archive: Foot in mouth disease
Foot in mouth disease
Varsha Bhosle
Rediff
July 13, 1999
Title: Foot in mouth disease
Author: Varsha Bhosle
Publication: Rediff
Date: July 13, 1999
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee is an excellent speaker. I don't
mean just his pulpit oratory, but the way he talks one-to-one. It's
all in his demeanour: amiable and courteous enough to make him seem
approachable; reserved enough to not seem unctuous or timid; and just
impatient enough to make a person realise she asked a stupid question,
and yet not feel slighted or rebuffed. It's a rare gift. No wonder he
has everyone eating out of his hands. If nobody but M/s Vajpayee,
Advani, Jaswant Singh and Yashwant Sinha spoke for the government and
their party, the Press would be in deep shit.
Unfortunately, wishes aren't horses. So, we're saddled with, among
others, Kushabhau Thakre, who believes it's his duty to open his
mouth, whether an opportunity presents itself or not, whether he's
required to or not. Take his recent statement that the majority of
Indians "want the government to retrieve PoK". One poll had indicated
that 63% Indians want it back. Therefore, the very next day, the BJP
supremo felt it incumbent upon him to declare it at a Press
conference. Had anybody specifically asked Thakre about PoK? No.
Result: Exactly when the whole world was having kittens over "India's
restraint," the BJP made headlines here and abroad with the "Hindu
nationalist party" tag highlighted, and without any mention of a poll
--- since the BJP president had introduced the topic, and presented it
as his own perception.
Last month, the party conducted a conclave to enlighten its
spokespersons on media management. (It's paid off with Arun Jaitley,
the polite lawyer whom I've often wanted to violently shake out of his
mildness. Now, he's decidedly aggro --- decimated Kamal Nath in a
debate on the politicisation of Kargil.) However, there was a major
lapse in the media strategy adopted at the meet: Mr Arun Shourie must
have forgotten to lecture on the judicious application of the
gag-plaster-and-muzzle. Hence, Thakre.
Even Mulayam Singh declared that although PoK was a part of India, the
decision to cross the LoC should be left to the military. Of course,
he then ridiculed Thakre for saying that the army should be "allowed
to cross" over. "It is not a game of kabaddi to cross the LoC,"
Mulayam sneered, and blasted him for creating a "war hysteria in the
country." I'm with him: One, he's been defence minister and has some
knowledge in that sphere. Two, if not for him, we'd have had a
vicious, dumb, Italian PM who would have, just to prove her
nationalistic credentials, thrown India into the Coliseum of a
full-scale war.
It's useless explaining to yobs that a leader's job is to lead --- and
not BE LED by the mob: Atalji has consistently gone against the wishes
of the Parivar (Panchjanya has just slammed him) --- and now, also
popular sentiment --- to place India in the position she finds
herself: Tomorrow, even if she were to cross the LoC (which chances
are looking extremely bright), no country can question her stand and
call her bellicose. That credit goes entirely to Atalji's handling of
the crisis. In all the Indo-Pak wars, Pakistan has always been the
aggressor, but the Congress leadership never could whip up even a
speck of international support...
But, with friends like Thakre, Atalji needs no Natwars: If the PoK
glitch wasn't enough, from Goa, he "categorically stated that along
with Kargil, everything that is being done by the BJP for the welfare
of the country would be made a poll issue." Excellent. After all the
other BJP deputies have gone blue in the face decrying the Congress
for politicising Kargil, its president announces that Kargil will be
the party's poll issue --- while accusing the Congress for making hay
"while the Indian soldiers were fighting on the battlefield to save
our country"!!
Result: headlines. So, Atalji had to beg his cadre, "We do not want to
exploit Kargil for deriving political mileage. We can only request
other political parties not to play politics with Kargil. The Kargil
conflict is a question of national security."
Other Thakre pearls include: "[Atalji] even declined President Bill
Clinton's invitation to go to USA" (great; I'm sure the State
Department appreciates the BJP president's rubbing it in). "There was
no financial crisis and not even need to declare emergency" (thanks
for informing Sancho Panza you were contemplating it). "The whole
nation knows that only due to Atal Bihari Vajpayee's visit to Lahore
the country could get outside support on the Kargil issue" (thanks for
telling us the fate of India hinges on a trip to Pakistan).
Could someone *please* inform this person that NOBODY in this country
is dying to hear his opinions? That we'd rather he not embarrass the
PM? That we'd rather he not ream external affairs? Please, just take
moun-vrat. And if you really want to help through your utterances ---
please, just join the Congress.
Is it any better with the Congress? Ha. The demands for a Rajya Sabha
session and a white paper and "democratic accountability" --- all
supposed to contrast with Nehru's handling of the China fiasco --- is
the stuff for comic books. Here's an extract from Panditji's speech
during the debate on the no-confidence motion on August 22, 1963:
"Everybody knows how strength in such matters depends not only on
arms, armies and armaments, but on the morale and unity of the
people... I would beg of the honourable members to consider how far
this morale and unity are strengthened by this motion of
no-confidence... The Chinese press, about which I get reports every
day, gloats over these things. I believe one of the reasons, perhaps
the major reason, for attacking us last October was the feeling in the
minds of the Chinese that India was faced with many disruptive
tendencies and if they gave a blow, we would split up into fragments.
They were mistaken, of course. The opposite has happened. Apart from
what they might think, we must ponder over what effect it might have
on our Army and our own people if we quarrel too much among ourselves;
it will demoralise them."
