Arvind Kejriwal’s Mission:
This is a positive critique in support of Arvind Kejriwal and should be perceived as such. Prior to 2015 Assembly victory in Dilli, the widespread perception was that the party had imploded due to the series of events that followed his resignation as CM post, which earned him the moniker “Baghoda”. The set backs included the disastrous Lok Sabha election results, followed by the in fighting, the defections that took place, talk of cronyism in the party, the cult around Arvind Kejriwal and criticisms of his dictatorial style, his parting of ways with many he worked with and who helped him to get where he is. AK was vilified by the press and summarily crucified. But AK prevailed, he apologized, he reinvented himself and led his party to victory. With that a new dawn has arisen for AK, AAP and India.
Arvind Kejriwal is on a mission to change the Nation that is mired in corruption and "Crony Capitalism" such as the 2G and Coal Block Allocation scams. Obstinacy, obsession, persistence and political incorrectness are par for the course when on a mission, faced with extreme opposition. In order to understand AK, the “Muffler Man” has to be viewed trough the lens of his “laser focus” to accomplish his Mission and his academic training as an engineer.
A Mahatma in the Making:
Mahatma Gandhi gave up a lucrative legal practice in South Africa in his Thirties to become a full time activist. He returned to India in 1915 when he was 46. AK left a cushy, comfortable, secure position of Joint Commissioner at the Indian Revenue Service when he was 37. Hence, given his accomplishments he could well be a Mahatma in the making. The fact that he is in government and has the power to introduce policies that will bring about the desired change, positions him to be extremely effective. In essence he is in charge of both his and India’s destiny.
What you see in AK is a person who is resolute on Policy and Strategy, and modest as a person.
The Master Strategist:
AK is a master strategist and a "marketing genius". There is no doubt about that based on the phenomenal results of winning 67 out of 70 seats in the 2015 Dilli Assembly Elections. Some of his decisions turned out to be right and others wrong. Results count and in the final analysis both his right and seemingly wrong decisions have absolved him. He has been accused by insider Prashant Bhushan as making compromises to win at all cost. Politics is War and winning is a goal as long as the party’s principles are not obliterated. AK made a blunder in the previous election by stating that he will neither give nor take support from others and then capitulating to take “outside support” from elected Congress MLAs to form a minority government. However, this was done after consulting voters. “Compromises” made have to be within the framework of the law. At times these compromises might “skirt” the party’s core principles and have to be rationalized on a case by case basis. This doesn’t mean the party’s core principles are thrown out of the window. Furthermore the goal is to field good candidates who can win. True, a number of candidates are wealthy and not “aam aadmi”. The message has to positioned as, “I am for the Aam Aadmi as opposed to I am an Aam Aadmi”. Ever since AK gained national and international recognition, he ceased to be an aam aadmi. The goal of AAP is to position itself with an agenda that is pro-people, pro-progress, pro-environment, pro-good governance, pro-transparency and resolutely against corruption. Winnable candidates who can push this agenda have to be fielded. The results in Dilli speak for themselves. 67 elected out of 70 gives the party resounding “Political Capital”. AK has said if anyone indulges in questionable behavior and practices, they will be forced to resign.
Strategic Decision Making:
Strategy cannot be derived in a democratic manner by committee. Making decisions that may not be agreed to by the "majority" will be cast as being dictatorial, regardless of the manner in which decisions are made. AAP is in its infancy and requires a strong leader. Furthermore there will always be some level of sycophancy wherein some will agree with the leader all the time. The issue is whether the leader is open to criticism and willing to admit his/her mistakes. AK has demonstrated both these attributes by publicly acknowledging his mistakes, along with some of his shortcomings and apologizing for them. It is up to the party insiders to challenge him if the occasion rises. That too is happening and is a healthy situation.
Application of Engineering Principles:
Conventional wisdom indicates that identifying and understanding a problem leads half way to solving it. An engineer’s scientific mind is trained to thoroughly understand and define the scope of a problem in the process of solving it. The solution may involve removing or working around constraints. Experimentation, trial and error are at times an integral part of the process in solving problems. Edison was faced with numerous unsuccessful attempts in inventing the incandescent light bulb. He persevered and attributed every failure as a step towards success. AK studied as an engineer and that has to be taken into consideration to understand his approach at solving the problems he is confronted with.
