The UDF and the LDF in Kerala are in the last state if seat sharing talks. In Tamil Nadu the DMK will declare likely declare its first list on March 10.
The Trinamool Congress Elections committee will be held at chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s Kalighat residence on Friday.
Meanwhile the BJP held meetings on Thursday to decide on their candidate for the polls. News18 learnt that the BJP is unlikely to field any MPs for these polls.
The BJP will also hold a meeting at their Hastings office in Kolkata at 5 pm on Friday even as their star candidate, a TMC turncoat, Suvendu Adhikari addresses a public meeting in Panskura.
The BJP on Thursday urged the Election Commission to remove “political appointees” from various boards of administrators in civic bodies appointed by the West Bengal government, saying it appointed the same representatives who had completed their term of five years in blatant violation of constitutional and legal provisions. A BJP delegation, including Union minister Dharmendra Pradhan, two party general secretaries Bhupender Yadav and Kailash Vijayvargiya, Om Pathak and Sanjay Mayukh, submitted a representation to the poll watchdog, asking it to take necessary steps for ensuring free, fair and transparent assembly elections in the state.
Special observer for the elections in West Bengal Ajay Nayak and police observer Vivek Dubey are supposed to arrive in Kolkata on Friday to overview preparedness for the polls.
In Assam too, the BJP is likely to announce a list of candidates on Friday
KOLKATA: With assembly polls just three weeks away, the BJP, amid an all-out effort to oust Mamata Banerjee from power in Bengal, is also struggling to keep its house in order, as old-timers and new entrants engage in feud over multiple issues, including ticket distribution. The saffron party, which had witnessed unprecedented growth in terms of vote share and mass base over the last few years, had opened its doors wide open for leaders from other parties, as part of its poll strategy, but that did not go down well with many senior leaders, who had once locked horns with the newbies from rival camps, sources in the BJP said. According to a senior BJP leader, the strategy had initially reaped dividends for the saffron camp, which labelled the TMC as a “sinking ship”, but it eventually led to infighting within the organisation and diluted the party’s “fight against corruption”, as several new entrants were found to have graft charges against them. The party recently did a course correction, and stopped the mass induction, but the damage by then was done, with the leadership now having to face the “herculean task” of identifying suitable candidates from 8,000 aspirants for the state’s 294 constituencies, the senior leader said. “We never thought that induction of leaders from other parties could lead to such a situation. Every day we hear reports of infighting between the old-timers and newcomers. We apprehend that post announcement of names (of contenders), discontentment within the camp will grow further,” the BJP leader noted. State BJP chief Dilip Ghosh, however, insisted that expanding the party’s base was necessary at this juncture. “The BJP is a big family. When your family grows, such incidents do take place. If we don’t take people from other outfits, how will we grow? That said, everyone has to abide by the rules and regulations of the party. No one is above the party,” Ghosh said. Elections in Bengal, poised to be a stiff contest between the TMC and the BJP, will be held in eight phases, beginning with polling for 30 seats on March 27. Votes will be counted on May 2. According to the saffron camp sources, many state leaders and the RSS — the BJP’s ideological parent – have aired their displeasure over induction of certain leaders from other parties. Thousands of activists from rival parties joined the saffron camp in the last few months during the ‘jogdan mela’ (joining programme) in various districts of the state. As many as 28 MLAs, including 19 from the TMC, and a sitting MP of the ruling camp have switched over to the BJP over the past few months. Prominent among them are heavyweight politicians and former TMC leaders Suvendu Adhikari and Rajib Banerjee, Sovan Chatterjee and Jitendra Tiwari. Discontentment in the saffron camp, which had been brewing for a while, first surfaced in September last year, when veteran leader Rahul Sinha was replaced by Anupam Hazra, a former TMC MP, as national secretary. Sinha openly spoke about the “injustice meted out to him to make space for leaders from the TMC”. Union Minister Babul Supriyo and other BJP leaders, including state general secretary Sayantan Basu and state Mahila Morcha chief Agnimitra Paul, had in December opposed Tiwari’s induction into the party. The state BJP leadership had then issued show-cause notices to Basu and Paul for speaking on the issue in public. Tiwari was taken into the saffron fold earlier this week. Several BJP old-timers across the state had objected to the induction of former state minister Syamaprasad Mukherjee, ex-TMC MP Dasharath Tirkey, and rival camp leaders Sukra Munda and Mihir Goswami. In certain pockets, BJP supporters have also come up with posters, which stated that local leaders would prefer backing an Independent candidate to supporting “parachuted leaders from the TMC”. “Old-timers are worried that new entrants from the TMC would hog all the limelight and the efforts put in by them to strengthen the party would go in vain. They are apprehensive that they might not get due recognition, and tickets could slip out of hand,” another senior state BJP leader said. “In East Midnapore, there are 16 seats. Adhikari might pitch for his loyalists who have followed in his footsteps and joined the BJP. The same could happen in Howrah, where Rajib Banerjee wields considerable influence. “If you accommodate them, old-timers will get angry; if you don’t, the loyalists will get infuriated. It’s a precarious situation,” the BJP leader said. Political analysts feel that a lack of strong leadership and over-dependence on central leadership might put the saffron party at a disadvantage. “Once the candidate list is out, it will lead to massive infighting. If the BJP fails to control this situation, it will be Achilles heels for the saffron camp,” political analyst Biswanath Chakraborty asserted Echoing him, another political pundit, Suman Bhattacharya, said induction of “tainted leaders” from the TMC has diluted the BJP’s main poll plank – ‘fight against corruption’. “The BJP, which had been levelling corruption allegations against TMC leaders, ended up welcoming some of them into the party. This has put a question mark on the BJP’s credibility as an alternative to the TMC,” he added. The TMC leadership — at the receiving end of the exodus — contended that only “rotten elements” have left the party to join the BJP. “The saffron camp has turned into a dustbin of the TMC. It is good riddance for us,” TMC secretary-general Partha Chatterjee said. The opposition CPM claimed that the switchovers only go on to prove that the BJP and the TMC are “two sides of the same coin”. Making light of the claims, BJP national general secretary Kailash Vijayvargiya said the BJP is the largest party in the country, and knows well how to tackle such “minor issues”. “People of Bengal have made up their mind to oust the TMC. These instances (of infighting) are minor hiccups, and we know how to tackle it. It won’t be an issue in the long run,” he said.
Delhi MCD By-Election Results 2021 LIVE Updates: AAP candidates were leading in four wards as the counting for municipal bypolls began today morning, election officials said. The AAP candidates were leading in Shalimar Bagh North, Kalyanpuri, Trilokpuri and Rohini- C wards. The Congress candidate was leading in Chauhan Bangar. More than 50 per cent votes were cast in the bypolls for the five municipal wards held on February 28. Out of the five wards, four were held by the AAP while Shalimar Bagh North had a BJP councillor. The results of all the five wards where the AAP, BJP and the Congress were main rivals is expected to out later on the day.
The elections were held in the backdrop of the raging months-long farmers’ protests that are being held along the borders of the national capital against the three central agri-sector laws. This is also the first electoral exercise being conducted in the national capital amid the coronavirus pandemic. More than 50 per cent voters had cast their votes with the highest voting percentage recorded in Kalyanpuri and the lowest in Shalimar Bagh North, election officials said. None of the COVID-19 infected voters, 10 in Shalimar Bagh North and two in Kalyanpuri, turned up to cast their votes, they said.
As per official figures, 59.19 per cent votes were cast in Kalyanpuri, 55.95 per cent in Trilokpuri, 55.60 per cent in Chauhan Bangar, 44.58 per cent in Rohini-C, and 43.23 per cent in Shalimar Bagh North wards. Total voting percentage in the five wards was 50.86 per cent.
