firstly, absolute power will not be granted to any individual or party in near future. we will only see coalition govts. so whether its BJP or congress, they will have to play coalition politics to stay in power. the so-called secular congress has done nothing concrete on any issue in past term except perhaps nuke deal. other than that, congress has no achievements. while, you draw confidence that 26/11 has woken up this govt, IMO, this govt has not only woken up but is panic stricken and it has chosen to surrender to terrorists. IPL moves out due to security fears. and many will follow, if UPA comes back to power.
the countless bomb blasts in all the major cities of our country, events like mumbai and probability that many more will follow, IMO, is more grave situation than that of silly muthalik episode. muthalik was presented as a grave danger by our SENSATIONAL media.
you say, this congress party is different from past ones, I say this congress party is more dangereous to our country than the past ones. I want remind you how one of the ministers of congress cabinet raised doubts over the authenticity of 26/11 just for his cheap vote bank politics.
the din raised by the so-secular parties when IndianMujahideen was encountered in delhi. infact, going so far as to doubt the authenticity of encounter ignoring that a brave officer was martyred!
I am sure BJP would be much much better that the pathetic governance this present coalition has inflicted on us.
coalition politics will keep in check everyone including modi(if he were ever to be a PM candidate), already we see that advani is trying to shed off his rath yatra image. coalition politics, mate, coalition politics.
You are failing to read carefully: this Congress government is different
because it has done something different from its predecessors. To paraphrase your own words, where other Congress governments have done "nothing in the past", this one has managed to pull off through diplomatic channels a deal that would have been inconceivable given the constraints of what you call 'coalition politics'. That is no mean feat. As well, I never said the BJP would be given absolute power if they were to become incumbent at the centre: indeed coalition politics will be the electoral norm for the foreseeable future. I said I had reservationss about what Modi might do if he was given "anything" that most closely "approximated absolute power"- which in a coalition system would mean the party first past the post. Also, were this to happen, the BJP will not be forming the government with parties of the Left, who are vehement about their stand against religious nationalism and have iresoluble ideological differences with the right, but rather with some of its former NDA allies (those that have managed to make a semblance of a showing in state assembly elections), regional parties and independents. In that event, there are also fundamental differences and differences of dialectic constitutive interests between parties that will have to be taken into consideration: for example, the JD(U) [Janata Dal + Samata party] was formed by their common opposition to the RJD in Bihar after the latter welcomed SP rebels like Jha and Mandal into their party; the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi party have a history of deep rift and mutual hositility &c - meaning that any alliances therewith are likely to be mutually exclusive. Moreover, the non-alignment of parties of the Left, and parties like the Janata Dal (Secular) which has and will consistently refuse to transfer power to the BJP because of its secular leanings, will mean that the few parties left will be both opportunistic at the cost of their core ideologies and more easily maneuverable by the politicking of a consummate administrator like Modi, leaving their opposition in the event that Modi tries to pull off another Godhra to doubt. Hence, "I shudder at the thought of what would happen if anything apporiximating absolute power is vested in the hands of Modi".
You are also forgetting that Advani as Home Minister has a comparable- if not more abysmal record on national security: it was during his tenure that we had high-profile incidents like the attack on Parliament, the attack on Red Fort, the hijacking of Indian Airlines flight IC814 and the subsequent capitulation to the demands of releasing the terrorist ideologue Azhar and others, the Kargil debacle to mention nothing of Gujarat and others. You may counter by saying that there have been more communal riots during Congress regimes than during the BJP's. Yes, but incidents of communal violence have witnessed a steadily downward trend since independence- even during Congress regimes- and the single most decisive factor for me is that the leaders at the helm of Congress governance during the worst of the riots have given way to leaders that have demonstrated a far greater penchant for secularism, while the leaders that have been guilty and/or alleged of communal violence in the BJP are the leaders that are being put forth for power in this very election. It is also pertinent to note that it is illogical to compare 56 years of Congress government with 6 years of BJP rule. And if recent events are any indication, an almost assymetric share of communal violence is attributed to BJP-ruled states: whether in Kandhmal in Orissa where major communal violence against Christians was witnessed for the first time in post-independence India, or Indore in MP that heretofore had a distinctive record for communal harmony. And it is important to note with respect to your argument about 'coalition politics', that in Orissa, Patnaik despite his (relatively) stellar credibility, was unable to take action because the BJP was part of the ruling alliance.
Yes, the Muthaalik fiasco was sensationalized- but then again, it was not an attack on a religious minority but on a section of the economic stratum- the very economic stratum that represents the face of the 'new India', and as such was taken to heart because it was conveyed by the mass media- and in particular the television media- to the very subscribers and patrons of this form of media: the burgeoning middle class.
Rhetoric is one thing, action quite another. I would have subscribed to your view of "this Congress party being dangerous to our country than the past ones" if the Congress minister in question: A R Antulay translated his verbally pronounced "doubts over the authenticity of 26/11" - more correctly over the killing of Karkare- for cheap vote bank politics into concerted action intended to debilitate the investigative process. I also fail to see what tangible electoral gains the statements would have made for him personally- seeing that the Congress chastised his verbatim and quickly distanced themselves from his view, cracking the party whip to bring him henceforth into line. The Colabha constituency of Maharashtra that he represents is the part of Mumbai where the Taj Mahal, Leopold and Chabad house are located, and seeing that this was the immediate epicentre of the attacks, any views that raised conspiracy theories when anger was palpable and high at the terrorists would have served to only be self-deleterious. Colaba is also substantially majority Hindu, although it has sizable christian and muslim minorities, and pandering to "cheap vote bank politics" would only have served to alienate Antulay from the majority of voters in his constituency. At the time, conflicting media reports also suggested those doubts, and those have to date not entirely been resolved.
I would rather the IPL be moved out of the country than suffer the embarassment of its being subject to a terrorist attack- especially in an election year when security forces are stretched thin and it's targeting is a very likely possibility- and especially for a country that contributes 70% of the ICC's revenues and is at the forefront of cricket, while surrounded by states that are a security and economic nightmare, and that have already jeopardized the subcontinent's reputation for hosting tournament's whose integrity is guaranteed. You overestimate the ability of our security forces to police such an event given the present constraints and the ease with which such a tournament that will be attended by people in their hundreds of thousands can be penetrated. The trade-off is a known financial loss for this year in the form of the exporting of the IPL tournament versus a risk that could translate into unknown and recurring financial losses in the long run.
I am not sure about "'coalition politics' keeping in check everyone including modi". Certainly, by your argument, it has not prevented the Congress from some of their 'shadier' pursuits (although IMHO these pale in comparison to what the
current leadership of the BJP has demonstrated it is capable of). The nature and kind of allies that the BJP will most likely coalition with in the event of being first past the post also suggests that they will be more easily made malleable to the pressure of the Sangh parivaar if it wishes to exact retribution or travail some of its activists. While I wholly commend Advani for trying to shed off his "rath yatra image" in preparation for this general election, I am also liable to doubt the merit and worthiness of his intentions, particularly because of his own ideological leanings and the proximity and beliefs of those of his ideological compatriots.
I will refrain from commenting on the Indian Mujahideen encounter in New Delhi because my own information on the incident is incomplete. I salute however the soul and family of the brave martyr: decorated officer Mohan Chand Sharma who put his nation before his life.