 Hello, welcome to NewsClick and you are watching Present, Past and the Future. First of all, a happy new year to all of you and we wish that this year is going to be the year of redemption, one in which the citizen of India get free of fear that we have been living for the last five years. Fear because of what all has been happening in the country since 2014 and the fear which is being generated by the present regime of what would happen if they are not re-elected. So this process of fear, this time creating fear for one's benefit has to end. Now, we are also entered the last lap of possibly the most confrontational years between two parliamentary elections. In all 30 years plus of being a journalist, I have not seen five years between two parliamentary elections being such confrontational, not a day or a week has gone by whether in which some basic foundations of the Indian Republic have not been challenged and backed by those in power or those who are supporting them. So obviously, this is going to a very important elections in 2019. Now, we have also noticed that since the middle of 2017, the so-called Modi Charisma has been declining. We first saw signs of it immediately in July after the rollout of GST and then we saw an emerging challenge in Gujarat throughout 2018, a large number of bi-elections took place in which the BJP lost more seats than winning them. And finally, we had the assembly elections in which the BJP lost power in three states, very important states, all a part of the Hindi heartland from where the BJP got as many as almost 200 seats out of the 280 to that it had. We are still in the process of trying to understand that what kind of this trend continues to what extent would the damage be done to the BJP. The point is that we want to talk about is that is the Modi Charisma really on the decline and if so, whether this is going to become get into a terminal decline or whether there is still any scope for him to stage a recovery. Now, I am joined in this conversation by Anand Sahay, a very senior journalist, somebody who has reported on this for almost four decades, Apurva Nan, a professor of Delhi University, one of the leading public intellectuals of this country. I want to begin with you Anand and I want to also tell Apurva Nan and the viewers that when I call you to check that are you available to come for this program, you say yes, I am very much here and I am in the central hall. There was a certain amount of glee in your voice, this new energy, you know central hall is where there is a lot of you can actually sense a pulse of the nation to a great extent. Do you think that there is actually what we are talking about, you know that there is actually a sense of hope out from the despair that we are talking about at least which I feel that has been there for the large part that Mr. Modi has been prime minister. Well, I think this government is a goner, that is the impression I pick up not only talking to opponents of the government in the central hall of parliament, but people who are within the BJP, people who are allies of the BJP parties. One can see a sense of some trepidation, quite apart from the trepidation one saw a few months earlier when the fear had become evident that the same set of people will not get nominations to fight on the BJP ticket, there will be a mass scale change. So there was a worry about. But that always happens. That always happens. But the scale. Set of the incumbent party. No, no, no. Change is a large number of candidates. No, but the scale on which it was being talked about then, like practically 50 percent of BJP MLAs in some of the leading states, MPs may not be renominated. Is this the case of the leadership trying to shift the blame on to local MPs? Partly that, partly BJP more than other parties does this shuffling of the pack. So that fear had commenced at that time. But now what this stinging defeat in these three states about which the Prime Minister remains in denial, as became evident through his interview that day, where he said these results are like hung assembly results. He also said that. The expression hung assembly. Success or failure cannot be determined only by winning or losing elections. After these losses and these losses in a particular area, the so-called Hindi heartland area, from which as you said they picked up so many seats, this has set the cat among the pigeons. There is genuine worry. And the genuine worry is, they realize that these losses can be ascribed straight in a straightforward manner to the farmers questions, to the question of unemployment, to issues arising out of demonetization and GST, all of those things. Those are real issues of everyday life of people. For that, you do not have to be a BJP person or a Congress person or a left person or Mayawati person to feel the impact of all those dreadful policies. Therefore, the reality is hitting them, smack in the eye and they are worried as hell. Apurvandan, let me bounce back. Question to you. 2013-14, five years ago in January 2014, I think it was the certainty that Mr. Modi is going to become Prime Minister. All that mattered is that whether the BJP is going to get 200 seats, 210 seats, 220 seats or maybe 250 seats, possibly not even the biggest admirer of the BJP would have actually felt that they are going to get a majority on its own. These are elections which happen once in an epoch, if two actually say that. After 84, you have not had that kind of a mandate ever. Initially last year when matters reports started coming that things were not very comfortable for the BJP in Gujarat. Initially, it