A 'Modi Wave' and the Muslim vote could stop Jayalalithaa's Delhi dreams

In Tamil Nadu, religion has seldom been a poll issue. Caste-based issues, regional and linguistic hegemony (the anti-Hindi agitations), the Lankan Tamil issue, water-sharing disputes (be it the Cauvery River problem with Karnataka or the Mullaiperiyar Dam row with Kerala), have dominated the Tamil Nadu political-scape for decades now. Another reason is the dominance of Dravidian parties, which in principle aim for social reforms through ending religious beliefs.
However, in this election things have changed with the BJP forming a five-party alliance in the state. Though in the past the BJP has contested from various seats in Tamil Nadu, it is for the first time that the national party has headed an alliance in the state. The NDA along with the Congress and AAP — both the parties are fighting the election alone in the state — has made the contest multi-cornered in many of the 39 seats in Tamil Nadu.

J Jayalalithaa with Narendra Modi (File photo)

The telling presence of the BJP in the state has made religion an important poll issue. The NDA has given the BJP a presence in the state like never before. There is a palpable ‘Modi Wave’ in the state. It is not clear if this ‘wave’ will help the BJP win a number of seats but it is likely to adversely affect the AIADMK in mainly two ways. First, traditionally, the upper caste Hindu votes have gone to the AIADMK. With the BJP in the poll scene, these votes are likely to split.
Second, it is likely that many of the voters apprehensive of the BJP and its prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi have voted against the AIADMK, fearing that the party will support the BJP at the Centre in a post-poll alliance.
A BJP campaign, led by Modi, has brought into focus the Muslim community. There are about 4.5 million Muslims in the state or 6% of the state population. In an election where the margins are slender, 6% cannot be ignored. This has seen many regional parties wooing the community.
However, the disillusionment among the Muslims, especially the youth, with many regional parties is an important issue. “The bulk of Muslims have been with the DMK since the 1960s. But, the younger lot of Muslims are increasingly moving towards the Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazagham and Tamil Nadu Tauheed Jamaat,” says S Anwar, a film-maker who has documented the history of ‘Muslims of Madras from 1600 to 2000 CE’ for the Madras Gazetteer Project. The inability to win the confidence of this section will prove crucial for the parties.

KM Khader Mohideen, president of the Tamil Nadu State
Indian Union Muslim League with DMK chief M Karunanidhi
(File photo by The Hindu)

The Muslims are unlikely to turn towards the Congress because of an anti-incumbency wave and it does not have a commanding presence in the state. AAP would like to believe its stand against corruption and the fact that a sizeable number of its 434 candidates all over India are Muslims may act in its favour. But AAP has failed to create a buzz in Tamil Nadu.
In such a scenario, it is the DMK, AIADMK’s arch-rival, which will benefit. The corruption charges against some of its leaders and the Alagiri-Stalin sibling rivalry is not likely to have an impact. Also, its vote base remains largely intact.
Though the AIADMK was leading in opinion polls initially, towards the final days before polling, the DMK witnessed a surge in its favour. A similar pattern was witnessed in 2009 — the AIADMK was expected to win a large number of seats but the DMK alliance surprised pollsters by winning 27 seats. In 16 days it will be clear how much of an impact the BJP-led alliance has made in Tamil Nadu. It will be clear how the Muslims has responded to the ‘Modi Wave’, and, most importantly, how these developments have affected J Jayalalithaa’s ambitions of playing a crucial role in government formation at the Centre.
(This appeared in the Hindustan Times on April 30, 2014)

It's not harvesting time for AAP in Tamilnadu

Yogendra Yadav (right) speaking to AAP volunteers in Chennai, Tamilnadu

Elections in Tamil Nadu this time are different from the previous years. For almost four decades the state has seen predominantly a bipolar contest between the DMK and the AIADMK, with the national and regional parties being in coalition with the big two Dravidian parties. This time, the Congress has decided to go alone in the state. The BJP has cobbled up a five-party alliance of regional parties, which failed to hitch a ride with either the DMK or the AIADMK. The entry of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has made it a five-corner contest in many seats.
The AAP, after its success in Delhi, has stretched its arms to other states in India and is contesting 434 Lok Sabha seats this election. In Tamil Nadu it is contesting 24 of the 39 seats.
AAP has many positives to its campaign — candidates with a clean background, a vehement stand against corruption and above all, no tall promises. While on paper this would seem good, the truth is that in the jigsaw of Indian politics where religion, caste, gender, region, etc play deciding factors, good intentions and promises alone won’t do.
However, AAP leaders are upbeat about the reaction the party has been receiving. “I am encouraged by the large number of volunteers who have joined this movement,” Yogendra Yadav told the Hindustan Times during a fundraiser dinner in Chennai. “It has been the hallmark of AAP that the spirit of voluntary work has been restored to politics. In the face of professional paid political workers who dominate all political parties, this is quite a relief and a matter of honour for someone like me working for the party. There is an excitement among the youth, minorities, middle class professionals and disadvantageous groups.”
AAP was slow to begin its campaign in the state. Many of its candidates have been campaigning for only two months and that’s too short a time for a new party taking on established parties like the DMK and the AIADMK. This is an observation David Barunkumar, AAP’s convenor in the state, agrees: “In Tamil Nadu, we took some time in the selection of candidates and so the time available for the candidates to campaign was very short.”
Raja, a vendor next to the Gandhi statue in Chennai, has not heard of AAP. “It must be a party in Karnataka or Bombay (sic).” Give a hint about the white Gandhi topi and he recollects the “thodapam” (broom in Tamil). “I have seen them,” is all that he can say about the party and does not know the name of the AAP candidate.

