Rahul’s warning is being viewed very cautiously in political circles and many believe that it was aimed at sorting out differences in the Delhi Congress so that the party faces the assembly elections in a united manner later this year.

However, it is an accepted fact that differences and factions have always existed in the Congress from the very beginning and the High Command has always been aware of these things. In fact, the High Command often uses factionalism to assert its authority and keeps everyone on tender hooks. For example if Bhupinder Singh Hooda is the Chief Minister, many leaders not on the same page as him such as Birender Singh, Kumari Selja and Kiran Chowdhury often get encouraged by top leaders to oppose him. In Punjab, when Amarinder Singh was the Pradesh Chief, Rajinder Kaur Bhattal, Pratap Singh Bajwa and Jagmit Singh Brar continued to pursue their own politics. If Ashok Gehlot is the Chief Minister of Rajasthan, there is CP Joshi to balance him. Newly appointed CMs of Himachal and Karnataka have their share of opposition within their own party.

Therefore, the question is how will Rahul end factionalism. Party veterans recall that during Indira Gandhi’s early years as Prime Minister, two camps—the Nehru Forum and the Socialist Forum co existed. They would often contest elections for the working committee and it was in a way a part of party’s culture. However, it is true that for many years, the Working Committee members are nominated by the party president and are no longer elected as they were earlier. In a way, inner democracy has decreased tremendously and small time leaders who have made it big due to proximity with some members of party president’s coterie call the shots and influence the course of politics. Rahul thus has to be aware that factionalism gets promoted due to the vested interests within his own party and it is important that he should try and identify natural leaders and empower them instead of the party being harmed by activists who are acting at the behest of these vested interests.

Rahul may find his mother to be soft but as a leader Sonia Gandhi has acted firmly against many of her colleagues and not allowed them to question her authority. When Sharad Pawar, P.A. Sangma and Tariq Anwar challenged her credentials, she did not hesitate in throwing them out of the Congress. It is another thing that they are now a part of her coalition at the Centre and in Maharashtra.

Rahul’s intentions are noble and he wishes to improve the functioning of his party. But he has to realise that he will have to first eliminate vested interests if he wishes to assert his supremacy in the near future. To begin with, he must take a call whether there are going to be changes in Delhi before the assembly and possibly the Parliamentary elections. Either way this should be conveyed to the cadres without any further delay. It is virtually impossible to end factionalism in any political party and particularly the Congress.

However, the manner in which the resignations were handled left a lot to be desired and has created an impression that a rift exists between the Prime Minister’s office and the party High Command.

Realising that the damage had been done, Congress chief spokesman Janardhan Dwivedi did try to correct the perception by stating that both the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi were on the same page while dealing with the matter.

But many in political circles do not seem convinced with the claim and feel that the controversies have generated a heat which both the party and the government will face when they celebrate nine years of UPA rule on May 22.

So far as the Congress is concerned, no worker has any doubt that Sonia Gandhi is the supreme leader and it is she who calls the shots while the government only executes her policies and programmes.

But lately, there have been confusing signals coming out from within the party when first Janardhan Dwivedi suggested that the dual power centre policy has worked and will be there in the future too.

He was obviously referring to the party being controlled by Ms Gandhi and the government by Dr Manmohan Singh and the two of them because of their extraordinary chemistry were successfully running the coalition. If things were smooth why should this be stated at all, some leaders ask.

Lately, another top party leader Digvijaya Singh observed that there should be only one power centre and that should be the Prime Minister. The buck has to stop at the Prime Minister’s office.

The two views have for some reason created an ambiguity of how the party leadership looks at the issue of dual power centre. Unless the High Command clarifies, this confusion will persist.

The Congress has done exceedingly well in Karnataka and if it wishes to consolidate its position in the rest of the country, it has to do much more than what it is doing. The party’s overall credibility has been low and the perception about the government’s performance too is worrying.

And if for some reason, the message goes out that the government and the party was not on the same page on key decisions, the fallout will be disastrous.

Only time will tell, how things will play out and how the Congress and the PMO will be seen as two sides of the same coin.

The results have clearly demonstrated that they were hugely influenced by the absence of former chief minister BS Yeddyuruppa as the spearhead of the party’s campaign in the state. There are many political analysts who believe that if Yeddyurappa would have been in the Saffron line up, the report card would not have been so heavily tilted towards the congress. Being the tallest leader and architect of the party in this Southern state, his humiliation was a factor which sunk the BJP.