appeared to be annexed total, a phrase which has been popularized by Mr. Ranjit Lee and said that anything against demonetization, the sentiment was annexed total. Later on, you had the Gujarat verdict where the BJP just about squeaked through, escaped with the skin of his teeth. Series of by elections through 2018, so it is not annexed total, there is empirical data. So, how are you seeing the ground in the mood, the changing nature of the discourse and what reports you are getting from or from those who are analyzing data? I think if we go back to 2015, when assembly elections took place and then Bihar and then Bihar, Modi Karishma didn't work in Delhi and Bihar too, Modi Karishma didn't work. Despite the BJP saying that there are going to be fireworks in Pakistan. In Pakistan and Modi also resorting to the cow politics in Bihar. That's the time when also, you had the unfortunate incident in Dadri when Mohammed Akhlam was listening to the people and Modi tried to appeal to the worst instincts of Hindus in Bihar elections, let's not forget that. Despite that, the Hindus of Bihar didn't go by what Modi was trying to sell them. But people say that people of Bihar are more politicized than the rest of the country. No, but that also means that there are more, a lot of common people also. But mobilizing only the common element was not going to be enough. Yes. And if you leave Bihar aside and if you come to Delhi, what happened in Delhi, all of us know. But let's leave that. This morning I was going from botanical garden to JP hospital and I was in Delhi and I was in an auto rickshaw. And the auto rickshaw wall was from Chhapra, Bihar. And he has been working in Delhi for the last 20 years. And he told me that now it's very different the scene from what it was in 2013-14. Because the cars that I used to have in the past two years were not ready to listen to anything against Modi. But now they remain quiet and some people don't think about Modi. And so the fear of speaking out is slowly disappeared. Disappeared. People are critiquing Modi. They're mocking Modi. And now jokes are taking place. So the Modi Karishma is definitely waning and is disappearing. It's also that people have got tired of Modi, too much of Modi. And they have also overdosed of Modi and they have also seen the arrogance of Modi during the course of demonetization or GST. And now the latest thing that the 2000 rupees notes are not going to be printed anymore by the government. So they feel humiliated. Questions as to why this entire thing was done. And Modi had started acting as an emperor. And for people, he started thinking he was God. He was God. And it's very difficult for the people of India to digest that. That somebody can even think of acting as king or emperor or God. Actually, I don't think that Indians like to be talked down to. That is true. But the most graphic and the most pernicious example of talking down to people, as you put it rightly, in the face of their immediate experience that we saw only a few days ago in the PM's interview, A&I interview, where for long stretches of that conversation, he says demonetization was a good idea. It was not shock therapy. It did good for the country, good for the economy, good to the people. Now this is like someone who's fallen down, you give that person one more kick. That was his attitude. Mr. Modi in that interview, and this again, I put down to an emperor cut off from reality, living in the past. Where he says in that interview, there is nothing has happened in the last four years. You have. January one interview. You have looked at the BJP very closely for a second. If I may just finish this thought quickly. In that interview, he says nothing has happened in the last four and a half years. We should set the people against my government. None of the policy failures which are seen as failures by ordinary Indians of all classes, all regions and religions and castes, and other groups, they have all been hit in some measure or the other as a consequence of many of these things. But our leader, unfortunately, does not see it that way. Right. In Apurvanand, what Anand is saying that do you think that despite the fact that BJP saying that there is not enough evidence that you are purely talking about some stray random stories, what does Apurvanand traveling in one auto disease use this to say that this is happening in the rest of the country. The point is, I think, let us try to understand that what has happened in the BJP narrative. In 2013 and 14, Mr. Modi was the alternative. Now, the thing is that he should be re-elected because there is no alternative. So, from the alternative he becomes here because there is nobody else. So, do you think that this is actually self-confession that yes, there has been a tremendous. And is it true that there is not anybody else there? I am not sure of that. That is a separate question. But the shift that you are talking about itself is an evidence that BJP now believes that the Bharati in the party and the Rastri Swamsevak Sangh that the inevitability of Modi is no longer there. So, Modi has now to be presented as somebody you cannot do without because there is no alternative. And that again trying to mock Rahul Gandhi and a fresh and renewed attack on Rahul Gandhi. And I would even say that the attack on Rahul Gandhi by the body of journalists is also an evidence that this is how you denigrate him and you say that he has that DNA of the dictator of emergency, of his grandmother. So, in the polarized world that India has become, the media has also got polarized. Yes, the media has not