Tamil Nadu Elections

(Excerpts from a News Source)

No state in India has been quite the graveyard of confident predictions of psephologists and political commentators as Tamil Nadu. Time and time again, the voters in this vast province, dominated by not one but two regional nationalist formations, have upset the apple cart of the ruling party and the opposition formation alike.

Just two years ago, a tidal wave swept J. Jayalalithaa’s party off the electoral map during the general elections. Her strident attacks on “Sonia Maino” fell flat. More seriously, the government employees rebelled against her, alienated as they were by her action to break their strike only the year before the general elections. This proved critical as Tamil Nadu has the highest per capita ratio of government employees in India and they are a highly unionized work force. It includes school teachers and nurses, farm extension workers and day care centre workers.

The last minute tie-up with the Bharatiya Janata Party proved to be a non-starter, alienating the sizable religious minorities against her in a state where Christians and Muslims together make up 11 per cent of the electorate. To add to this, the Dravidian ideologues were railing against her, following the enactment of measures to block religious conversion and the ban on animal sacrifice in temples. It is an amazing turnaround; one rarely seen in recent times but the present election is poised at knife-edge. The Centre for the Study of Developing Societies survey went so far as to say that the polls in the state are “too close to call”. Despite a slender lead of two per cent in the vote share of the ruling All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam- led alliance, the result could tilt either way. Irrespective of whether she loses or wins, the chief minister has made this a battle worth watching. Placed in perspective, she has converted a huge vote deficit of 2004 into a minor surplus. If this trend continues, she might even look forward to a simple majority for her own party with no crutches from her allies.

There have been similar contrasts in recent years between Lok Sabha verdicts and state assembly elections. In 1998, Digvijay Singh in Madhya Pradesh led the Congress to a second term in office though his party lost the subsequent Lok Sabha elections in the state. Lalu Prasad and his wife performed a similar feat in Bihar in 2000 a little less than a year after the general elections.

But there are two crucial differences in Tamil Nadu. One is a generational issue. This is almost certainly the last time M. Karunanidhi will lead the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, a party he has been a member of since its foundation in 1949, to battle. This may well prove to be his Achilles heel: his heir apparent and son, M.K. Stalin, lacks popular acceptance. This has forced the veteran to clarify publicly that he will be chief minister after his party wins at the hustings.

The other has been a significant feature of the Tamil Nadu polity for the last two years. Jayalalithaa has crafted her policies to defuse disaffection among the very sections that bolted from her party in 2004. The arrest of the sankaracharya of Kanchi was well publicized to reaffirm the belief that religious leaders were not above the law. Less publicity was given to rescinding the law on conversions, or to the expansion of the free meal scheme in temples to churches and dargahs. There was also a rapprochement with the powerful government employees’ unions.

The turning point came with the tsunami in December of 2004. Contrary to knee-jerk press reports specifically in the audio-visual media at the time, the state government handled itself with considerable alacrity and speed. A similar drill was in place during the floods the following year. Jayalalithaa’s opposition to the Sethusamudram project taps into genuine fears of the fisher folk about their livelihoods.

Jayalalithaa’s other masterstroke was the timing of the bicycle gifted to high school girl students. In her first hundred days in office, in 2002, she announced a programme to give a cycle to every Dalit girl. Two years ago, this was extended to all girl students in Class XI and XII. It is important to note that these students will comprise a significant chunk of first generation voters now that voting begins at the age of eighteen.

This is also perhaps the first time in many years that a chief minister is campaigning by highlighting her performance. The opposition is anxious enough to promise free colour television sets and rice at two rupees a kilogram to the poor. To be sure, the DMK has a formidable lineup of allies and is fighting hard. Its main bastions lie in north Tamil Nadu where its ally, the Pattali Makkal Katchi, is also strong. Further sources of support include the left and the Congress. Both are localized but in this contest every seat and vote will count.

History is testament that the incumbent usually loses power in Fort St George. In recent times, only the late M.G. Ramachandran managed the feat of never losing a single assembly poll. Yet the legacy of the past weighs equally heavily on the DMK. When E.V. Ramaswami Naicker announced that he was marrying in order to beget an heir, C.N. Annadurai founded the DMK as a revolt against the idea that power flowed through lineage. It is ironical that Karunanidhi’s own party now has a line of succession that runs from father to son.

It is here that the chief minister’s choice of allies shows a shrewd political mind. V. Gopalsami or Vaiko left the parent party in 1994 protesting against dynastic politics. He retains a thin layer of supporters across the state. Equally crucial are the Dalit Panthers, a militant party led by T. Thirumavalavan. This is the first time that a Dalit party has such a prominent role in a larger alliance. Both parties compete with specially tailored welfare measures for the poor and have their own blend of growth and welfare.

The choice is still a very important one. Five more years of the AIADMK will mean continuity, and this will shake up the UPA coalition. Karunanidhi is banking on the arithmetic of alliances to bring him back to power one last time. Its maths versus performance. This election looks like a cliffhanger though a come back for the ruling party may well be on the cards.

ROAD TO PERDITION

Perhaps it's difficult for you to get away with a week -end. This time I invested my week end by watching a Hollywood movie – ROAD TO PERDITION. This is a nice gangster movie, claims to be next best gangster movie after GODFATHER.

Michael Sullivan Sr. (Tom Hanks) is a trusted aide to John Rooney (Newman), an Irish American organized crime boss. Sullivan, an orphan and a soldier in the Great War, was adopted by the older man as a child, and he has been working with him ever since his teens. Rooney treats Sullivan as a surrogate son, being closer to him than his own son and heir, the vain and insecure Connor Rooney (Daniel Craig). Further frustrating Connor, his father treats Sullivan's two sons, Peter and Michael Jr. like grandchildren. At a wake of a former buisness associate, Michael Jr. and Peter notice the subtle friction between their father and Connor.

Sullivan senior and Connor are instructed by Rooney to deal with Finn McGovern, another employee of Rooney's whose brother was murdered by the Rooney organization as punishment for allegedly stealing from them. Unbeknownst to both Michael Sullivan and Connor Rooney, a curious twelve-year-old Michael Sullivan Jr. hides in the car and witnesses the ensuing scene where Connor, acting against his father's wishes, murders McGovern. The shocked Sullivan Sr. swears his son to secrecy, while John Rooney humiliates his son by demanding an apology for his seemingly hotheaded actions. Ostensibly to prevent the threat of Sullivan Jr. divulging the murder he witnessed (but in reality feeling jealous of and threatened by Sullivan Sr.), Connor, again against his father's wishes, attempts to have Sullivan murdered at the same time as personally killing his wife Annie and younger son Peter. Both Sullivan Sr. and Jr. survive the attempt on their lives and flee to Chicago.

When it becomes clear that Al Capone's crime syndicate will not countenance Sullivan's goal of taking revenge on the Rooneys, he develops an elaborate scheme to protect his son and to blackmail the mob into giving up Connor by robbing its secret accounts in banks throughout Chicago. Sullivan personally steals the 'dirty money' that Capone is holding, while Micheal Jr. provides his assistance in the getaway car. This way, Capone will give up Connor, in exchange for the money. Capone, however, is more upset at losing his money, and he will not make any bargains or deals with Sullivan at all. He sets up Harlen Maguire (Law), a voyeuristic, freelance photographer/hit man hired by the Capone organization, to complete the eradication of the Sullivans. Maguire has a habit of taking pictures of his dead victims, much to his pleasure.

