TURNING GUJARAT RIOTS INTO A RIOT OF POLITICS

TURNING GUJARAT RIOTS INTO A RIOT OF POLITICS

By A. C. Vashishth

New claims surfacing every other day about the 2002 Gujarat riots are puzzling and, to an extent, intriguing because of the contradictory nature of the claims and the counter-claims. This game of one-upmanship is likely only to hinder the process of reaching down to the bottom of the truth. The only hope remains the Supreme Court which is sure to clear the untimely clouds of doubts raised by contradictory and conflicting statements and claims.

A Gujarat IPS officer, Sanjeev Bhatt, in his affidavit in the Supreme Court has claimed that the Chief Minister Narendra Modi in a meeting held on February 27, 2002 expressed the view that Hindus be allowed to vent out their anger.” Media reports quoting sources close to him said he was referring to the affidavit in the Zakia Jaffery case. (http://www.dayandnightnews.com/2011/04/gujarat-ips-officer-alleges-modis-complicity-in-2002-riots/)

The media has gone on to describe this disclosure as a great blow to Mr. Modi and raised finger at his involvement.

On the other hand, K. Chakrabarthi, Gujarat's Director General of Police at the time of post-Godhra riots has said: "He (Sanjiv Bhatt) was not present in that particular meeting held with the Chief Minister and other high-ranking officials. I have told this to the Special Investigation Team (probing the riots) during my deposition." (http://www.asianage.com/india/ips-officer-bhatt-not-present-meeting-modi-guj-ex-dgp-561)

Another queer allegation has been hurled by another IAS officer Mr. Pradeep Sharma, an officer suspended by the Modi government. Mr. Sharma is behind bars for his involvement in an alleged land scam case. He says that he was called by the chief minister’s office and told to ask his elder brother Kuldip, then posted as IG of Ahmedabad range, “that he should abstain from taking any proactive measures in favour of minorities”. (Mail Today, April 26m 2011, P.3)

Does it imply that Mr. Modi thought that IG Kuldip was so high an official that a chief minister dare not speak directly to him and, therefore, he had to seek the assistance of a junior officer and Kuldip’s younger brother to convey his wishes? Does it also mean that the CM perhaps thought that Mr. Kuldip may defy him but will comply with the wishes and directions of his younger brother, Mr. Pradeep Sharma?

Efforts seem to be afoot to put some words in the mouth of Mr. Narendra Modi and to prove through the evidence of certain persons who have now preferred to open their mouth, for unexplained reasons, only after nine years.

But surprisingly our media and politicians are more willing to jump at the ‘truth’ of Mr. Pradeep Sharma’s and Mr. Bhatt’s statement than giving weight to the words of latter’s boss.
GUJARAT & ANTI-SIKH RIOTS
Anti-Sikh riots broke out following the unfortunate assassination of late prime minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi but, surprisingly, remained confined only to Congress-ruled States in the country resulting in merciless killing of more than 5,000 Sikhs (almost more than double the number that died in Gujarat riots). The then Prime Minister late Mr. Rajiv Gandhi is on record having justified the Sikh genocide saying, “When a big tree falls the earth shakes around it.” The tremors will be felt all the way up to Delhi. (http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/columnists/print.php?content_id=85795)
Yet, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi continues be a great ‘secular’ icon. Nobody raises fingers at him. This also exposes the hypocrisy, morality, impartiality and fairness of our ‘secular’ intelligentsia.
That is the way of Indian politics, ‘secularism’ and system of justice. No court, so far, seems to have taken cognizance of this confession. More than half a commissions of inquiry into the anti-Sikh riots have testified to the fact that the Police administration and the then Lt. Governor had stood like a silent spectator to the orgy against Sikhs. No official has been punished. No leader is behind bars. In Gujarat numerous politicians have been convicted and many are languishing behind bars. Justice still eludes the women widowed, children orphaned and elders snatched their life support during the anti-Sikh riots even after 26 years.
Compare where do Mr. Rajiv Gandhi and Mr. Narendra Modi stand in the estimation of our ‘secular’ media, intelligentsia and human rights activists all over the world? ***

