|
An article from TOI-By Gurumurthy
It is certainly not a matter of pride to have Sonia as the Prime
Minister. You cannot be electing a person as Prime Minister and not feel proud
of having elected her. When someone wants to lead this country, it must be a
matter of pride for its people to have that person as their leader.
Imagine the depths to which this issue has descended.
& quote ;What is wrong if she is the Prime Minister,& quote; is an argument that
comes
not from the ordinary people of India, but from the educated Indian.
This comes from the Chidambarams and from the Rajdeeep Sardesais of this
country; this comes from editorial writers sitting in cities. So let us analyse
this issue with all its implications for a country like India, which has an
unbroken civilisational continuity.
India is indeed a civilisation behind the facade of a nation. It is now facing
the might of the nation-state, which has evolved in the west. The nation-state
mechanism in the west is basically aggressive, violent, conquering, invasive,
dominating, imperialistic. It is a concept which the Indian mind cannot
internalise, understand, or exhibit in its attitude.
So, now we are conceding that foreigners can become prime ministers and
presidents of India, provided they hold a citizenship certificate.
Odious comparisons are being made by a few who are bent on justifying Sonia as
the prime minister. Look at Sister Nivedita, they say. She rebelled against the
British for India. And her name was Margaret. Swami Vivekananda called her
Nivedita because she had surrendered herself to this country. Where then is the
comparison?
Compare Nivedita with Sonia Maino. She came to India marrying a very good-tooking
man. When she came to India in 1968, she was wedded to an Indian who was the son
of that country's Prime Minister.
People say it is our tradition that when a woman enters her husband's home, she
becomes part of that family, and so Sonia too is an Indian. It is a sentimental
attitude. Look at the acts. Sonia did not apply for Indian citizenship in 1968
when she married Rajiv and came to India. It is what any good Indian wife would
have done.
She filled an application in 1968 for permission to stay as a foreigner in India
for five years. She said, & quote ;I am married, I am married into the Indian
Prime Minister but I would still like to remain a foreigner.& quote; So she was
given a certificate in 1968 to reside in India as a foreigner for five years. In
1973, after the first five-year period expired, she again applied for the permit
to stay on in India for another five years as a foreigner. And this is the
person who is going to live and die for us.
My friend Cho Ramaswamy told me not to believe what she says, There is not only
a complete divorce between what she says and what she does; there is also a clue
that she will do precisely the opposite of what she says. I will come to it
later; there are instances and instances.
So, she again applied for a foreigner's permit. You know why? Between 1968 and
1973, there were indications of war with Pakistan over East Pakistan. And sure
enough there was the Bangladesh war. During that conflict, when all commercial
pilots were asked to forego their leave and enter service, she asked Rajiv to go
on long leave. He was given special permission and they left the country.
Throughout the period of the war, they were in Rome. Why? Because the American
Seventh Fleet was moving towards India, and Sonia Gandhi probably had serious
doubts about India's survival!
So she deserted the country with her husband. She returned only after peace was
restored, and after India had won the war because of Indira Gandhi. This is
where the stark contrast between Sonia Gandhi and Atal Bihari Vajpayee is most
glaring. Look at their conduct after the two wars.
After the creation of Bangladesh in 1971, Vajpayee, who was the Leader of the
Opposition, stood up in Parliament and congratulated Indira Gandhi for her
courage and vision and praised her as Durga. He was a patriot. At that important
moment, he never thought that acknowledging the achievement of his political
adversary will cost him votes. Yes, he and his party lost votes in both
Partiament and Assembly polls, but not because Vajpayee
stood tall in his praise oflndira Gandi. After the Kargil war, Sonia Gandhi told
the NDA Government, & quote; Please do not ask for any credit.& quote ; This is
meanness, pettiness, smallness, and foreignmindedness.
Sonia Gandhi played politics even with the self-esteem of this country by
choosing the wrong moment to demand an explanation from the government, to raise
issues of corruption in defence deals. Her praise of our armed forces came after
she realised that the people of this country were not taking her criticism very
well. That she was a foreigner and had no business asking for explanations came
across very clearly. Every intelligent lndian knew there were problems,
including corruption associated with some sections of the army and that it was
these problems that resulted in the Kargil invasion.
