At first glance, the headline and the photographs might make you think of an irresponsible fantasy. As one colleague put it, the words and ideas have been simply conjured from behind the safe shadows of a comfortable arm chair! But then think again: what are the three critical problems that India faces on the domestic front in the 21st century? The first is lifting about 500 million Indians from abject poverty. Aruna Roy has done remarkable work in this area for almost four decades. The second is waging war against the cancer of communalism that threatens the very foundations of our society. Teesta Setalvad has been waging war against communalism for more than a decade. The third is the disruptive manner in which exploitative crony capitalism is threatening Indian democracy. Arundhati Roy, during the course of her passionate and outspoken struggle against this, has seceded from the Indian Republic way back in 1998.
On the face of it, all three represent ideas that are critical for the very survival of India. Why, then, are they disruptive for India? The fact is: the three are symbols of an insidious mindset that is resulting in tragic consequences for India. They represent a “my way or highway” approach to problems and their solutions that brooks no dissent and no difference of opinion. Aruna Roy seems to think poverty can be eradicated without growth; Teesta Setalvad refuses to accept even considered judicial opinions if they differ with her world view of who and what is communal and Arundhati Roy finds not a single redeeming feature in Indian democracy. Isn’t it time for people like them to engage in a honest and non judgmental debate over India’s future?
This was soon after Pranab Mukherjee was elected as the 13th President of India with an overwhelming majority in July, 2012. After taking advice from senior leaders and back room warriors, the Congress President Sonia Gandhi and the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh together came to an inescapable conclusion: it was time to do something about the Indian economy that was going into a tailspin and spooking investors as well as consumers across the board. Despite official denials, the duo were deeply concerned by the words used in a report released by the global rating agency Standard & Poor in June, 2012. Some of the remarks that rattled Mrs Gandhi and rankled with Dr Singh were: “Slowing GDP growth and political roadblocks to economic policy making could put India at the risk of losing its investment grade rating…paramount political power rests with the Congress President Sonia Gandhi who holds no cabinet position, while the government is led by an unelected Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who lacks a political base of his own…it would be ironic if a government under the economist who spurred much of the liberalization of India’s economy and helped unleash such gains were to preside over their potential erosion…”
This resulted in Gandhi and Singh asking the “crisis man for all seasons” P. Chidambaram to reclaim the crucial post of Union Finance Minister. Since then, Chidambaram has tried every trick in the book to restore investor and consumer confidence as well as economic growth. Since then, the UPA government has taken the “bold and reformist” step of allowing foreign direct investment in retail despite Mamata Bannerjee walking out of the government and the UPA. Alas, even the universally acknowledged efficiency and dynamism of Chidambaram has not helped. Latest data indicates that GDP growth in 2012-13 has been just about 5%, the lowest in a decade. Both Gandhi and Singh realize what widespread allegations of corruption coupled with low growth rates that restrict economic opportunities will mean during the 2014 Lok Sabha elections when the middle class decides to express its anger and disgust.
It is against this backdrop that the widely respected Aruna Roy announced her disassociation from the National Advisory Council, the “kitchen cabinet” whose chairperson is Sonia Gandhi. In her letter of “resignation” sent to Mrs Gandhi, Aruna Roy lambasted the government led by Dr Singh for jettisoning the idea of inclusive growth. “I do believe it is extremely unfortunate that the Prime Minister rejected the NAC recommendations on payment of minimum wages to MGNREGA workers…Given the hunger and malnutrition scenario in the country, a Food Security Bill should have been debated and passed by the Parliament now…”
How does that make the respected Aruna Roy disruptive? After all, no one with even an iota of sense would disagree with the contention that India has no future without inclusive growth. Let’s look at that in a while.
