What is the technical difference between "not saying something on the record" & "saying something in an informal chat" timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/BJP…—
Offstumped (@offstumped) June 21, 2012
Much is made of the Nitish-Modi conundrum but little has been highlighted on when and how exactly did this develop.
A timeline trace of Nitish Kumar’s remarks between 2002 and 2007 tells a fascinating story of the pursuit for the incremental Muslim vote in Bihar as Nitish’s JD-U grew at the expense of both the Congress and the RJD drawing in dubious individuals including the now vocal Shivanand Tiwari who not too long ago was Lalu Yadav’s mouthpiece.
On the surface it may seem to be a story of opportunism and hypocrisy while deep down it is a story of cold realpolitik and naked ambition going all the way back to 2000 and Nitish’s first attempt at becoming the Chief Minister of Bihar.
The most fascinating aspect of this story however is that while Narendra Modi kept away from Bihar, neither campaigning nor saying much about Nitish, it is Nitish who cast the first stone while campaigning in Gujarat during the 2007 assembly elections on behalf of the JD-U and against the BJP.
In fact through the exhaustive search of Google News Archive it is hard to find a single direct comment by Narendra Modi on Nitish Kumar during that entire period.
This Indian Express editorial from 2005 highlights the extent to which the BJP in general and Modi in particular obliged Nitish to enable him to build his story in Bihar after Nitish’s botched attempt at forming a government in Bihar in 2000 with help from the BJP.
Nitish Kumar in May of 2002 on Ram Vilas Paswan’s opportunism over Gujarat 2002 riots
Railway minister and Samata Party leader Nitish Kumar has dubbed Lok Janshakti Party chief Ram Vilas Paswan “an opportunist who will join the Laloo bandwagon via Congress”. “Every political party has the right to make a decision. But Paswan’s decision had nothing to do with Gujarat. The Gujarat violence has been taking place for the last two months,” Kumar said, adding that Paswan’s exit from the NDA will have no impact in Bihar. “Paswan was trying to weaken the NDA even when he was in it,”
Nitish Kumar in December of 2002 on Narendra Modi’s victory in the state assembly elections
Congratulating the BJP, its allies at the Centre on Sunday refuted suggestions of any “polarisation” of votes in Gujarat but said it was a verdict against the Congress.
“The people of Gujarat were aggrieved with the kind of image painted outside the state and hence reacted in this way,” senior Samata party leader and Railway Minister Nitish Kumar said.
Claiming that there was no polarisation of votes between Hindus and Muslims, he said, “People are secular and they do not like any fundamentalists”.
Briefing mediapersons following Mr. Lalu Prasad’s charge that he had not got the Godhra incident probed sufficiently, the former Railway Minister denied it and accused his successor of “acting irresponsibly.” “This is a political statement meant to address a particular community,” he said.
Nitish Kumar in January of 2005
“It is a political stunt but they (the Centre) should know that they cannot take advantage of the Gujarat riots again and again,” Kumar told reporters here when his reaction was sought on the report which was submitted to the Railway Board chairman R.K. Singh today.
Kumar, who was the Railway Minister when the mishap took place, said, “they (the Centre) will have to look for a new issue.”
The showing of CDs on the Gujarat riots by the RJD in Purnea and Kishanganj is in blatant violation of the EC directives as it is aimed at fomenting communal tension. I demand the EC to immediately ban it, JD(U) parliamentary party leader Kumar said.
Congratulating Narendra Modi for his victory in the assembly elections in Gujarat, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar on Monday said Railway Minister and RJD supremo Lalu Prasad was happy over Modi’s victory as his importance in the UPA at the Centre would remain intact.
Describing as ‘spectacular’ Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s victory, Prasad said Congress’ defeat reflected ‘some flaws’ in the party’s electoral strategy which included nominating BJP rebels.
The above remarks by Nitish after this also in December 2007 which is perhaps the first time we see signs of the JD-U in general and Nitish in particular taking on Narendra Modi.