IS HAMAAM MEIN SAB NANGE -- MEDIA BHI

इस हमाम में सब नंगे, मीडिया भी

-- अन्‍तर्यामी

साप्‍ताहिक चौथी दुनिया ने अपने 25–—01 मई, 2011 के अपने अंक में ''26 लाख करोड् का महाघोटाला'' शीर्षक से मुख्‍य पृष्‍ठ पर एक रिपोर्ट छापी है जिस में कोयला मन्‍ञालय में हुये घोटाले का पर्दाफाश करने का दावा किया है। संयोगवश इस मन्‍ञालय का प्रभार स्‍वयं प्रधान मन्‍ञी डा0 मनमोहन सिंह के पास है।

साप्‍ताहिक के अनुसार इस घोटाले की जानकारी उन्‍हें मध्‍य प्रदेश के भारतीय जनता पार्टी सांसद श्री हंसराज गंगाराम अहीर से प्राप्‍त हुई जिन्‍होंने अपने पञ दिनांक 18 नवम्‍बर 2010 को कंटरोलर एवं आडिटर जनरल आफ इण्डिया (सीएजी) को इसकी विस्‍तृत जानकारी दे दी है। सीएजी कार्यालय ने भी अपने पञ संख्‍या AMG-III/Coal Blocks/MP/2010-11/216. दिनांक 8 दिसम्‍बर 2010 द्वारा इसकी पावती सांसद महोदय को भेज दी है। अब इसकी जांच के बाद सीएजी किस निष्‍कर्ष पर पहुंचते हैं और अपनी क्‍या रिपोर्ट भेजेंगे यह तो समय ही बतायेगा।

पर इतना अवश्‍य है कि अभी तक इस संसनीखेज् रहस्‍योदघाटन पर सरकार ने अपनी जुबान नहीं खोली है। न आरोप लगाने बाला ही कोई मामूली व्‍यक्ति है और न ही छापने वाला कोई थैलाछाप समाचारपञ। आरोप एक जिम्‍मेदार सांसद ने लगाये हैं और एक ऐसे साप्‍ताहिक ने छापे हैं जो ब्‍लैकमेलर नहीं माना जाता। यह सा‍प्‍ताहिक 1986 से छप रहा है जिसे एक पूर्व सांसद निकाल रहे हैं।

सांसद और पञकार दोनों ही जानते है कि इतने गम्‍भीर आरोप लगाने का हशर क्‍या हो सकता है। झूठे आरोप लगाना एक आपराधिक कुकर्म है जिस कारण उन्‍हें जेल भी हो सकती है और मानहानि के जुर्म में भारी जुर्माना भी भरना पड सकता है।

सरकार को भी पता है कि चुप्‍पी सदैव निर्दोष होने का सबूत नहीं होती। कुछ लोग इसका अर्थ दोष की स्‍वीकारोक्ति भी मानते हैं। वैसे आज निर्दोष होने के दावे की कोई विश्‍वसनीयता भी नहीं बची है। 2जी स्‍पैक्‍टरम घोटाला हो या कामनवैल्‍थ खेल घोटाला सरकार के मन्‍ञी ए राजा और सुरेश कलमाडी भी छाती ठोंक कर निर्दोष होने का डंका पीटते थे। दोष और निर्दोष का निर्णय न तो आरोपी स्‍वयं ही कर सकता है और न इस पर जनता ही अपना फतवा सुना सकती है। इसका निर्णय तो अन्‍तता अदालत को ही करना होता है।

पर इस सारे प्रकरण में मीडिया की भी पोल खुल गई है। अपने आपको सदा सतर्क, निर्भीक, निष्‍पक्ष और अपने कर्तव्‍य के प्रति ईमानदार होने का दावा भरने वाला मीडिया आज स्‍वयं कटघरे में खडा दिख रहा है।

किसी बडे नेता, विशेषकर गुजरात के मुख्‍य मन्‍ञी नरेन्‍द्र मोदी के, स्‍वामीरामदेव के विरूद्व कोई भी छुटभैयया नेता या नौकाशाह आरोप लगा दे। कोई भी कुछ बोल दे। कोई अनजान स्‍वयंसेवी संस्‍था का सदस्‍य कोई आरोप जड् दे तो यह मीडिया के लिये एक ब्रेकिंग न्‍यूज बन जाती है जिस के लिये हमारी न्‍यूज चैनल घंटों का समय दे देते है। लम्‍बी लम्‍बी चर्चाये शूरू कर देते हैं वह। हमारे समाचार पत्रों के प़ृष्‍ठ भरे पडे रहते हैं। पर अब जब कि एक साप्‍ताहिक पत्र् ने एक सांसद के हवाले से गम्‍भीर आरोप लगाये हैं तो हमारे निर्भीक, निष्‍पक्ष, स्‍वतन्‍त्र् और अन्‍वेषी पत्रकारों की तो मानों आंख पर ही पटटी बंध गई हैख्‍ जुबान बन्‍द हो गई है।

यह एक ऐसा मौका था जब हमारे पञकारों को अपनी कौशलता, निर्भीकता, स्‍वतंञता व ईमानदारी के सिक्‍के जमा सकते थे। इस समाचार व आरोप को परम सत्‍य का रूप मान लेना भी उतना ही गलत होगा जितना कि उसे सफेद झूठ कह कर नकार देनाा न मीडिया ही इस पर अपना अन्तिम निर्णय सुना सकता है। पर इतना तो अवश्‍य है कि जैसे अन्‍य समाचारों व आरोपों पर मीडिया अपना मत व अपनी टिप्‍पणी प्रस्‍तुत करना अपना नैतिक कर्तव्‍य समझता है, वैसी ही कर्तव्‍यपरायण्‍ता का प्रदर्शन व परिचय उसे इस रहस्‍योदघाटन पर भी करना चाहिये था। वह सत्‍य की तह तक जाकर या उसे नकार देता या स्‍वीकार कर लेता। मीडिया का यह तो ऐसा अधिकार है जिसे भारत सरीखे जनतंञ में कोई चुनौति नहीं दे सकता। पर इस कर्तव्‍यपरायणता से मीडिया अपना पल्‍लू भी नहीं झाड् सकता। ऐसे में तो मीडिया की चुप्‍पी भी उतनी ही रहस्‍यमयी बन जायेगी जितनी कि सरकार की। तब तो इस हमाम में सब नंगे हैं वाली कहावत ही चरितार्थ हो जायेगी--मीडिया भी।