Around the time Mrs Gandhi was confabulating with Dr. Singh on ways to restore the growth momentum in the Indian economy, she was also busy discussing strategy with senior Congress leaders on an equally important issue: how to tackle Narendra Modi and the assembly elections due in Gujarat by the end of 2012. By this time, Mrs Gandhi had realized that the well oiled PR and marketing offensive launched by acolytes of Modi was the biggest threat to Congress prospects in 2014. By the time the monsoon season was well underway in India, it was clear to the Congress that Narendra Modi was looking well beyond Gujarat and eyeing the post of the Prime Minister. Intense discussions with trusted leaders like Ahmed Patel and Digvijay Singh led Mrs Gandhi to formulate a simple strategy to counter the looming Modi threat: It was to reduce the margin of victory of Modi to such an extent that his Delhi ambitions would be nipped in the bud. The Congress campaign focused on puncturing the hype surrounding Modi and Gujarat as the successful growth and development model that the rest of India should follow. But while this campaign went full steam ahead, the Congress think tank continued with the old strategy of targeting Modi for his role during the shameful 2002 post Godhra riots in Gujarat. Every now and then, “allies” like IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt would launch a diatribe that tried to project that Modi was guilty of both omission and commission during the riots and its aftermath. So much so that the wife of Sanjeev Bhatt contested the assembly elections with blessings of the Congress party. Simultaneously, Zakia Jafri, the widow of former Congress M.P Ehsaan Jafri, who was brutally butchered by a mob during the riots, refused to accept the report of the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigative Team which basically exonerated Modi for lack of evidence. She continued to file petitions against the SIT report and a “protest” petition is being heard even now in a court. But even Congressmen privately admit that while Zakia is the aggrieved widow seeking justice, it is controversial activist Teesta Setalvad who is the moving force behind this part of the “demonize and demolish” Modi campaign. As it turned out, the dual strategy adopted by Mrs Gandhi and her warriors failed to enthuse the voters in Gujarat who gave 115 seats to Modi and the BJP in December, 2012, two less than in 2007 and five less than in 2002. That decisive victory against formidable odds has enabled the supporters of Modi generate even more hype about his ostensible qualities as a future Prime Minister.
Meanwhile, Teesta Setalvad continues her unflagging campaign against “communalism” and is not averse to taking pot shots even at the Congress party. On May 15th, 2013, Teesta Setalvad attended a state conference of the left leaning AIYF organized in Kozhikode in Kerala where delegates lambasted Chief Minister Oomen Chandy of the Congress led government for following neo imperialist policies. Addressing the charged up delegates, Setalvad went back to her pet theme (Gujarat riots) when she thundered, “Well before the era of Narendra Modi, Gujarat had been set for communalism and the brutal anti constitutional and anti minority polcies. It is a fact that Narendra Modi took it to the ultimate extent. There was no resistance from the civil society, trade unions, professional organizations and business bodies. This was planned in such a way that rapacious globalization policies could be implemented…The PR exercise being carried out for the makeover of Narendra Modi now is backed by the neo liberal corporates, which have amassed a significant number of shares in television channels. This disruptive nexus is a threat to the country, democracy and free speech”.
Question number two: What makes Teesta Setalvad so disruptive? After all, no one with any sense will disagree with the contention that communalism is a serious threat to the future of India. Let’s get to that in just a little while after we provide a backdrop to the third personality of this disruptive triumvirate, namely, Arundhati Roy.
When Sonia Gandhi was finalizing the return of Chidambaram to the Finance Ministry with Manmohan Singh and brainstorming with Ahmed Patel and Digvijay Singh on a strategy to contain the Modi menace, she was confronted with another dilemma and delicate decision. As Chidambaram moved on to conjure up more dream budgets, the crucial and sensitive post of Home Minister became vacant. There were some in the Congress party who were not comfortable with the idea of Sushil Kumar Shinde as the Union Home Minister. Even as the name of the then Power minister Shinde was being bandied about, India became a laughing stock as a virtual collapse in the electricity grids of north and east India brought large parts of India to a standstill, including trains stopping dead in their tracks. According to Congress insiders, Mrs Gandhi finally opted for what is called the “Pratibha Patil” solution. The key reason for the Congress Boss choosing Patil as the 12th President of India, despite her many flaws, was because she was completely reliable and trustworthy. Ditto with Sushil Kumar Shinde who now vies with a predecessor Shivraj Patil in taking honours in incompetence as the Union Home Minister.
When Shinde took charge as the Home Minister, the most significant threat to internal security came from Maoists as there was a perceptible toning down of insurgency in Kashmir and the North East as well as terrorist attacks planned and launched from across the border in Pakistan. The Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh repeatedly identified Maoist violence as the single biggest threat to India’s internal security. The South Asia Terrorism Portal, in its report presented in 2012 had clearly stated that the government was on the Blackfoot, both at the center and the states when it came to curbing the menace of Maoism. According to the report: “State responses have also shifted track, with the vaulting clear, hold and develop strategy aggressively advocated by the Home Ministry, and enthusiastically embraced by some states- particularly including Chattisgarh- having been entirely abandoned indeed after the Chintalnad incident of April 2010 in which 76 CRPF personnel were killed. The aggressive area domination approach was abruptly discarded, as the disconnect between objectives and capabilities became obvious even to those who had deliberately blinded themselves to the realities of the ground. The ministry has since shift its rhetoric to a holistic approach increasingly emphasizing development…”
So by the time Shinde took over, the ruling establishment had succumbed to stubborn insistence of many intellectuals and activists that winning hearts and minds was a better way of dealing with Maoists than bullets. In fact, there were deep divisions on this issue even within the Congress party with Digvijay Singh publicly lambasting the then Home Minister Chidambaram for adopting a hard line stand against the Maoists. To be fair, even the Supreme Court of India had delivered two verdicts that made the hearts and minds approach more credible. In one verdict delivered in Muly, 2011, the apex Court declared the Salwa Judum illegal and ordered the Chattisgarh government to disband it. The Salwa Judum was started by the slain Congress leader Mahendra Karma as a kind of citizen vigilantism against the Maoists with full support of the BJP government led by Raman Singh. About two months before that on April 15, 2011, the Supreme Court had granted bail to activist doctor Binayak Sen and observed that it was not a crime to be a Maoistsympathizer. 
Sen had been arrested by cops in Chattisgarh for allegedly helping Maoists and was convicted by a local court on charges of sedition. Ever since these two verdicts were delivered, the human rights lobby was emboldened and questioned virtually every operation of the security forces. Around the time Shinde took over as the Home Minister, security forces in Chattisgarh claimed that they had killed 17 Maoists in a fierce encounter in the forests of Bijapur district. The human rights lobby fiercely disputed this claim and demanded a Supreme Court monitored investigation with Swami Agnibesh saying, “All those killed are innocent tribal villagers. It was cold blooded mass murder.”
This see saw battle between the bullets versus hearts and minds approaches continued into 2013 with the later enjoying a clear upper hand. An unmistakable message was sent by Sonia Gandhi about the intent of the UPA regime by giving a sinecure to Sen in the Planning Commission.
And then it happened on May 25, 2013. Maoists attacked a convoy of Congress leaders that was traveling through jungles near Bastar. They inflicted 78 knife and bullet wounds on the body on Congress leader and founder of Salwa Judum Mahendra Karma in the process of killing him and then danced over his dead body in a macabre ritual of celebrating ‘victory’. They ‘abducted’ the state Congress president Nand Kumar Patel and his son. Their mutiliated dead bodies were found subsequently. Veteran Congress leader and former Union Minister V.C Shukla has been badly shot and is battling for his life in a Gurgaon hospital.
That reminded many of the stand taken by the self styled activist Arundhati Roy on the issue of Maoist violence. Here is just a bit from an interview that Arundhati Roy gave to Sagarika Ghose of CNN-IBN after 76 CRPF personnel were killed by the Maoists in 2010:”I think he (Chidambaram) is fighting with an imagination that is chained to the corporate companies that he wants to serve…Enron to Vedanta to all the companies that he has represented. I am not necessarily accusing him of being corrupt. I am,accusing him of having an imagination that is driving this country into a very serious situation and it is going to affect all of us”.
Question number 3: How is Arundhati Roy disruptive? After all, anyone with sense will agree with the contention that crony capitalism is a cancer inflicting India and depriving the poor and marginalized of their land and livelihood?
Now let’s look at the headline of this story all over again: India’s most disruptive Trimurti. To be sure, even their enemies will agree that all three are genuinely and passionately committed to their pet causes. And there is no doubt that the issues they are raising are fundamental to the future of Indian democracy. Aruna Roy is absolutely right when she says that India cannot truly prosper without inclusive growth. Teesta Setalvad is absolutely right when she says that Hindutva brand of communalism is dangerously destructive for India. And Arundhati Roy is absolutely right when she says that crony capitalism is making a mockery of Indian democracy.
So how and why have they become disruptive? The bland fact is, they are not disruptive as individuals but as symbols of a disruptive mindset. Quite simply, the three symbolize a mindset that presumes their viewpoint and their solutions are as good as gospel and contemptuously dismiss any different point of view or solution as worse than blasphemy. And that is not good for India. Aruna Roy is so focused on welfare schemes as a,solution for poverty that she is unwilling to accept what even many left of center analysts accept- that it is important to first have growth before you can have inclusive growth. Teesta Setalvad is so focused on the alleged communal sins of Narendra Modi and his alleged role in the 2002 Gujarat riots that she prefers to reject conclusions drawn by an investigative and judicial process under the direct supervision of the Supreme Court. Arundhati Roy is so focused on the exploitation of tribals through crony capitalism that she simply dismisses Indian democracy as a farce with nothing redeeming to show for more than 65 years of effort.
Most important, I think, is the role played by Sonia Gandhi as the patron saint of these symbols and the mindset they represent. She is unquestionably the most powerful and influential political leader in the country, no matter what sycophants of Narendra Modi would have us believe. Isn’t it time she paused and reflected on the Frankenstein’s monsters that her admittedly well meaning actions are creating? It is really her call because it would be futile to expect the Trimurti to change either their opinions or their obduracy.
