JDG wrote: > At 10:39 AM 5/14/2004 +0530 Ritu wrote: > >BJP with its Hindutva ideology [India is for Hindus, let the > muslims be > >aware that they need the goodwill of the hindus to survive > and thrive], > > In fairness, it is worth noting that BJP is steadily toned > down its Hundutva rhetoric while in government, particularly > during the most recent > campaign.
Yep, they did tone down their rhetoric, even going as far as explicitly stating their intention of going mainstream in their Vision Document [at least until they could comandeer a majority all by themselves]. But I don't see how that makes much of a difference or why anybody should be impressed by that or assume that it is anything more than an electoral/political ploy. After all, Narendar Modi remained the poster boy of BJP all through the recent elections. I would have reassessed BJP's motivations had they taken any action against the architect and administrator of the 2002 pogrom but as long as they support him with pride, they can spout lines from Iqbal, Chishti and Nanak and I still won't buy their claims of having 'calmed down/grown up'. It is easy to spout sweet words but it is ridiculous to expect others to take them seriously when the Supreme Court has to move cases out of Gujarat to ensure that justice is done. > Also, it is worth noting that the Congress > campaigned on a > relatively socialist platform and against many of the > economic reforms that are absolutely essential to India's development. Which economic reforms would these be - the essential ones opposed by Congress, I mean? > Overall, however, I simply think that it is a good thing for > a maturing > democracy to periodically vote in the opposition. Heh. I am just glad that we'll have a government which stands a good chance of uniformly applying the basic law of the land. BJP's treatment of the muslims was not only deeply offensive on a number of levels, it was also giving rise to more terrorism. > I hope that the > Congress Party and their coalition partners will live up to > their promises to India's poor, vigorously pursue peace with > Pakistan, continue the path > of economic reform, and actively deepen ties with the United > States. And > I will say, that today I am optimisitc that Congress will do > precisely that. I wish I was that optimistic, JDG, but I do thank you for your kind words. I am not sure just how fast/slow the reforms would continue as I don't know what concessions the Left is going to insist on [Congress' manifesto insisted on a speeding up of the economic reforms]. But one thing which I can predict with relative safety is that the Indo-US ties would deteriorate unless one of these three things happen: A] US elects Kerry in Novemeber B] Bush changes his pre-emptive war policy C] Congress and the Left learn the art of disagreeing diplomatically I don't know how strong the chances of [A] are but I don't see much likelihood of [B] and [C] happening. Given the fact that, unlike BJP, Congress doesn't wish to launch pre-emptive attacks against Pakistan and given the fact that Bush administration seems even less fond of criticism than most govts. usually are, I think the Indo-US ties might suffer for a while. Ritu
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