After a decade of losing power, the Left Front, in alliance with the Congress and the newly formed Indian Secular Front (ISF) on Sunday projected itself as a “third alternative force” in the emerging TMC versus BJP political binary in West Bengal, but chinks were evident in the nascent alliance. The Left-Congress-ISF alliance kicked off its campaign for the upcoming assembly elections in West Bengal with a mega rally at the Brigade Parade Ground in Kolkata.
At the rally, leaders of the CPI(M)-headed Left Front called for “knocking out the communal TMC and BJP, and stressed the need for a third alternative to provide a “Janhit Sarkar” (people’s welfare government) to ensure employment generation and usher in industrial development in the state. State Congress president Adhir Chowdhury said that the grand alliance of the Left-Congress and other secular forces won’t let the West Bengal assembly elections to be a two- cornered contest and would defeat both the ruling Trinamool Congress and the opposition BJP.
However, a discordant note was sounded by ISF chief Abbas Siddiqui who, unhappy with the progress of seat-sharing talks with the Congress, issued a veiled threat to the party. Siddiqui vowed to defeat the TMC and the BJP and ensure that the Mamata Banerjee-led party becomes a “zero” after the assembly elections, but in a word of caution for the Congress, with which the party’s talks are in choppy waters, said that the ISF is here to become a partner and get its rightful claims.
The TMC and the BJP slammed the Left and the Congress accusing them of surrendering before a “communal force” like the ISF. Accusing the ruling TMC and the opposition BJP of dividing people on communal lines to serve their political interests, West Bengal CPI(M) secretary Surya Kanta Mishra said that the state needs a government that would work for its development and would not be a “copycat” of the TMC and the BJP.
“Both the TMC and the BJP are two sides of the same coin. They plan to divide people on communal lines and rule.We have seen how TMC leaders are joining the BJP lock, stock and barrel.
Except for the chief minister and some other leaders, the rest have switched over to the BJP. Both the TMC and the BJP now stand unmasked. We, the Left along with the Congress, would provide an alternative to people,” Mishra said. He said that the state needs a government that can take up industrialisation and generate employment for youths both in government and the private sectors.
CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury said that the Trinamool Congress has to be defeated first to stop the communal bandwagon of the RSS-BJP and claimed that the TMC might rejoin the NDA to form the government in West Bengal in case of a hung assembly. “Many people ask me what we would do in case of a hung assembly. I tell them to direct their question to the TMC as they are in the best position to answer it.
“The TMC has been part of the NDA (for several years) since 1998. It was part of the NDA government (at the Centre).In case of a hung assembly, I am confident that the TMC would join hands with the BJP to form the state’s government,” he said.
Terming the ongoing political tussle between the TMC and the BJP as a “mock fight”, Yechury alleged that the saffron party is using money from the PM CARES fund, set up to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, to “buy” leaders during the time of elections. “Our call is we want a Janhit Sarkar in Bengal for its overall development and protection of the rights of the masses,” he said.
CPI(M) politburo member Mohammed Salim said that the grand alliance would give a “knock out” punch to the communal TMC and the BJP. “We are fighting for changing the situation in Bengal, and some people are busy changing sides. Those who looted public money in chit fund scams are now switching parties. If we are voted to power, we will auction properties of corrupt leaders to return the looted money,” he said.
The Left Front ruled the state for 34 years since 1977 and its government was ousted by the TMC in 2011. Addressing the rally, state Congress president Adhir Chowdhury asserted that the massive gathering proved that the election will not be a two-cornered contest.
“Morning is the harbinger of the day, and this meeting proves that both the TMC and the BJP will be defeated in the coming election. The goal of the grand alliance is to ensure the victory of secularism and democracy and to defeat communal and repressive politics in Bengal,” he said. “In Delhi, the BJP talks of getting rid of the opposition. In Bengal, the TMC talks of opposition free elections. The BJP and the TMC want that other than the two, there should not exist any other political force in Bengal and no other party should come between them, he said.
