Lasting Rose

One day, when Barack Obama will no more be the President of the U.S., someone will venture to make a movie on his life. It will be almost impossible to find an actor willing to enact the President's role because the performance of the future actor will be measured against that of the President himself, who in real life was forced to live through the toughest of theatrical moments, like when he addressed the Newton School gathering after the massacre.

No actor, however capable, can bring out the agony of the president, who has to suppress his internal turmoil and present a different face to the nation for the sake of the position he is holding. No director can pull off visualisation of a complex surge of emotions of a whole nation behind a tragic event like that happened in Newtown, which the President was subjected to over and above his own turmoil.
There are moments when a president has to deliver inspiring speeches to convey his vision or unify the country against adversity. Then there are occasions no one wishes to face in life, when the President is expected to address the nation, to say something, to console, assure and somehow alleviate the collective burden on the nation's psyche. The Newtown School speech in the aftermath of the massacre of twenty innocent children and six of their teachers was one such testing moment for President Obama.
Though several tragedies have occurred during his presidency where he had to deliver consoling and supporting messages to the nation, the Newtown tragedy, coming right after a very divisive election in which he won against all odds, must have been very different and difficult for the president.
It is hard to understand, why Barrack Obama is seen as the first "black" President by many Americans and even by leading media though he was born to a white Caucasian lady. Though for the rest of the world this is a non issue, it is the perception. However, this must have been the most difficult aspect for President Obama, who had to face and address a town whose population and the bereaved they came to mourn are almost entirely white.
No one can deny that such was the ferocity and divisiveness of the politics which only just ended in his re-election, which many in the nation still do not accept, at least have great difficulty to reconcile. No one can deny that the second amendment, which the President could do little about and something which his audience hold sacred had to do with the tragedy.
That, President Obama, as a very loving parent of two children couldn't hold his tears while announcing the tragedy that occurred at Newtown as a national tragedy, didn't somehow alleviate his dilemma. Where trust was at best fragile, it must have been very difficult to find the right words to express and communicate something meaningful both to the community and to the nation at large.
The Newtown tragedy has occurred in the Christmas season, when everyone has to rejoice and not bereave, has rendered the event poignant beyond imagination. Mundane call of Presidential duties in the face of the Fiscal Cliff which he has very little time to sort out before the nation fall off it and the nomination of his future secretary of state must have been adding immense pressure to his working life. Yet the President was duty bound to come to the bereaved, and address and console as the supreme commander.
President Obama did come to Newtown, and delivered the most difficult speech of his presidency with amazing grace. With measured words delivered in a way only Barack Obama, the great communicator can do he somehow spoke, conveying the consolation and support of the Nation he took to Newtown and asking for the Nation's support and resolve to enable him for meaningful and effective action.
Without referring to the Second Amendment or NRA he brought home the need for controlling the ownership and accessibility of dangerous weapons. Without admonishing, he brought home the need for better parenting and teaching and loving children. In as few words as possible he reminded Americans about family values they all need to return to.

You handled this horrific situation with such honest sympathy & grace. You have done our nation (and yourself) proud during one of our darkest moments. I am proud to call you My President.

"They that have done this deed are honourable: What private griefs they have, alas, I know not, That made them do it: they are wise and honourable, And will, no doubt, with reasons answer you."