Should it be used as an occasion to expose a small number of people and defame
the entire army in the process? The army today represents the core of Indian
nationalism. This was the occasion for the nation to rise above everything and
pat the army for its heroism, courage and sacrifice. But only a nationalist will
think like this. However, Sonia Gandhi, who was after votes and political power,
could not think like this. Now let us come to the period between 1973-1978. In
1977, when Indira Gandhi was defeated, Sonia sensed the mood of the nation, took
refuge in the Italian Embassy and refused to come out of it. She said she was
going back to Italy. Sanjay Gandhi had to go and plead with her to return.
Is this is the person who is going to live and die for India? To live in India
is very different from living for India. And to live in India in such glory,
with such protection and resources, is very different from dying for India.
Nationalism will not come by merely wearing saris. It is as much a fancy dress
today as any other dress can be. But some Indians are very happy to see Sonia in
a sari, and regard her stay in India as their good fortune. Why? I am going to
say something which many of you may not like.
Some of you may even say I am a racist. I was discussing this issue with Cho
Ramaswamy. He told me something he may not write but I will share this with you.
Cho said, and I quote, & quote ;If Sonia Gandhi had been black, had been a
person of African origin, this problem would never have arisen.& quote;
Do you understand what this means, unpalatable though it may be to some of you?
It is this fascination for the white skin and it is we, the English educated
Indians, who are responsible for this. Tamil patriot and poet Bharathi said, &
quote ; Ayiram undingu jathi, enil anniyar vanthu pugal enna neethi. & quote ;
Yes, we may have hundreds of castes but that is no reason for an alien to fish
in our troubled waters and play arbiter here. That is what Tilak mean by Swaraj
first. We may fight among ourselves, we may even
kill each other, but we don't want a foreign arbiter.
I know of several political leaders saying that the Indian English Press will
stand against us. Only because the Indian English Press is bound to take a
hostile attitude towards those who consider Sonia as a foreigner and a reluctant
citizen, many political parties are unwilling to make this a national issue.
This is the terrorising influence that the English educated Indian intellectuals
have on the political class. Another argument is that this is not an issue in
the rural areas. If you do not make it an issue, how will it become an issue
there?
The Emergency was imposed in India. The national TV, the Press, everything was
controlled by the government. The cities revolted against the Emergency; in six
months it spread and percolated, and then the villages revolted, too. Ideas
always percolate, but if they are edited at the top, the nation remains
confused. Never in the history of the world has a foreigner ruled another
country except by invasion.
But what is abnormal here is that we are in danger of electing a foreigner to
rule this country. Some Indians do not want to be seen as being narrow-minded or
less liberal. What is this liberalism? One-sixth of humanity living together is
in itself the greatest symbol of liberalism.
We are one-sixth of humanity and we live together and live well together. Let us
now recap what Sonia did in 1978, after Indira Gandhi lost the elections in
1977. Sonia again applied to stay on in India as a foreigner.
In 1968, 1973, 1978- for three five-year terms - Sonia applied for a resident's
permit to stay in India. On April 30, 1983, her third five-year permit expired.
By that time it was certain that Rajiv was to become the heir to Indira Gandhi.
And so, even on April 27, three days before the permit expired, she had still
not opted for Indian citizenship. She wanted to be a foreigner till the last day
the permit allowed her to be so. And this is precisely what Sharad Pawar asked
her in the Congress Working Committee (CWC), in May 1999 It all happened
suddenly. Pawar described to me how it happened. On that day, the CWC was to
discuss the Goa election and Pawar was supposed to present his analysis of the
situation in Goa. The lady came with a prepared speech (please note, even in the
20-member working committee, she comes with a prepared speech).
She began reading her speech. Everybody was surprised at what she had to say.
She said that the Sangh Parivar, against which her mother- in-law carried on a
campaign to finish communalism, against whom her husband did his and that, had
now decided to destroy her.
