary of Modi as well. But sources said that in the present scenario, Modi enjoys TINA (There is no alternative) factor.
Court Convicts Accused
An special court in Anand on April 9 convicted 23 accused and let off as many in a case it described as "rarest of rare." The court held 23 of the 47 accused guilty. One of the accused died during trial. Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code (conspiracy) has been applied to all 23 convicted, while 18 have also been convicted of the charge of murder, four of abetment to crime and one of unlawful activities.
According to the prosecution, a 1,500-strong mob gathered in Ode village on March 1, 2002, and started throwing stones and damaging the property of the people in the minority community-dominated Suriewali Bhagol. A handful of policemen present lobbed teargas shells and then opened fire to disperse the mob. The people dispersed, but the death of a boy, Nishith, in the police firing sparked tension.
Twenty-three persons, including nine women and as many children of the minority community, were burnt to death in a house in Pirwali Bhagol area of Ode village by a mob of over 1,500 on March 1, 2002 following the Godhra train burning incident that had triggered communal conflagration across the state.
Earlier, a court had awarded the death sentence to 11 and life term to 20 in the Godhra train burning incident in which 58 persons, mostly kar sevaks, had been killed on February 27, 2002.
Assessment
The court's own decision on the matter — whether to accept or reject the closure report – will doubtless be litigated by one side or the other. But whatever the final view taken by the courts on his individual legal culpability for the tragedy of Gujarat, Modi should know this much. The fact that he remained — at best — a mute spectator to the killing of hundreds of innocent citizens and did nothing to ensure justice for the victims afterwards is a moral and political badge of dishonor that will ensure the higher office his supporters seek for him remains out of reach.
Nevertheless, it is an open secret that the Modi government has remained a mere spectator during post-Godhra carnage pogrom resulting in the destruction of over 500 places of Muslim worship and loss of precious lives for which the Gujarat High Court has indicted the state government only, as reported. In fact, all of our sensible countrymen and women must admit that whatever had happened was a blot on our secular credentials.
Modi may be the latest of the persons in power not doing the right thing in the heat of highly charged riots between communities, whoever the instigator was. It takes statesmanship to show right action even at the cost of personal popularity. I recall then Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's counsel at the time to Modi to follow Raj Dharma which was sadly not followed. In addition to Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, none of the leaders since Independence including Indira Gandhi, Kumaraswami Kamaraj, Rajiv Gandhi and others followed this dictum when they faced similar challenges.
As case after case is taken up of that unfortunate period of recent history, it is sad that Modi-led Gujarat Government has not thought it fit to tender a public regret over its failure to prevent such large scale killings. The Gujarat chief minister keeps talking of the need to move on, but would not a public apology go a long way in healing 10-year-old wounds?

Manmohan Singh's Afghan Tour

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's Afghan tour is of vital importance. During a dinner thrown by Afghan President Hamid Karzai, he said, 'We want to see a strong and peaceful democracy in Afghanistan, so that its people play their role in respect of cultural and social fabric on global level. We have come here with a message of peace and India will keep on contributing for the development of their country.' On this occasion, Singh presented a gift of $100 million to Afghanistan.
Predecided Visit
After six years, the Indian prime minister's visit to Afghanistan was predecided and had no relation with Osama Bin Ladin's death. Suddenly, South Asia's scenario has changed after 2 May. The political upheaval has escalated post-Bin Ladin's death in Pakistan and Afghanistan will also be affected with this. What will be the foreign policy of Afghanistan cannot be said.
However, during talks of Manmohan Singh and Karzai, the withdrawal of US troops is neither in tune with South Asian policies nor would benefit India. This is the reason that the United States does not want to spoil relations with Pakistan.
Bin Ladin's Presence in Pakistan
Bin Ladin's presence in Pakistan was not strange for India as Pakistani intelligence functioning is well known to India. What is happening there and what it can do is very clear. The 26/11 (Mumbai terror attacks) occurrence has opened our eyes, but now the United States must review its relationship with Pakistan. Although the United States is making inquires in this regard and is talking to teach a lesson to Pakistan, its foreign policy will not weaken it because the United States is at liberty to use its land as and when needed.
The second big power of the world is China, with whose borders the United States can come closer due to Pakistan. This is the reason China is not expressing its anger over Bin Ladin's shelter in Pakistan. More so, in this region, no other country, accept Pakistan, will act with the United States. Singh must speak to Karzai about permanent peace in the region and bringing an end of US meddling in Afghanistan.
India's Foreign Policy
One should not forget that after 9/11, prior to Pakistan, the Indian Government offered the use of its land for land and air attacks in Afghanistan. That time Atal Behari Vajpayee was the prime minister, and this was an unsuccessful attempt of India's foreign policy. After the Indian offer, Pakistan also felt necessary to offer itself. That time the United States preferred Pakistan over India and strengthened its economy, besides praising it all the time.
Had India not presented its offer, Pakistan would also not offer due to public opposition and its true nature would not have been revealed. The Indian prime minister is once again on tour to give a new shape to South Asia. Let us see what the country gain and what it lose.

