The Devastating Politics of India - Manan Vasudeva

The Devastating Politics in India

I would love to ask the audience what is national and what is not? And if something is anti-national who are the ones who to decide whether the said thing is anti-national or national? Anti-national states or means that something said is opposing for a country (oxford dictionary).And this Jnu case puts a very interesting debate in front of the nation today and that is “anti-national v/s freedom of speech”. So I tell you some of the key points about the JNU case which can rip the country apart.

So basically if we speak or write something honestly about our country, how can anyone can suit me just upon my opinion and put a legal charge – sedation. It’s just my opinion and I have a right to speech so how can someone put me behind bars? Yes, Kanhaiya Kumar (the president of the students union of Jawaharlal Nehru University) was arrested with the charge of sedation and was put behind the bars. So on what ground can anti-national be judged? I personally fell that anything which opposing for the country should be categorized as an anti-nationalist. The whole JNU case has shaken the world with a bombing a very big debate about anti-national or national. so basically a major party named Bhartiya Janta Party(BJP) is playing a major role in the whole jnu case as they have a affiliated party (ABVP) which is student council of the whole students union. Which in turn is pressurizing against the slogans taken (Pakistan Zindabad etc.) by the students gathering and blaming them as criminals and putting them behind the bars. However the eye witness of the gathering says that they haven’t heard any of the slogans and not even said. So basically the media is playing the key role in convincing the public and making the news with some masala. I can guarantee that this debate will rip the country apart. We can make the amendments in the law , we the citizen of the nation can change the country’s situation, we can do better than yesterday, all we believe in one power. Yes im talking about the monarch system that should be in our country as we can all see that democratic system cannot work the things out. Everyone needs a mentor in their life and a mentor over here we are talking about a king or a queen or dictator. So basically the law of the india and the system on which india runs causes major problems like this jnu case. In the end I would conclude that is charging a person with a person blaming him anti-nation and putting him behind the bars valid?

Manan Vasudeva            

20153004

Bloody marshes to Mothers’ bonkers, Love conquers all…

“To become an extremist is the easy way, but to reach a solution in this conflict through dialogue, and to find understanding, would be more helpful. If you can't be part of the solution, leave us alone. I really mean that”, accounts these Supermoms of Israel and Palestine who are becoming the new face of an Intifada (‘shake off’ in Arabic).

The historical context of women's non-political role in the Middle East was rather discouraging, however as these mothers on both sides are united in decrying their children's deaths in this decades old crisis, they are learning and exploring new ways to influence the fate of their countries against all obstacles. Can You Hear Me? , they ask as the fight for peace continues. There is new hope to come over the storm of catastrophe. In 1989, the women of both regions of conflict met in Brussels and discussed the importance of a resolution through negotiations and recognition of Palestine and a call for mutual recognition of peace. They suggested a two-state solution.

Though prospects for peace have subsided and flowed between Israelis and Palestinians, women peace activists have worked consistently to bring an end to the bloodshed. Ever since, many grassroots initiatives have been created to build cooperation, understanding and trust between Jewish women in Israel and Palestinian women in West bank and Gaza Strip. These exchanges also include rigorous dialogue, conferences, collaborations and several visits. Women’s Organizations continue to work together to come over poor social, economic and political conditions. They are empowering themselves and therefore the ability to play a role in advocating support for peace.

As women, they assert their power and move away from the stereotypical mindsets (of fear or focus on military engagement) of the conflict, which may also help to transform the entire conflict and make a difference. Clearly, War begins in the minds of men and so does Peace. What these women are doing not only opens up a world of opportunities to engage, with a genuinely gendered approach, but this crusade for equal representation and voicing their opinion to consideration, they are demanding peace from war. They cry for democracy and freedom from chaos and violence to Change.

Change is not easy, but they know there is bonding, there is friction, there are differences of opinion. But most of all, their anger and anguish is directed into a fast unfolding story about women who have hope and keep trying to hear each other and do not give up their work for peace.

2 STATES

Giving a detailed account of words we can say that constitution is the body of fundamental principles according to which a state is acknowledged to be governed. Also we can say that it is a set of laws that determines the central institutions and offices and power and duties of the state. Basically constitution is a set of checks and balances between all the branches of government, so that no one institution can have more power than other. Basically the Constitution has 3 branches i.e.:-

·         Executives

·         Legislatives

·         Judiciary

Executive branch is responsible for mainly initiating actions for the public good through the initiation of policies like our Hon’ble Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched a number of policies for the public good. Now Executives are also divided in two parts:-

·         Head of the state i.e. President

·         Head of the Government i.e. Prime Minister

India has both the executive officers where as in USA there is only the Head of the state.

Legislature is basically responsible for passing the laws and keeping the eye on the executives that whether they are working in a good sense or not. Basically Legislature is the law making branch. Legislature is formed by the chambers of the state which is Parliament. It can be unicameral i.e. one chamber or bicameral i.e. two chambers. India is a bicameral country as it has two chambers, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Both the chambers keep an eye on the executive officers to maintain the proper functioning of constitution.