ISF president Siddiqui asserted that people of West Bengal would teach Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee “a lesson for her arrogance” and ensure that her party becomes politically insignificant after elections. The ISF was floated by Siddiqui, an influential Muslim cleric of Hooghly district’s Furfura Sharif last month.
“We don’t want appeasement. We want our rightful claims, just like any other citizen of this country. We too have equal rights,” Siddiqui said. The BJP often accuses the TMC of appeasing Muslims for vote bank politics.
Expressing his gratitude for the West Bengal Left Front chairman Biman Bose for accommodating his fledgeling party in the grand alliance by sharing 30 seats, Siddiqui said that ISF activists and supporters will fight until the last to ensure the Left Front’s victory and its allies in various parts of the state. However, he said, “I didn’t speak about the Congress.
I am here (in politics) to be a partner, not for any kind of appeasement. I am here to get my rightful claims.” The ruling TMC and the opposition BJP slammed the Left’s brigade rally and accused them of surrendering before a “communal force” like ISF. The TMC claimed that the Left has surrendered before a communal force like the ISF.
“It is now proved that both the Left and the BJP are communal forces. The TMC is the only secular party,” senior TMC leader Firhad Hakim said. Alleging that the Brigade rally was sponsored by the TMC, BJP leaders said that both the Left and the Congress would fail to make their presence felt in the elections.
The Election Commission of India had on Friday announced an eight-phase poll in West Bengal, which will commence on March 27 and conclude on April 29. Counting will be held on May 2.
A new book, titled Vajpayee: The Years that Changed India is all set to hit the stands on 25th December to mark the birth anniversary of veteran BJP leader, and former Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The book charts the course of Vajpayee’s prime ministership and tries to give the readers a glimpse into Vajpayee’s thought process and political philosophy.
Written by Shakti Sinha, who had worked very closely with Vajpayee during his tenure as the prime minister, and is currently the honorary director of the Atal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Policy Research and International Studies, at MS University, in Vadodara, this book outlines in details many highlights of Vajpayee’s career, including the series of nuclear tests that the prime minister conducted in Pokhran. In the book, the author writes that although initially the decision to go nuclear caused domestic euphoria, and silenced the opposition, as more tests were conducted Vajpayee faced international criticism, with the then US President, Bill Clinton, calling it a ‘terrible mistake.’ The book states:
“After the initial domestic euphoria, which forced the Opposition to keep mum, domestic criticism (of the Pokhran Nuclear Test) gained force. The left parties criticized the Vajpayee government for deciding to change national policies unilaterally. They felt that the other political parties should have been consulted. The Congress was confused as to how they ought to react. Should the tests be celebrated as a programme begun by Indira Gandhi, which received a major fillip during Rajiv Gandhi’s regime? Or would such a stand make Vajpayee look good, hinting at the Congress’s implicit acceptance that this was the right thing to do? Their initial reaction was, ‘Why now?’ Essentially, the Opposition did not know how to react, as was soon illustrated by I.K. Gujral. His remedy was that India should sign the CTBT, like France and China did after conducting tests.
This ignored the fact that both these countries were recognized nuclear weapons states under the NPT, and the CTBT allowed them to test if they felt that their national security was imperilled, a luxury denied to India. Another Opposition leader, Mulayam Singh Yadav, had a simpler criticism—that the tests should have been kept a secret.
Even as reactions to the initial tests, conducted on 13 May, were coming in, two days later, India conducted two more tests. These ‘were required to demonstrate our capacity to miniaturise, at sub-kilo yields, and with that India concluded its planned series of tests’, as the media was informed by the government. The next step taken was possibly the best thing to have been done as a follow-up to the tests, though it received a lot of flak at that time.
This was to write to world leaders explaining the circumstances which had made testing a compulsion for India. Unlike normal diplomatic correspondence, which is all sweet and cloying, this one was direct but polite. A great deal of effort went into the writing of these letters.