India-China Cooperation

The twists and turns in China-India relationship show no signs of disappearing in the near future. It is, however, equally necessary not to let these complications exceed a certain limit. Some progress might be made in this direction with the meeting between Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh and his Chinese counterpart Wen Jiabao on the sidelines of the ASEAN Summit in Hanoi on 29 October.

Dr Singh and Jiabao have met 10 times in the last six years, as the Chinese leader observed when the two met. That is a high metric even for top leaders of neighboring countries. On each occasion there has been a degree of feel-good, considering that relations between Asia’s two biggest countries and fastest rising economies -- which also leave a mark on the world stage -- are not wrinkle-free. And yet, it is apparent to all that the frequency of contact hasn’t lent itself to the two countries moving to a stage of easy give-and-take in ties.

Common Interests
The Chinese prime minister will visit India in December. In order to make this visit a success, it is important to reduce the misgivings of the two countries. India and China are neighbors. Both are members of alliances like BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China). They have common interests in matters like environment and world trade. They also work together in these fields. At the same time, it is also true that the two countries compete in economic and several foreign affairs, especially in spreading their influence in areas like East Asia and Africa. The old border dispute between India and China is yet to be solved. This often creates bitterness.

Dr Singh went ahead and raised all the troubling questions in the bilateral relationship that have surfaced of late -- China’s adopting a forward position in respect of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), its questioning of India’s sovereignty in Kashmir suggested by stapling -- not stamping, which is the international norm -- of visas for Jammu and Kashmir residents, Beijing’s offer of a stapled visa for a general who commands India’s Northern Army, (which had the effect of scuttling the military officer’s visit to China on a goodwill defense visit earlier this year), and the revival by Beijing of its claims over Arunachal Pradesh (after the Indian state had been officially shown as being part of India during the term of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee).

Exploring Possibilities
India intends to explore these possibilities as much as it can. Such joint efforts will help all countries to overcome poverty and backwardness quickly. Distrust and suspicion between India and China obstruct any progress in this direction. Even the dispute between India and Pakistan has been kept alive to a large extent on China's support.

China certainly completes with India in the economic field, but it also has problems with Indian democracy. Modern China has had a dictatorial form of government for more than 60 years. Having adopted a liberal economy, it is now going through difficulties of introducing a liberal political system. Prime Minister Jiabao had to face severe criticism from conservative forces for advocating such a system.

Lack of Equilibrium
Chinese are afraid that a close friendship with a big democratic country like India might create an urge for democracy in the country. Suppressed dissatisfaction and lack of equilibrium might come out in the open.

The other problem faced by China is that democratic Western countries and Japan pin hopes on India rather than on China's monopolistic economic strength. India is trying not to let these issues come in the way of mutual relationship, but China has its own reasons for being apprehensive.

Withdrawal of US Forces From Afghanistan May Put Pakistan at Risk

The tragedy of the Pakistani rulers and leaders is that while in power they say something and after being ousted from power they go abroad and their rhetoric undergoes a change. When Benazir Bhutto was the prime minister, she often issued "anti-India" statements and like her father, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, she had been harping on the Kashmir issue.

While in power she never uttered a world against hardliners and fanatic elements that dominated the whole of Pakistan. After losing power, she lived abroad on deportation. She would tell the media in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Dubai that normalization of relations between India and Pakistan was extremely imperative for peace in South Asia. Prior to the last elections in Pakistan when she returned home, she addressed foreign journalists and said she was extremely critical of militants, describing them as fatal for the region.

Present Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, during his foreign tours, made similar statements against the Taliban and other extremists. But when back in his country, he gives "anti-India" statements and blames India for terrorist activities and gives a clean chit to the main conspirator of the Mumbai attack, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed.

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is the only Pakistani ruler who perceived the ground realities and took practical steps to improve relations between India and Pakistan and invited former Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee to Lahore. A resolve was taken to settle the Kashmir problem and other bilateral issues through talks. But Musharraf, who was the Pakistani Army chief, started the Kargil war and upset the peace efforts.

Support to Militant Organizations
Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf captured power through a military coup. He instigated the Taliban government in Afghanistan and extended patronage to Al-Qa'ida and other anti-India organizations during his term as Pakistan president. The attacks on the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly and the Indian Parliament were carried out during his term.

The Pakistani intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), extended full support to militant organizations and the Taliban in Afghanistan were provided directions by the Pakistani military officers. Then, Musharraf's intention was to achieve access to the Middle East via Afghanistan. Yet, his game was spoiled due to the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. He was constrained to join the global war on terror when Bush reprimanded him. Under the UN pressure, he had to rein in militant outfits. But, even thereafter, Musharraf continued to play double games.

While the ISI and the Pakistani military bolstered the Taliban, organizations such as the Lashkar-e-Taiyiba went on with their activities by changing their names. Musharraf remained in a mode of denial of the existence of militant training camps on the Pakistani soil and the infiltration along the border with India, but simultaneously went ahead with bolstering militants. So far so, Musharraf received US aid to the tune of billions of dollars. It was during his term that the leaders of the United States and other countries of the world termed Pakistan as a nursery of terrorism.
Change of Power in Pakistan
Finally, in the wake of change in power in Pakistan, Musharraf had to flee to the United Kingdom and now the possibility of his return to Pakistan is ruled out. After meeting journalists in foreign countries, Musharraf has now realized the stark reality and in a statement in Washington recently, he said, "President Obama Barack administration has reportedly planned to withdraw forces from Afghanistan within a year but there is no truth in that.

For peace and stability in the region it is imperative to defeat the Taliban and the continued presence of the US forces is extremely essential to crush the Taliban there." It is the first time that Musharraf has spoken the right thing in no uncertain terms.

Taliban suicide attacks in Afghanistan are causing huge loss of life and property. If the US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces withdraw from Afghanistan without the elimination of the Taliban and Al-Qa'ida, the very survival of Pakistan and Afghanistan will be jeopardized and peace and stability in the region will be shattered, thereby creating a serious threat to the whole world.

BJP's Opposition To Return of Indians in PoK

Home Minister P. Chidambaram has agreed with Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and has announced that Kashmiri youth who crossed the border and had gone to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) would be forgiven and safe passage would be provided for their return. The decision has sent ripples in New Delhi, Srinagar, Islamabad and Muzaffarabad. This sudden and unexpected decision has led to a controversy.

The first to express his desire was union Health Minister and former state Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has decided to launch a countrywide agitation against it. Newly elected BJP president Nitin Gadkari had fixed 25 February for launch of the agitation in Jammu. The party has termed the decision dangerous.

Immediate Action for Success
Both pro-government and antigovernment elements have expressed their displeasure over the issue, while the National Conference has termed the acceptance of its recommendations a great success. The state Congress has welcomed Chidambaram's decision. PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti has welcomed the decision and has tried to take credit for the same.

Separatists have termed the decision a conspiracy. They have said that the government should take immediate action for the success of a composite dialogue. Kashmiri pundits in Jammu and New Delhi have expressed disapproval of the decision. They said forgiving militants would amount to turning the clock back. Kashmiris in PoK have rejected the decision. They said that the Indian Government should withdraw the army and should give people the right to self-determination.

Major Hurdle
All are expressing their views and nobody can be stopped from doing so. As far as the BJP's opposition is concerned, it is an opposition party, which had been in power in the past. It rules in several states. On the whole the party does not enjoy countrywide acceptance. Many persons, including non-Muslims, consider it a communal and extremist Hindu party.