& quote ;They are branding me a foreigner. I will fight them to the last drop of
my blood. But, I don't want this issue to drag on till the elections. I want it
decided today because if it is decided now, we can fight it out at the time of
the election, and it will be no issue at all. So, I want to know first whether
any of you have any objection to my becoming the Prime Minister,& quote ;she
said.
All these fellows remained silent. And then Madhav Rao Scindia spoke, & quote
;Madam, you do not have to fight the Sangh Parivar propaganda, I will fight it.
This is not your battle, this is my battle:' This set the tone for the rest of
the discussion and soon most members began to ask, who are these RSS people to
dub Sonia a foreigner? Soon it was Sangma's turn to speak. Sangma said, & quote
;Madam, I have very different views on this issue. I don't know anything about
you; There are people who are saying that for 17 years you lived as a foreigner
in India. If the voters ask me, how will I explain? Please tell me why you did
not opt for Indian citizenship in 1968? I cannot convince the people of my
own State, my own constituency on this." And then it was Pawar's turn. He
told me he was sitting immediately to her right. He was the last to speak. He
was the first one to organise a public meeting for her, a massive rally in
Maharastra. He told Sonia, and I quote, & quote ;In that rally, you said I am an
ordinary humble Congress worker. You said I don't want any position, I don't
want power, and I am associated with the Congress family. You also said I don't
even want to become a Congress member. can't bear to see a party with which my
mother-in-law, her father, her grandfather, and my husband were all associated,
decaying like this. So, want to strengthen this party. This is what you said on
that day." Then Pawar told the rally, "If she is willing to do such a
generous job for a nationalist party, there should be no objection. She does not
want to be the president of the party, she does not want to be in any position
and she doesn't want to be an MP.& quote ; Pawar told me that he had recounted
the statements made at that rally to BaI Thackeray in defence of Sonia Gandhi. &
quote ;But the day she ran to the President of India and told him that she had
the support of 272 MPs to become the Prime Minister of India, which was a lie,
all of us changed and I changed, too;" Pawar told me.
Sonia said she was not interested in politics, and that she would never enter
politics. She said she would not become a Congress member but will only help the
party as a person belonging to the Congress fami1y. She said and I quote, "I
am just a four anna member, I will not occupy any position.& quote;
But what happened thereafter? She physically threw out Sitaram Kesri from the
office. The poor fellow was in the toilet. His chair was empty. And do you know
what happened? The Congress goons bolted the toilet door from outside and made
Sonia occupy' his chair, The elderly man wept.
This is how she became the president of the Congress Party. In the same way the
western armies in the past invaded other civilizations and seized power, she
seized power in a 'coup d'toilette'. This is the disconnect between her word and
her action. Her conduct was the very reverse of her profession. she said she had
no ambition to be the Prime Minister. But who ran from pillar to post to bring
down the Vajpayee government?
Again, when the media probed her about the money paid by Bofors to her friend
Quattrocchi, she said, & quote; Yes, the CBI is saying he is a suspect, but they
have not produced any papers; and unless you produce papers to prove that
somebody is guilty, you cannot say he is guilty.& quote;
But what is the truth about Quattrocchi ? In the Bofors deal, the quality of the
gun was not the issue. It was always rated as a good gun, but there was a better
gun called Sofma. In 17 meetings, the negotiating committee kept the Sofma gun
ahead of the Bofors gun from 1984 June to early February 1986. For two years, in
17 meetings, the army brass involved in
the decision making had preferred Sofma to Bofors. But everything changed on
February 17 that year. Please mark the dates. The competition among arms
manufacturers to sell guns to India was on from 1980.
On November 15, 1985, a company called AE Services entered into an agreement
with Bofors. It said, & quote; Gentlemen, I will get you the Government of India
order for Bofors guns. And I will get this order by March 31, 1986. And if I get
it by March 31, you will give me three per cent commission, which is $36.5
million or Rs 160 crore at the current rates of exchange. So, if I get you this
order by March 31, you will give me this commission and if I don't get it you
need not give me anything. You owe no obligation to me.& quote;
Who can enter into this kind of a contract except the person who can get it?