Accommodating One Person One Post:
The one person one post makes sense if the posts require a lot of work and attention. AK has to succeed in Dilli if the party is to survive. When it comes to strategy there is no one other than AK. One solution is to create a new post of Chief Strategist that is assumed by AK. Let us be frank, there is no other person in AAP that can fill this post effectively. The National Convener role should be made a tactical/operational role that implements the strategy. This bifurcation of Strategy and Operational roles would free up AK to focus on governing Dilli and set the strategy as well.
Going National:
The expansion of AAP to other States is a foregone conclusion. State Chapters are energized and enthusiastic after the Dilli success. But they cannot rely on AK’s active participation to grow. India is not Dilli and Dilli is not India. The election in Dilli brought forth a new Class of Voter, who was not bound by caste, community and religion. People voted for participatory democracy, to improve the quality of their lives, for good governance, for the opportunity to fulfill their aspirations, and putting a stop to rampant corruption. However India is still mired and welded to caste, religion and community politics. The old guard and old allegiances holds sway. It is a long and winding road with many challenges ahead.
There is a lot of grass roots work that needs to be accomplished before the party makes any head away at the National level. Dilli is the beacon of hope for the party to succeed at the National level. AK’s self proclaimed mission is to be successful is Dilli. The opportunity for AAP at the State level is to leverage AK’s accomplishments. Message to State Chapters, “Focus on State and local issues. Win a beach head in the State that can serve as the “nerve center” from which to expand. Note Dilli has only seven Lok Sabha seats. When concerned about what is happening in Dilli, take steps not to replicate what is happening there. Rely on AK’s accomplishment as CM. Don’t expect him to participate in State level activities and initiatives”.
The issue of falling out with people:
Critics of AK point out his abandoning the "hand that fed him" as mentioned in the following article (included at the very end):
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/inside-track-5/
Differences between AK and others over Strategy and Policy are often portrayed and amplified by the media as “personal differences”. The “Parting of Ways” when in conflict with the mission doesn’t necessarily mean a personal falling out, although some have “personal overtones” to them. These need to be examined on an individual basis:
Aruna Roy played an important role in RTI along with others. She along with Jean Druze pushed for the Food Security act and probably had a role in defining the National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREGA) act. Aruna Roy and Jean Dreze are leftists and if left to them, they will push an extremely leftist policy. The National Advisory Committee promoted a pro-poor policy without addressing funding. A disagreement over policy with Aruna Roy is understandable, but that doesn’t mean there are personal issues involved. Besides, Aruna Roy resigned from the NAC over policy issues.
Anna Hazare did all the heavy lifting by fasting and putting his life in danger. AK benefitted from it. However it was clear that Parliament had to be breached in order to bring about changes. AK chose to take this path and Anna was adamant against it. It was Anna who criticized AK, made it a “personal issue” along with some acrimonious statements and accusations. AK has time and again acknowledged Anna as his Guru. What does one do if the Guru distances himself from his student? When the Guru says stand, should the Shishya obey unilaterally? Here again it was a “policy issue” that escalated into a “personal issue”. Both Anna and AK, put Nation over Self, but differed in the path being taken. In such cases cooperation is possible when parties are in agreement. Conflicts arise when parties are opposed.
Kiran Bedi is not all that she projects herself to be. The less said about her the better. The Dilli elections proved her wrong and AK right. Her involvement in the party would have resulted in a constant source of friction. She serves a good purpose by shouting her head off as a "Talking Head" on TV and being a critique of AAP and AK, from the outside.
Justice Hegde could not stomach the political incorrectness and left on his own accord. The Lokpal being pushed by Team Anna cast a net over the States as well. It was Arun Jaitley who pointed out the Federal aspect of our constitution and that the Centre could not stipulate this. Justice Hegde might have pointed this out or if he didn't it was surely an embarrassment to him.
Prashtant Bhushan apparently had major issues over candidate selection. This was an internal issue and had to be settled internally. Prahant Bhushan’s value add to the party is his legal competency, his insistence on transparency and upholding the party’s principles. It appears that Prashant Bhushan’s puritanical idealistic views resulted in friction within the party and it became difficult to work with him. Prashant Bhushan has made many statements that have had to be "walked back" by AK. Many of his statements and interaction with the press have had a negative impact on the party. Group dynamics is important for the smooth operation of the group. His departure from the Political Action Committee could have been handled more gracefully. The party’s ideology gives no privileges just because he and his father put up the initial crore for the party.
