| |
EDITORIAL
Alone Together
Will Vajpayee and Advani now bring home the bacon please
 At
the best of times a four-hour lunch with an old friend is a luxury. The
meeting on Wednesday, May 2, of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and
Home Minister L.K. Advani was, however, more of
a necessity. From assembly elections to economic reforms, no doubt the
BJP's duumvirate had much to talk about. Beyond specifics though the overriding
concern must have been the NDA regime's lacklustre performance. Vajpayee
has been prime minister for three years now. After his re-election in
1999, his stability has been unquestioned. What has he got to show for
it? Not that Advani can be let off the hook, particularly with regard
to internal security, his supposed area of concern and competence. There
have been several misgivings even within the Government on issues as divergent
as tackling Kashmiri terrorism and the Prime Minister's Office usurping
powers. Instead of talking frankly to Vajpayee as his most senior colleague,
Advani has taken the line of least resistance. Of what use is a 50-year-old
camaraderie if you allow courtiers, time servers and professional sycophants
to plant stories against each other?
Admittedly, the Vajpayee-Advani non-communication is not the cause of
the Government's problems. It is, however, an important symptom. There
is a political implication as well. As the NDA's largest constituent the
BJP will end up carrying the can for the Government's lapses. The minor
partners will simply jump ship with minimal damage to state-specific vote
banks. Whether it is ham-handed administration or the response to Tehelka,
the "party with a difference" is only proving to be indifferent.
As the BJP's senior statesmen Vajpayee and Advani owe a responsibility
to an organisation that will outlive them. As the Government's two charioteers
they owe answers to a people who elected them. For a start, they have
to be answerable to each other.
The
Name Of The State
Does India require a US nod to see Pakistan as a sponsor
of terrorism?
 It
has become the biggest "why" for the Pak-obsessed: why has Pakistan
not been labelled a terrorist state by the only country in the world that
has the power and privilege to label other countries? The US State Department's
Patterns of Global Terrorism 2000, an annual ranking of international
misbehaviour, however, is categorical about Islamabad's support to terrorist
groups in Kashmir and the Islamic dictatorship's "traditional"
relationship with the Taliban. Still, Pakistan provides "significant
assistance in the area of counterterrorism". Translation: Yes, Pakistan
is a rogue, but we need this rogue. Actually, there is nothing new about
this US position-the so-called global morality of Washington has always
been subordinated to America-First national interest, and that is not
a bad trait either.
So forget the overwhelming paradox: Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat
to American lives and property, the Taliban is its most barbaric face
today, and Osama bin Laden, whose association with the Taliban is no secret,
is the most wanted terrorist ... still the country that is a common factor
in these realities is not a terrorist state. Isn't it time then to look
at the national character of Pakistan without the assistance of the US
certificate? For, Kashmir-which, according to the earlier US administration,
has made the subcontinent one of the flashpoints (by the way, the global
terrorism report too is a work of the previous administration)-alone makes
Pakistan a state that uses terror as the most effective form of national
expression. Pakistan needs an enemy for its own survival-and its dictator's
survival. But the enemy is insurmountable. Hence the industrialisation
of crossborder religious terror. Does India really need a US endorsement
to find a suitable adjective for such a state?
|
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