Deja vu...? Why hasn't the BJP pasted this on Natwar gob?? Because,
those who should be poring over papers to find precedents which
fortify the government's stand, are busy trying to get their mug shots
and opinions into newspapers and television...
Like Panditji, Atalji is right. Look where the Shroud's avarice has
led: The Dawn of 7 July reports, "Sonia Gandhi, head of the Congress
party, said the government had failed in its duty to protect India's
borders. 'People want an answer from this government for its weakness
and slackness on the borders,' the Italian-born widow of former prime
minister Rajiv Gandhi told a gathering in Bihar. 'Keeping borders
protected is the responsibility of the government but they failed in
their duty,' she said in one of the strongest attacks yet on the
BJP-led coalition government over Kashmir."
In The News of July 10, Imtiaz Gul writes, "[The Indian Army] that has
suffered huge human and material losses and would like to reap bloody
noses from the Kargil heights to assuage its own ego, and more so of
the Indian public and political parties who have been looking down
upon them as a *incompetent* and *demoralised* lot."
The 150-year-old Indian National Congress has now become a rallying
point for Pakis. They use the Shroud's gas to claim that the Indian
government is weak and the Indian Army --- which is thrashing them ---
is slack at the borders. The Pakistan paper -- to date -- hasn't
quoted a pinko or the Gujral Doctrine or even Sancho Panza. At the
meeting of the CMs, Jyoti Basu said, "The message must go out loud and
clear that so far as driving the infiltrators away from the soil of
our country is concerned, the Union government and the State
governments will act and move unitedly to strengthen the solidarity of
the nation." Whereas the Shroud's lap-dogs --- Dixit, Digvijay, Gehlot
--- were *instructed* to sharply criticise the government.
Then again, what else can one expect from a foreigner...
With Pakistan, it's even worse. Hard job, handling the Press --- not
for yobs. On July 4, after the Clinton-Sharief summit, the entire DC
and NY Press corps walked out of the briefing given by Pakistan's
foreign office spokesman Tariq Altaf. He told a senior NY journalist
that the latter had either not read or didn't understand the language
of the joint statement. When other old-hands tried to pin him down on
the "concrete steps" promised by Pakistan, Altaf told them "not to
raise your voice." Finally, one Washingtonian blew his top and shouted
that he wasn't going to stand being treated like schoolkid --- and
walked out. The rest followed.
Discourtesy is the hallmark of Pakistani diplomacy. On 18 June,
Cairo's leading English-daily, Egyptian Gazette, wrote: "The Pakistani
embassy's press counsellor seems to be experienced in everything
except for the Press area which is presumably his key assignment as
his job title indicates. His reply to the gazette is filled with
nothing other than insolence. Moreover, Islamabad's involvement in
supporting militant groups runs counter to the principles of peace it
advocates." The Pakistani diplomat has exposed himself as only
"versatile in mouthing insults and vulgarities," it said.
This was in reaction to the Pakistan embassy's Dr Shakil Akhtar
getting hives over an analysis on Kargil, which he felt did not
portray Islamabad's view. Among other things, Akhtar wrote in a letter
to the editor that Pakistan was willing to "arrange, free of charge,
special summer course for your 'analyst' in the art of writing
credible news analyses and preparing propaganda stuff with some amount
of sophistication." This is the standard of Pakistan's counselling.
The Indian Army's spokesman, Colonel Bikram Singh, in private, may use
the choicest khada gaalis for Pakis. But when he went on the
microphone after the return of the mutilated bodies of the six
soldiers, the hardest he went was, "This is a gift by Pakistan to
India a few days before its Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz visits New
Delhi to discuss the Kargil situation." It's called restraint ---
essential when one's country is *officially* being presented to the
world.
But listen to ISPR spokesman Brigadier Rashid Qureshi during a media
briefing in Pakistan --- on the very day his PM was negotiating a
face-saver with Clinton: When quizzed about India's recapturing Tiger
Hills, Qureshi said, "30,000 men, 150 artillery guns, 70 aircraft
operating unopposed for the last two months against some mujahideen,
and the Indians have nothing to show for it. Not one mujahideen body,
and five peaks?! Yes, they have something to show for it --- about 600
men killed and 1,100 wounded. Yes, they have something to show for it
--- burials, burials and burials of Indian soldiers."
No, it shouldn't make your blood boil --- that's to be reserved for an
intelligent foe. The Qureshis and Guls are meant to be brushed off.
For then, we suddenly find somebody else doing our job for us: Tim
Sebastian of BBC's Hard Talk, has been like a fox terrier snapping
away at the heels of Pak diplomats. First he screwed Altaf's
happiness, now he's buggered Sartaj Aziz's. I have never, ever, seen
Mr Sebastian aggressive and hostile towards his guests. What's it with
him and Pakis?! Methinks, it's that old foot in mouth disease that's
made Pakis, well, Pakis...
Tailpiece: Piali Roy wrote, "Newsflash to Ignorant Indians: Long
before we became South Asians, desis or Indian-Americans, we were all
once Pakis."
Cute. But the Charitable Canadian should exert her brains, too: Were
Pakistanis the first group from the subcontinent to emigrate? Are they
numerically more than Indians? Why weren't THEY called "Indies"??
Why's it that when cops question Pakis for, say, a pub brawl, they
identify themselves as Indians in the hope of being let off lightly?
Answer: Indians have earned a good reputation. The habit of writing
for Western publications engenders an obsequious and self-deprecating
mentality: Try writing for India, and as an Indian, sometimes.
Back
Top
|