Yogendra Yadav is an academic and an analyst. He is a good spokes person and an excellent campaigner. It is not clear what the policy and strategy differences are between him and AK. In upholding the principles of transparency, these differences should be disclosed. If this causes friction in the functioning of strategy, then YY has to concede to AK’s wishes.
Note to Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav:
In summary, both PB and YY have to concede to AK with respect to Strategy. While they have every right to critique and question “strategy” issues, ultimately they have to let AK decide. With regards to “Policy” they have every right to question, critique or propose. Whether they are part of the “inner circle” or have to do so as senior members of the party is a decision best left to party interpersonal and organizational dynamics. That said transparency ought to be limited to policy and strategy issues and who voted for/against/abstained. Members should refrain from making public, “He said, she said” statements under the auspices of transparency. Doing so is breach of confidence and tantamount to engaging in gossip.
The article: “Parting of Ways” by Coomi Kapoor
Arvind Kejriwal is earning a reputation for biting the hand that feeds him. The ouster of Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav was done at his insistence. Years ago, Kejriwal worked under Aruna Roy on the Right to Information campaign. Roy acted as his mentor and guide, recommended him for the Magsaysay Award and helped him when he started his NGO Parivartan. But later he had a bitter falling-out with his mentor. Even those who were associated with Kejriwal in Parivartan, such as Anjali Bhardwaj and Panini Anand, have now left him. Kejriwal called Anna Hazare his guru during the Lokpal campaign, which he exploited to become a nationally known figure. But he disregarded Hazare’s wishes not to join politics. When he formed the Aam Aadmi Party, the initial donation of Rs 1 crore came from Shanti Bhushan. Bhushan’s son Prashant was largely responsible for conceptualising AAP and spreading its message. Several of the corruption exposes came from Prashant. Now Kejriwal’s supporters dismiss Prashant as just one of its 1,000 founder-members. Yogendra Yadav is another one-time ardent supporter-ideologue who enthusiastically campaigned for the party.
This is a positive critique in support of Arvind Kejriwal and should be perceived as such. Prior to 2015 Assembly victory in Dilli, the widespread perception was that the party had imploded due to the series of events that followed his resignation as CM post, which earned him the moniker “Baghoda”. The set backs included the disastrous Lok Sabha election results, followed by the in fighting, the defections that took place, talk of cronyism in the party, the cult around Arvind Kejriwal and criticisms of his dictatorial style, his parting of ways with many he worked with and who helped him to get where he is. AK was vilified by the press and summarily crucified. But AK prevailed, he apologized, he reinvented himself and led his party to victory. With that a new dawn has arisen for AK, AAP and India.
Arvind Kejriwal is on a mission to change the Nation that is mired in corruption and "Crony Capitalism" such as the 2G and Coal Block Allocation scams. Obstinacy, obsession, persistence and political incorrectness are par for the course when on a mission, faced with extreme opposition. In order to understand AK, the “Muffler Man” has to be viewed trough the lens of his “laser focus” to accomplish his Mission and his academic training as an engineer.
A Mahatma in the Making:
Mahatma Gandhi gave up a lucrative legal practice in South Africa in his Thirties to become a full time activist. He returned to India in 1915 when he was 46. AK left a cushy, comfortable, secure position of Joint Commissioner at the Indian Revenue Service when he was 37. Hence, given his accomplishments he could well be a Mahatma in the making. The fact that he is in government and has the power to introduce policies that will bring about the desired change, positions him to be extremely effective. In essence he is in charge of both his and India’s destiny.
What you see in AK is a person who is resolute on Policy and Strategy, and modest as a person.