The party has enmity with Muslims. It wants to keep them backward. If any Muslim makes any protest, he is asked by the party to go to Pakistan. It considers all Muslims antinational and terrorists. However, when elections comes the party begs for Muslim votes. This party is opposed to Pakistan. It has decided to launch agitation against return of Indians from PoK.

However, when it is in power, it develops a soft corner for Pakistan. Atal Behari Vajpayee as prime minister shook hands with his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif. L.K. Advani paid obeisance at Jinnah's mausoleum in Pakistan and Jaswant Singh wrote a book favoring Jinnah.

Pakistan's Antics Against India as Attempts To Cover Up Failures

Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik has once again made a mockery of India by saying that the Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) is extending support to terrorist activities in Pakistan. He added: "We are investigating into the role of this intelligence agency into creating unrest in Baluchistan."
A few months ago when Pakistan leveled such an allegation, India commented in the October 2009 editorial that Pakistan is trying to be smart by concealing its failure to foil the attempts by terrorist groups like the Taliban to spread violence in its territory. The discerning Pakistani public also is aware how their leadership is misleading them by indulging in falsehood.

Nefarious Aggressive Designs of Pakistan
There exists a general belief in India that "We wish we could retaliate nefarious aggressive designs of Pakistan then we would not have been subjected to terrorist violence spread across India." In fact, India faltered when it agreed to the incorporation of the reference to the Baluchistan issue in the joint statement issued by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani at Sharm-el Sheikh wherein it was stated that terrorism will not be included in the "composite dialogue with Pakistan." In this context, Manmohan Singh put forward the explanation, "how will Pakistan prove our involvement in Baluchistan when we are doing nothing there?"
Nevertheless, this provided an opportunity to Pakistan to level the charge against India. Malik even started saying that Pakistan is in possession of hard evidences of India's involvement in Baluchistan and the same can be produced before India at any forum. Notwithstanding all such claims, Pakistan has failed to bring them forward before India.

India's Non-Violence Approach
India is known for its history that even as it propagated its spiritualism and knowledge through saints and sages. Yet, it never mounted any military offensive in any part of the world. On contrary, the monarchs of India have been such that King Ashoka, extremely distressed over widespread bloodshed in the battle of Kalinga, abandoned the sword and adopted the path of non-violence by embracing Buddhism.
Prithviraj Chauhan pardoned Muhammad Ghori who invaded India 17 times and paid the penalty for his forgiveness when he was defeated in Ghori's 18th invasion. He was taken captive and his eyes were extracted. The Mughals invaded India and they settled here. In 1947, when Pakistan attacked Kashmir and when the Indian forces marched forward by pushing back Pakistan, Jawaharlal Nehru, showing magnanimity, affected the cease-fire and took the issue to the United Nations. As a consequence, one-third of Kashmir remained under illegal occupation of Pakistan.
In 1971, Indira Gandhi, exhibiting large heartedness and a sense of pardon, released 90,000 Pakistani troops captured by India. She displayed this quality of forgiveness when at the Shimla Conference Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto made entreaties to her saying, "With what face I will go before the Pakistanis empty handed."
Atal Behari Vajpayee also, in the wake of terrorist attack on Parliament, declared to go for a "do or die" war. Diplomatic relations with Pakistan were severed, air, road, and rail services were suspended, but later forces were withdrawn from the border. Exhibiting magnanimity, after some time all these services that remained suspended were resumed ultimately. In the name of "Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai" slogan, China grabbed 60,000 sq. mile territory of India. Even now it indulged in incursions along the Indian border. We are promoting trade ties with it, but failed to regain our territory.
In so far as the intelligence agencies is concerned, they failed to give advance input to the government with regard to terrorist attacks on the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly, nor for that matter Parliament. They could not gather advance information regarding terrorist attacks on Delhi and Mumbai either. Had our successive governments and the intelligence agencies the potential to carry out any kind of aggressive action we would have long ago resolved the Kashmir problem and wiped out terrorist training camps being run in Pakistan.
The Pakistani prime minister and the interior minister are deliberately terming India valiant. But, notwithstanding all this, if Pakistan is doing so in order to cover up its failures, then India also is helpless.
Nonetheless, such statements must delight the Indian Government and those RAW officials who are being awarded such a big certificate of creating unrest and disturbance in Pakistan even after their actually doing nothing in that country.

