The recent UK election has certain outcomes that might be interesting for the Indian mass. They are as follows –
1.) Keith Vaz and Valerie Vaz of the Labour Party have become the first brother-sister duo to jointly enter the House of Commons since 1950s. Their ancestral root lies in Goa.
2.) Indian origin Priti Patel has become the first Conservative Party woman of Indian origin to be elected to the UK Parliament.
3.) Priti Patel and Valeri Vaz have also become the first women of Indian origin to enter UK’s directly elected national legislature.
4.) Indian origin Marsha Singh has again won from the Bradford West constituency, an area often referred to as “Little Pakistan” as the majority of the local population is of Pakistani descent. In fact Marsha Singh has been winning this constituency since 1992. It is notable that his opponents have always fielded Pakistani origin candidates against him. And yet he has managed to retain his constituency which is, I repeat, dominated by Pakistani origins.
Congrats guys! You have really made us, the citizens of your ancestral country, proud. We wish you all a rewarding political career in the UK.
A Pakistani success
Shabana Mahmood has become the first woman of Pakistani origin to enter the UK Parliament.
Congrats sister! May you achieve the zenith of success in your chosen vocation, and make your ancestral country proud of you.
A tight slap for the anti-immigration hawks
The anti-immigration, far-right British National Party has failed to win a single seat, despite the fact that they fielded 300 candidates. The Asians owe a huge thanks to the forward thinking people of the UK, who rejected downright the flawed jingoism that British National Party was trying to sell.
News Courtesy: The Times of India, New Delhi, 8th May 2010.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Friday, May 7, 2010
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Change of Guard in Japan – After 50 Years
A historic political change took place in the Asian neighbourhood, when Japan’s main opposition party Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) overthrew the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in the recent general election, after an almost unbroken rule by LDP for half a century.
For quite some time the Japanese voters had been highly displeased with the ruling party for the strong economic crisis that Japan has been going through for around 20 years, witnessing high level of unemployment and other unpleasant factors that accompany a struggling economy. Moreover, there was no sign of any improvement in the near future, which could encourage the common people to retain faith on LDP. Therefore there is nothing surprising that the Japanese voters got LDP ousted. Rather what may be surprising is how they could tolerate LDP for such a long time.
However, DPJ has no time to cherish the elusive victory that they have at last managed to grab. They are now responsible for bringing back the country’s failing economy back on its feet. They must realize that actually it was not their victory, but the loss of LDP. The actual objective of common people was not to bring DPJ to power, but to get LDP out of power. So, instead of patting their own back for the electoral results, they should swing into action immediately. At the same time they must remember that there should not be any over-enthusiasm, no desperation to bring a sudden improvement in the economy. Any hasty act can result in further worsening of the situation. Rather, they should first make a proper, all-round study of the scenario, identify the loopholes and draw backs, and chalk out a roadmap, and then proceed.
We all know about the resilience of our Japanese friends. The way they bounced back after being demolished by US atom bombs is almost like folklore. And we all believe that the Sun of economic prosperity will again rise in this “Land of the Rising Sun”.
Photo Courtesy - www.newsweek.com
Friday, August 28, 2009
Goodbye Ted
So Edward Kennedy is no more? When I got the news, it was not that I was depressed (after all, he was not exactly a great leader, and certainly not a world leader). But yes, I of course felt a sort of vacuum. After all, who can deny this fact that the phrase "Kennedy Family" rings a music in our ears (though Kennedys, including J.F.K., did have their share of draw backs)? And therefore it was certainly sad to know that an old guard of the family - a legacy - was gone.
Edward Kennedy may have failed to hold the highest political office of his country (except in the Jeffrey Archer novel Shall We Tell The President?, where he was portrayed as the US President). But it must be acknowledged that he proved himself to be a worthy successor of the legacy left behind by J.F. Kennedy (and Robert Kennedy, to some extent), and established himself as one of the most successful Senators that the US Congress has ever had. And that was not a low achievement.
May his soul rest in peace.
Photo Courtesy - www.topnews.in
Monday, August 25, 2008
Ruling Coalition in Pakistan Suffers Crack
Just the other day – in my last posting – I had written that now Musharraf was out, it was the time for real test for the sustainability of the ruling coalition in Pakistan. Some political watchers had already started saying that the common objective of ousting Musharraf was the only binding force between the two major constituents of the ruling coalition, and now it was time for the coalition leaders to prove those political watchers wrong.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
My posting had barely gathered dust when the world witnessed what it had already anticipated – a crumbling of the coalition with Nawaz Sharif’s party pulling out of the same. Reason? Differences of opinion with Zardari & Co. over key issues, such as the reinstatement of the judges sacked by Musharraf and selecting the candidate for the Presidential election to be held on 6th September (Nawaz’s party wants an apolitical candidate for the position, while Zardari reportedly wants to contest for the position himself).
Differences of opinion in a coalition of government are nothing unusual. But the coalition partners must have the maturity and political acumen to sort them out amicably, without letting the same threaten the sustainability of the coalition itself. What happened in Pakistan does not only reflect the political undependability of the parties of Nawaz Sharif and Zardari, but it raises serious question about the dependability of the so called political parties of Pakistan as a whole. After all, how can the common people of Pakistan now afford to bank on parties which fail to sort out issues and part ways at the drop of a hat, eventually leading the country to political instability? Have the coalition leaders given a thought to the message that their action has sent to the mass?
