Talking of building a “new India” by 2022, Prime Minister listed government’s key achievements, the emphasis this time being on the supposed fight against corruption and black money. The address was apparently aimed at 2019 test for mandate. Critics will question the claimed success of demonetisation, given the country-wide disruption it caused, apart from deaths, job losses and economic slowdown.

While Modi government has renamed and marketed as its own some of the UPA programmes—Make in India, Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Start up India and Jan Dhan Yojna—what impact these make on the lives of people will determine the voters’ choice in 2019. A programme’s success depends on how far it has moved from the paper to the ground.

Nowhere is the gap between rhetoric and reality as glaring as in case of employment generation. The challenge of jobless growth has remained unaddressed so far and government spokespersons are not prepared even to acknowledge it. There has been little recognition of the concern expressed in the Economic Survey--2 about deceleration. Unless it shifts from windy rhetoric to act, the NDA could witness a replay of 2004 “shining India” campaign which indisputably was its worst strategy. Being out of touch with reality, has consequences and no one should know it better than NDA.

In a pleasant U-turn, Prime Minister sought to sell the Kashmiris the virtues of conciliation as the only way out to the Kashmir problem. His formulation was: na goli se, na gali se, Kashmir samasya suljehegi gale lagane se ( neither bullet, nor abuse but conciliation will solve Kashmir problem). A perplexed Kashmir has welcomed this change in tune. The Hurriyat chairman, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq too has made welcome noises.

The Prime Minister’s formulation carries with it a promise of repudiation of all the policies and practices that have been sought to be operationalised in the last 16 months. It is also at odds with all the attempts that are being made to reopen the settled constitutional status of Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmiri public opinion is inclined to believe that these attempts have New Delhi’s backing and blessings.

Modi arrived in 2014 with a promise to re-invoke Atal Behari Vajpayee’s “humanity” formula. The PDP-BJP alliance promised to create political and psychological space for attempting something “out of the Box”. Three years later, the alliance has lost its political cohesion; the situation on ground remains tense and tough, with the security forces achieving a kind of upper hand in dealing with the terrorists; the alienation remains intact as does the separatist constituency; and, the external world continues to be skeptical about our ability to tame the recalcitrant elements in the valley. It is in this context that the Prime Minister has changed gears, just when all indications would suggest that the ground was being prepared for a very hard and harsh treatment for the separatists and their militant wings. The Prime Minister’s olive branch must have confused all the valley players-- except the common Kashmiris who continue to pay a heavy price for the absence of any dialogue and conciliation.

Apart from Prime Minister’s customary address to the nation, the black out by Doordarshan and AIR the independence day speech of Tripura Chief Minister Manlk Sarkar cast a dark shadow on August 15 celebrations. By all accounts, after a local official raised an objection, the decision not to broadcast CM’s speech—unless it was “reshaped”-- was taken at Prasar Bharti’s Delhi office. In arrogance to itself the power of a censor over an elected chief minister, the public broadcaster has revived serious question about its mandate, its degree of autonomy from political—government control.

Sarkar’s speech could at worse be described as politically charged. Without naming any party and individual, CM spoke of secularism under attack and “conspiracies and attempts” to create “division in society” that are “contrary to the goals, dreams and ideals to our freedom struggle”. In fact, the chief minister’s speech was no more political than any speech made by his counterparts in other states on the day.

Despite a 20-year-long career, and report and recommendations of several committees, the Prasar Bharti is yet to restructure its operations either to respond to the requirement of changing times, or to establish a record of impartiality and fair play. Successive governments have also been reluctant to give up control over a captive media. The censorship in Agartala, therefore, immediately invites suspicion about the role of the central government in the black out of an opposition leader. The NDA is particularly vulnerable to these charges. (IPA Service)