US on the other hand, has the House of Representatives , the US senate  forming  the US congress. Congress is thus the bicameral legislature of the United States. Members are either republicans or democrats. Rarely any third party finds a place. These members are elected from districts. They serve these interests. These are similar to the constituencies in India. Difference is that the power of the centre is more in India and the power of the state governments in US is much more.

This help understands the importance of government in two different contexts. They are 2 answers to the same questions.

-          Baikunth Gupta

-          20153034

MEND- Terrorists or Freedom fighters?

Oil & poverty? Do these words fit together? It’s almost like an oxymoron, but these seeming antonyms may stick to each other while describing the densely populated Niger Delta. In fact the region, which lies in Nigeria, accounts for over 80 percent of the country’s total annual income but still faces a great degree of destitution.  It’s like blatant irony since the Delta is so abundant in natural resources, especially oil.

It’s not surprising that such conditions serve as incubators for rebellious groups. One such group is the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta also known as MEND. MEND is one of the largest militant groups in the area. It has been known to kidnap workers, attack oil fields, blow up pipelines, fight the military and participate in oil bunkering.

As I was writing this piece, I looked up the definition of terrorism, I used this explanation by Boaz Ganor as my template; "Terrorism is the intentional use of, or threat to use violence against civilians or against civilian targets, in order to attain political aims.” As I read further to decipher whether MEND is a terrorist organization or not initially I thought, yes it is. Except that they fit the prototype of a terrorist organization, they have also harmed the people of Niger Delta. They are the reason due to which 80% of the companies have shut down which has led to major unemployment especially among the youth. Moreover the development of the area has been impaired, for example the telecommunication activities.

Objectively if MEND’s activities are viewed, they can pass the terrorist threshold easily. But taking into consideration the cause they fight for which is the rights of the locals in a situation where there is powerful military oppression, one might want to re-think.

Not only does the oil extraction economically fail to benefit the region but a report by Essential Action and Global Exchange cited that the oil corporations in the Delta have threatened the livelihood of the local people; because of environmental pollution their jobs such as farming and fishing have been disrupted. There has been loss of property, price inflation and scarcity of drinking water. Organized protests usually lead to military repression. There have been some serious environmental and humanitarian violations in the Delta, which the government has in some cases instigated and other times turned a blind eye to.

MEND steals oil, disrupts the oil companies work to protect the people of Niger Delta. The government’s ignorance results in distrust and hatred towards the government, which in turn leads to groups such as these. The militant group should not be seen as a terrorist organization anyhow, since they are the ones who are fighting for basic rights. The government lacks legitimacy, although recently dictatorship was overthrown and democracy was embraced, the people have not really been won over by their rulers.  Legitimacy is hard to establish in Nigeria since the government on it’s own needs experience with time, the brutal military oppression shows lack of rule of law and there are a lot of ethnic conflicts. Till the time the government consolidates legitimacy in it’s country and protects the basic needs of it’s people, it cannot convict organizations such as MEND for terrorism since they’re just fighting for their rights and rightly deserve to be called freedom fighters!

Tahhira Somal
20153048


Works Cited: 
"Niger Delta Fund Initiative: Additional information on the Current Situation in the Niger Delta." <Earth Rights>. N.p., n.d Web.
Shah, Anup. "Nigeria and Oil." <Global Issues>. N.p., 10 June 2010. Wed 27 Feb.2016.
Hanson, Stephanie. "MEND: The Niger Delta's Umbrella Militant Group." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 22 Mar. 2007. Web. 27 Feb. 2016
https://quizlet.com/12065457/ap-comparative-government-chapter-8-nigeria-flash-cards/ "How to Define Terrorism [Sinai] Perspectives on Terrorism." <How to Define Terrorsim>. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2016.

   

                                                         

The Realm Of Religion In Politics -Prinssa Joby,20153036

It is not strange how religion holds a sway over politics and this is very much evident in many Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia where religion is the very essence of politics. When a monarchy like Saudi Arabia offers more restrictions to its people especially women, there are other Muslim countries like Turkey which are much more tolerant. Turkey being a secular country offers more freedom to women considering that it is a Muslim country with Muslim majority. But why are the approaches of both these countries different towards religion? Is it because Turkey is a parliamentary democracy whereas Saudi Arabia is a monarchy? One common ground we could find between these two countries is that both are Muslim countries with different approach towards the realm of religion in politics. I was taken aback when I came to know that hijab and other kinds of religious clothing were banned in Turkey (the ban has been lifted).  Considering the fact that Turkey is a Muslim country added to my surprise. The entire concept of Turkey as Muslim country made me think that they must be conservative like that of Saudi Arabia. Turkey which was once the centre of political power for Islamic world has changed drastically towards moderate and global Islam. How can a country which was once the centre of political power for Islamic world have a modern outlook on religion? Many people claim that it might be due to the non-Arab origin of the Turks or its stance towards Europe. Both Saudi Arabia and Turkey are good examples of how religion holds sway over politics. The purest form of politics is when it is not infiltrated by religion and other factors. The difference lies in the fact that Turkey is more tolerant and has a modern outlook towards religion and does not merge religion with politics whereas Saudi Arabia has a conservative outlook and has merged religion with politics. A rule can be called an actual rule only when religion is kept apart from politics and this is what Turkey has successfully done.  This difference in the approaches of the two countries might also be dependent on the type of government .Saudi Arabia which comes under the reign of the royal family might have a conservative look on politics while Turkey which is a parliamentary democracy has a more secular outlook. To all those who say that religion has always had and will have sway over politics, I would suggest that politics is possible without religion. Religion being a different entity should be kept away from politics.

