Temple near my house was broken at least twice in the last few years (it means under both NDA and UPA rule), and people say, whenever the “Hundi” gets filled – it gets broken. No political party calls for protests!!! Because, it is place of worship/faith.
Joking apart, Ayodhya is place of “Politics” more than a place of worship/faith (it propped up a whole new political dispensation). In fact that is the reason terrorists picked up this place. Obviously BJP will cash in the incident (however unfortunate it is).
I don’t think Opposition (BJP) will allow the “dust to settle down” to protest. I don’t think it will matter then. Imagine, BJP calling a “bundh” saying, “Let’s protest against the last month’s attack on Ayodhya”. Obviously you will ask why now, why not then? They have been saying for a while that “Internal security” is diluting (but Government, played it down), now they have a reason to be vindicated. (Perhaps, the only thing they have got right, so to speak).
To be fair to government’s reaction – they are also doing it right - appeal for calm, do few meetings, criticize the opposition (for politicizing), of course blame state government for lapse of security.
I personally feel this is a breach of security. 5 guys, battles with host of security personnel, for 90 minutes and reaches just about 100 mts of highly secured place – I think it is breach of security.
PS:
>>They must be thinking they did something wrong after all.
Good one!!
The timing of the protest and the blame-setting. My point is this. It is generally accepted that during times of national emergencies, the opposition (and the government) refrain from politicising the event, and extend their full support to the government. This is what happened during the initial days of Kargil I think, unless someone corrects me. The opposition did not blame the government for the Pakistani intrusions. And it would have been in dubious taste to do it too. This is what happened during the initial days of 9/11. The Democratic party stood with the Bush administration. Similarly for Akshardham and so on.
Whether this is a correct convention can be debated. And maybe this incident does not belong up there with the big ones. But it had another aspect to it - that of potential violence in reaction to the incident. At that moment, the opposition needed to stand with the government and also cool down the tempers of their own party people. They could have criticised it later, once it was clear that no untoward incidents would occur. Not a month perhaps - more like a day or two. Luckily, people seem to have lost interest in the Ayodhya issue. Else, I think the reaction to such statements, coming at the time they did, could have been bad.
As for the government blaming the states, I think kmp is referring to the statements by the Home Minister (and also a chief secretary) that intelligence had been available and had been forwarded to the states. That could have been a response to a direct question from journalists if the government had any prior knowledge of the attacks. Probably that explains why there was no headline anywhere saying "Centre blames UP state government". I'd love to know if there, in fact, were headlines like that. And though kmp does not compare the two, Shivraj Patil (or a chief secretary) blaming the state is not the same as Vajpayee speaking out against both. Patil and Vajpayee have different sized spheres of influence.
And the government criticizing the opposition - that is precisely my point. They had every reason to, considering the fact that they themselves had refrained from doing such things when in the opposition. And moreover it was actually the Congress spokesperson who did the criticizing. The PM merely requested (demanded would probably be too uncharecteristic) that the issue not be politicised by anyone.
And yes, 100 metres does seem a bit close. So there could be a case for thinking of it as a breach of security. I'm probably looking only the end result. Probably it is not like a ODI match where only the result matters. There were reports that security was about to be reduced in the near future - evidence that there was a feeling that nothing would happen. But something did happen.
Whether this is a correct convention can be debated. And maybe this incident does not belong up there with the big ones. But it had another aspect to it - that of potential violence in reaction to the incident. At that moment, the opposition needed to stand with the government and also cool down the tempers of their own party people. They could have criticised it later, once it was clear that no untoward incidents would occur. Not a month perhaps - more like a day or two. Luckily, people seem to have lost interest in the Ayodhya issue. Else, I think the reaction to such statements, coming at the time they did, could have been bad.
As for the government blaming the states, I think kmp is referring to the statements by the Home Minister (and also a chief secretary) that intelligence had been available and had been forwarded to the states. That could have been a response to a direct question from journalists if the government had any prior knowledge of the attacks. Probably that explains why there was no headline anywhere saying "Centre blames UP state government". I'd love to know if there, in fact, were headlines like that. And though kmp does not compare the two, Shivraj Patil (or a chief secretary) blaming the state is not the same as Vajpayee speaking out against both. Patil and Vajpayee have different sized spheres of influence.
And the government criticizing the opposition - that is precisely my point. They had every reason to, considering the fact that they themselves had refrained from doing such things when in the opposition. And moreover it was actually the Congress spokesperson who did the criticizing. The PM merely requested (demanded would probably be too uncharecteristic) that the issue not be politicised by anyone.
And yes, 100 metres does seem a bit close. So there could be a case for thinking of it as a breach of security. I'm probably looking only the end result. Probably it is not like a ODI match where only the result matters. There were reports that security was about to be reduced in the near future - evidence that there was a feeling that nothing would happen. But something did happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment