UP BY-POLL RESULTS: DEFEAT OF HATE POLITICS…SETBACK FOR BJP, NOT MODI; BIG BOOST FOR MUALAYAM!

17-9-2014 1.20PM IST

Medhaj News: Interview with Amaresh Misra, Editor-in-chief, Medhaj News…

Q. You have worked with Times of India in 1990’s as a roving correspondent in UP, you are also an analyst of UP politics. Medhaj News was the only organization to predict that SP will bag 4-6 seats. All other channels were talking about a clean BJP sweep, and seeing the recent result of LS polls, BJP was supposed to win by majority. Then how you and your team got it right?

Ans. Even during the LS elections, BJP’s tally of 73 seats sounded a bit abnormal. Even if we discount allegations of rigging etc, there was still some problem somewhere… imagine Mayawati ending up without a seat. During the LS elections on the ground also, yes there was a tremendous pro-Modi undercurrent in UP, but it was not as huge as would translate into 73 seats. But it was a wave election and in a wave you can’t spell out where the wave will stop...so it is possible that BJP got 73 seats by fair means. At the same time, the UP LS results came out of deep polarization. One should never forget the background of Muzaffar-nagar riots, something which UP had not seen since 1947 -– and 2014 elections being held immediately after the mini-holocaust type event. This time around though, raising of ‘Love-jihad’ slogan and speeches by BJP leader Adityanath failed to polarize the electorate.

Q. So was this obvious to you before 13th September?

Ans. I saw two major differences between Muzaffar-nagar and incidents like Thakurdwara in Moradabad. Non-BJP parties were much more alert to the threat of polarization. Rahul Gandhi made a statement questioning why ‘Love-jihad’ type incidents are occurring only around areas where by-polls are due. Also, Mulayam Singh Yadav, I think instructed Akhilesh to be more firm and not let the communal cauldron boil; Mulayam also kept Azam Khan in the background to prevent polarization. The UP administration also was strict in subduing equally the communalism of both the camps…

Q. Are you trying to say…

Ans. Yes, I think keeping both Adityanath and Azam Khan at bay was a clever strategy which prevented polarization and helped pull UP out of an abnormal political situation. Mulayam Singh and Rahul Gandhi must be congratulated for the part they played in nipping the politics of polarization in the bud. This kind of politics harms the society and nation as a whole. Results of both Bihar and UP by-elections, prove that unity of non-BJP parties proves to be a barrier which the BJP is unable to cross; in Bihar, Lalu, Nitish and Congress were united; and in UP Mayawati did not contest, and Congress remained passive. This helped in consolodation of social forces behind Samajwadi Party which people saw is giving an equal fight to BJP.

Q. Where was Amit Shah? What was Modi’s role?

Ans. I was quite pleasantly surprised the way Prime Minister Modi conducted himself during these elections…

Q. What do you mean? You have been a strong Modi critic!

Ans. Yes, but the Narendra Modi before and after 16th May -- two different political personalities. I have to commend Prime Minister’s role in voting against Israel during the Gaza crisis in the UN which was a continuation of India’s non-aligned foreign policy. I must also commend the way Prime Minister withstood western pressure, took a pro-peasant nationalist stand by not signing the WTO agreement.

Q. What does this have to do with UP by-elections?

Ans. In politics, macro currents are intertwined finely with micro ones. If you see, Prime Minister Modi, as per his calling of being a leader of the nation and not just a party, distanced himself amicably from the ‘Love-jihad’ card. Amit Shah also did not come to UP.

Q. Are you saying that somewhere along, BJP election campaign shifted from Modi’s developmental plank to old type of politics?

Ans. Yes, I feel that way; the way Prime Minister is trying to bring in investment and boost development in India was not highlighted by BJP during the by-polls. Issues like India’s admirable stand on Gaza and WTO also were not propagated as achievements of a BJP government at the centre. It baffles me how and why this happened; the UP BJP just frittered away all the goodwill which PM Modi had generated during the first three months of his rule.

Q. Wasn’t price rise an issue?

Ans. The UP by-election results show the fastest anti-incumbency ever; some people are talking about ten years of UPA anti-incumbency and three months of NDA’s anti- incumbency! The Indian electorate is always very sensitive to the issue of price rise, I would say extra-sensitive. Price rise did play a role in BJP’s defeat in, not just UP, but also Rajasthan and Gujarat.

Q. What was the role of the Media?

Ans. I think the mainstream Indian media is controlled by a right-wing mindset. The media was not very happy with the nationalist stand taken by the PM in Gaza and WTO and it exaggerated anger on price rise which actually is a product of the economic policy being currently pursued, is a much larger issue with macro economics being involved…

Q. But don’t you think it was the media that built up Narendra Modi?

Ans. Yes, they did; but it would be a travesty to say that Modi won 2014 LS because of media’s support. Vast numbers of Indians genuinely felt that only Narendra Modi can lead India at this juncture. The opposition was badly divided and discredited which led to BJP getting a decisive mandate. But the largely corporate controlled media overreached…

Q. What do you mean by overreach?

Ans. By overreach I mean that the media started assuming that they could dictate their agenda to the new PM. Most of media honchos are a product of the 90’s and have little knowledge of Indian political traditions since 1947. If you look at Modi’s first speech in Parliament, immediately after the 16th May election results, he openly said and I quote “No one should think that the past governments did nothing... All Indian governments tried their best to build the nation in their particular time…and I will strive to carry forward the tradition”

Q. But are you trying to appropriate Modi for the ‘secular’ establishment?

Ans. Not at all; in any case, I am a secular nationalist and not just ‘secular’; but there is dialectics involved here. Modi is today’s leader and he has his own idea of how to build India which might go beyond the idea held by the ‘secular’ establishment. But the position of the Indian PM is such that you have to blend change with continuity. PM Modi understands this perfectly; though the by-election results are a setback for BJP, they have not really dented Modi’s image as such…