It is being said that in dispensing with Yeddyurappa, the BJP leadership paid a heavy price. Unlike Sonia Gandhi who decided to go ahead with Virbhadra Singh as her party’s main mascot in Himachal Pradesh despite unsubstantiated corruption charges leveled against him by his adversaries, the BJP decided to sacrifice their strong man. The Congress president knew that the party had no chance without Virbhadra who is clearly the most popular leader in the hill state but also that charges against him were both baseless and handiwork of his rivals both inside and outside the party. She decided to gamble with him and the party reaped dividends and returned to power.

In Karnataka, veteran BJP leader LK Advani was keen from the very beginning to bring his protégé Ananth Kumar as the chief minister. Realising the caste factor would never allow this to happen, he tried his level best to dislodge Yeddyurappa. In fact, according to BJP insiders, Yeddyurappa was a victim of his own party’s inner power politics rather than that of the Congress. He was replaced as the CM and made the president of the state party unit. Finally circumstances were created so that he went out and formed his own outfit. This self-destruction exercise, which is being described by BJP spokespersons as their commitment to combat corruption, has boomeranged on the Saffron Brigade.

The moral of the two recent elections where the BJP has been humbled is that while Sonia Gandhi got it right in Himachal and backed Virbhadra, Advani and company got it wrong when they threw out Yeddyurappa. Secondly like in Himachal, the Narendra Modi factor did not work in Karnataka either. However, the consolation for the BJP is that if one goes by recent history, whoever wins Karnataka never forms the government in New Delhi. So there is still hope.

This dalit from Punjab who has been in a Pakistani jail since the last 22 years has slim chances of survival and unconfirmed reports have already stated that he was brain dead and the ventilator support was merely making his heart function. Family members of the prisoner who was brutally attacked inside the Lahore jail have returned to India after a disappointing trip to Pakistan and are planning to meet Congress president Sonia Gandhi to seek her intervention.

The official response of our High commission in Islamabad has been pathetic and what has happened also demonstrates how casually the entire incident has been dealt with. It was known that Sarabjit’s life was in danger and it was the responsibility of our diplomats there to ensure that he was given adequate protection as well as proper legal advice. Nothing was done and after this dastardly pre-mediated attack, the Pakistanis initially even denied Indian officials access. The access was apparently given only after it was declared that the prisoner’s chances of survival “were slim”. Thus they were unable to know firsthand what his condition was in the first few days.

Sarabjit’s family particularly his gutsy sister have been running from pillar to post and have not received any help except verbal assurances. They will be totally shattered if the news about Sarabjit’s passing away was to reach them in the near future.

This incident has been highlighted by the Indian media extensively and shows our government in an extremely poor light. Since this has happened in the election year, it will contribute to further eroding the image of the government, which needs immediate steps to correct the public perception about its functioning and effectiveness. Apart from this episode, what is happening in Ladakh is also being watched very closely by the people. The inability of the foreign office to deal with Beijing has created an impression that the Chinese were going to have the last word.

The UPA government whose foreign policy is essentially decided from the Prime Minister’s office must realise that both Pakistan and China are seen as countries that are not perceived by the common people to be friends of India. Therefore if matters relating to these countries with whom India has had wars in the past are to be dealt with, the government at no point should be seen as weak and wavering. Otherwise, it will have to bear the brunt of this negative public opinion.

Many top composers acknowledged her unbelievable range but often ignored her because they feared that the gifted Mangeshkar sisters who ruled the world of music would get offended. But Rhythm King, OP Nayyar who introduced Punjabi folk music in a big way in Hindi cinema saw her potential and used her to give some of the evergreen songs of the silver screen. Though he was obsessed with Asha Bhonsle whose career he helped to build, Shamshad’s voice in the superhit song leke pehla pehla pyar with both Asha and Mohammad Rafi stands out. It is said that whenever this song was shown in the theatres, audiences would clap in appreciation and applaud the score as well as the singers.

Both Shamshad and Rafi came from the same city and thus were the perfect foil to each other, besides being extremely suitable to sing Nayyar’s melodies.