The Bihar chief minister who was in Badodara yesterday was quick to react: “Narendra Modi should not have raised the issue, which is still sub judice. He (Modi) has raised it to polarise a section of voters in his favour, which is wrong.”
While campaigning in various parts of Gujarat, Nitish went to the extent of alleging: “The Gujarat chief minister has deviated from the path of development and has been ignoring the cause of tribals and Dalits.”
The JD(U), which has two MLAs in Gujarat, neither has a stake in that state nor is a party to the Modi government. “It’s good for us that Nitish Kumar has shown his dislike for Modi while campaigning there.The Muslims understand that the JD(U) is a secular party,” remarked a JD(U) MLA. Interestingly, Bihar BJP, which is party to the Nitish Kumar government, has preferred to stay silent on Nitish’s remarks on Modi, though the state’s deputy chief minister Sushil Kumar Modi who campaigned for another Modi in Gujarat.
Filed under: Narendra Modi, nitish kumar, UPA-II Critical Appraisal
My hypothesis is that Nitish kumar wants to experiment with combining micromandal and Muslim vote bank to stand on his own feet. Lalu with no Muslim vote bank can’t come to power with Yadav vote bank and BJP can’t come to power with upper caste and without OBC. 2014 can be nitish’s opportunity to safely experiment before going to assembly election.
BJP should chart its own strategy without OBliging to JDU. Decision to separate has already been taken,, these shenanigans are just to justify separation and further consolidate Muslim vote bank.
The current fracas of JDU vs BJP seems like entirely media made to me. Tho it is possible that Nitish is trying to make sure he also is in the PM race.
What is difficult to understand is the mainstream media optimism about a possible NDA split… does anybody really believe that JDU will sacrifice their state govt in 2012 for a possible shot in 2014?!
I hope the BJP reaction to this is more mature and sensible.
Jai
Get real.
Advani (FC)/Gadkari(FC)/Jaitley (FC)/Joshi(FC)/Sushma(FC) will NOT let Modi (BC) become Prime Minister.
They’ll collude with CBI/Congress to malign/murder him in the pretext of Godhra repercussions.
Good inside in to the mind of a man who appears more ambitious now.He sees his chance to throw the hat in the ring, as Congress is likely to end up with lowest tally.He has started the elimination game.But then Modi’s silence is more pregnant with more possibilties.Nitish is big nothingness beyond Patna.
The dramas over the last 15 days….. BJP is no party now. Thanks to the shenanigans of its Delhi leadership, it has lost its moral legitimacy in the eyes of its own supporters. It is now a ‘Modi party’, he is the only rationale for any support it might get in future. Next elections would be Modi-centred. Till results come out we would not know if there is indeed a Modi wave in this country, minor BJP will likely get around 140, major 200. Without him at the helm, BJP would be down well below 100. Modi has become an iconic figure for many Indians, and more the media and his other enemies demonize him, more the support he attracts – for his strength of character,his stoic and uncompromising attitude towards his opponents. So it’s a win-win condition for him, but not necessarily to capture power in Delhi. Anti-Modi campaigns, in the eyes of the public, have now become too banal and unimpactful.
[...] Older » [...]
The problem is not with Nitish Kumar. Instead of overanalysing Nitish Kumar, it is time that RSS/BJP guys do some introspection. If someone criticises Modi they immediately label that person as :
1) ‘Pseudo-secular’
2) ‘Communist-leftist’
or 3) ‘Congressi’
or even worse 4) ‘anti-national’
Instead of looking and trying to find some real or imaginary label for people who criticise Modi, it is important to see the contents of that criticism.
1. Modi will always remain a liability for the BJP. In the present age where world over, people look for governments and leaders who have a broad, tolerant vision of the world, Modi’s record stands out like a sore thumb.
