On the recent stand-off between the CBI and state police in Kolkata, the editorial in Organiser declares that in politics, every political leader or party uses “policies, strategies and perception management” to ensure “authoritative allocation of values” according to their own political interests. The way Mamata Banerjee chose to target the CBI, and Chandrababu Naidu becoming an important ally in this endeavour, needs further scrutiny, claims the editorial. It adds that “she (Banerjee) tried to block the investigation (into the Sharada scam) by central agencies even in the earlier stages, and the reasons are obvious.”
“Rajeev Kumar, the IPS officer who investigated the scam as the head of SIT and who allegedly did not hand over all the relevant evidence to the CBI, can be the obvious ally in the cover-up. Naturally, Mamata did not want CBI to get into this for which she effectively staged and used the political drama. The optics that Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee wanted to convey are very obvious. She wants to play the victim card to invoke Bengali pride by playing Centre vs State and most importantly, to establish herself as the most formidable challenger to the BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi (sic),” says the editorial. It also claims that the Congress is the biggest loser in this game, as it cannot afford to support or oppose Banerjee.
An article in Organiser claims that the stiff opposition to the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2019 by certain political parties, even after it went through the scrutiny of a joint parliamentary committee and its subsequent adoption by the Lok Sabha, is surprising. It asserts that on the whole, “this bill is an important initiative which would not only render justice to large number of persecuted children of Mother India but can also deliver a body blow to vote-bank politics”.
“The people and parties of Assam have a special responsibility. History will not forgive them if they fritter away the advantage of this momentous initiative because of their myopic views,” the article counsels. It adds that the government would do well to enlist Bangladesh’s support for the effective implementation of the Bill. From time to time, the Bangladesh prime minister has expressed gratitude for India’s help to her country’s liberation struggle. India has continued its “good gestures” ever since, through various measures such as giving more than its fair share of Ganga waters through the Farakka barrage, investments in connectivity projects, lines of credit of a few billion dollars, conceding larger areas to Bangladesh in exchange for border enclaves, etc.
“In return, India can make a legitimate request to Bangladesh to help with the repatriation of her people. Friendship cannot be a one-way traffic. Moreover, her help would also be critical to ensure that the outflow of religious minorities is prevented in future. If the Bangladeshi government is not confident of stopping persecution of its minorities by the extremists, both countries may work together in finding ‘out-of-the-box’ solutions to the problem,” reads the article.
The article also asks the “agitating people of Assam” to consider the fact that most political parties who are opposing the Bill have been opposing the National Register of Citizens (NRC) as well”. “These parties want ‘status quo’ in the state at any cost. Further, there is widespread notion of manipulation of ‘legacy data’ on ground. If it is true, the NRC may not address their concerns,” the article claims and adds that “the Centre has a well-thought out holistic plan to protect the interests of Assamese people against the “demographic invasion” from Bangladesh.
The editorial in Panchjanya suspects a political conspiracy behind the recent incident in Aligarh, where a saffron-clad woman — allegedly a leader of the All India Hindu Mahasabha — on January 30 pumped three bullets into a poster of Mahatma Gandhi. The Aligarh police subsequently made arrests in the matter. The editorial condemns the act and adds that it might be a political conspiracy to discredit on saffron organisations. That this incident was meant to trigger political outrage could not be ruled out, given the timing of the act. It also claims that the Congress party “tried to blow the matter out of proportion with statements and agitations in protest to create outrage against the BJP and Sangh Parivar”.
The editorial says that a provocative and condemnable act carried by a little-known Hindu organisation was used “against the political leadership of the country and its biggest social organisation”. “This move is not new for Congress. It has used this move for generations, slandered Hindu society, divided society and conducted massacres to stay in power. What had happened after the assassination of Gandhi? Chitpavan Brahmins were killed by Congress hooligans in Maharashtra. Congress leaders and workers were found indulging in the killing of Sikhs after the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984,” alleges the editorial. It suggests that there is a need to be wary of such cheap propaganda at the time of elections.
Compiled by Lalmani Verma