No sooner had Vajpayee’s letter reached the White House than it appeared in the New York Times. This caused considerable embarrassment for us, since we had pointed to the ‘China factor’ as the primary reason for our decision to test. It was said that the compulsion to go nuclear was driven by, to quote from the letter, ‘. . . overt nuclear tests on our borders, [conducted by] a state which committed armed aggression against India in 1962, [and] although relations had improved in the last decade or so, an atmosphere of distrust prevails mainly due to unresolved border problem. That country has materially helped another neighbour of ours to become a covert nuclear weapons state, [due to which, we] have suffered aggression from that neighbour, [making us] victim of relentless terrorism and militancy.’
Factually, the statement was correct, but all hell broke loose. The Chinese were livid and made their outrage known. Domestically, too, a lot of people criticized the government for having spoilt relations with China; Chinese perfidy in supplying nuclear and missile technology to Pakistan which undermined India’s security was conveniently ignored.
The international reaction to Vajpayee’s letter was subdued, almost bordering on disbelief. The American analysts only picked up the 1962 part, ignoring the rather nuanced reference to India–China relations in the letter. I remember reading an American comment that India could not expect to be taken seriously if it used the 1962 war as justification for the tests. Clearly, the commentator either did not read the statement, or if he did, its meaning escaped him.”
The author Shakti Sinha pointed out that the criticism against conducting the tests grew louder as the series of nuclear tests continued and it wasn’t just America, but United Nations, as well as Nelson Mandela, who condemned them. During such circumstances, Vajpayee got an unexpected supporter in Dalai Lama, who was primarily against nuclear armament of any kind but, more importantly, did not like the ‘undemocratic’ way in which countries were accessing the dangerous weapon, with some having more right and access to it, than other. In the book, Sinha writes,
“The international reaction after the second series of tests and the letters was several degrees ‘hotter’ than what had followed the initial tests of 11 May. And yet, there were some realistic voices who singly agreed with India’s need to move ahead but in groupspeak went along with condemnatory statements. Clinton said that India had made a terrible mistake. He even moved on removing the hurdle of the Pressler Amendment so that arms sanctions on Pakistan could be lifted. Nelson Mandela condemned the tests. The United Nations Security Council expressed its dismay. On the other hand, France said that sanctions made no sense.
They were joined by the UK and Russia, who also said that they would not impose sanctions. Within the US itself, different voices now started speaking up. House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that Clinton was being one-sided, blind to China’s doings, and was in fact selling nuclear technology to them, which was adding to India’s security concerns and making the latter more worried about China than about Pakistan. Congressman Frank Pallone, co-founder of the India Caucus (a group within Congress, sympathetic towards India), opposed the tests but asked Clinton to consider the situation India was in and put it in perspective.
India had a long and contested border with China and faced a large PLA presence on its border. The Chinese presence in Burma was of concern to India as well, and there was Chinese support for hostile groups operating against the Indian state. Pallone’s recommendation was that the US should take the threat India faces from China more seriously and consequently work in closer coordination with India. A few years later, as India’s position as a rising but responsible power was being recognized, Henry Kissinger backed the tests. Despite his long ties with the Chinese regime and old history of rubbing India the wrong way, he conceded that India had a case for a deterrent against China. Like many others, he felt that the American sanctions were probably a mistake.
The Dalai Lama sent a personal letter to Vajpayee, in effect supporting the decision to test by alluding to the point that the possession of nuclear weapons would deter any offensive actions and would therefore ensure peace. Vajpayee was very touched when he read the letter. Later, the Dalai Lama went on record saying that India should not be pressured into giving up nuclear weapons; it should have the same rights as developed countries. His basic point was that he thought ‘nuclear weapons are too dangerous. Therefore we should make every effort for the elimination of nuclear weapons.’ However, he disagreed with the assumption that it was all right for a few nations to possess nuclear weapons when the rest of the world did not; it was undemocratic.”
The following excerpts have been published with permission from Penguin Publishers.