2. Whether the court has punished Modi or not, the perception among a section of Indian population that Modi is guilty of participating in a genocide in 2002 is enough for any right thinking party to avoid Modi. Of course at regional level, monsters like Bal Thackeray who has never shied away from his attacks on Muslims and non-Marathi fellow Indians has been propped up by marathi voters (shows that our democracy has yet to reach the maturity levels that one sees in countries like UK where the parties advocating supremacy for white UK population or similar chauvinistic agenda like Thackerey, has been wiped out by the UK population).
BJP (and hopefully the RSS) will see some sense and promote people other than Modi.
We have to also remember the Indian mythology, even though Mahabali was a great administrator, eventually Lord Vishnu came as Vamana avatar and punished him. (Even though it is said that he was such a popular ruler that people of Kerala still celebrate Onam for the return of Mahabali).
BJP by insisting on Modi seems to be giving 2 messages:
1. They do not have other equally good administrators in BJP, so relying too much on Modi for PM.
2. They want to give a message to those who are uncomfortable with Modi – saying they can go to hell.
(That is an incredibly arrogant message because any great party with some ethics and morals would like to consider every section of the society as their own…..!!)
Even though I would not consider myself a congress supporter here I would like to contrast this with the way Sonia Gandhi herself abdicated her Prime ministerial position in 2004 and gave it to Manmohan Singh, knowing that large sections of Indian population were uncomfortable with the idea of a foreign-born Prime Minister.
In fact, Modi himself should clearly state that he will not be in the reckoning for the post of PM and should promote a person like Sushma Swaraj for this position (from within the BJP). Sushma is young, sincere, clean, articulate and intelligent and a woman.
If the PM candidate must be within NDA I heartily recommend Nitish Kumar, whatever his previous background as a socialist, he has shown that he is sober, intelligent and most importantly – a very good administrator, which is what India badly needs today.
Governance will automatically not come to someone being articulate and making great speeches (Sushma Swaraj) or being honest (lets say Kejriwal). Its also just not about having great adarsh /ethics (lets say Anna) or just being highly educated (Manmohan Singh).
Delivering good governance is about improving the quality of life of the whole society, considering human psychology and self-interest , its a constant challenge, involves problem solving and intelligence as how to improve things while avoiding conflicts generated by people , rivals and nature.
How to build consensus yet make steady progress and be efficient ?
It requires constant hardwork, constant effort to find solutions, strong management skills and requires exceptionally strong moral values.
It requires lot of positive energy, it requires focus, it requires very strong motivation to always be optimistic and it requires great inter personal skills .
It is like… ok accepted that you are an honest person with very good ethics etc etc but how do you accomplish this ? Do you have the capability to make the babus work for India’s good ? Can you convince people to trust you and change there habits for the society’s good ? Can you give results ? Can you simply deliver and not get distracted by numerous other things in public life , whether greed , lies spread by media, negative thoughts, opposition or rivals in your own party ?
A lot of people associate Modi with good governance because he is demonstrated that he has all the qualities associated with it. Foremost he has the quality of always remaining positive inspite of most people in a position of influence whether in media or public life opposing him , inspite of every evidence pointing to his innocence , not accepting the truth that he tried his best to control the riots.
Can a man with Modi’s brain not play votebank politics to his own advantage ? With his problem solving skills and rated as the indisputable top manager in India, can he not amass wealth legally if he provides consultancy to any top MNC for just 1 hour a day ? Can he not use his electronic platform reach and his skills to destroy his rival’s reputation ?
If he lets his brain to think negative and not follow dharma he can easily finish his enemies, especially if he chose to plays with their rules where every dirty trick his allowed. How difficult will it be for him to polarise the voters , especially if he knows a section of society will never vote for him ?
Modi is great , because of a number of reasons as above. He remains positive . He uses his brain and his oratory to a great use when he effectively counters his enemies , but this is only to ensure that they donot stop him from doing people’s good, from delivering . He doesnot use his resources on negative acts.
More and more convinced , people who have irrational hatred for modi are either plain dusht and wicked or they suffer from some kind of disease which affects rational thinking and logic.