OLD DUD versus AMUL BABY

Old dud Vs. Amul Baby Hypocrisy -- Secular India’s proud political creed By Antaryami India may be a secular country yet, it seems, hypocrisy has evolved itself into a national creed of the political life of the country, unofficially by practice. Our politicians take pride in criticizing their opponents, calling names and going sarcastic. But when their target retaliates and they are at the receiving end, they cry: “foul, uncivilized, unbecoming behaviour”. The problem with our political class is that normally it doesn’t think before it opens its mouth. Offence, this class believes, is the best form of defence. But it forgets that when it targets somebody, that person is not going to take things lying down and will retaliate in self-defence, may be more offensively, more fiercely and more forcefully. Mahatma Gandhi may have preached that if somebody slaps you on one cheek, offer him the other. But this has never worked. It never happened even in his time, nor does it today. It is natural – and human too – that if somebody hits the other, the latter is most likely certain to strike back. Therefore, if somebody calls bad names, slaps or hits the other, the aggrieved may prove to be more foul mouthed and may hit back by hurling a hundred abuses and beating him into dough. In that eventuality if the person who tried to strike first grumbles that he has been maltreated, inhumanly beaten or abused, sympathy will lie with the person who was the victim first. The golden principle is that before you venture to be on the offensive to be the first to slap a person, you should first be chivalrous and gracious to be ready for a backlash -- to bear 10 or 50 slaps in revenge. Since India won independence, when was political sarcasm and abuse absent? When Mrs. Indira Gandhi was made the prime minister, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia had dubbed her goongi gudia, a dumb doll. He had also remarked: Nehru gave his ornaments to his daughter and his ashes to the country. The late Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao was repeatedly called mauni baba (a silent saint) Late Mrs. Tarkeshwari Sinha was a deputy minister for finance in Pandit Nehru’s council of ministers. She herself reminiscenced once that when she gave a reply to a question in parliament, a member pointed out that there were discrepancies in the figures quoted by her. On this a member remarked: Let us examine the figure of the minister and then find the difference. She said everybody laughed in the house. Calling our political opponents as chor (thief), daaku (dacoit), corrupt, exploiter, etc. is order of the day. We commonly hear the slogans, “gali gali mein shore hai,…..chore hai”, “is gali-sadi sarkar ko ek dhakka aur do”. Till about five-six years back we cherished the BSP’s pet political slogan: Tilak, tarazoo aur talwar – Inko maro joote chaar”. How many and who had protested then? It is the trick of the game of politics (and election) that one must hit the opponent where it pinches (or punches) the most; touch the raw nerve. This seems what Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi did when while campaigning in Kerala elections he poked fun at State chief minister V. S. Achuthanandan’s age saying: “If LDF is re-elected, Kerala will have a 93-year old as chief minister in five years time”. Politics, somebody rightly said, is the art of making fool of as many people as one can for votes and whoever succeeds in striking the highest score, wins. It seems to be in line with this doctrine that Congress youth icon derided in Kerala Achhutanandan’s advanced age but in the neighbouring Tamil Nadu he campaigned for M. Karunanidhi for CM who is no less aged than Achuthanandan. Incensed at this remark, Kerala CM hit back: “I need not tell you that Rahul Gandhi is Sonia Gandhi’s son. Rahul Gandhi is an Amul baby. He has launched a large number of Amul babies as Congress candidates”. He further claimed that by the age of 16 he was fighting the British and questioned, "Please tell me where was Rahul Gandhi (politically) before he was 40 years." He did not spare the defence minister too. "Pakistan terrorists came through the sea route to Mumbai and mounted an attack which shocked the nation. Was the Defence Minister in deep slumber, like Kumbhakarna then?" he taunted. In the current political atmosphere, where is the justification for taking offence at such electoral flings when the Congress leaders too have not been that polite and ‘civilized’? It was, therefore, surprising when Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee called the Achuthanandan comment on Rahul Gandhi as “uncivilized” and Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi calling it “an insult to entire youth of the country”, little realizing that Rahul may be youth icon for Congress but not for the whole youth of the country. And then every leader in every party is an icon for some section or the other. In our country, as a newspaper put it, a 50-year politician is taken as a young man and Mr. Rahul Gandhi is only 40. Moreover, a bachelor is always taken as a boy. Copying the western style we even call an 80 year old person the “birthday boy” on the day he celebrates his birth. The fact is that we are very touchy when the sting hurts us. Otherwise, we enjoy it when it hurts the other person -- our opponent. When did the Congress lag behind in hurling abuses and insults on its opponents? Late Mrs. Indira Gandhi took pride in dubbing everybody who opposed her or the Congress as “anti-national”. During the last Gujarat assembly election campaign, Congress President Mrs. Sonia Gandhi had called Gujarat CM Narendra Modi as maut ka saudagar. Did she or Congress apologise? Who among the politicians has been found amiss in this game of political name calling? During the election campaign Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav had called Bihar CM Nitish Kumar as emperor Nero when Patna had been submerged during monsoons. At other time he had called Nitish a combination of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Gobbles. His wife Mrs. Rabri Devi had used the word jamai (son-in-law) for some leader. People’s Democratic Party leader had called J&K CM Omar Abdullah as “Blackberry boy”. Punjab Congress chief Capt. Amrinder Singh had branded Punjab Deputy CM Sukhbir Singh Badal (son of Punjab CM Prakash Singh Badal) as balungra (kitten). At different times Mr. L. K. Advani had called Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh as a weak prime minister. Mr. George Fernandes had once called Mrs. Sonia Gandhi as jhoothi challenging her qualifications. Idioms and sayings are the very treasure of any language. These provide richness to the language and help give a better expression and understanding of a situation or a person. Joote chaatn (lick somebody’s feet), kutte ki tarah poonch hilana (wag tale like a dog), kutte ki poonchh jitni bhi seedhi karo, tedhi he rahegi (however you try, dog’s tail will never get straightened), apna ullu sidha karma (serve your purpose) and the like. But when these words and sayings are used in writing or speeches of politicians, the persons for whom these expressions are used, take objection to it. Does that mean that our political class wants all these sayings and idioms to be taken out of our dictionaries and literature? It is time our politicians either stopped hurling abuses or making fun of others. Or they should have the moral strength to put up with the counter-attacks by others if the party tried to be even with them using the same weapons of offence. When a bull will try to attack a person, the latter is sure to catch it by the horns. Nobody should then cry foul.