India's Experiment with Democracy: The Life of a Nation Through Its Elections: A Review

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

India's Experiment with Democracy: The Life of a Nation Through its Elections

S Y Quraishi, IAS (retd)

New Delhi: Harper Collins 2023

Shri S Y Quraishi I A S (retd) has written a hastily written book on Indian Elections in which all the talking points of George Soros and his Merry Men who scream about India being a flawed "democracy" in which "back sliding" of norms has become endemic are sprinkled in ample measure all through this badly written and sloppily edited book. We expect some quality from men who hold high Constitutional Office and I am sorely disappointed having perused the turgid pages hoping for insight and elucidation. And both were not forthcoming, unfortunately.

As the Chief Election Commissioner during the Man Mohan Singh regime, Shri S Y Quraishi for reasons that are quite obscure fails to highlight the two most important dangers faced by Indian Democracy: Corruption and Dynastic Politics. His tortured attempt to gloss over the conviction of Rahul Gandhi for his conviction in a criminal case of defamation shows bias in favor of the Congress and his insinuation that the case was instigated as vendetta makes one wonder about the quality of his judgement. He cites the Lily George judgement and is certainly aware of the consequences that stem from conviction. The purchase of criminals over Indian politics is hinted throughout the book but there is studied silence on Shahabuddin and Atiq Ahmed, the two most egregious instances of criminals masquerading as leaders. Giving more powers to the Election Commission of India to disqualify candidates is hardly a solution as this provision is likely to be used selectively on ideological grounds. Identity politics is reprehensible in whatever form it takes.

Apart from overweening bias, the book is flawed in that it takes a standard instrumental line when it comes to Democracy, Elections and Politics. The Indian Constitution does not mention Political Parties or their role in the affairs of the State and hence we can raise the question is the multi party democracy that flourishes in India alien to the letter and spirit of the Constitution. If political parties are not mentioned then it logically follows that defection cannot be regarded as an offence as the Constitution does not recognise the existence of political factions. This point is not addressed by Shri Quraishi though one of his predecessors Shri Navin Chawla thought it prudent to let the cat among the pigeons. Political Parties get legal status only through the enabling legislation, Representation of Peoples' Act. The founders of the Indian Constitution were perhaps aware of the ill of party democracy and hence avoided even according political parties constitutional recognition. 

The  Prime Minister has spoken of One Nation one Election as a solution to the constant election fever that grips the country. The Media has the distracting habit of reading election results as though state elections are referenda on the Central Government. This vital debate is not addressed except in a perfunctory casual manner. He rightly rejects NRI voting right but seems to bend towards allowing migrant voters the right to vote. Elections is India are in a federal context and the individual state must remain the locus of elections. On the Model Code of Conduct Shri Quraishi seems to think that giving it statutory powers will enable the Commission to be more effective. I think this will only lead to more litigation on the implementation of the code. 

Shri Quraishi seems to give far too much importance to Political Parties. May be for the Election Commission of India they remain its prime clients. However, political parties with a few honourable exceptions, have failed to maintain inter party democracy, failed to submit their election accounts to the Commission, failed to nominate candidates with good track record, and most have circumvented democracy by openly embracing dynastic fascism as the norm. Regional political parties are particularly prone to this tendency. And he has also failed to investigate the pernicious and corrosive practice of distributing money to the electorate. The Tirimangalam By election brought this before the Nation. And the author is discreetly silent on the huge sums of money seized during Elections. In Tamil Nadu, container lorries stuffed with currency notes were seized and till this day we do not know how the Election Commission of India disposed off the case. And the example of the Sivagangai Parliamentary Election result is still a lingering sore. Quraishi ignored all substantial issues dealing with money and crime in Indian elections. 

There is a great deal of repetition in the book. Passages are repeated verbatim and this only shows bad editing and poor writing and drafting. On page 218 and pg 222 we find the same sentence repeated dealing with corrupt practices. We find such instances throughout the book. It seems this hastily written book is designed to reinforce the George Soros and its affiliate Institute of Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) propaganda against India. India will remain a democracy in spite of the  poison emanating from white societies and their ideological partners and sepoys. 

Why should India and its former Election Commission have a  view on the elections in USA.  On pg 288 he write that President "Trump sought to cancel the 2020 election results an declare himself the victor". This is absolute nonsense. Trump sought to raise questions about the legal validity of the elections and nothing more. We do not expect a functionary of the Election Commission to accept uncritically the talking points from Washington Post and New York Times. His laboured effort to defend Muslim social practices as followed by Taliban in Afghanistan is not worth dealing with as a religion is judged not by what it preaches but what it practices. In any case that is an exercise in futility as far as the indigenous people of India are concerned.

This is a bad book. Written in a style that is full of North Block officialise and we are left with the wisdom that the Chief Election Commissioner ranks higher in the pecking order as seen in the Warrant of Precedence compared to a Principal Secretary. Hierarchy once again. 