It later becomes apparent that Connor has been embezzling money from his father, holding the money under the names of gang members that he has murdered. Confronted by Sullivan with the evidence that his son has been betraying him, John Rooney refuses to stop protecting Connor. He reminds Sullivan that, they too, are murderers, that this life they chose, and that "none of us will see heaven." Wanting his son to avoid traveling the road he has taken in life, Sullivan has a difficult decision to make. In order to gain revenge and protect his son, Sullivan must then kill the members of Rooney's gang, including John Rooney. He is then able to track down and avenge himself on Connor. Since Capone protected Connor because he was only Rooney's son, there was no more reason to hide him after his father was dead.

Subsequently, the psychopathic (and disfigured) Maguire succeeds in tracking down the Sullivans and murders Michael Sullivan senior at a beachside house in Perdition. Apparently, he traced a call placed from Sullivan to his wife's sister, Sarah, and he was able to determine that they were headed for the town of Perdition. Exactly how long he was there and what he did to Aunt Sarah is unknown, but, noting that he was cold blooded and there was no furniture in her living room, it is implied that he killed her before she could warn them, hid the body, and waited for his real prey. Michael has the opportunity to shoot Maguire but does not (Maguire is instead killed by the dying Sullivan Sr.), thus ensuring that Michael, at least, has a chance "to see Heaven".

On FEDERALISM - G.L.Peiris

Professor Gamini Laksman Peiris

Former Minister of Justice, Constitutional Affairs & National Integration
The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka

VENUE: School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University

How do you reconcile ethnic and cultural diversity with the concept of mature and cohesive nationhood? Certainly in South Asia this is a perennial problem. In many of our countries there are people who speak different languages, profess different religions, come from different cultural backgrounds. How do you construct political and economic institutions which enable this range of diversity to be readily compatible with the perception of belonging to a single country, without any element of exclusion from decision-making processes?

I think that is a central challenge facing many of the countries of the developing world.
In Sri Lanka we are experimenting with certain ideas which will enable us to devolve substantial power to different regions in the country. The whole thrust of this is empowerment of people; making it possible for them to play a more active and vigorous role in the making of decisions which touch their daily lives.

How do you do this within the framework of a single state? In Sri Lanka, as we proceed with this initiative we find ourselves facing a particular problem. We are told that if you look at the history of federalism in the world the typical model of federalism is that of regions coming together, regions that were earlier independent. But they come together for certain limited purposes. That has been the traditional pattern. Now, Sri Lanka, by contrast, has always been a unitary state. Federalism has not at any time been part of the political experience of my country.

What we are now contemplating is the changing of that unitary structure to admit of a degree of power-sharing, which is generally associated with quasi-federal structures. Now the question that is asked is: We're all familiar with the phenomenon of independent entities coming together within the framework of a federal state, but is it possible, is it feasible, to envisage a country which has always been a unitary state now adopting, as a result of a political process, quasi-federal structures and mechanisms? That has been a question which has been put to us, very pointedly, in the course of the constitutional initiative which is taking place at the present time in my country.

I need to tell you that one of the problems that we face here is an emotional problem. Not people being cerebral, reflective, thinking consciously about these matters, but an intuitive and emotional response to these very mixed and convoluted issues. The problem there is this: Many people feel, in our part of the world, that federalism is the precursor to the physical dismemberment, or the disintegration of the nation state. If you proceed in that direction the end result would be the break-up of a national state. Now many people are suspicious of federalism in our country. They are suspicious because they feel that this is the thin end of the wedge. Once you begin travelling in that direction how do you stop short of the physical disintegration of the state?

So it is the emergence and the consolidation of structures which have enabled people coming from a diversity of cultural backgrounds to feel at home in their respective nations. It is these mechanisms that have enabled the survival of these entities as unified countries. Now, that may be self-evident when you put the proposition in that way, but one has to overcome a high degree of emotion and convince people of the reality of that position. In doing so I think we have to jettison labels; nomenclature is not the most important thing. There are many countries in the world which do not fall neatly into this category of unitary or federal. There are hybrid structures. So I do not think that we should be slaves to stereotypes or to labels.