Though William Shakespeare, the greatest of English writers, used those words to define a bunch of Roman conspirators, he might have used them even today to expose an elite bunch of egoistic Indians, blind with self glorification.
Who are they? They are all honourable leaders of modern India who collectively brought down the Indian GDP growth from 9% to 5% in a couple of years, sabotaging any chance a billion of its poor had to come out of poverty and a miserable life. There are even Harvard educated among them, but the plight of the poor and down trodden was not their concern and the need for GDP growth was not their business.
The damage and the back stabbing they have collectively done to India is nothing short of the treachery and guile in the Shakespearian drama, because as highly educated they are, they can't pretend not to know the damage they have caused to the plight of a billion poor Indians who earn barely a dollar a day, in their own quest for glory.
These pretentious leaders, each one of them with a hidden agenda, pretend to uphold morality in life and politics and fight for it, in various forms, as if it is the only thing India needs. Disregarding the damage they will cause to the country's image and growth, they have latched on to every opportunity, every accusation of impropriety to obstruct the functioning of the government inside and outside the parliament, bringing total paralysis.
In a short span of two years they have managed to sabotage every attempt of the minority government of Dr Man Mohan Singh and all reform measures he has tried to bring to maintain the high growth trajectory his reforms and governance has brought for India.
On the top of this list of these self serving Indians who have appropriated morality for themselves is India's CAG, Vinod Rai, himself a Harvard educated government servant, who has dealt the first and heaviest of blows, with accusations of ludicrous amounts of loss to the government. Though the hollowness of his accusations have since been exposed by an auction and revelation by a subordinate, it too late as enormous damage has been done to investor confidence.
Arvind Kejriwal, the "Indian Romney" who claim that the direct disbursement of income benefit to the poorest people of India amounts to bribing, can claim a prominent position. Kejriwal, who shot himself to fame by training his guns on the popular Gandhian Anna Hazare to appropriate some popularity for himself has since been exposed by declaring his own political party, of all things to fight corruption, of course.
Mamta Banerjee, the main coalition partner of Dr Man Mohan Singh who has vetoed every one of his reform measures should be honoured as the Nero of modern India as she spends her time in art and writing poetry as India's GDP had been tumbling down the drain and her own state of West Bengal had been sinking more and more in to the Bay of Bengal with debt burden of over populist governance.
If the Indian parliament had been totally dysfunctional since the last election, the credit almost entirely is that of Sushma Swaraj, the leader of the opposition, in title and action. Sushma Swaraj, who would like to be a future Prime Minister of India, has almost single headedly destroyed the biggest democracy in the world by instigating and leading sheer unruly and disgusting behaviour of elected representatives in parliament.
Dr Subramanian Swamy, an ex professor at Harverd must be credited with finding a life time occupation in filing cases against the Indian Government he can never win. But this doesn't preventSwamy in filing a new case every time he finds an old sheet of news paper with some ludicrous mention of corruption.
Dr Mulrali Manohar Joshi, a leader of the BJP has long since proven his penchant to erase and rewrite history when, as the Human resources Minister, he meddled with school text books, to remove and absolve the cold blooded assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, by Hindu fundamentalists. He has now been exposed as the main instigator of fictitious losses to the government by corrupt practices, which is no surprise at all.
There are of course a bigger list of supporters and collaborators, who the mob may search out on a second wave, for reprimand.
Fortunately, the Indian masses probably have never read Shakespeare, especially Julius Creaser. The chances are they will never ever grasp the importance of GDP or the rating agencies.
Article first published as Six Hallowed Indians Who Could be Lynched by a Billion of India's Poor if They Knew Simple Economics. on Technorati.

For those who believe in celestial interventions in affairs on the earth, there were indications of the re election of President Barack Obama and even a third term in office. But for mundane observers, a look at the events to the run up of the presidential election, its conduct and the post election realities raise the question whether Barack Obama will be the next three term president of the U.S. In fact most of the issuesObama is likely to address might need well over a decade to solve and for a determined President too difficult to give up before he achieve.


A taller President.

By achieving the impossible and winning the re election, Barack Obama has grown taller in stature virtually dwarfing almost everyone else, not just in the U.S. but on the world scene.
First, let's remember what Obama did in the first term: he passed the most substantial new element in the American safety net in generations, Obamacare. He helped pass a massive re-regulation of the financial sector, the Dodd-Frank bill. He passed the biggest stimulus package in our history, which I believe--Ezra Klein convinced me of this--prevented the worst economic depression in four generations. He did these things in the first two years, of course, when Democrats controlled Congress, but he did them. They were not chopped liver, whether or not you liked them. Q&As, Washington Post