The Great Game all Over Again: Durand Line and India's Diplomacy

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The disgraceful exit of USA from its 20 year involvement in Afghanistan, has presented India with an unenviable plight. Having backed the Northern Alliance and having spent 3 billion US dollars in various social and economic projects for the improvement of the Afghan people, India stares at two distinct  possibilities. First, the possibility of increased militancy in Kashmir is something that the Indian Security Establishment will have to consider. Second, the rise of Taliban as the ruling political hegemon in Afghanistan raises the possibility of a revival of the internal strife, the Stasis, as Thucydides termed it. Given the complex ethnic mosaic of Afghanistan the civil war may lead to certain unforeseen outcomes. The disintegration of Afghanistan as a Nation State with the Tajik and Uzbeg territories joining their ethnic cohorts across the border. More likely the Durand Line will once more become the bone of contention between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the state of Afghanistan.

Sir Mortimer Durand 

Lord George Curzon who had a deep and profound insight into the strategic requirements of the Indian frontier maintained that the Durand Line came close to being a "scientific frontier" for the Indian Empire. The Treaty of Gandamak, 1879 had established British control over the hyber Pass and the Amir of Afghanistan surrendered the right to conduct an independent foreign policy making the kingdom a satellite in the orbit of the British Indian Empire. As can be imagined this Treaty was highly umpopular with the Aghans and Sir Louis Cavagnari who was appointed Minister was assassinated in Kabul by an exited mob.

The response of the British was swift and ruthless. Three Armies were fielded against Afghanistan. General Roberts was to lead a force to Kabul, General Stewart was to occupy Kandahar and General Bright was to march to Jalalabad.  The forces of Amir Abdul Rehman were defeated and Afghanistan was forced to accept British demands and make territorial concessions. 

In November 1893 the Amir appended his signature to a one page document in English and he did not sign the accompanying map. Sir Mortimer Durand and his compatriot Sir Salter Sykes had succeeded in making the Amir sign away more than half the Pashtun territories of his Kingdom. Chitral, Bajour, Swat and Waziristan were essentially annexed and became the North West Frontier Province and till this day form part of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Kafiristan, an indigenous non Islamic territory was handed over to the Amir as concession and he promptly set about Islamizing the area. 

The Duran Line introduced a highly volatile element in the relationship between Afghanistan and the British Empire in India and after the War in 1919 Afghanistan was forced to accept the Durand Line as the border. The present Taliban rulers of Afghanistan have already said that they do not accept the Durand Line a nd have laid claim to the entire Pashtun speaking areas of Pakistan and this would also include Peshawar. The establishment of a unified Pashtun Homeland by combining the territories on both sides of the Durand Line is a possibility that India may have to confront. Iran has already stated that they do not recognize the Taliban and have asked it to gain democratic legitimacy. Herat, Kandahar, Mazar i Sharif and Kabul have all been part of Safavid territories before Ahmed Shah Abdali seized these cities. It is quite likely that Iran may seek to gain territory at the expense of a faltering and failing Afghan state.

India has to deal with this situation.  What will India do? It is time to enter the Great Game and the stakes are high. If played well India can achieve its long cherished goal of reclaiming the parts of Kashmir that are now occupied by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. And of of course Gilgit and Baltistan can also be regained. There are opportunities for India if the game is played well And dangers if  India does not seize the opportunities.

  

The Massace of the Innocents at Peshawar, Pakistan

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The massacre at the Army Public School located near the Cantonment at Peshawar has shocked the world and India is aghast at what happened. A two minute silence was observed in educational institutions all long the length and breadth of the country. Cynics might say that this is only a ritual for public consumption. However as a teacher myself and as a parent I, an ordinary citizen felt the pain and anguish of the ordinary Pakistani man and woman. To dismiss the gesture as a mere choreographed display of hypocritical concern will not help anyone. Unfortunately there are sick elements in the Pakistani civil society who have gone to town blaming India for the massacre and this propaganda is only to serve the purpose of diverting attention from the real perpetrators of this outrage. The longer Pakistan lingers in the twilight zone of denial the longer tit will suffer. India cannot do such an act not because it is an innocent country of lambs, but because such attacks do not serve India's interests in the region.

The Pakistani Taliban has taken responsibility for the attack which killed 132 children and 9 teachers. The motive behind the attack is said to be the ongoing Army operations against the Taliban which is going on in the North West Province, the Kim country. Apparently, the Taliban hoped to weaken the resolve of the Pakistani Army in hunting down the militants in the mountain territory. However, they seem to have seriously miscalculated an the Pakistani Army corrupt and criminal force that it is, will not forgive a blatant attack on its own raison d'etre.  I think a turning point has been reached, the tipping point which will see a dramatic changes on the ground. I wish the Army well in its hunt.

Is India responsible for what is going on in Pakistan. I have no doubt that some financial and perhaps military support is being given to some secessionist groups in the Baluchi region. However beyond that India's responsibility  lies in the fact that at the time of Partition the Pakthtoons who were led by the Frontier Gandhi were staunchly against Partition and the silly criminal man called Nehru sold them short and therein lies the roots of the problem. Nehru who wanted his seat of power by all means possible just allowed the Pakhtoons to be swallowed by the Pakistani state in the same manner that Baltistan too was taken over. Had there been an exchange of population, then the demographic character of Pakistan would have changed and the mohajirs would have been in the majority. Since the demand for Pakistan essentially came form this section, they would have defended the nation by not leaning on Islamic fundamentalism as the ideological glue to hold the disparate nation together.

India has to answer the question raised above.