In my own country most of the problems are in the northern and the eastern regions where the majority of the people speak the Tamil language. That is, those are regions dominated by a minority. There is a similar situation in Canada, in Spain, and in other countries. Do you then solve the problem in this way: a duopoly approach that greater powers need to be devolved to those regions where the most acute problems arise in every day experience?

Now, in Sri Lanka we have found that one of the reasons why that approach is difficult is a degree of emotional resistance. If the majority feel that some kind of completely special and disparate treatment is meted out to a particular region, which is inhabited by a group of people who belong to the racial minority, then psychologically there's a high degree of resistance to the adoption of those models and structures. But whichever solution you adopt, symmetrical or asymmetrical, it is important to insist, in keeping with the contemporary Sri Lankan experience, that there must be power-sharing also at the centre.

Now the situation is complicated in a country like my own where the minorities do not live exclusively in a particular part of the country. They do live in the northern and the eastern provinces, but then there are large numbers of Tamil-speaking people who live in the capital city and its environs. So a viable structure cannot consist simply of the devolution of power to regions. You have to look at the problem of power-sharing at the centre and develop appropriate mechanisms to accomplish that objective.

Then there's this one other element that I need to refer to. These problems in our part of the world cannot be analyzed solely in terms of majority versus minority. What imparts a particularly complex dimension is the minority versus minority aspect. In Sri Lanka there are two minorities: there are the Tamils; there are the Muslims. So if in the northern and the eastern regions you devolve very substantial powers to the Tamil-speaking minority then the Muslims ask that their own fundamental rights be suitably entrenched by constitutional arrangements to prevent the Muslims from being overwhelmed by the Tamil community. So that is a dimension that we need to bear in mind.

It is also important, I think, to make the point that in our part of the world, certainly in South Asia, we have a serious problem of political polarisation. The disappearance of middle ground. People are not willing to compromise. Some of these issues are tarnished with emotion. In that kind of situation we have made provision in our constitutional arrangements for the regional governments to consist not only of the party that has been successful at the polls, but proportionately the party in opposition will be entitled to a number of seats in the board of ministers of the region. So we have departed from the traditional principle of winner takes all. We have made it possible for the party in opposition also to make a constructive input into the making and the implementation of policy and we think that that is a constructive contribution to diminishing the tradition of political confrontation and polarisation which is the bane of the political culture of a great part of the sub-continent.

There must be a high degree of public awareness of the value systems that are sought to be embodied in the constitutional arrangements. You need a vigorous press. You need trade unions. Political parties. You need democracy within political parties. You need certain regulatory mechanisms with regard to the finances of political parties. There must be access to justice. The ombudsman or the equivalent of the ombudsman must have a significant role to play. So some degree of egalitarianism is necessary in order to make a success of some of these principles, so one is to have a holistic conception of human development, and the political and economic structures that come into being must reflect that commitment to pluralism, secularism, and the functioning of representative democracy.

Sudesi & Good Governance

With the State Legislative elections around, Vijayakanth, who recently floated his own party to test the waters in the elections, has come out with ‘Sudesi’ where he strives to reform the Chief Minister of the State. Though the preachy tone grates, the film has its moments. Vijayakanth takes dig at the present political culture in the State and indirectly projects him to be the savior on a mission to reform the corrupt rulers of the State.

What is significant is that the film depicts an arm-twisting a corrupt chief minister into introducing welfare schemes for the people with the help of an incriminating video. Sudesi, who chances upon the CD which has the execution of the existing Chief Minister, uses effectively for the betterment of the society at large. Though the movie is aimed at taking to masses the political agenda of Vijayakanth, it has certainly offered few sure ways for good governance. It has a few radical ideas for change and reform, such as:

• Making a year-long ‘Rural Health Internship’ mandatory for medical college students to get their degree. "They will gain experience and understand their country better," he says.