Despite the gloss over Ann Romney tried to give the historic improvisation of Clint Eastwood, who tried to address and insult an invisible Barack Obama who had no way of fefending himself, the Democrats will be eager to pull off something in return at the DNC.
Letting the GOP get away with a piece of stage drama to score a political point against them will be a political sin the democrats can't afford. They can't let the insult go away unpunished like the way the convention managed an important debilitating debate on abortion, which preceded it, to totally disappear from the agenda.
Though it may not be entirely in style for a sitting president, who has already declared that he is no way offended by the episode, to stoop to such silly political theatre, it actually gives Barack Obama a precious chance to defend his records by "Eastwooding" George Bush. After all, Bush, from whom he inherited the economic mess, was conspicuously absent from the RNC to evade having to defend his poor record which would definitely have hurt the claims of the GOP.
George Bush must have evaded the convention under pressure from the GOP, precisely not to remind anyone of his legacy or what the Republicans really did to the US economy in the eight years they were in power. In any case, George Bush couldn't have defended his record convincingly and might have ended up with embarrassing remarks, for which he has a solid record, which might have turned in to the high lights of the convention.
Though George Bush himself was on record about his decision to stay away from the convention, For the GOP itself, who is trying to win back the power in Washington, not being able to hold their ex president in front of the nation, as a guarantee of the rosy state of affairs they promise, is an indefensible weakness.
Whether the political managers of the Democratic Party can see this massive hole in the defence of the GOP and capitalise on it can make a real difference to the message they will transmit from Charlotte in the next few days.
Under normal circumstances any attempt by President Obama and his party to go back several years in history to defend their records would have been torn apart by the GOP as weak defence for incompetence. However, the GOP can no more complain about being unduly attacked if some one will do an "Eastwooding" on any of their leaders as they have publicly praised and justified what the Octogenarian Hollywood icon has enacted during the RNC.
But what will be the best way to delicately tap in to the enormous opportunity must be the thought which has kept the DNC managers sleepless for last week. Obviously a copy cat performance by another celebrity or any of the leaders will be deemed ridiculous and can easily backfire.
Their best bet is President himself, who has time and again proved his entertainer appeal, especially during the White House Correspondents Dinner Speech. Obama has proved not only that he can pull off effective jabs at his political opponents, but that he can do such things convincingly while unbelievably difficult situations like the operation Geronimo was being carried out under his command. President Obama no doubt is as much a theatrical performer as Clint Eastwood is.
It is hard to see that Barack Obama and his political managers will let such an opportunity go untapped. A rebuttal in some form or the other must be expected. It will certainly be one of the high points of the DNC.
In what form and way the president will deliver that will determine the political maturing of Barack Obama.

There are ways to test the worth of things. But the means of real tests are always harsh and bruising like the touchstone on which you rub your gold nugget to see if it is genuine. For Harvard, the proof of the pudding is when its alumni get roasted in the harshest ovens of real life business and come out shining.

Palaniyappan Chidambaram, an alumnus of Harvard, is about to prove his worth with another stint as India's Finance Minister. But in his case, his nemesis and his biggest distracter is also an ex professor of Harvard, Dr Subramanian Swamy.

The problem is that, to gain the confidence of foreign investors, Chidambaram has to find ways to arrest and reverse the powerful negative trend in India's growth which has ended up in a yawning gap in the nation's fiscal balance and high inflation, left behind by his predecessor and the new Indian President Pranab Mukherjee. Perhaps this was also the main reason behind the decision of the UPA leadership to project Pranab Mukherjee as the presidential candidate.

Moreover, since his last stint, despite the confidence of the political leadership he enjoys and repeatedly publicly proclaimed by the Prime Minister, Chidambaram is confronted with a variety of allegations from electoral tinkering to corruption.

While being the country's Finance Minister, Chidambaram has also to fight off extreme political attacks and damaging allegations of corruption, pending legal scrutiny in the courts, which Dr Swamy and the main opposition BJP are spearheading, making his task really daunting for any politician.

To be fair to Chidambaram, he has already been credited with some convincing reforms to India's archaic investment framework during his stint as the Finance Minister during the previous government of the United Progressive alliance of Sonia Gandhi.

Though Chidambaram had to leave the position in the Finance Ministry with an unfinished agenda in the wake of the 9/11 Mumbai Terror attack to take over the Home Ministry, at the behest of the party leadership, unfortunately, no one gives him the credit for stabilizing the country's governance and internal security with swift and decisive actions. Like everywhere good acts in politics have no rewards in India too.

However the impressive measures of modernisation and reforms he undertook as the finance minister is much recognised by the foreign and Indian business community.

In fact this is the main reason why the sentiment of foreign investors has been boosted raising the NIFTY a couple of hundred points since his elevation, from the beginning of the month, as the Finance Minister by the Prime Minister Dr Man Mohan Singh.

Though the political baggage he has to carry is making his task of putting the country's economy back on track extremely hard, his task is in fact not only important for India and its future but is vital for the survival of the UPA and its success in the elections to be held in 2014.

It is this imperative against which Chidambaram's mettle being tested which makes his actions and steps so vital to the world investors looking for successful business in India. It looks like the UPA leadership has realised that it is time for decisive action if the government has to expect another term after the next elections. This will certainly strengthen the hands of the new Finance Minister, giving hope to the investors in India and abroad.

However, a host of other issues from land reforms to mining and power generation which are outside of the Finance Minister's control also need to be sorted out on extremely high priority, which will decide Chidambaram's success in turning the economy around.

So far, it looks like Chidambaram has been successful in boosting the sentiments by quick and decisivemeasures and steps everyone has appreciated. Whether he will be able to carry through the political anarchy which modern India is turning in to through the so called civil society and anti corruption movement of Anna Hazare and others is a matter to see.

If what Harvard instilled in the Finance Minister by his education will stand him in his seemingly gargantuan tasks of being decisive and taking assertive actions in the face of furious opposition, the world famous university can really be proud.

Anna Hazare has proved to be the modern Don Quixote of India. Your life is only worth as the cause you stand for and legitimate action by the government can wipe out your cause. That is what Anna Hazare movement eventually shows the world. If America's Mitt Romney has taken up any cause and is counting on it to win the election he has to make sure it won't be gone in thin air, come November.
Like any other consummate politician who he claims he isn't, Anna Hazare took on an opportunistic fight against corruption when an avalanche of perception of rampant corruption was engulfing India and its UPA government, led by the Congress party.

What secret mission can be more daring for James Bond than whisking the Queen and dropping her in to the Olympics opening Ceremony from the sky? If anyone ever doubted whether the British Monarchy is in touch with the common man, is there any better proof than a Monarch willing to amuse the whole world, for the sake of her country, in such a down to earth appearance? The daring Royal entry in to the Olympics alone has redeemed the pride of the British who have suffered a series of mishaps and international doubts about their ability to stage the London 2012 Olympics, by their sheer sense of humour and ingenuity.

The truth is the world is dazzled and jealous how the British pulled off a magical night as their own with characters that in fact belonged to the whole world. The London Olympics opening event is slowly getting its shower of praises after not so flattering and sarcastic remarks from foreign media.

There were some early cringe-worthy scenes of pre-industrial Britain: maypole dancers, thatched cottages, mustachioed beekeepers, and a hirsute Kenneth Branagh dressed up as British engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel orating from Shakespeare's The Tempest.
At times quixotic, the Opening Ceremonies were immediately accused by some of being simply too British, laced as they were with obscure references to the National Health Service and English club music

Despite being fantastic eye catching events, many people can hardly remember anything from the 2008 Olympics in Beijing or several others before, which were telecast to the whole world.

From Chincha Alta (Peru) to Siem Reap (Cambodia), who doesn't hold a little corner of their heart with some affection for many of the characters who enlivened the evening? Starting with the Queen, several living and fictional characters like Mr Bean, Mary Poppins, Peter Pan, James Bond, Harry Potter, Paul McCartney, David Beckham and many others have left indelible marks on human memory and will continue to do for centuries.

Is there anyone fortunate to have a basic education who is not taught of the Industrial revolution? Is there anyone who whish they didn't have a universal health assurance epitomised by the British NHS, except perhaps the Americans who think it is a crazy idea?

Of course one could argue that going back further in history, to Shakespeare and Henry VIII; you could be really English and British. Though that would have been more 'Greek' to the rest of the world, there would still be some universality about it.

The reality is, it is almost impossible to conceive a 'totally British' Olympics 2012 opening ceremonylike the one presented by Danny Boyle without having a universal appeal. That is because there was hardly a 'British' character in the whole show that didn't belong to the whole world.

Yet, the London Olympics opening spectacle of Danny Boyle, with the Bond-Queen séance and Mr Bean's version of Chariots of fire, both of which have gone viral on the social web, is already being etched in to the human psyche.

If the British characters have become the world's own, you can't blame the British for it. Neither can you blame the English Language. It is the genuinely human appeal each of these British born or conceived heroes evoke in human minds which make Macbeth to Slumdog Millionaire endearing to human minds, something no other nation has been successful at.

That is the quintessential Brutishness evinced by Danny Boyle's wonderful and ingenious production the British can be really proud of. In fact a celebration of the freedom of spirit and mind engrained in the British social values, and in the ultimate British sense of humour.

As the IOC president Jacques Rogge reminded in his opening speech, London is home to the Olympics games in many ways, by establishing many of the ground rules in the 1948 games and proceedings. Danny Boyle and his team can be proud that the 2012 Olympics Opening Gala will make it even more so by establishing the standard and benchmark for future opening events.

That sheer regimentation, pyrotechnics and robotics, at the cost of millions of dollars just for showmanship and the grandeur of any event have come to the end of their limits, is shown by the Beijing Olympics. That the way forward, in the real world beset with economic crisis, is the ingenious use of imagination and modern technological innovations in media and imagery is shown by the London 2012 ceremony.

Yet it will be almost impossible to better what was seen on the night of the 2012 Olympics opening night in London in the imaginable future, because Danny Boyle has already pulled out the best of everything.

Whether you like it or not the British have done it again. No point being jealous about it.

The Brits, as a nation, get pretty excited even at the drop of a royal hat. Anything remotely British like mere thought of winning a Wimbledon or World cup which were last won decades ago can turn the national pride and spirit a notch or two.

In the olden days, not so long ago, heads of states used to look older, wiser, indomitable and even formidable. These days a G8 summit photo has many baby faces of leaders who don't have a clue of not only how to deal with the Euro crisis but even of the price of milk they still drink. Gone are the days when the British voices of Churchill, Wilson and Thatcher were carried along as far as the waves of Britannia reached.

Americans may not see it because they may not want to. But when it comes to basic human rights at least, the world is coming to see little to differentiate the U.S. from the Taliban it wants to get rid of in Afghanistan. The Taliban thinks women shouldn't go to school; the Americans think 32 million of them shouldn't have a mandatory health cover. What is the difference?

The United States of America may be the richest country in the world without universal healthcare for all, a situation Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) will certainly change. For the rest of the world, with no easy access to facts and figures to compare and who is unaware of the historical U.S reticence towards human rights, the United States of America, which wants to challenge and repeal Obamacare is looking more like a third world country.
That is the take away from the recent Obamacare judgement by the U.S. Supreme court, the dissentand the ensuing political battle cries, all of which have brought the U.S politics and the legal system to world focus, with some disbelief. Hey, is this the America everyone looks up to?

To many foreigners, thanks to its legal system, the U.S. had been the "Never Never Land" which gives shudders down your spine, nearly the same feelings an American family, who is offered a free holiday in Iran, gets in the guts at the thought of a trip.
The general apprehension about the U.S. attitude towards human rights might not be entirely without justification:
• When an Australian citizen seeks asylum in a third world country's embassy out of fear of incrimination and death penalty from a U.S. court if extradited to the U.S.?
• When an ex president of a "friendly" nation with a population of 1.3 billion can be stopped andfrisked at the airport because of his name and racial profiling?
• When a president of the World Bank is handcuffed and thrown in the prison cell overnight withoutrecourse to any legal aid because an illegal immigrant cried foul?
• When recent cases of miscarriage of justice have sent innocent people to the death row which all civilised countries have abolished by now?
• When Guantanamo and stories of renditions are still a reality?
That is to say that there is certainly a 'disconnect' between how the Americans see their justice system from a lot of other people around the world, who are apprehensive, or at least can't understand the way Americans think.
It was not surprising that the entire world, like the President himself, had resigned to the reality and waited for the U.S. Supreme Court, with a conservative majority, to throw the Obamacare, proposed by a democratic administration, in to the bin. That would have been treated as an internal matter and the fate of the U.S citizens.
However, how one judge decided to change history by passing the law has brought the issue to the attention of the world and its scrutiny. Whether Judge Roberts acted to avoid the Supreme Court verses elected representative controversy or out of conscience and a desire to bring the United States of America in synch with the social values the rest of the developed has long since taken for granted has become immaterial.
What gives credence to the question whether the U.S. has really evolved in its human rights view is the vehement and destroying fury of the dissent by the four judges, who have chosen to ignore the human rights implication, in their fervour to uphold the U.S. constitution and the free market.
But what is even more shocking and raises the question if the U.S. indeed cares a toss to be viewed as a third world country is the intransigent politics which has turned the Obamacare, which brings the Americans closer to civilised societies, in to the bone of contention of the next presidential election, with the GOP and its candidate Romney wowing to destroy it at any cost.
Twenty five years back as an immigrant from India in France, I was shocked by a scene when a nearly paralysed lady arrived in a supermarket for her weekly shopping, flat on her back, in a stretcher, being carried by two attendants. That day I had realised what universal healthcare really means in a caring society.
Today, I wonder what would have happened to that person if she lived in the richest country after the next presidential election of the U.S.A.

Article first published as Does Obamacare Make Americans Third World Citizens? on Technorati.

Perhaps it is time the Americans considered changing their electoral system for something 'funnier' like the Presidential election of India. In the Indian Presidential election a candidate some parties refuse to declare their support for has more of a chance to be elected as the President of the country than others they chooses to support. It is merely the negative political sentiments which come in to play irrespective of the calibre andsuitability of the individual.
With the trend of latching on to the 'negativity' in every statement, every faux pas the president or his opponents make and blowing it out of proportion, the American democratic process also beckon the question if it is a desirable trait for a free and fair electoral process of a leading democratic nation.
In terms of political power, the two presidencies have no comparison, except in an emergency when the Indian President can assume unlimited and unprecedented executive powers like those of the US president. Yet,the electoral processes which decides the president by an election or a unanimous choice can reflect the political balance in the Indian context.
By all counts, Pranab Mukherjee, India's finance minister fit the bill to be elected unanimously as the country's president. If Mukherjee, despite his three decades of service to the country as part of various governments including that of Indira Gandhi, is not well known outside India it is his own fault for being a thorough, non controversial and soft spoken gentleman politician, which has made him universally acceptable. Yet In the Indian system even an eminently suitable candidate like Mukherjee has to be propped up by negative and partisan vagaries of the political class.
Four years back, when the congress party president Sonia Gandhi chose to install Pratibha Patil as the first woman President of the country, perhaps with a vision in to the future for herself, it was the refusal of BJP, the main opposition, to support the incumbent President Kalam which led to her success.
Interestingly, an open declaration of support of BJP to Kalam this time has simply precluded his chances of ever becoming the president again, as practically ever party rejected the suggestion.
A few weeks back the Indian communists declared their support for Pranab Mukherjee, a native of West Bengal and India's minister for Finance, as the new president. Though this had increased the support for Pranab, Mamta Banerjee, chief of Thrinamool Congress who rules West Bengal did not support, merely because of her opposition to the communists. Such is the nature of egoistic negative politics of India.
However, the communists now have changed their mind and are clamouring for someone outside the ruling congress party as the new president. This no doubt has increased the fortune of Pranab Mukherjee as Mamta Banerjee now has no excuse but to support him.
What is interesting is the credentials and capability of a person to be the figurehead of the largest democracy of the world has no relevance in this incredibly idiotic process which, every Indian needs to be ashamed of.
These ridiculous vagaries of the Indian politics which several regional players play out, may never infect the American system, clearly established in a two party political debate and balance. However, the bickering and wrangling amplified by the media and social web certainly take the sheen out of a process which may inside and outside the country believe must be a model for the fledging democracies of the world.
Article first published as If Only Barack Obama Could Win The Presidency By Negativity, Like Pranab Mukherjee of India. on Technorati

Anna Hazare proclaims to be a surviving disciple of Mahatma Gandhi, the Gandhi who won independence for India from the British Empire. It is no secret that Anna Hazare can't read English and can't understand the charges he raises and his team knows very little other than Law, a subject the worst students in India can count on for a degree. For a growing community of frustrated investors and expatriate Indians, Anna Hazare team is looking more and more like a bunch of Motley Fools out to destroy India.

Not without some reason. The "poor" nation of half a billion people Gandhi bequeathed has made impressive strides and record growth even when the rest of the world was reeling under crisis after crisis. Now, along with several other distracters, the very disciple of Gandhi has succeeded to drag the country back several years to where it started from.

The Indian Rupee has touched the lowest ever exchange rate to the US Dollar, the growth has plummeted from the heady 10% India boasted about in the past decade to a 5% range India was stuck with for ages and most of the foreign investment which brought in the growth and prosperity has all but withdrawn.
It is hardly surprising that the investor confidence has taken a flight from a country whose Prime Minister and 15 of his ministers have been accused of corruption without any basis by the Anna Hazare team, crippling any decision making power left with a government held together with finicky regional parties. More disgustingly, it has brought a world renowned economist to offer his resignation as the prime minister of the country. This is a more serious issue affecting not just India but global economy, given the globalisation which render growth in any part of the world vital for the rest of us as well.
The latest accusations of corruption is based on a report the CAG of India has produced which claims loss of astronomical sums to the government by allocation of coal fields to private companies. What the CAG hasn't taken in to account is that the coal the government offered to reluctant and risk-averse entrepreneurs to excavate was worth the mud it was covered with, without the massive inflow of foreign investment. It is different matter that in a fast developing India coal has become a scare and costly commodity. If the ruling government took a view and acted upon it in the interest of developing the Industry, it becomes corrupt act only in the lopsided logic of Indian accountants. What if the companies didn't find any useful coal when they had excavated?