The Master Strategist:
AK is a master strategist and a "marketing genius". There is no doubt about that based on the phenomenal results of winning 67 out of 70 seats in the 2015 Dilli Assembly Elections. Some of his decisions turned out to be right and others wrong. Results count and in the final analysis both his right and seemingly wrong decisions have absolved him. He has been accused by insider Prashant Bhushan as making compromises to win at all cost. Politics is War and winning is a goal as long as the party’s principles are not obliterated. AK made a blunder in the previous election by stating that he will neither give nor take support from others and then capitulating to take “outside support” from elected Congress MLAs to form a minority government. However, this was done after consulting voters. “Compromises” made have to be within the framework of the law. At times these compromises might “skirt” the party’s core principles and have to be rationalized on a case by case basis. This doesn’t mean the party’s core principles are thrown out of the window. Furthermore the goal is to field good candidates who can win. True, a number of candidates are wealthy and not “aam aadmi”. The message has to positioned as, “I am for the Aam Aadmi as opposed to I am an Aam Aadmi”. Ever since AK gained national and international recognition, he ceased to be an aam aadmi. The goal of AAP is to position itself with an agenda that is pro-people, pro-progress, pro-environment, pro-good governance, pro-transparency and resolutely against corruption. Winnable candidates who can push this agenda have to be fielded. The results in Dilli speak for themselves. 67 elected out of 70 gives the party resounding “Political Capital”. AK has said if anyone indulges in questionable behavior and practices, they will be forced to resign.
Strategic Decision Making:
Strategy cannot be derived in a democratic manner by committee. Making decisions that may not be agreed to by the "majority" will be cast as being dictatorial, regardless of the manner in which decisions are made. AAP is in its infancy and requires a strong leader. Furthermore there will always be some level of sycophancy wherein some will agree with the leader all the time. The issue is whether the leader is open to criticism and willing to admit his/her mistakes. AK has demonstrated both these attributes by publicly acknowledging his mistakes, along with some of his shortcomings and apologizing for them. It is up to the party insiders to challenge him if the occasion rises. That too is happening and is a healthy situation.
Application of Engineering Principles:
Conventional wisdom indicates that identifying and understanding a problem leads half way to solving it. An engineer’s scientific mind is trained to thoroughly understand and define the scope of a problem in the process of solving it. The solution may involve removing or working around constraints. Experimentation, trial and error are at times an integral part of the process in solving problems. Edison was faced with numerous unsuccessful attempts in inventing the incandescent light bulb. He persevered and attributed every failure as a step towards success. AK studied as an engineer and that has to be taken into consideration to understand his approach at solving the problems he is confronted with.
Accommodating One Person One Post:
The one person one post makes sense if the posts require a lot of work and attention. AK has to succeed in Dilli if the party is to survive. When it comes to strategy there is no one other than AK. One solution is to create a new post of Chief Strategist that is assumed by AK. Let us be frank, there is no other person in AAP that can fill this post effectively. The National Convener role should be made a tactical/operational role that implements the strategy. This bifurcation of Strategy and Operational roles would free up AK to focus on governing Dilli and set the strategy as well.
Going National:
The expansion of AAP to other States is a foregone conclusion. State Chapters are energized and enthusiastic after the Dilli success. But they cannot rely on AK’s active participation to grow. India is not Dilli and Dilli is not India. The election in Dilli brought forth a new Class of Voter, who was not bound by caste, community and religion. People voted for participatory democracy, to improve the quality of their lives, for good governance, for the opportunity to fulfill their aspirations, and putting a stop to rampant corruption. However India is still mired and welded to caste, religion and community politics. The old guard and old allegiances holds sway. It is a long and winding road with many challenges ahead.
There is a lot of grass roots work that needs to be accomplished before the party makes any head away at the National level. Dilli is the beacon of hope for the party to succeed at the National level. AK’s self proclaimed mission is to be successful is Dilli. The opportunity for AAP at the State level is to leverage AK’s accomplishments. Message to State Chapters, “Focus on State and local issues. Win a beach head in the State that can serve as the “nerve center” from which to expand. Note Dilli has only seven Lok Sabha seats. When concerned about what is happening in Dilli, take steps not to replicate what is happening there. Rely on AK’s accomplishment as CM. Don’t expect him to participate in State level activities and initiatives”.
The issue of falling out with people:
Critics of AK point out his abandoning the "hand that fed him" as mentioned in the following article (included at the very end):
http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/inside-track-5/
Differences between AK and others over Strategy and Policy are often portrayed and amplified by the media as “personal differences”. The “Parting of Ways” when in conflict with the mission doesn’t necessarily mean a personal falling out, although some have “personal overtones” to them. These need to be examined on an individual basis:
Aruna Roy played an important role in RTI along with others. She along with Jean Druze pushed for the Food Security act and probably had a role in defining the National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREGA) act. Aruna Roy and Jean Dreze are leftists and if left to them, they will push an extremely leftist policy. The National Advisory Committee promoted a pro-poor policy without addressing funding. A disagreement over policy with Aruna Roy is understandable, but that doesn’t mean there are personal issues involved. Besides, Aruna Roy resigned from the NAC over policy issues.