The AAP office in The Nilgiris, Tamilnadu

AAP has fielded candidates against A Raja in The Nilgiris and against Dayanidhi Maran in Central Chennai. The opposition has highlighted the scams in which both the DMK leaders have been accused. “Corruption becomes an issue when there is an alternative which seems to be viable. If people have two corrupt parties to choose from, corruption does not become an issue. That is why the DMK and the AIADMK have gone about doing what they do. Moreover, how can Jayalalithaa or Karunanidhi talk about corruption? In Pune they [Congress] could not give a ticket to Suresh Kalmadi. Here [in Tamil Nadu] they think they can get away with murder and it is our job to show that they can’t,” Yadav said.
However, AAP is not really a factor in Tamil Nadu in 2014. But AAP could upset the chances of the top contender in a few constituencies. For example, Maran is the sitting MP and principal contender in Central Chennai. All other candidates, including AAP’s J Prabhakar, are targeting Maran. In such a scenario, where the votes are split, the winning margin will be considerably reduced. It is here that parties like AAP can make the difference.
It is unlikely that many of AAPs 24 candidates in Tamil Nadu will emerge victorious. One of the seats the party is hopeful about winning is Kanyakumari. AAP’s candidate SP Udayakumar, who led the anti-Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project protests, has got tremendous support — but so has BJP’s Pon Radhakrishnan and Congress’ H Vasanth Kumar is not a pushover.
As far as AAP’s expectations and strategy in Tamil Nadu this election is concerned, Yadav succinctly summed up: “We are planting seeds right now. This is not harvesting time for us (in Tamil Nadu). Every seed counts because in the long term it can be decisive.”
(An abridged version of this appeared in the Hindustan Times)

NDA in TN: Captain to give Modi the Dravidian push

L to R: Vaiko, Vijayakanth, Rajnath Singh, Anbumani Ramadoss

Creating a “new political history” in Tamil Nadu as BJP president Rajnath Singh put it last Thursday while unveiling a new NDA coalition might be to overstate the case. But nevertheless, it is a significant achievement for the saffron party. Unable to reach a pre-poll alliance with its erstwhile ally, the AIADMK — notwithstanding the bonhomie between chief minister J Jayalalithaa and the BJP’s PM candidate, Narendra Modi — the BJP has brought together five regional parties on the same platform. What the BJP has achieved through this coalition is unique and commendable. It is unique because for more than four decades Tamil Nadu has seen bipolar politics between the main two Dravidian parties — the DMK and the AIADMK. Other parties, including the Congress, have been relegated to the margins. The NDA alliance in Tamil Nadu — including Vijayakanth’s DMDK, Vaiko’s MDMK and Ramadoss’ PMK — has the potential to challenge this two-party dominance. This is commendable because the BJP has virtually no presence in the state. In 2009, the BJP did not get a single one of the 39 seats and today it is spearheading the third political option in the state. Compare this to the Congress, which in 2009 won eight seats while in an alliance with the DMK, but today finds itself alone with no alliance partner.
That said, the BJP’s alliance comes with many built-in limitations. In the event of the BJP requiring the support of either the AIADMK or the DMK to form a government at the Centre and given the bitter differences among  the regional parties, it is to be seen how a Vijayakanth-led DMDK and a Jayalalithaa-led AIADMK can be accommodated on the same side. A contradiction in this coalition is the coming together of the DMDK and the PMK as both parties have been at loggerheads. The absence of PMK founder S Ramadoss from Thursday’s function has also created a lot of speculation. But, to quote Otto von Bismarck, “Politics is the art of the possible…” and in the past we have seen unexpected twists and turns during government formations.
A lot can happen between now and April 24 when the state goes to polls and even after the results are announced on May 16.  Nevertheless, it would be safe to say that the BJP has made the right moves by extending its alliance in the South and thereby getting closer to its target ‘Mission 272+’. These developments, if nothing else, will impart the colour and dynamism that will make elections in the state all the more interesting.

