Drona - A teacher who failed!

Dronacharya by all means is the dream guru of all those who believe that ancient India was a marvel of science and technology. After all the great sage was born but not in a womb, perhaps the first nuclear scientist and of course an archer beyond comparisons. 

All these great virtues and deeds of his completely overshadow the fact that he was revengeful, casteist, partial, sycophant and if one can stretch the argument a little further, a murderer as well.

I am sure that in the present times the story of his birth will attract more jeers from the evolved residents of the erstwhile Gurgaon rather than being amazed at what advanced stage of biotechnology India was practicing in that era. 

If one has to impartially analyze the character Drona from Mahabharata without falling into the trap of being national or anti-national, it could be easily said that Drona was a teacher who failed. And this is not because he chose to be on the losing side of the Great War. If the old texts are to believed he chose to be with Kauravas fully knowing what it may lead to.

Drona’s trappings lie in the fact that he did not even had the basic quality to be a teacher. He was partial and believed that it is the end that matters and not the means.This character of his is well sketched out in what he did to Eklavya, son of a tribal chief and finally to Abhimanyu, the son of his favorite pupil, Arjun.

Perhaps the way he was killed was a perfect ending to his saga. He was killed by deceit and that is why Mahabharata is known to be the most well-balanced epic of all times. 

The incumbent government conveniently chose to ignore these facts while renaming the city.  I am sure that they will definitely think twice to change the name of any city in Uttar Pradesh based on these lines given that elections are due soon.  Meanwhile Mr. Khattar will do some service to both himself and Haryana if only he can also take a cue from Mahabharata...

Rain-Bow

Multi-coloured and perhaps the only feather in the cap of finance minister Arun Jaitley is supposedly the banking reforms. Opening of bank accounts, followed by loading of various insurance and pension benefits was the first part of this narrative.   

Proudly the government wears the certification from Guinness Book of World Records on opening most bank accounts in a week. It also does not fail to mention that how increasingly most of these accounts have seen a spurt in deposits thus ensuring that they do not remain dormant. 

Then there is the unsaid promise that once the government finally gets a hold on hoarders of black money abroad, some of it will flow into these accounts and the prophecy of Jan Dhan will be fulfilled. Some naysayers, however, predict that the government may dole out cash in the grab of subsidies at the fag end of its stint. In both cases it only looks like the proverbial gold pot at the end of the rainbow. 

But it was the second spate of reforms that was said and meant to be more qualitative than quantitative. In August 2015, the rainbow was launched. Dubbed as Indradhanush, the government ushered a seven pronged plan to free the public sector banks in India from the clutches of crony capitalism being pursued during the tenure of previous government.

Mr Jaitley at various fora has eulogized these measures as path breaking and that which changed the landscape of banking in this country.

But if you look closely, Mr Jaitley and his lieutenants have only rearranged the VIBGYOR, with little or no effect. 

Through Indradhanush, the government promised a comprehensive reform in state run lenders. So far, it has appointed only two private sector candidates in the top five public sector banks, and one of them had previously worked with country’s largest lender, State Bank of India.

In line with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) suggestions, the post of chairman and managing director has also been split. Though the verdict on appointing private sector guys and splitting the post is yet to be out, till date none of these newly appointed heads has embarked upon an innovative approach.

Then comes the appointment of independent directors, which the government had promised to do in three months. There has been no movement on that. The proposed bank board bureau, where members were to be selected in six months has not seen any action too.

The government which revamped the selection process of top executive in PSBs and had cancelled appointments done by previous government has also done little to revolutionize the selection process. It has only divided the existing selection committee into three groups and added one more member with rest of the process being mostly the same. 

The government promised Rs 70,000 crore towards bank capital allocation till FY 2019. It said it has ‘estimated’ the capital needs and that banks valuations will increase significantly due to ‘far reaching governance reforms’ helping them to raise the remaining capital from the markets. 

The UPA government in its last stint had allocated around Rs 62,000 crore towards bank capital allocation when the more stringent Basel norms were yet to be set in and banks enjoyed the leeway to manage their books and hide their non-performing loans. 

If not for RBI’s asset quality review (AQR), the bad loans may have never tumbled out of the closet. The AQR directly resulted in most banks reporting losses or a sharp drop in third-quarter profit. Gross non-performing assets (NPAs) of many banks have since climbed to nearly 10%, thus stripping them of the government’s ‘estimate’ that they will be able to raise over Rs 1 lakh crore from the markets. 

Step down from the rainbow, and the banking sector in the country doesn’t look that it has moved much ahead. There has been no talk of consolidation in public sector lenders. The weak banks are not to be on the block and the large banks are still averse to mergers. 

Mr. Jaitley like always may argue that the legacy issues are too big to be sorted out this quickly. The rainbow, however, mostly comes after a shower, and for now it looks like it will pour, and pour hard.

India 2016.

Finance, and Information & Broadcasting Minister Arun Jaitley in a tweet has condemned the recent attacks on journalists. Mr. Jaitley with quite diligence and hopefully conviction too, have been condemning similar incidents 'online', such as he did when a journalists in Uttar Pradesh suffered similar fate. In the same vein, Mr. Jaitley has also mentioned that politicians and journalists should know their facts.

Through Mr. Jaitley’s Facebook post and some blogs, a large section of this country is aware that the well renowned lawyer does not have a reputation for thrift in words, or ideas. In fact, he has come up with some seething headlines and quotes – tyranny of the unelected, manufactured revolt – much to both envy and delight of editors in newsrooms.  So, going by that high standards there were expectations that he may ditch the 140 character platform and expound a bit on this issue as well.

Since he has not, let us assume what he could have said if he had decided to…

Facts & Beyond

If one is to dispassionately analyse the present issue, it may be not unfair to say that journalist were thrashed because they went beyond their brief. As you all know I have been regularly interacting with senior editors and in some cases promoters, so I am mostly aware of what makes a good story and in some cases the news list.

In this case in particular, I am told – not by OP Sharma – reporters wanted to know that on what basis some JNU students were arrested on charges of sedition. Now that is going well beyond their brief. They were to report on what’s happening and not on the why and how. That part has been already covered by some channels and dailies in detail and I do not see any reason to go further into that debate.

The other argument, which I am hearing that how can those reckless students be anti-national just for mouthing some slogans against our country, and that BJP should not have a problem because after all we have a coalition government, till now, with PDP in J&K, where shouting anti-India slogans is the norm.

Now, here am speaking with some experience for you know that I have been active in politics since my university days. In fact, this is nothing like the Emergency era, when whatever you said was deemed anti-national. I have been through those times and trust me we are doing a much better job. Borrowing a line from my Rajya Sabha speech, I will like to stress that…“there are worst illustrations in history when Constitutional systems are used to subvert the Constitution.” So lawyers taking up violence in the court premises do not fall under this constitution category.

As you all know that I can easily tear apart any argument on what is the definition of nationalism, but remember that those who opposing us has always had ‘ideological intolerance towards the BJP.’

This whole JNU issue is again “politics by other means,” for if these JNUites are as patriotic as they claim, why did not their “their collective conscience was shaken by the corruption involving lakhs of crores between 2004 and 2014?”

As the outgoing Delhi police commissioner has said on hacks being thrashed that it was a minor incident and rightly pointed out that it was fallout of emotive issue, you may appreciate that ‘nobody has alleged any governmental complacency in these crimes.’

The shouting of slogans by some foolhardy students was a manufactured paper rebellion, which ought to be crushed at the very outset for otherwise it would have led to a manufactured crisis of a larger level.

Jai Hind.