Indira Gandhi targeting RSS during Emergency & legitimising it, Rajiv giving up mandate in 1989, and Vajpayee, Advani advancing general elections – these errors changed the course of India’s politics.
The key difference between BJP & Congress governments is that ideology guided Congress's policies, never governed them, while BJP's commitment to ideology is almost fundamentalist.
Legatees of political forces Indira Gandhi locked up during Emergency are now redefining some of India's foundational principles. They can be challenged, just as she was in the 1970s.
This is not an argument about Islam, the faith. This is about political Islam, where the faith is the state religion, defines a nation and/or maintains its mostly unelected leaders in power.
Congress refusal to attend Ram temple inauguration triggers questions, including one on its post-1996 ideology in face of today's electoral politics. Could it have joined celebrations with Hindu majority while also criticising Modi, BJP, RSS?
Smarter opposition leaders could pick an issue with emotional potential & conjure up a campaign pitch, a line, to convince a large enough body of voters that it mattered to them.
A DDA flat was a privilege in a city where almost nobody could build anything. Its inventory of unsold flats now exceeds 40,000 at a value of Rs 18,000 crore, and it's still building more.
India’s political geographies display BJP’s strengths & vulnerabilities. Nobody understands this better than BJP and it is because of this hard-headed realism that it keeps winning.
Situation calls for bringing focus back on Punjab. Working with credible political forces, even adversaries, would serve national interest better than fighting in New York courtrooms.
It was probably the setback in Karnataka that shook Modi & the BJP. As is a pattern in our politics, the loser searches for external factors to blame rather than look within.
The Beckhams have had the sleekest, unassailable PR game in celebrity town. And much of it rests on their carefully curated social media image, especially on Instagram.
Economists say there are weaknesses in India’s GDP data. But statisticians claim the accusations are based on flawed understanding, saying while GDP has problems, the economists are looking in the wrong places.
Both the governments expressed their commitment to strengthening their maritime cooperation to strengthen the maritime safety and security framework in the region.
Thanks Shekhar Ji for such a nice article. I am an Associate Professor in Economics at the University of Leicester , UK.
If I may please, I would differ with you a bit on the 1989 analysis. The President did call RG to form the government first, but at that point RG had no other option but to decline. How would he get the additional numbers required? Congress dod not have any major pre poll alliance. At that scenario, even the leftwould have not supported the government. However, I do think RG should have formed the government after the fall of the VP government. With the CS faction out, with 197 he could have made CS the deputy PM and offered a few more important cabinet posts. Instead RG chose to repeat the Charan Singh type tale. Incidentally in a recent researcg paper we have shown by careful econometric analysis that this act did cost RG electorally in 1991.
Don’t see the connection between the so-called major blunders. The analysis is too hypothetical. It simply says had Rajiv Gandhi not sat out in 1989 politics of subsequent period would have played out differently. How? Rajiv’s government would not have lasted. He might have still felled by LTTE bullets.
Since the prism is political, sending the IPKF to Sri Lanka can be excluded. However, seeking to nullify the Shah Bano verdict and also opening the locks to the Babri Masjid was a mistake. For Mrs. Gandhi, playing footsie in Punjab, leading ultimately to Operation Blue Star.
Thanks Shekhar Ji for such a nice article. I am an Associate Professor in Economics at the University of Leicester , UK.
If I may please, I would differ with you a bit on the 1989 analysis. The President did call RG to form the government first, but at that point RG had no other option but to decline. How would he get the additional numbers required? Congress dod not have any major pre poll alliance. At that scenario, even the leftwould have not supported the government. However, I do think RG should have formed the government after the fall of the VP government. With the CS faction out, with 197 he could have made CS the deputy PM and offered a few more important cabinet posts. Instead RG chose to repeat the Charan Singh type tale. Incidentally in a recent researcg paper we have shown by careful econometric analysis that this act did cost RG electorally in 1991.
Oh
Don’t see the connection between the so-called major blunders. The analysis is too hypothetical. It simply says had Rajiv Gandhi not sat out in 1989 politics of subsequent period would have played out differently. How? Rajiv’s government would not have lasted. He might have still felled by LTTE bullets.
Since the prism is political, sending the IPKF to Sri Lanka can be excluded. However, seeking to nullify the Shah Bano verdict and also opening the locks to the Babri Masjid was a mistake. For Mrs. Gandhi, playing footsie in Punjab, leading ultimately to Operation Blue Star.