The composer also used Shamshad in a popular duet with Kishore Kumar in the fifties. The song, meri neendon mein tum is amongst the unparalleled melodies. She sang kahin per nigahen kahin pe nishana, boojh mera kya naam re and after a break of many years, kajra mohabbat wala for the composer who once described her voice to be like a temple bell for its clarity and tone.

Shamshad also sang the famous Mughal-e-Azam qawali, teri mehfil mein kismat aazmah kar hum bi dekhenge along with Lata Mangeshkar under the baton of Naushad. It is said that while recording the qawali, the two vocalists shared the microphone. While Lata sang into the mike, Shamshad stood more than a foot away because of her enormous range. It is said that this would be a common practice whenever she sang a duet with any singer. For Naushad, she also sang, chhod babul ka ghar and a duet with Talat Mehmood, milte hi aaankhen dil hua diwana kisi ka‘ besides many more tunes.

Her followers will always recall her other super hits like, meri jaan meri jaan sunday ke sunday and mere piya gaye rangoon for C. Ramachandran, ek tera sahara and nain bhar aaye neer for Ghulam Haider and the immortal compositions by many other music maestros.

Shamshad Begum once stated that she had withdrawn herself from cut-throat music world since she no longer wished to be part of any kind of bitter politics. She spent her last years with her daughter Usha Ratra and son-in-law in Bombay after her husband Ganpat Lal Battoo passed away in the fifties. She was an ardent admirer of singer-actor KL Saigal and watched his film Devdas 14 times. The artiste was conferred the Padma Bhushan in 2009 and also the OP Nayyar Award, the same year.

Matters have got further complicated with some BJP leaders attacking Nitish Kumar and questioning his credentials while the Bihar chief Minister is also contributing to the confusion by his remarks.

First of all it is not the business of any political party to tell another political outfit even if it is an ally on who should be their leader. Secondly, Narendra Modi is not the BJP nominee as yet and may never be. Thirdly, even if he was the BJP candidate, the JD (U) has to assess its alliance with the saffron party in totality and not merely on the basis of one leader’s projection. Fourthly, the JD (U) needs the BJP in Bihar as much as the BJP needs the JD (U) for improving its electoral prospects.

So the question, which arises, is that why is there a public confrontation between these two parties. There may be many theories but a possible one, which is also plausible, is that the inner factional fight within the BJP is finding reflection in how the JD (U) is trying to set the agenda for its ally.

The BJP response so far has been feeble because many within the BJP do not want Modi to be the Prime Ministerial nominee and since they are scared to say so in public are expressing themselves through their ally. Significantly, a debate to bring back LK Advani into consideration for the top job has also started.

Obviously all this is being done to scuttle moves to have Modi for the top job. The Gujarat strongman perhaps realizes this and has thus suddenly withdrawn himself into a shell. He perhaps knows that in Delhi’s power politics, it is better to maintain total silence.

At another level, the JD (U)’s move to make BJP declare its prime ministerial nominee ahead of the polls is finding a reflection also in UPA’s politics, NCP superemo Sharad Pawar recently stated that he was going to ask the UPA chairperson to convene a meeting of the allies to discuss who would be projected as the coalition’s face for the next polls.

There is certainly a co-relation in what is happening both in the NDA and the UPA since in both cases, junior partners are aiming to dictate terms to senior partners. In NDA’s case, the BJP is facing an internal faction fight while in the case of Congress, the leadership is not as strong as it was in 2004 and 2009.

In any case, with Parliament reconvening next week, there is going to be a lot of politics. More politics will follow the Karnataka elections. Therefore it is going to be a season of politics.

On the BJP foundation day last week, Delhi BJP president Vijay Goel took everyone by surprise when he said that the next Lok Sabha polls will be held under the leadership of Advani who was also seated on the dais along with party chief Rajnath Singh. Though Goel later clarified that his statement was not meant to project Advani for the Prime Ministership but to only recognize his status as the top most leader of the party, his remarks brought to fore acute factionalism within the party. It has become evident that Modi will have to clear many hurdles within the Saffron Brigade if he has to get the nod for being the BJP’s main man in the next Parliamentary polls.

Advani’s camp has since been talking about his (Advani’s) capacity to lead from the front to make a strong case for a leader who has apparently been told by the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh not to contest the next Lok Sabha elections. Whether this is true is for the RSS to clarify but to imagine Advani in Lok Sabha without being the leader of his group will be something hard to believe.

