DC Edit | Govt, Rahul Both Need To Tone Down Confrontation
Of late, Mr Gandhi has been targeting the government for the Indo-US trade treaty which the governments say has been finalised. The Union government has been anything other than transparent in the matter
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, wrote Samuel Johnson. Those who cannot stand criticism and those who consider power a tool to silence opponents and critics shall use patriotism as a façade to hoodwink the larger population while they move against their opponents.
The BJP-led Union government has been demonstrating its irritation at Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi’s criticism of the government and its actions. It has now put its full weight behind the substantive motion moved by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey calling for action against Mr Gandhi, including stripping him of the membership in the House, for his “anti-national statements”. The motion, if admitted by the Speaker, will entail a motion in the House which the ruling alliance can get through as it has the numbers.
Of late, Mr Gandhi has been targeting the government for the Indo-US trade treaty which the governments say has been finalised. The Union government has been anything other than transparent in the matter: statements keep coming from the White House about the details of the deal and the Union government makes approving noises. The farming community in the country has been restive about the bits and pieces of information that are coming out about the deal. It apprehends that there will be provisions in the deal which could take away farmers’ livelihoods as they cannot fight with the US farmers who have been at an advantageous position for several reasons, including the substantial government support, vis-à-vis Indian farmers. The government has been assuring them that agriculture and dairy are out of purview of negotiations but they are not convinced. It is a substantive issue, and Mr Gandhi has been taking up their cause, much to the chagrin of the ruling dispensation.
Mr Gandhi has raised the issue of the government position on the matter of border skirmishes with China in 2020. He questions the claims that there has been no Chinese incursion on the border and that the government has been fully on board. Mr Gandhi has been quoting from an unpublished book of then Army chief Gen. M.M. Naravane which, inter alia, suggests that there was a lag in the response of the political leadership to an emergent situation. Neither Gen. Naravane nor the government has denied the references in the book yet; the government has instead taken the position that the reference is not authenticated as it is from an unpublished book. The Delhi police has reportedly launched a multi-nation investigation into the leakage of the book, too.
The government can make a clean breast of the deal and assure the nation that the interests of its annadatas will be protected fully. It can also hold talks with the farming community and allay their fears, instead of making evasive and half-baked statements. Mr Gandhi can be legally proceeded against if he has broken some law with respect to his statements on border situation and the former Army chief’s book. However, it has chosen to resort to rhetoric instead, invoking patriotism and nationalism, and is angling to strip the Leader of Opposition of his membership of Parliament with the majority it commands in the Lok Sabha. The NDA has done it in the last Lok Sabha, and is spoiling to do a repeat of it in this House.
Substantive issues call for substantive answers and solutions based on fairness and a sense of justice, not substantive motions that can be decided based on who has the numbers. Invocation of nationalism and patriotism hardly help to address them.