got polarized, media has practically gone the way of the powers that be by and large. Because I was amused, I was amused. With honorable exceptions aside. Yes, I was amused. I would like to believe that there are still people but who are not, who do not have the courage to say that for reasons of survival. A few honorable people, they are keeping the flag flying. But it was very interesting because Rahul Gandhi had merely said that the journalist was pliable. He shouldn't have said that, that's my view also. Your view. But pliable is not a word, which would say that it's comparable to prostitutes. Prostitutes or to news trader. This is more used. You know, I was asked to write an article by a website on the interview in which I did talk about as to the choice of the scribe and I did say that besides of course the fact that A&I provides a perfect platform in the sense that it gets picked up simultaneously by every television channel also has a good print. Footprint is also the fact that the journalist interviewing is not a very unsympathetic journalist, you know, who has not to say that there has been sympathy to which she has not been not unsympathetic. That apart. That apart. Professionally speaking, anyone, any person can have, people can have their own sympathies for different ideas, different parties or politics and so on. But if I think the whole thing was prearranged in a particular fashion and the thing is this, you are told, you can ask a question, whatever the issue is, after that our country's leaders will answer it and then the follow-up supplementary question is valid. That's the point. If I had come to you from the United States, from the Prime Minister of India, whatever the big leaders of the world are, you interview them like this, I would say, thank you very much, not my cup of tea. I would walk away from it. But this interview itself shows that Modi has become very desperate. Nervous. There's another point. Moving on from the interview, I want to talk about that the experience of the last five years, also the way in which the public mode has changed, also given the past history of the country, do you think that India's socio-economic to use our pluralism or our composite nature, not in just our society, but also there is a certain economic compositeness also which is to be required, is more secure when we have a slightly insecure regime. If you look back at history, I do not think the people of India have been greatly benefited by those regimes which have had very strong leaders. We have had the experience of Indira Gandhi after the 71 war when she had a massive mandate, but could not really control the government. There is a lot of resentment and even Rajiv Gandhi came with such a thumping majority. Within two years, script started going wrong against him. So, would you say that actually despite the denigration of coalitions not really working, is possibly the best the why for a country like India of so much of diversity? Why not? I do not think coalitions are bad and I do not think coalitions do not provide stability if economy is concerned or if social cohesion is concerned. So, how do societies live is the question and that social cohesion has been shattered and it badly needs restoration. So, any alternative which replaces this government should be welcome. Well, I would say that this government is also a coalition frankly speaking. In that coalition, the one party getting 280 plus seats would not have been possible if it had contested on its own because it contested as part of a coalition, the NDA coalition and therefore Well, on its own 31 percent would not have got them 34, 7 percent which got them 280 to 6. And on its own, it may not have been 31 percent at all. And it also helps them show that it was in a way representative of a consensus. Absolutely. Despite this. Now, in spite of this, what I am saying is I have as a Puranan said, I have nothing as coalitions. I think coalitions have been stable, they have been fine. Nor do I have anything in particular in a definitional way against one party having a majority. Now, I am not here in a normal kind of majority. I am not speaking of the majority you had like out of 550, 530 seats, you have 450 seats, one party has. That is a different situation where tyranny of the majority can actually come into be brought into play with greater ease. And according to the political convenience of the leader or the coterie around the leader, let us say. So, I think this is, I do not think we can make a proper firm hypothesis of the fact is a coalition in every situation to be preferred to a single party majority in every situation. It depends on a host of other factors. What kind of class representation do the MPs have? What kind of class representation does the leader himself or herself represent? That and what is tuning with the ideas of international life are tuning to the idea of science and technology are. India is such a complicated and a country with a certain kind of culture where culture itself is changing in a variety of ways and affecting large sections of young Indians. So, a leader or leadership group, how it connects with all those factors. Whether you are a coalition leader or a single party leader, a lot depends on the kind of people, your sympathies, do you have sympathies and compassion for the poorer sections of society or not. So, that takes you to the class question. It takes you to the question of what Gandhiji used to talk, not in terms of class, but the poor, the needy, the last person, all those things. So, all these are also factors to be considered. I do not