There are many in the political arena who are wondering whether Advani is using the old ploy of Doves and Hawks to get another nomination for himself. Old timers may recall that at one point of time Advani himself was seen as a Hawk while Atal Behari Vajpayee was the Dove within the BJP. Ultimately Vajpayee got the Prime Minister’s job. In changed circumstances, Advani is that Dove, particularly after his Jinnah controversy and Modi is the Hawk. Obviously, Advani supporters may think that he will thus get it.

But than anyone with political understanding may also figure that for Modi, there are two obstacles before he is made the Prime Ministerial nominee. The first is to get the nod from his party and that means leaders of his own generation mostly. The second stage involves possible allies. But in the first stage itself, Modi will never allow from his position of strength any BJP leader who is of his own generation to get on to become the BJP’s PM nominee. If he finds that there was a difficulty for him, he would opt for Advani or even Murali Manohar Joshi rather than Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley or Rajnath Singh. This is because if anyone from his generation comes in, he or she will obviously have a long innings.

But what is also making things not too good for Modi is his frequent interactions in different places where some of the examples he has been giving are putting people off. For instance at one place he said that when you have your Tea do you know where the Milk comes from. It comes from My Gujarat. Someone should ask him where do the Tea leaves come from. The Milk is added only later. The reverse example can be that when you sit in a Car in Gujarat, do you know where it comes from? From Haryana.

Therefore, it would be in his own interest that he should maintain a low profile for sometime to consolidate his position within his own party.

But the way things are, there will be a lot happening inside the BJP.

Senior UPA ministers have claimed that there was no danger to the government as of now since no one has so far challenged the numbers backing the Manmohan Singh ministry.

However, there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that the government had been reduced to a minority after the Trinamool Congress led by Mamata Banerjee had pulled out last year and now with the DMK also doing the same, the numbers have further gone down.

Yes, if the UPA has managed to keep afloat it is primarily because the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party, which account for 43 MPs amongst themselves, are providing notional support from outside.

The second reason is that the BJP, the principal opposition party has not challenged the UPA on the floor of the House by moving a no confidence motion under rule 195 out of fear that the regional parties may gang up in the name of opposing communalism and defeat the motion.

This would thus provide both legitimacy and a lease of life to the government.

But many social activists including Anna Hazare and Arvind Kejriwal have alleged in the past that a section of the BJP was hand in glove with a section of the Congress and thus there was no imminent danger to the government.

The question, which has arisen after the DMK withdrawal of support, is not as much about the survival and stability of the government as it is of what could happen in the future.

The Congress has been losing credibility over a period of time and the same goes for its government at the Centre. Its managers have to come out with a political strategy to ward off the looming crisis.

This strategy has to have both short term and long term components as the next couple of years could actually see a period of instability coming about notwithstanding whether elections are held this year or later.

It is becoming increasing clear that the Congress faces the prospects of its worst performance in a Lok Sabha election and therefore has to figure out how to keep itself relevant in the political scenario which is fast emerging.

As stated in my article in HT on December 22 last year, the Congress may itself be compelled to go for an early election later this year.

This is because the grand old party is pitted against the BJP in a direct contest in four states in November and cannot afford to take any risks.

The risk is in form of a loss in all the four states-Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Chattisgarh.

If it loses, it will be a non-starter in the parliamentary poll next year and it will be in the party’s interests to have the Lok Sabha elections either along with these states or before them. This is naturally a call of the Congress High Command.

The ability of the Congress managers to sustain a minority government is also suspect and sooner or later, the truth will have to be faced.

Both Mulayam Singh Yadav and Mayawati will try to take as much as they can from the UPA but there has to be a point where the government has to decide enough is enough.

Secondly, the unreasonable demands by regional parties to influence India’s foreign policy have to also stop at some stage. Otherwise there is no end to this.

The country comes first followed by its citizens. It is not easy to comment on citizens of others countries, especially in the immediate neighborhood whatever the compulsions may be.

Overall, elections seem to be the only solution to address problems that are arising now.

If one election does not solve these problems, another one may have to follow. A single party rule is any day better than a coalition government and big parties should strive towards that objective to bring about stability.

