Opinion View From The Right: Give it up
As Pakistan’s adamant stand on an invitation to the speaker of the J&K Assembly and mute spectatorship of other members have again jeopardised Bharat’s position on J&K, Bharat should sound a death knell on the membership.
The CPA “is meant to cherish the colonial heritage that many intellectuals rationalised in the post-Independence period. (Source: Express photo)An editorial in the Organiser urges India to give up its Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) membership as it reminds us of our colonial past. Lauding India’s decision to boycott the annual conference of the CPA, to be held in Islamabad, in protest against Pakistan not inviting the speaker of the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly, it says: “As Pakistan’s adamant stand on an invitation to the speaker of the J&K Assembly and mute spectatorship of other members have again jeopardised Bharat’s position on J&K, Bharat should sound a death knell on the membership… Instead of that, the same energy should be utilised to strengthen institutions in the Indian Ocean region and Southeast Asia.”
“The question is not limited to the conference but the very rationale to be part of this organisation symbolising the colonial baggage,” it asserts. The editorial argues that the CPA “is meant to cherish the colonial heritage that many intellectuals rationalised in the post-Independence period. Bharat, with its growing stature, should [re]think continuing with this colonial bondage.”
Spirited Defence
The editorial in Panchajanya lauds External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj’s intervention in Parliament on August 12, explaining her position in the IPL controversy. According to the editorial, her speech gave the sense of a different “psychological freedom” and cannot be viewed just as an explanation of the conduct of the external affairs minister. “It will be an injustice if one considers it just as an explanation by the minister or a counter attack,” it states. In a way, it was an explosion of many questions that were on the minds of several people, it says. Swaraj’s explanation has left more questions than it answered, it says, but Parliament is the best place in a democracy to beat a family-oriented party.
“Post Independence, there was a disease in our society that not only avoided criticism of some families but also considered them to be above allegations. August 12 demolished that concept. No one had ever ventured to question or expose the Congress’s first family. The biggest diffidence in Indian democracy was shattered on that day in the temple of democracy,” it argues. “Wherever it is necessary there should be investigation and strict action. Everyone has to face the truth and everyone should be treated equally… But on the occasion of the 69th Independence Day, the Congress’s Yuvaraj should tell us: What’s his problem in Parliament getting back to normalcy?”
it asks.
First Family
The cover story in the latest issue of Panchajanya criticises the Congress and its leadership for the disruptions in Parliament and talks about how External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj exposed the Gandhi family in her counter attack on the IPL controversy in which she was targeted by the opposition. The article starts with claiming that the nation will never forget the glimpses of Sonia Gandhi’s expression when Swaraj attacked her late husband, Rajiv Gandhi, for the sins of “omission” and “quid pro quo” committed during his time as prime minister. “Many in the country are aware of the exploits of the Congress’s first family. But those voices were always suppressed,” it says, adding that Subramaniam Swamy had levelled many allegations against them but people did not have the written or other evidence to believe them. “But Sushma Swaraj’s speech has become a starting point for those who want to speak on this issue. What she said was in the presence of both Sonia and Rahul Gandhi and is in the records of Parliament.”
It also criticises Mallikarjun Kharge, saying that his “demand to dismiss Swaraj’s speech… was an expression of the Congress’s commitment to one family”. The article, written by Jnanedra Bartariya, also points out that the demand was countered by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s argument that if portions of Swaraj’s speech were to be expunged, Kharge’s entire speech should be expunged too.
Share