Fina11y, the cat was out of the bag. The person who signed the contract filed an
affidavit in the Swiss Court saying it was Quattrocchi who advised him to enter
into this contract.
The sequence was as fo11ows: On February 17, 1986, the Bofors gun was nowhere in
the picture. However, on March 15 and 16, Rajiv told the Swedish Government ( on
a State visit to Sweden) that he will give Sweden the order for supply of Bofors
guns. On March 17, the negotiating committee cleared the deal in 48 hours.
Eleven officials and Rajiv Gandhi signed the deal and on March 21, 1986, 10 days
ahead of the deadline to which Quattrocchi had committed himself, the contract
was signed.
The bribe agreement between this shady company AE Services, and Bofors said: &
quote;Bofors will pay AE Services proportionate to the amount the Government of
India pays to Bofors.& quote; The Government of India paid 20 per cent of the
money to Bofors and exactly three per cent of 20 per cent was released in
September 1986 to AE Services.
Within 13 days, that money was transferred to an investment company and two
years later, after The Hindu and The Indian Express came out with exposes on the
deal, with documents as proof, it was transferred to another company and the
Swiss Police unearthed the fact that the persons behind all the three companies
into which these monies had gone was Quattrocchi and his wife.
Only they had the authority to sign the secret accounts. When this was found out
and the bank documents were being transmitted, Quattrocchi filed an appeal
against the transmission of documents in the Swiss Court but the court said he
was a dishonest man and overruled the objection saying Quattrocchi was involved
in the deal. He has taken bribes and he is related to the Indian administration
at the highest level, the Swiss Court said.
The Swiss Court order came in July 1993 when Narasimha Rao was the Prime
Minister and the Interpol told the Government of India that Quattrocchi 's
appeal in the Swiss Court had been dismissed, which meant & quote; Arrest
him."e;
The powers-that-be gave Quattrocchi one week's time to escape. Just like Win
Chadha has been allowed to escape an year earlier. And this man too flew out of
India. When the CBI raided his home and found his diary notes,. these revealed
Quattrocchi had been having dinner meetings with Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi. They
found photographs and letters that had been exchanged, and everything was
seized. Thereafter, the Delhi High Court issued an arrest warrant against
Quattrocchi. He appealed to the Interpol which was dismissed.
The Delhi High Court also dismissed it saying his presence was needed and he had
to be arrested. These are all judicial orders printed, published, and available
in the public domain. Thereafter the matter went to the Supreme Court.
Quattrocchi told the Supreme Court through his advocates that he would come and
present himself, and that he should not be arrested. The Supreme Court said,
since the man says he will come and present himself and be available for
interrogation, why should he be arrested? However, Quattrocchi defied the orders
of the Supreme Court and did not turn up. He filed an affidavit in the Swiss
Court saying that India was a brute nation and he cannot get justice in the
judicial system of India.
And Sonia Gandhi is defending this fellow Italian. It is, therefore, a blatant
lie to say there are no documents to prove Quattrocchi's guilt. It is also a lie
that Sonia did not know his plans to abscond from the country. It is impossible
that somebody who resided in Delhi for 20 years, who shared weekly evenings with
Rajiv and Sonia, would have suddenly
left Delhi , without even telephoning to her. She must have been privy to all
these things and she has the audacity to ask where is the proof?
So, truth has nothing to do with Sonia Gandhi. There is an absolute disconnect
between her words and deeds. Now the issue is whether Sonia in politics is a
national shame.
Whether it is a national shame or not, it is certainly a danger to national
security. Why do we have rules in the army which prohibit a foreigner, a foreign
born person, even though he is a citizen, from occupying certain high-ranking
offices in the army? Why do we say that our IPS officers should not be of
foreign origin? Why do we say that our IPS officers cannot marry foreigners?
Now, herein comes the idea of the modern nation-state. A modern nation-state has
a built-in insecurity and that is the reason why it has to secure itself. But
can the Prime Minister have a foreign wife?
