Pegasus, what? Surveillance is a poll promise
More skeletons tumbled out of the Pegasus cupboard this week, but the Government of India remains unfazed. The New York Times reported that India bought the spyware from Israel, as part of a deal that was agreed upon at the level of the Prime Ministers of both countries. Criticism of surveillance -- in this case, it allegedly involved a round-the-clock watching and listening of constitutional functionaries, journalists, political opponents of the government and even associates of the ruling party -- is centred around two concerns, namely, the breach of privacy and violation of democratic norms. But these concerns are likely not shared by a wide spectrum of society, if one goes by the politics over it. Pegasus is not a talking point in the ongoing campaign for elections to five State Assemblies. Far from it, the Aam Admi Party (AAP) is boasting to voters in Punjab that its government in Delhi has installed more surveillance cameras than New York and London, offering the same to them too! The party’s chief, Arvind Kejriwal, has a knack of identifying what the people want. He is right — Indians are more than willing to surrender whatever privacy they may have for security and welfare. Privacy may be a concern for only the small urban elite. That explains the nonchalance of the BJP and the Modi government in the face of credible allegations. The sensibilities of the old order are immaterial to the new politics built by Mr. Modi. The BJP narrative on Pegasus is that surveillance for national interest is not merely acceptable, but much needed.
(Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw. Photo credit: Sandeep Saxena/The Hindu)
The Government of India has never denied buying the spyware, and statements from government functionaries only claimed that nothing illegal had happened. What has the government said so far, and what is legal surveillance? Here’s an explainer.
Hindu appeasement
When he is not promising more surveillance cameras, Mr. Kejriwal is playing to the Hindu gallery in Punjab, with no apologies to anyone. He called for a law on religious conversions, while his colleague Raghav Chadha said the Congress did not appoint its leader Sunil Jakhar as Chief Minister of Punjab just because he is Hindu. Mr. Jakhar had said he was overlooked by the high command for the post of CM, despite having the support of 42 of 79 Congress MLAs. Charanjit Singh Channi was appointed the Chief Minister. In Punjab’s unique political landscape, Hindus, who compromise 38% of the population, largely supported the Congress in the past. The Congress used to derive its strength from both communities -- Sikhs and Hindus. The BJP, nationally a Hindu party, used to be in alliance with the Shiromani Akali Dal, a Sikh religious party, and was less acceptable to the State’s Hindus. With all the previous alignments unravelled, AAP is seeking an opportunity in dividing Sikh and Hindu voters of the Congress. Hence, this openly communal campaign.
In Uttar Pradesh, the Samajwadi Party has little appetite to challenge the ruling BJP on Hindutva, and for understandable reasons. In fact, occasionally, it appears that the battle is over the question of who is friendlier towards Hindus. Party leader Ram Gopal Yadav, who is close to nephew and party supremo Akhilesh Yadav, said the Ram Temple in Ayodhya would be built “faster and better” if the latter becomes the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh.
BSP in action
The BSP too has promised to do better than the BJP for the Ram Temple. I had written earlier, including in PL, that the BSP is on terminal decline. Did I speak too early? Perhaps. Ground reporting indicates that the BSP might hold on to its loyal base and who knows, even emerge as a kingmaker in the event of a hung Assembly in UP. As campaigning gets underway, the BSP’s support base appears to be largely robust.
Rahul Gandhi has been trying to frame the ongoing religious politics as a contest between Hinduism and Hindutva but his newfound friend, Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut, says the real contest is between true Hindutva and pretenders. “A true Hindutvavadi would have shot Jinnah and not Mahatma Gandhi,” he said. The Sena, which takes pride in its militant religious and ethnic politics, was a BJP ally until 2019. But the party and the government it leads in Maharashtra along with the Congress is now stridently opposed to the BJP.
Catholics of the BJP
I had mentioned a report from Goa earlier about the possibility of the BJP giving up on Catholics and pitching for Hindu consolidation. As it turns out, “the party has surprised its detractors by fielding no less than nine Catholic Christian candidates – more than what Manohar Parrikar had done in both the 2012 (six Catholic candidates from the BJP) and 2017 Assembly election (eight minority candidates)”
KCR, Stalin, Mamata -- An emerging triad against Modi?
DMK president and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin has requested leaders of key political parties across the country to nominate their party representatives to the All India Federation of Social Justice, a platform he announced on January 26. “…it is vital that all progressive forces join hands to protect the interests of the oppressed,” he wrote to 38 political party leaders including Congress leader Sonia Gandhi, RJD leader Laloo Prasad, SP leader Akhilesh Yadav and the Chief Ministers of non-BJP ruled States.
Re-elected chairperson of the Trinamool Congress, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, has appealed to all regional parties to come together and defeat the BJP in the 2024 general elections. But Ms. Banerjee may have spread herself thin by entering into too many battles outside West Bengal, and things are actually going south for her in Goa.
Telangana Chief Minister K. Chandrashekhar Rao has, meanwhile, announced that he would be seeking a national role ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha election. Mr. Rao said he was not trying to be PM but only trying to knit together an alternative to the BJP. He had made some unsuccessful attempts in this direction ahead of 2019 also.
Federalism Tract
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi put the debate on federalism in the spotlight with a passionate speech in Lok Sabha, which got him both bouquets and brickbats. He said the Centre cannot rule the States by suppressing the different cultures, languages and histories. He found support from several leaders, particularly Mr. Stalin.
Just a day earlier, Mr. Rao had blamed both the Congress and the BJP for their centralising tendencies at the cost of the powers of the States. He called for redrafting the Constitution to ensure better sharing of power between the Centre and the States. The Congress and the BJP have both opposed the idea.
Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi has returned to the Assembly Speaker a Bill seeking to dispense with NEET-based admissions for undergraduate medical degree courses. NEET has been criticised for taking away the powers of State governments, and the TN government wants to restore its own powers through the legislative route. The Governor had been delaying a decision on the Bill, and now the DMK has decided to pass the same Bill again. The Governors of Maharashtra and West Bengal are also on the warpath with State governments.
The conscious construction of national history often leads to negligence of our varied past. Anirudh Kanisetti, author of the new book Lords of the Deccan argues in a fine essay that India’s “quest for pure national histories” has led to “ignoring the histories of the Deccan, Odisha, Andhra, Kerala, or Assam..”
I have been inviting your attention to the stateless status of thousands of Chakmas and Hajongs in Arunachal Pradesh, who had to leave what is today Bangladesh because of religious persecution and displacement caused by the building of a dam. It is a very complicated story -- indigenous tribes are themselves protected by law, and movement into their areas is restricted, as the nativist politicians of Arunachal Pradesh consider them as foreigners. This piece explains the issue lucidly and sensitively.
Subscribe to the Political Line newsletter here