DMK: An arena for political fratricide

The good ol' days: MK Alagiri (left),
M Karunanidhi (seated) and MK Stalin

With the call for clean politics getting louder with every passing day, one would expect political parties to tailor their decisions keeping this in mind. However, the DMK, under the leadership of its president M Karunanidhi and MK Stalin, has chosen to ignore such signals. The party released a list of 35 candidates it wishes to field in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, and its decision to field A Raja and Dayanidhi Maran, both former telecom ministers under the scanner for their alleged role in the telecom scams, shows that the DMK is not in tune with the public mood in the country. At a time when the people, especially the youth, are demanding accountability and transparency from political parties and when the judiciary is taking steps to keep tainted politicians away from fray, the move to field Mr Raja and Mr Maran could backfire on the party. On expected lines, MK Alagiri, Mr Stalin’s elder brother who was earlier suspended from the party on disciplinary grounds, was not given a ticket.
Of the many inferences that can be derived from the DMK’s list of candidates, the most evident is Mr Stalin’s stamp of authority on the selection. The majority of the candidates are Stalin loyalists, while Alagiri loyalists, like former minister D Napoleon, have been denied a ticket. Mr Stalin has closed the door on his brother’s chances of returning to the party and contesting the polls by announcing the candidature of V Velusamy, a Stalin loyalist, from the Madurai constituency — Mr Alagiri is the sitting MP for Madurai. Caught in infighting, the party seems oblivious of the changing reality in Tamil Nadu. The ruling Jayalalithaa-led AIADMK is showing no signs of fatigue and Vijayakanth’s DMDK is gaining momentum, especially after its alliance with the BJP. Rather than focusing on important issues the DMK is washing its dirty linen in public.

In the recent past: Dayanidhi Maran (left)
and A Raja (right) with Alagiri

Whatever be the verdict on May 16, one thing is clear: The DMK, today, is a far cry from a party that was founded on  social goals. The Dravidar Kazhagam (DK), born out of the Neethi Katchi in 1944, was the DMK’s parent organisation formed to protect the interests of the Dravidian people. It aimed at social reform and ending upper-caste dominance. The DMK, which was formed in 1949 because of personal differences between its founder CN Annadurai and DK leader Periyar EV Ramaswamy Naicker, continued the DK’s mission of safeguarding the rights of the people of Tamil Nadu. It is unfortunate that what started as a social revolution and later metamorphosed into a political movement is today reduced to an arena for political fratricide.

Sibling rivalry in the DMK opens up the political space in Tamil Nadu

M Karunanidhi (left) with MK Stalin

DMK leader M Karunanidhi is a troubled man these days. His party is not in power in the state and nor is it in alliance with the UPA government at the Centre — but that is the least of his concerns now. On Friday, one of the DMK leader’s sons, MK Alagiri, was suspended from the party for anti-party activities. That this came after Alagiri’s younger brother, MK Stalin, was appointed to lead the party was not lost to anyone who knew about the bitter sibling rivalry.
All this has been accompanied by the sound-and-light show that Indian politics promises the people — Karunanidhi accused Alagiri of saying that Stalin will die in three or four months; Alagiri denied it; Stalin took it in stride; Stalin supporters burnt Alagiri in effigy and a section of the party nominated Stalin’s name for the Madurai Lok Sabha seat (at present Alagiri is the MP from Madurai). It is surprising that for all his political sagacity, Karunanidhi, at the autumn of his political career, could not see this coming and planned a better transition of power.

MK Alagiri

The crisis of this sort is detrimental to any political organisation and it couldn’t have come at a worse time for the DMK. The party was just about recovering from the electoral drubbing it got at the 2011 assembly elections — of the 234 seats in the state assembly the DMK managed a paltry 23 — and it was cobbling together an alliance for the general elections.
The DMK is no stranger to dissent. In 1972, MG Ramachandran broke away from the party to from the AIADMK. In 1994, Karunanidhi’s then trusted lieutenant Vai Gopalswamy (Vaiko) was expelled from the party. The relationship between the two soured when Stalin and Alagiri were given preference over Vaiko.
For more than four decades Tamil Nadu has had either a DMK or an AIADMK government. This two-party dominance has given little room for other parties to grow and the many that have sprouted out during this time have remained on the fringes or faded out. However, if the Alagiri-Stalin tiff were to hamper or even split the DMK, it could lead to a vacuum in the political space, altering the present balance. If such a scenario arises, the biggest gainer, for the moment, is actor-politician Vijayakanth’s DMDK which got 7.9% of the votes in the 2011 assembly polls. The Congress, Left parties and the PMK are other probable gainers.
Though Karunanidhi, last December, declared that the DMK would not ally with the Congress in the coming elections, the possibility of a post-poll alliance with either the Congress or even the BJP cannot be ruled out. However, the present crisis will hamper the chances of the Dravidian party to net a sizable number of seats to be wooed by either of the national parties or even for a third front. This uncertainty makes politics interesting in the state.
(This appeared in the Hindustan Times on January 30)