The image of these so called democratic leaders was in any case not very bright in Pakistan. They actually managed to grab power in the last election by piggybacking on the shabby image of Musharraf. The mass actually voted out the dictator, and not voted in these leaders. So what these leaders should have immediately done after coming to power was to focus on good governance, thus brightening their image and enhancing their administrative credibility. And what they did was just the opposite.
And what is worse is that this development will pave the way for the revival of the army (as I had said in my last posting). And if the army does manage to exploit the present turmoil and grab power, then they will have an extra advantage this time. And what is that?
Well, they can claim that the democratic political parties are absolutely not dependable, as they cannot sustain their internal problems, let alone broader issues faced by the nation. And thus depending on them means ushering in turmoil, disturbances and political instability. On the other hand the army is an organized and disciplined institution, determined to achieve something for the nation.
Needless to say that the common Pakistanis will instantly buy such propaganda by the army, with the bitter experience of depending on democratic political parties fresh in their mind. And then it will be extremely difficult for the democratic leaders to oust the army, no matter who the dictator is. In fact, they will not even have the guts to approach the common people for support, as the latter will always ask those leaders to explain the reason for their failure to retain the power that they had been given the last time.
Friday, August 22, 2008
End For The Musharraf Regime
He had tried his best to avoid it, and had successfully delayed it for quite some time. But at last Musharraf had to accept the inevitable – his ouster. With the threat of a disgraceful impeachment looming over his head, the embattled President announced his resignation in a press conference on 18th August, 2008.
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
In a carefully constructed speech with an emotional undertone, the former dictator gave a detailed description of all the achievements made by his government, ranging from the ones made in trade and commerce (like attracting foreign investments) to those in education, social development, etc. Like shrewd politician he also admitted that he may have made certain mistakes, and justified the same on the basis of “Man is to err” philosophy.
Significantly, he claimed that he was not afraid of facing the impeachment motion, as all the charges against him were “wrong”. Rather, he claimed to be confident of winning the impeachment motion. But still he decided to put down his papers, as he felt that any such action against the President of the country would make Pakistan lose its face in the international arena. This, as per Musharraf’s version, was the only reason why he decided to quit.
No matter how strong the opposition against him was, Musharraf’s ouster would not have been easy if he managed to win USA’s support. In fact, USA was his last refuge, and Musharraf had heavily banked on the country which had considered Musharraf’s Pakistan a significant ally in the war against terrorism. However, Bush and his companions decided to keep themselves away from the internal politics of Pakistan, leaving Musharraf helpless against the huge tide of opposition against him.
Well, now comes the crucial question. Now Musharraf is out, what will happen to the ruling coalition? There have been some sporadic comments that anti-Musharraf movement was the only unifying factor for the coalition partners having lots of differences over various issues. In fact, they had joined hands only to address the common political objective, i.e. the ouster of Musharraf. With that common political objective achieved, will they be now able to retain their friendship?
Their differences of opinion have already been out on various occasions, which raise serious questions about the sustainability of the coalition. One key issue, that is threatening the coalition’s sustainability, is the issue of reinstating the judges suspended by Musharraf. In fact, the difference of opinion on this issue has gone to such an extent that just the other day Nawaz Sharif threatened to pull out of the coalition.
The leaders of the coalition partner must sort out all these issues as soon as possible, and ensure a stable government aimed at offering a clean and effective administration. The failure of the democratically elected government to sustain its internal problems will not only pave the way for the army’s revival (with either Musharraf or Kiyani or somebody else at the helm), but will also seriously damage Pakistan’s common peoples’ faith and confidence on the country’s democratic political parties. After all, how can a coalition claim to solve the country’s problems when it cannot solve its internal problems?
Photo Courtesy: www.apna.tv
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Revival of Democracy in Pakistan. But Does That Guarantee A Better Governance?
The general election in Pakistan has dethroned the ruling establishment, paving the way for the revival of "democratic" political parties. It is certainly a great news for all democracy loving people not only in Pakistan, but all over the world.
But there is one key question that nobody can afford to overlook. Does the revival of "democratic parties" necessarily guarantee a good governance? It is a harsh fact that the record of elected Pakistani leaders has not been very bright, with almost everybody's tenure being marred by corruption, nepotism, etc. The same is true about the tenures of Nawaz Sharif and Late Benezir Bhutto, whose parties have been in the forefront in the recent "fight" against Musharraf's dictatorship. In fact, when army had taken over in 1999 under Musharraf, there was huge jubilation among common Pakistanis in various parts of the country, as they had become tired of the misrule of so called popularly elected leaders.
Anyways, the revival of democratic rule is always welcome. Let us hope that the democratic political parties will now make a proper use of the opportunity granted to them by the common Pakistanis, the opportunity to run the country, and will drive their country towards all round prosperity. Our best wishes for them.
But there is one key question that nobody can afford to overlook. Does the revival of "democratic parties" necessarily guarantee a good governance? It is a harsh fact that the record of elected Pakistani leaders has not been very bright, with almost everybody's tenure being marred by corruption, nepotism, etc. The same is true about the tenures of Nawaz Sharif and Late Benezir Bhutto, whose parties have been in the forefront in the recent "fight" against Musharraf's dictatorship. In fact, when army had taken over in 1999 under Musharraf, there was huge jubilation among common Pakistanis in various parts of the country, as they had become tired of the misrule of so called popularly elected leaders.
Anyways, the revival of democratic rule is always welcome. Let us hope that the democratic political parties will now make a proper use of the opportunity granted to them by the common Pakistanis, the opportunity to run the country, and will drive their country towards all round prosperity. Our best wishes for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