think I can, in a position to draw a straight line and say, coalition achha hae automatically or wo bura hae or the other vera. But I have to address one thing which we have talked about in a very passing way, this so called charisma. Charisma of our present leader of the country. I believe he has no charisma. I believe he had no charisma from day one. I believe that winning an election in a big way does not automatically confer charisma. I think there was a wave at that time which I was not experienced enough to see. I am making a confession. I made a mistake in my assessment at that time. But I think so did the RSS. I think RSS took advantage of the fact that the ground had started crumbling under the Manmohan Singh government or Congress party. That started in 2010 itself. If we actually look back at what happened, what led to the verdict of 2000? I will tell you one quick point. One quick point, Ranjan, if you please permit, is this that I think in that making of that wave, there are several factors but a very important factor is the role played by the media. And the media was either whipped into submission or they were incentivized in other ways. And but for that very, the media to the last man almost, I am talking to the big sections of the media, they played the part of a certain campaign. Another major point, as an outsider from outside the media, we have two people from the media. No one should really actually feel that whether the media is still as influenced as in 2013-14. Do you think it is? I would still say yes. I have another related question which stems out from this. And if you look at Hindi media and language media, then... The language media, not just the Hindi media. That's very important. Language media. Fair to just call it the Hindi media, but basically the English media is considered to be more balanced, more circumspected. This is to a different kind of an audience, but even there there has been a lot of division, a lot of change. It is said that there are three things which can still swing things back the BJP's way. One is overplaying of the divisive card, dividing people, Hindu, Muslim, Hindutva, Ram temple, Sabrimala, Triple Talak, endlessly beef eating, cow protection, goes on endlessly, UP, UP, anything. You can talk about anything, wearing Kurta Pajama for instance. Just about anything. Second is that Mr. Modi's last minute ability to come into the campaign and actually being able to change things in his favor. That failed, that failed. Well, in Gujarat it worked. Well, just about. You know, there are, you know, okay. You know, these and then the third and most important thing of which signs are available, that out here is going to be a leader who's going to be the government. It still has about six to eight weeks before the model code of conduct comes into play. Economic doles, distribute money. You have a Janathan system, dole out, dole out. Poor economics, but so what gets. So the fourth factor, what about the opposition? They have to get the act together also. Yes, that's very important. Do you think that there is a possibility of a revival? There is always a possibility because these divisive factors are being played out daily. The Prime Minister spoke about Vande Mataram or Jo Vande Mataram Rokte Hain Onse Saawdhan Rahana Chaiye. This is what he spoke in Gurdaspur. So, look at how. That's a common. The tone of the Prime Minister Arun Jaitley and others. So, it's getting harsher and harsher. And again harping on the same issues of nationalism, Vande Mataram. Even the Vice President went to the function of Akil Bharti with the Arthiparishad. And there was this RSS Functionary. And both of them started talking about the importance of Rashtwad, how Rashtwad was very important. And there are forces which are trying to undermine Rashtwad. So, in a way, the Vice President is also participating in this whole discourse. Yes, so this is what we need to understand that. They'll argue that the previous Vice President talked about the secular fabric of this country. So, he was also participating in the political and dominant political narrative. And if I understand RSS correctly, RSS would not like power to go out of its hands. So, it would go even out of its way to keep it within its grips. And Narendra Modi still continues to be the best bet for RSS. There's no alternative for Narendra Modi in Bharti-Janta Party, even if Nitin Gadkari is being presented as an alternative to Narendra Modi. Because Narendra Modi can still appeal to the worst instincts that lie somewhere deeply buried within us and can instigate that. No other leader has that capacity or that ability. So, what comes out from both of you, you know, talking with both of you, is that while there is definitely science of hope of some kind of a regime change, we really cannot be known, can be complicit. Most of it, which Anand said, the opposition has to put its acts together. We are no one, we are nobody to be advising them as to what they should do. We are observing the same. We are observing the situation. As journalists, the two of us, or as a public intellectual, it is our duty to keep on observing. But also alerting people, also alert people. And alert people as to what we think, are the dangers for them if things which have gone on, you know, continue over the next five years also. So, we will continue to talk about this. And I think it is time that between now and the elections, whenever they held, this is an issue, this is going to be possibly one of the most important elections in India's contemporary history. Thank you for watching this program.