                                                                             -Prinssa joby,20153036

Military: Guardians of National Interest

             Military: Guardians of National Interest

The military was devised as a tool to safeguard the domestic boundaries of a State. The greed for power has enabled to states to use their military to safeguard the interest of allied nations and themselves. Although the sovereignty of another state is no business of a state, the national interest of the state motivates it to use military force. The most obvious of user of military force to safeguard national interest is the United States. Ever since it dawn as a sovereign state, the United States has been involved in mote than a 100 conflicts. Most recent use would be in Iraq in effort to topple the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein who refused to trade his nations oil with US Dollars; this irked US officials leading to the Iraqi invasion under the pretense of WMD’s. China is also under the spotlight for claiming island in South China Sea, which may or may not be Chinese. Some unpopular examples are British involvement in Afghanistan during the Great Game or US involvement in Russia during Bolshevik Revolution. These are just some of the examples of the game we call National Interest.  

With the rapid economic growth and Militaristic Growth of India another player has the joined the game of National Interest. The question remains whether India will be able to use Military Force as effectively as the US, UK, Russia or China in order to bolster it Strategic and Economic interests.

Mohammed Ali Khan

20153038

The ballot is stronger than the bullet

“The efforts of the government alone will never be enough. In the end, the people must choose and the people must help themselves.” By: John F. Kennedy.

Better the elections process of the country; better the politics of the country. Therefore more than government, public should put an effort on improving politics and electing the representative of the country. For better understanding lets go through the election process of US and India. This will help you to know where do we lack and how election is the backbone of Democracy.

US election process:

People often talk about US elections, it has been said that US election is best form of democratic elections and also fair enough for every citizen. US election has a long drawn process, it not only take weeks but months. It is also most open form of election, as the candidates are directly voted by the people. Therefore in India political parties elect its candidate, which is in comparative to US is not democratic and fair. There are four steps in which process go through:

Primaries- in this preceding people elect their candidate. Which starts in January though the main elections are held in November.

The convention- The main goal of a national party convention is to unify party members behind the party's platform and nominees. Thousands of delegates gather to rally support for the platform and to nominate candidates for president and vice-president.

The campaign- this is the shortest period of the process where campaigning is done by massive amount of people through huge publicity which are highly funded. The Most interesting part is that the debate between the candidates while campaigning is  televised world wide.

The election day- The elections are always held on the first Tuesday succeeding the first Monday in the month of November when the votes are counted and an initial result is announced within 12 hours after closing of the polls followed by the counting of the votes after which the whole process proceeds towards the electoral college. Each state has a number of Electoral College members and the candidate who wins the most votes in a particular state wins the state’s entire bunch of Electoral College members. Finally, when a candidate gets the majority of votes across states, the elections are over and then lastly, the electoral college members votes for the president.

The election process in India:

The Election Commission of India is an autonomous body responsible for administering election processes, headed by The Chief Election Commissioner of India. initially a voter’s list is prepared and voting cards are made. The Indian states are geographically divided into 543 constituencies representing each candidate, which then file nominations at the office. The Returning Officer scrutinizes the nomination papers very carefully if dissatisfied; the candidate is officially stopped from contesting election for six years. The parties issue their Election Manifestoes, which is “a formal Statement of the programme and objectives of a political party”. There are strict regulations, which ensures that no party can exceed the required election expenses. The parties and the candi­dates usually make use of these techniques in order to carry their message to the voters by public meetings, rallies and advertisement through media. Booth-wise counting was preferred for one more reason. Thus, the candidate who obtains the highest number of votes is declared elected.

The power of purple rules:

After looking at the election procedures of both the nations, I can firmly stand for India as it’s a living example of free and fair elections having a multi-party system. In US there is a two-party system which really don’t give people a lot of choices which means that there are less number of candidates representing just few sections of the society leading to restricted policies whereas on the other hand India’s election procedure stands the true test of democracy, representing almost every community and enforcing effecting policies for the same.

 But is it ethical to  take in account the election procedures of the nation to determine a true democracy?

                                            

                                                                                    - Purna Agrawal

                                                                                               20153033