Can the Prime Minister's son have a foreign wife? Sitting in the Prime
Minister's Office, in the Prime Minister's home, a foreign wife for 15 years;
who ran away with her husband when the nation was at war, breaching the
discipline of commercial pilots is now a well, established fact. In India, the
MLAs, MPs, and ministers are not subject to any rule or discipline. Even today
whether an MLA or MP is a public servant is a matter that is being debated in
courts.
So, can an MP have a foreign wife.? Can a minister have a foreign wife? This
distortion has crept into the system. And what are the consequences of
foreigners penetrating our polity?
When George Fernandes spoke on this issue on the national television, it was
chilling. He spoke of a particular file whlch contained all the secrets of the
government. Where are the nuclear weapons, where are the missiles, who can press
the button, which missile points in which direction, who are our spy links in
different countries? This single file contains all this information.
That file is not handled by anybody other than the Prime Minister of India. If
Vajpayee ceases to be the Prime Minister and Sonia becomes the Prime Minister,
he will have to hand over this file to her. It will have every nationa1 security
secret. If it falls into wrong hands, it will strip India naked before inimical
forces.
`Can we afford to hand over these secrets to her?` Fernandes said even the
Defence Minister cannot do anything; he cannot look at that file. Even the
Services chiefs know only their part of the secret. The combined, collective
national secret is in the hands of one man that will be handed over to this
foreigner, should she achieve her political ambition.
Whether somebody can speak tolerable Hindi or not is not the issue; it is far
more serious. It goes to the root of the existence of the nation, its security
and its survival. Sonia's loyalty to India will always be in doubt. If there is
even a millionth of a chance that her loyalty to, this country is in question,
it should be enough to disqualify her from prime minister ship. The issue is not
whether Sonia will succeed in becoming the Prime Minister, but the very idea
that somebody like her can nurse such an ambition.
If the intellectuals of India, whose duty it is to preserve the mind of India
have failed, I am certain that at least the ordinary people of India will
succeed in protecting national interest as they did in 1977.
Facts about Sonia
This is some information on prospective PM of India - Sonia Gandhi that every
Indian must know.
1. Sonia Gandhi is ONLY a high school graduate. It is not even sure if she is
Metric pass or fail. Cambridge University has confirmed that they have no Sonia
Maino on their alumni list.
2.. Her sister, Nadia Mario, who had never visited India before rushed to New
Delhi, after Vajpayee govt.fell, to be by her side amidst reports that she
might soon become India's Prime Minister.
3. Should Sonia Gandhi become Prime Minister, her relatives in Italy would be
fully entitled to round-the-clock protection by the Black Cat commandos at the
Indian taxpayer's expense.
4..She worked as an house maid in UK while taking classes to learn English in
some no name school. She was from a poor family in Italy but now has almost as
much money as Bill Gates (guess whose money is it).
5.. During the 1971 war, while all Indians stood ready to fight for the Indian
cause Sonia Maino and her husband Rajiv Gandhi went on vacation in Italy.
6.. In 1977, when Indira Gandhi and Congress lost elections, Sonia Gandhi with
her children and husband in tow took refuge of Italian embassy in New Delhi.
Only after Indira Gandhi, Sanjay and his Indian wife Maneka convinced her that
they came back.
7.. Sonia married Rajiv in 1968 and was eligible to become Indian citizen 5
years later yet she did NOT become Indian citizen till 1984 I.e. 16 years after
her marriage) This late bloom of Sonia's love for India also was out of
political consideration. In 1984, Rajiv, was heir apparent and most likely next
Prime Minister. It would be awkward for a PM to have a foreigner wife. Voila,
Sonia became an Indian Overnight.
8.. She has not given a single interview or offered any ideas on a single
issue facing India now. Her only qualification is that she married a Gandhi. No
newspaper has taken up the issue; no political party is opposing this, people
are falling in line as if this is nothing unusual.
9.. Sonia became an Indian citizen in 1984 but did not surrender her Italian
citizenship. She continues to be simultaneously a citizen of India and Italy as
Italian law does not require her to surrender her Italian citizenship or
passport. Simply put, Sonia is a dual citizen of India and Italy, now dreaming
of becoming the next Prime Minister of India (she
can also legally become the prime minister of Italy!).
|