Banning menace: Reason for Bollywood to cheer

 

In February, information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari tweeted: ‘Committee on Cinematographic framework (will) give latitude to review every aspect of certification process holistically & ensure integrity’ and the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee has used that latitude to come up with a progressive model Cinematograph Bill to replace the Cinematograph Act 1952. The I&B ministry setup the Mudgal panel after the Jayalalithaa-led AIADMK government in Tamil Nadu banned Vishwaroopam. This was not a one-off case. While Prakash Jha’s 2011 film Aarakshan was banned in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Andhra Pradesh, Ashutosh Gowariker’s Jodha Akbar was banned in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and UP. Other films include Parzania, Firaaq that won two national awards, Madras Cafe, Bandit Queen... the list is endless. Done to not ‘hurt’ the sentiments of a particular section in society, such arbitrary bans have not only hampered artistic freedom but has also emboldened keening fringe groups to have their five minutes of glory by raising frivolous excuses to stall the screening of a film. It should be noted that these films run into troubled waters even after getting the go ahead from the censor board, thus rendering such vetting processes meaningless.

In the wake of such issues, the suggestions put forward by the Mudgal committee are noteworthy. The committee’s suggestion that the selection to the advisory panels of the Centre Board of Film Certification be more professional, consisting of members who are skilled, is spot on. The present practise of political appointments, often with people who have no inkling of the job required, is detrimental. Another suggestion is to increase the mandate of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) to hear cases regarding an objection to any particular film, rather than a plaintiff approaching court as it happens at present. The suggestion to have more categories for classification of films and to bring age-specific divisions is a step in the right direction. The committee has also suggested that in cases where a state uses law and order as a reason to ban a film, ascendency must be given to the powers of the Cinematograph Act. Law and order being a State subject, this suggestion is likely to run into rough weather — and that would be unfortunate.
While the Mudgal committee has come up with astute insights, it is still a long way before these are implemented. There are many stumbling blocks in the way that might force this report to end up in the dusty pile of unimplemented reports submitted by various other government-appointed committees in the past. The Mudgal committee has done its job. Now, it is up to the government, both at the Centre and states, to see that it is implemented without much delay.

Kachchatheevu: A no man's land everyone wants

Kachchatheevu, an uninhabited island, a little over a square kilometre in area, has been a bone of contention between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka for decades. The Rajya Sabha on Monday saw MPs from Tamil Nadu criticising the Centre for its affidavit to the Supreme Court, which stated that no portion of India’s land was ceded to Sri Lanka. The Centre was responding to a petition by Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa, filed in 2008, seeking the apex court to declare unconstitutional the 1974 agreement. Tension over the island came to focus in 1974 after the Centre signed an agreement with Sri Lanka accepting that Kachchatheevu was not a part of India. According to the agreement signed between the two countries, fishermen from both sides can use the island to dry their nets and even pray at the St Antony’s shrine in the island. Politicians, across the political spectrum in Tamil Nadu, claim that the Centre ceded the island without passing a resolution in Parliament and thus it is an invalid agreement. To bolster their claims politicians claim that the island was under the king of Ramanathapuram and later under the Mdaras Presidency. Over the years, especially after the end of the civil war in Sri Lanka, there have been an increasing number of reports of confrontation between Indian and Sri Lankan fishermen and cases of the Sri Lankan navy firing at Indian fishermen. More than 150 Indian fishermen have been arrested and are at present facing trial in Sri Lankan courts.

The manner in which the Centre ‘ceded’ Kachchatheevu to Sri Lanka in 1974 should be seen not as an aberration but as a general tone adopted by New Delhi while dealing with the states. Much of the problem surrounding the rights over the island could have been avoided if in 1974 the Centre had taken the then state government in Tamil Nadu into confidence. Today, a similar pattern can also been seen in the way the Centre has gone about unilaterally on its decision to carve out a Telangana state out of Andhra Pradesh, so much so that it has not even won the support of its state leaders on the decision.
For our democracy to be robust and to function in the manner it is meant to, the Centre cannot treat the states as lackeys. States should be seen as equal partners in the democratic process and in decision-making and should be consulted on matters that concern the respective state. This is all the more important in a coalition era where regional parties play an important role in government formation at the Centre.