Anna Hazare did all the heavy lifting by fasting and putting his life in danger. AK benefitted from it. However it was clear that Parliament had to be breached in order to bring about changes. AK chose to take this path and Anna was adamant against it. It was Anna who criticized AK, made it a “personal issue” along with some acrimonious statements and accusations. AK has time and again acknowledged Anna as his Guru. What does one do if the Guru distances himself from his student? When the Guru says stand, should the Shishya obey unilaterally? Here again it was a “policy issue” that escalated into a “personal issue”. Both Anna and AK, put Nation over Self, but differed in the path being taken. In such cases cooperation is possible when parties are in agreement. Conflicts arise when parties are opposed.
Kiran Bedi is not all that she projects herself to be. The less said about her the better. The Dilli elections proved her wrong and AK right. Her involvement in the party would have resulted in a constant source of friction. She serves a good purpose by shouting her head off as a "Talking Head" on TV and being a critique of AAP and AK, from the outside.
Justice Hegde could not stomach the political incorrectness and left on his own accord. The Lokpal being pushed by Team Anna cast a net over the States as well. It was Arun Jaitley who pointed out the Federal aspect of our constitution and that the Centre could not stipulate this. Justice Hegde might have pointed this out or if he didn't it was surely an embarrassment to him.
Prashtant Bhushan apparently had major issues over candidate selection. This was an internal issue and had to be settled internally. Prahant Bhushan’s value add to the party is his legal competency, his insistence on transparency and upholding the party’s principles. It appears that Prashant Bhushan’s puritanical idealistic views resulted in friction within the party and it became difficult to work with him. Prashant Bhushan has made many statements that have had to be "walked back" by AK. Many of his statements and interaction with the press have had a negative impact on the party. Group dynamics is important for the smooth operation of the group. His departure from the Political Action Committee could have been handled more gracefully. The party’s ideology gives no privileges just because he and his father put up the initial crore for the party.
Yogendra Yadav is an academic and an analyst. He is a good spokes person and an excellent campaigner. It is not clear what the policy and strategy differences are between him and AK. In upholding the principles of transparency, these differences should be disclosed. If this causes friction in the functioning of strategy, then YY has to concede to AK’s wishes.
Note to Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav:
In summary, both PB and YY have to concede to AK with respect to Strategy. While they have every right to critique and question “strategy” issues, ultimately they have to let AK decide. With regards to “Policy” they have every right to question, critique or propose. Whether they are part of the “inner circle” or have to do so as senior members of the party is a decision best left to party interpersonal and organizational dynamics. That said transparency ought to be limited to policy and strategy issues and who voted for/against/abstained. Members should refrain from making public, “He said, she said” statements under the auspices of transparency. Doing so is breach of confidence and tantamount to engaging in gossip.
The article: “Parting of Ways” by Coomi Kapoor
Arvind Kejriwal is earning a reputation for biting the hand that feeds him. The ouster of Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav was done at his insistence. Years ago, Kejriwal worked under Aruna Roy on the Right to Information campaign. Roy acted as his mentor and guide, recommended him for the Magsaysay Award and helped him when he started his NGO Parivartan. But later he had a bitter falling-out with his mentor. Even those who were associated with Kejriwal in Parivartan, such as Anjali Bhardwaj and Panini Anand, have now left him. Kejriwal called Anna Hazare his guru during the Lokpal campaign, which he exploited to become a nationally known figure. But he disregarded Hazare’s wishes not to join politics. When he formed the Aam Aadmi Party, the initial donation of Rs 1 crore came from Shanti Bhushan. Bhushan’s son Prashant was largely responsible for conceptualising AAP and spreading its message. Several of the corruption exposes came from Prashant. Now Kejriwal’s supporters dismiss Prashant as just one of its 1,000 founder-members. Yogendra Yadav is another one-time ardent supporter-ideologue who enthusiastically campaigned for the party.
Interesting and Refreshing.
ReplyDelete