In effect, there was no governance in India for the last 3-4 years because Anna Hazare and several insane politicians refused to let the government or the parliament function. More than Anna Hazare, the people who have ganged up around him, in the name of fighting corruption, must be made answerable for this plight.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like the Anna team can understand that the deliverance of a billion poor citizens of India from poverty will only happen from sustained economic growth. But this motley crowd who use his popularity to stir up emotions and obstruct all efforts of a hard working and well meaning government, by casting aspersions and raising baseless allegations, eroding investor confidence, must surely share the responsibility for the downfall of India

Article first published as Who Can Stop Anna Hazare and His Motley Fools from Taking India to Where Gandhi Left it? on Technorati.

When faced with real issues in life astrology is only the last resort to many people. Yet for millions around the world, it is what gives hope and support to carry on from day to day. Astrology doesn't stand on firm grounds when questioned based on logic and hard scientific principles, but thanks to modern computing software, subjectivity of astrology pundits at least is removed.

It is quite easy for anyone to be an astrologer these days. All you need to do is to download and install a free piece ofsoftware written by Narasimha Rao, an ex software engineer from PictureTel Corporation and feed some basic information like a place, date and time of birth of a person in to it. If you have some basic understanding of the tenants of Vedic Astrology, it could really add to the fun.

So pondering on the question of the birth of Barack Obama, which has been a matter of controversy in the past and which is recently resurrected, it was intriguing to see what the software will produce. The personal details of celebrities were always difficult to obtain, but thanks to the controversy, the long form birth certificate President Obama was published and is available on the US President's website for anyone interested. According to this document also available here he was born in Honolulu on the 4th of august 1961 at 7.24 PM., which is the basic data used to give it a whirl for the fun of it.
A lot of what the software output is really for the expert astrologer but there is also some plain English which states the qualities and positions in life the person will achieve.


Now Barack Obama might have been born or not as stated in the certificate, but the results certainly reveal a lucky individual with some qualities worthy of a president of the United States.

For a discerning believer in vedic astrology, there are also some important and obvious indications in his birth chart like the excellent positions of the planets, enough to explain why he has become the first Black President of the US or why he succeeded in bringing justice to the victims of a great US tragedy.
Obviously for those clamouring about his worthiness to be a US president, despite being born and delivered to a white female citizen of the United States of America, this is no answer, but for lovers of astrology, there is enough evidence.

When Hillary Clinton planned and set off to theFareast for what was supposed to be her farewell trip, no one expected the secretary of State and her team to fly right in to the eye of the most testing diplomatic storm of her career. It is remarkable that Hillary Clinton and her equipage left Beijing without being mauled beyond recognition by the Chinese dragons.

So no one can blame Hillary if she decided to take it easy, and give a scoot to her risky engagement with the Tigress of West Bengal, Mamta Banerjee, for some powder room diplomacy instead. Mamta Banerjee had recently got rid of the communists who wrecked the state and its economy during past 24 years and has opposed US investment in India in the retail sector.

In political terms Mamta Banerjee has every quality of a Tiger, an endangered species of wild cats, for which the Sundarban forest of West Bengal is a protected sanctuary and tourist attraction.

Hillary and her team had planned to engage the mercurial leader for extracting concessions for US investment, which she was vehemently objecting. It was part of the larger recognition that power in India no longer resides simply in New Delhi and the U.S. must engage with regional leaders.

Instead, Hillary simply turned her trip in to a charm offensive with her 'namaste' (Indian way of greeting by holding your paws together) and winning smile, making everyone smile and pour accolades and genuine affection on the US Secretary of state, even implore her to contest the presidential in 2016.

Hillary and her team spend the time visiting its Heritage and engaging with its citizens in various cultural programmes though reports say that there were enough of discussions on what she wanted to exchange with the chief minister, which was played down by Mamta and the Indian press.

"I know for myself how difficult it is for women to get elected anywhere," Clinton said in Kolkata. "When I meet a woman who's broken through those barriers. . . we share a common bond, if you will, having gone through the fire of electoral politics."
There is no wonder why Hillary Clinton chose more to explore the lighter side of Kolkata, with which not only the British East India Company but many other famous personalities like Mother Theresa and Dominique Lapierre, the author of 'City Of Joy' were enamoured in the past.
However, it must be the spirit and emotional character of this city, in which it is hard to find a citizen who wants to migrate elsewhere, despite its din and dizzle and mass of population, which must have rubbed on the US Secretary of state and made her declare: "I want to come back to India and wander about without the streets being closed,"
Despite the sweltering heat of the Indian summer, Kolkota, which was the first British capital of India with many heritage buildings and history, has a lot to offer for a tourist with some spirit of adventure.