The emphasis of the post mortem report that has been shared with the media so far has been that death was due to hanging. There is also the confirmation of a ligature mark, which has to be there in cases of strangulation or death due to asphyxiation. But the detailed report can easily establish whether it was a case of suicide or murder. The doctors have so far only stated that “death appeared to be suicidal”. But one of the doctors said that his tissues had also been sent to the forensic laboratory to rule out poisoning. This raises doubts about the cause of death and the autopsy board should have been more categorical in its findings, which were shared with the media.

What is also surprising is that if Ram Singh had indeed committed suicide as is being claimed by the Tihar jail officials, then why there was no mention of the state in which his body was. According to experts, in case of death by hanging, particularly at that hour, there must be a faecal discharge. In other words, the deceased’s clothes as also the scene of the incident should have had traces of his faeces and excretions. No mention of this was made on day one and by the time police reached, the spot may have been tampered with. Any experienced police officer can also make out what to expect in a case of hanging.

Secondly, there appears to be grave doubts on how a man with a deformed hand could make a rope so strong out of his sleeping mat without being detected and how he could hang himself from the ceiling without attracting attention. His cellmates would have surely heard the plastic bucket being kicked from under his feet and how would anyone believe that they slept through the entire episode.
Forensic experts can also easily tell by the angle of the ligature mark as to whether it was suicidal or homicidal. The family of the deceased is claiming that Ram Singh was murdered and then hung. All these questions need to be answered satisfactorily even if the deceased was an accused in one of the most heinous cases in our country. Justice has to be given to everyone.

Finally, the government must take strict view of the incident and take appropriate action against the Tihar jail staff responsible for laxity that led to this shocking death. There should be zero tolerance for such acts. The Inquest report should address all questions and come out with credibly answers.

He was one of the most trusted aides of Anna Hazare and subsequently broke away from him to form his own political outfit.

Of late Kejriwal has been taking up populist issues such as increase in power tariffs and the overall corruption in Delhi government thereby endearing him to the capital’s middle class in particular.

In fact, he is an iconic figure amongst middle classes and enjoys a very good image. His support base has been increasing gradually and there are a large number of resident welfare associations which support his cause. These include those who were a part of Delhi government’s Bhagidari initiative at one time.

Kejriwal may make his debut in electoral politics later this year when the elections to the Delhi assembly take place.

He is expecting great support from the citizens of this historic city whose trust in the Congress party and its government is not what it was at one stage.

But he and his group are new to the game of politics and thus may be doing certain things which could benefit the forces they are fighting against right now.

Delhi has for a long time had just two functional parties—the Congress and the BJP. Whenever a third force has come into play, one of these two parties has benefited.

The Congress took advantage of the presence of the Janata Party nominees in 1983 and the BJP came to power in 1993 when the Janata Dal also put up its candidates.

The situation could be similar in 2013 when the presence of a third force in Delhi will help the Congress in all probability. This belief is based on the assumption that the anti-Congress vote will be split between the BJP and the third force.

In any case, the middle classes were always the strength of the BJP but in Delhi they had turned towards Congress, partly because of Sheila Dikshit and partly because of Dr Manmohan Singh.

The middle classes are at present greatly disillusioned with the Congress and its leaders due to rising prices and allegations of rampant corruption.

The BJP has suffered because the middle classes shifted loyalty to Anna Hazare and activists with clean image such as Arvind Kejriwal.

The Saffron party has since been trying to woo the middle classes but there is no evidence till now that they have returned to its fold. But elections will be the ultimate test to determine the way this segment votes.
The speculation in political circles is that if the anti-Congress vote gets divided, the outcome will favour the return of the Congress in the capital.

Some opponents of Kejriwal also suggest that he and East Delhi MP Sandeep Dikshit have been close to each other and this could be a joint strategy of the Congress camp to ensure a fourth successive defeat for the BJP in Delhi.

To support this argument, it is pointed out that Sandeep Dikshit and late Vilasrao Deshmukh had played a major role in persuading Anna Hazare to break his fast at Ramlila ground when Anna’s team was still united and at that time Kejriwal was his principal aide.

But these suggestions have a huge share of political dimension and thus cannot be taken just on the face value.

It is therefore for Kejriwal to dispel any such view that he was inadvertently helping the Congress if he is serious at what he is doing right now.

Otherwise, he could be what Manpreet Badal was in Punjab and Keshubhai Patel was in Gujarat in 2012 assembly elections. Kejriwal has a great image right now and he should try to keep it intact with the right deeds.