India Fails To Spell Out National Action Against Terror Plans

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement at the Chief Ministers' Conference that "Pakistani terrorist groups are on the look out for yet another attack on India and we should remain wary of it" has stunned even his supporters who welcomed the joint statement between him and his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Raza Gilani at Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt. It is tantamount to a virtual "U-turn" from his (Singh)statement at Sharm el-Sheikh. He agreed to de-link the terrorism issue from the India-Pakistan dialogue process during his two-hour talk with Gilani. Then, Singh gave the clarification that Pakistan had assured India that it would not allow the use of its soil for any "anti-India" terrorist activity.

Opposition to PM's Statement
The Congress party leadership opposed Singh's statement. The party leadership was angry over it. Finally, the Prime Minister had to say in the Lok Sabha [Lower house of Parliament] that no shift has taken place in the firm Indian stand on the India-Pakistan talks.

Unless and until Pakistan punishes the perpetrators of the 26 November Mumbai attacks and dismantles the terror infrastructure within its country, talks cannot be held with it.

Lapless At Indo-Pak Talks
It would have been better if the Prime Minister simply observed the formality of mere handshaking and put off the talks at Sharm el-Sheikh just like Atal Behari Vajpayee had done with Musharraf in Kathmandu." The prime minister's talks with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari tended to soften the Indian stand.

The other lapse that took place was that during the talks with Gilani at Sharm el-Sheikh, Singh relented to such a large extent that he failed to keep in view the diplomacy that Pakistan, under great Indian pressure, was anxious to prove itself innocent. After believing the assurances given by Gilani, Singh returned to the country. But Pakistan persisted with its mischief.

Indian Army Chief's Views
Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor also stated recently that prior to the start of the winter season infiltration attempts by militants have surged. The Pakistani military in these attempts cannot be ruled out. Pakistan does not favor that peace should prevail in Jammu and Kashmir for a long time and hence a spurt has taken place in the infiltration from across the border. Defense Minister A.K. Antony also said that a large number of terrorist training camps were being run in the Pakistani territory. Moreover, incidents of infiltration and pushing arms into Jammu and Kashmir registered a substantial rise during the past four days. This is amply evident from the incidents given below.

August 15: The Border Security Force [BSF] arrested four Pakistanis making a bid to infiltrate near the Tapu checkpoint of Khemkaran and recovered from them four pistols, arms and ammunition, night vision devices, and two kg heroin.

August 16: The security forces foiled the attempts made by militants to cross the Line of Control by cutting the barbed fencing in the "Chakhan da Bagh" area of the Ranigarh section of Poonch.

August 16: In an encounter between the police and the Lashkar-e Taiyiba in the Pulwama sector, one terrorist, John Muhammad, was killed.

August 17: In the Rajouri sector, security forces killed self-styled Hizbul Mujahidin commander Altaf Husayn. It also recovered 20 kg RDX in the Gambhir Mughal forests.

August 17: In the Sir Creek sector of Katch, the BSF arrested nine Pakistani infiltrators near the Akri Moti power plant.

August 18: In the Poonch sector, security forces seized 10 grenades, one carbine, and four pistols.

There are also news reports that the Lashkar-e-Taiyiba is once again trying to start a November 26 type attack from Jafarabad. The Pakistani Government is not taking any action against the main conspirator of the Mumbai attacks, Hafiz Sayeed yet.

Congress Dissatisfaction
The truth is the Congress party was not satisfied with the joint statement at Sharm el-Sheikh. Non-incorporation of Kashmir in the joint statement was being put up as India's achievement. But, harping on the Kashmir issue, Pakistan has started saying that Kashmir is such an issue without which resolution mutual differences of the two nations cannot be sorted out. In such a state of affairs the prime minister, in order to satisfy his partymen, had to mention at the chief minister's meet the possibility of a fresh Pakistani terrorist attack on India.

We reiterate that though the prime minister has made the point of a fresh Pakistani terrorist attack, he has not stated what action India will take in reply. There is also the need to think that fake currency notes, drugs, arms, etc. are often seized in train and bus services between the countries. It should be seen whether due to these services the country is being caused more damage than gain.