• Implementing ‘Regular, Random Surprise Visits’ by the Chief Minister to the districts periodically.

• Developing a Redressal System for grievances by which people can collect 5000 signatures to dismiss government officials in their area or re-install them, and

• Making it Compulsory for government employees to send their children to government schools, to ensure that the standard of education and quality of staff in State-run schools improve.

I am now to believe that it is not too difficult to impart a change in the system of governance. Though there are ingrained constraints in implementation of innovative plans, it is not totally impossible. “WHERE THERE IS A WILL, THERE IS A WAY’.

Rafting at Rishikesh

When it comes of exquisite entertainment and blissful enjoyment, Himalayan exploration beckons you. True to its word, our trip to Rishikesh was quite memorable and will be cherished throughout our life. With Beryl accompanying me and half-a-dozen foreigners with us, the trip was wonderful.

While thousands flock to Haridwar and Rishikesh for a religious ‘fix’ with a dip in the Ganga, White Water River Rafting on the Ganges is a different high altogether. The swirling and foaming rapids had succeeded where innumerable temples and clanging bells had failed. They brought me face to face with God, I think the entire Indian pantheon of 33 crore deities had flashed before my eyes. It is no surprise that many adventure seekers flock like migratory birds each season to get their dose of thrill. The ‘holy’ river is very popular for this adventure sport.

It all started on Friday morning at 8.30 pm. The Raft company took us in a SUMO to a starting point at least 12 kilometers away from Ram Jhula where we were staying. We were given Life Jackets, Helmets and of course safety briefings as to how to overcome fear of water and how not to become 'panic' in case of a 'fall'. I was assigned to take up Forward Position along with my German friend 'France'. He is a wonderful gentleman full of wisdom. Another English woman from UK, Fiona was assigned Middle position. Beryl was assigned a task of a Captain and was responsible for tightening the ropes. After initial warm-ups, we started our journey.

When we encountered the first rapid, our instructor started shouting 'Come on team, all forward', 'Forward Team, Forward.' But it was easier said than done. "Yaaah…….!," the full-blooded war cry was of no use in our herculean effort to paddle forward but it did help in squashing the butterflies in my stomach. There was no turning back from the ‘great wall of water’ in front of us and we braced ourselves as the swirling rapid buffeted the raft.

"Ram, you have finally lost it," a voice kept screaming in my mind as we climbed the wave at a precarious degree tilt - up, up.. and then down with a bang. Within minutes it was all over as I heard the command, "relax team". Flushed with excitement, adrenaline pumping through my veins, I joined the rest as they raised their paddles and slapped them flat on the water. The rapid we had negotiated merited its name, ‘Roller Coaster.’ It was a joy ride of a lifetime and I was hooked. The lure of life, one with nature and of high adventure seduced me despite my brief two-day sojourn. Thirsting for action I got more than I bargained for on the ten different rapids on the river.

"Okay folks this is your chance to body surf. Just hang on to your life jackets and float with your legs pointing downstream and your heads above water to watch out for the rocks," announced our instructor. At first I thought he was joking. He must be crazy to think of jumping in the freezing water. But then I thought to myself, "What the hell, it’s now or never" and jumped overboard.

As I went under, I felt the cold water biting into my flesh . But as I resurfaced to stare at the sun, a feeling of exhilaration swept over me. Floating downstream in the pristine waters of the Ganges was really worth enjoying. It really was a wonderful experience - when you don't know swimming - to float on the Holy Ganges which was so deep. Everything seemed to slow down as I got enveloped in a cloud of tranquility. The body seemed to be suspended in time and space.

Finally we reached the end point at Ram Jhula. The five hour journey was quite thrilling, exhilarating and memorable. Though there were other teams which managed to complete the stretch within 3 hours, we took our time to watch/admire the nature's bounty on both sides of the river. As our fellow traveller - German Friend- noted, 'Our aim was not for reaching (the end-point) but Journeying'.