kmp writes in, in response to the Let There Be Elections post:
I think coalitions are not horse-trading in the narrow sense. That is because almost all of the NDA and UPA coalitions were formed prior to the elections - they were pre-poll alliances to use the correct terminology - correct me if I'm off the mark here. One could argue that they were thinking of principles and common ideologies when they formed the pre-poll alliances. Of course, desperation or cold calculation could be another motive. Whatever the reasons, they were existing before the parties involved knew the outcome - hence probably not horse-trading in the strict sense - since no money changed hands and neither did any other bartering take place. But once the results are out - then of course things get a bit steamy and some media-posturing and pressurising occurs definitely - for the right ministries. Glorified horse-trading?
Coming to The Hindu opinion piece - the writer takes a idealistic view about government formation with fractured verdicts (as I did here), when he justifies 'suspended animation'. He believes (as he writes in the piece) that the legitimate route open to both the Congress-RJD and BJP-JD(U) groups was to persuade Paswan to join them. I would say, they could have tried to persuade the rest of the LJP folks too - why only Paswan? He is simply against any inducements being offered - he probably feels that is when the line is crossed into horse-territory.
But yes, if one is pragmatic, one would have to agree that President's rule was imposed for horse-trading. That is how it goes. That is the politics we have currently.
The Hindu, is like Tavleen sometimes…Gets worked up (or does not) based on which political formation is responsible.Let me reiterate: I thought the dissolution was partisan - solely because of the timing - and said so in the post. Would the assembly have been dissolved if the 're-alignment' was towards the RJD - I think the answer is a definitely No. And no, I don't believe the The Hindu is a completely unbiased paper either.
Having said that, Was there any Alternative to Dissolution – No. But, the timing makes it partisan. Instead of ‘Suspended Animation” it should have been Dissolution, and give me a break – wasn’t the President rule imposed (that too in Bihar) to encourage the “Horse trading”?
While on the subject? As on The Hindu reader pointed out, would the Government have dissolved the assembly if the “re-allignment” (or horse-trading) was towards RJD?
And as another reader pointed out (with the dictionary meaning of “Horse-trading” ) that isn’t the coalition governments by definition is result of horse trading?
I think coalitions are not horse-trading in the narrow sense. That is because almost all of the NDA and UPA coalitions were formed prior to the elections - they were pre-poll alliances to use the correct terminology - correct me if I'm off the mark here. One could argue that they were thinking of principles and common ideologies when they formed the pre-poll alliances. Of course, desperation or cold calculation could be another motive. Whatever the reasons, they were existing before the parties involved knew the outcome - hence probably not horse-trading in the strict sense - since no money changed hands and neither did any other bartering take place. But once the results are out - then of course things get a bit steamy and some media-posturing and pressurising occurs definitely - for the right ministries. Glorified horse-trading?
Coming to The Hindu opinion piece - the writer takes a idealistic view about government formation with fractured verdicts (as I did here), when he justifies 'suspended animation'. He believes (as he writes in the piece) that the legitimate route open to both the Congress-RJD and BJP-JD(U) groups was to persuade Paswan to join them. I would say, they could have tried to persuade the rest of the LJP folks too - why only Paswan? He is simply against any inducements being offered - he probably feels that is when the line is crossed into horse-territory.
But yes, if one is pragmatic, one would have to agree that President's rule was imposed for horse-trading. That is how it goes. That is the politics we have currently.
No comments:
Post a Comment