Article first published as How Did Hillary Clinton’s Diplomacy Tour Turn in to an Indian Holiday, Winning Hearts? on Technorati

Pranab Mukherjee has never dared, but will soon be the next president of India. Today, there is every reason whyPranab Mukherjee, India's Finance Minister will be its next president. Perhaps it can turn out to be the best thing for India, beset with a series of reversals which have crashed the hopes of western investors and the morale of Indian entrepreneurs.

Pranab Mukherjee, the suave Indian politician and finance minister is a seasoned trouble shooter and negotiator, more like a Full back of a soccer team. Yet when the Team India manager and UPA chair person Sonia Gandhi formed her alliance's second ministry, Pranab Mukherjee, much like David Beckham of Manchester United, chose to play as its striker, setting for himself huge goals of fiscal balance and growth rates.
As a striker finance minister, Pranab Mukherjee is a disaster. Despite being recognised as a no risk taker, letting him have a go at the finances of the country, when keeping the momentum of growth is crucial to political success, is the biggest mistake of Sonia's United Progressive Alliance.
Mukherjee has missed two vital fiscal years and budgets without hitting any goals of reforms and growthwhile a roaring international audience of investors waited for action. The stock markets have tumbled since he took over the ministry. The recent announcements of India oriented tax policies, 2G spectrum licence reversals and corporate penalties have confused everyone. Has India gone back to the eighties?
The result is a disastrous crumbling of investor confidence in India's growth rate. The Indian game is over for them, they have left with their cans of coke and pop corn for action elsewhere. withdrawing huge amounts of investment. The world would rather have someone who played ball like everyone else, especially when they see Indian corporate houses like Mithal, Ambani and Tata grabbing a fair share of international business.
Perhaps this cautious, no risk approach, a typical Indian strain, is what made Pranab Mukherjee a 'political loser' despite his long 43 years in the Indian politics. In his long career he has never become a Chief Minister of his own state of West Bengal or the Prime Minister of India.
Yet, by a strange coincidence of political forces which props him for the post of the President of India he will be elevated to that positioning July. His elevation, in political terms, will be like conferring a doctorate on someone who failed his degree and post graduation. Pranab Mukherjee and most of India will however welcome this as a stroke of immense luck like the famous long shot goal David Beckham scored against Wimbledon which instantly made him a household name.
Pranab Mukherjee non partisan amicable nature makes him naturally acceptable for the various political factions whose votes he must secure as they have nothing to worry about him. This has already assured his position to a large extent with Sonia Gandhi and the congress managers being able to strengthen that support to evolve a consensus.
However, the most compelling reason why Pranab's will be the chosen name for a consensus candidate is his erstwhile party colleague, compatriot and alliance partner Mamta Banerjee. Like Mukherjee, Banerjee hails from the State of west Bengal and is its current chief minister.
However Mamta is seen more and more as a "black mail" politician. Mamta is at logger heads with the Finance minister and the UPA leadership, and has blocked almost every effort for much needed reforms in policies and governance using the support of her MPs crucial for the parliamentary majority.
But when it comes to Pranab Mukherjee for the President of India she is undoubtedly in a catch 22 situation. West Bengal never had a President or Prime Minister in history and to be seen as someone who spoilt a chance will be almost unforgivable for any Bengalee, especially its Chief Minister.
Chances are Mamta will have to cave in, especially with her personal equation with Pranab Mukherjee who has ceded the position of Chief Minister to her, without contest, in the past.
Though the elevation of Pranab Mukherjee is being viewed in his party circles as 'weakening' of the government by the loss of a crucial trouble shooter, at the end of the day, it can induce much needed financial policy handling talent to gain international confidence in the India story.
Playing and winning the 'Mamta' game will be the ultimate test and proof of the ability of Sonia Gandhi as a political manager of a nation with 1.3 billion people. From a lady to lady Mamta can't afford to let her down.
It is a mere coincidence Pranab Mukherjee will be the real winner in this ladies club contest.

Article first published as Why Pranab Mukherjee Be the Next President of India on Technorati.