Nalini Sriharan is on hunger strike seeking an early release from jail. 

But she’s no ordinary prisoner.

Nalini is currently serving a life sentence for her role in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

Part of Nalini’s plea is that she does not expect to live long due to her deteriorating health after spending nearly two decades in prison.
 
Nalini, her husband and two others were sentenced to death for conspiring to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi in 1991.

But her sentence was commuted to life imprisonment at the pleading of Sonia Gandhi, head of the ruling Congress and widow of Rajiv, so that Nalini’s young daughter would not be orphaned.

Priyanka Gandhi met Nalini in jail last year and later said the meeting helped her come to terms with her father’s loss.

The Gandhi family appears to have made peace with Nalini.

Should the country also respond in kind?

Can her case be treated as punishment intended for reform rather than retribution?

On Sunday, media reports said Nalini had earned a post-graduate degree in computer applications, topping the course among jail inmates who appeared for the examination in Tamil Nadu.

The Tamil Nadu government has said it will decide on Nalini’s case after consulting the union government.

Should Nalini be released?

Or is her hunger strike an example of “blackmail” — which is how a TV news channel put it.

(PHOTO: Nalini [R] seen in a court in the southern Indian city of Chengalpattu in this June 15,1991 file photo)

When India’s ruling Congress party asked ministers and bureaucrats to cut down on needless expenses at a time of recession and deepening drought, many in the country had one question on their lips: will the austerity drive work?

Rahul Gandhi tried to set an example by travelling by train as an ordinary passenger. His mother, Sonia, abandoned her private army plane and flew economy class on a commercial flight for a party rally in Mumbai.

But there is still a great deal of scepticism among people. Some of the doubting was fuelled after the train Rahul was travelling in was pelted with stones. Experts said Rahul’s train trip was a security risk, which could cramp the austerity drive.

But it’s not just the security concerns alone. The austerity drive also drew ridicule following a controversy over two senior government ministers staying in luxury hotel suites priced at $1,000 and $1,500 a night until their official residences were ready.

Both ministers said they’d paid for their suites themselves, but stung by criticism amid the government’s austerity drive, they moved to more modest temporary homes.

However, it was too late to change the mind of ordinary Indians who over years of Nehruvian socialism had begun to associate Congress politicians as leaders in simple hand-spun cotton, or khadi, clothes who drove around in old-fashioned Ambassador cars.

Now, the question many are asking is: will the austerity drive last with election campaigns for Maharashtra and Haryana about to begin?

True, with the economy in trouble, the government is making an effort with the finance ministry appealing for fewer overseas trips and smaller entourages as well as a ban on conferences in luxury hotels.

But it isn’t easy: one minister protested he was “too tall” to fly economy while another said their positions demand they entertain in style.

So, will the government’s austerity drive last? The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) doesn’t think so. A BJP spokesman said it was just an “election gimmick” and they would go back to their usual ways once the state elections were over.

Will they?

With the wrangling for allies in earnest ahead of election results due Saturday, women leaders hold an inordinate amount of power in deciding who will form the new Indian government.

Women leaders have always had a role in the rough and tumble of Indian politics, from Sarojini Naidu and Annie Besant in the independence struggle to Indira Gandhi, the second woman in the world to become prime minister.

Women leaders are perhaps at the peak of their influence now, with Gandhi’s political heir regarded the most powerful of them all — indeed, the most powerful political leader in the country.

Congress chief Sonia Gandhi is credited with energising the party and leading it to a surprising victory in the 2004 election, and she looks to have the lead this time around too, according to exit polls.

Gandhi, once voted the world’s sixth most powerful woman by Forbes, walked away from the prime minister’s job in 2004, but her influence over party allies and even with the on-again off-again left is unquestionable.

Her influence though, doesn’t extend to Mayawati, the feisty and controversial leader of the Bahujan Samaj Party and chief minister of the potentially swing state of Uttar Pradesh, which sends a whopping 80 seats to the lower house.

Mayawati, hailed as queen of the lower-caste Dalits, is part of the Third Front, and a prime ministerial aspirant whose ambition mirrors her party’s elephant symbol.

Known for her lavish birthday celebrations and love for giant statues of herself, Mayawati’s massive following among lower caste Hindus, tribes and other backward classes is not to be trifled with.

At the other end of the spectrum is J. Jayalalithaa, a convent school-educated high-caste Hindu and leader of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam in the potentially swing state of Tamil Nadu.

The former film star, a part of the Third Front, has allied in the past with both the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party, and could be a kingmaker this time. A win for AIADMK would boost the prospects of the Third Front, and Jayalalithaa, who was once jailed on corruption charges, will be a vital pawnbroker.

As will Mamata Banerjee, leader of Trinamool Congress in left-ruled West Bengal state. With exit polls pointing to an erosion of support for the left, Banerjee — who drove Tata Motors’ Nano car project out of the state — is on a good wicket.

“The outcome of this endgame is linked to women,” political analyst Yogendra Yadav wrote in The Hindu newspaper.

Perhaps their examples will inspire more women to take the plunge into politics; there were only about 550 women candidates against more than 7,500 men candidates. Or are they not quite the role models we seek?

The countdown has begun in India. As political pundits peer into their tea leaves before the results of another marathon election, the question on everybody’s lips is: will the Gandhi magic work again?

Exit polls show the coalition led by Sonia Gandhi will fall short of an outright majority, but her Congress party has a slight edge over its rival, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
But then exit polls in India have been way off the mark in the past. Like the last election.

In the 2004 election, the Congress scored a shock victory over the BJP, which many said was a result of Sonia Gandhi’s tireless campaigning and, more importantly, the magic of the Gandhi name. Nobody, just about nobody, had expected the BJP to lose? Or the Congress to win. Not even the Congress itself.

But will Sonia Gandhi do it again this time? Will the Gandhi name work like a charm again? Nobody is willing to hazard a guess this time. Indian voters are known to throw up enormous surprises.

One of the biggest upsets in the history of post-colonial India was Indira Gandhi’s massive defeat in the 1977 election. Mrs Gandhi was considered so invincible that a slogan coined by one of her partymen — Indira is India, India is Indira — had become a household buzzword. She was almost like a Mother Goddess at the time.

And so not even the sharpest of political observers could have predicted 1977. Not even Mrs Gandhi herself.

Defying all expectations, angry Indian voters threw out Mrs Gandhi after she imposed a state of emergency when she clamped down on dissent and launched a sterilisation programme as a solution to the country’s population problem. It was the first time the Congress had tasted defeat in national elections since it began ruling the country after India’s independence from Britain in 1947.

But it wasn’t the last. Indira’s son, Rajiv, who came to power on a massive sympathy wave after her assassination in 1984, didn’t lead the Congress to a majority win in 1989. The Gandhi magic, it seems, had lost its sheen.

Five years ago, when India went to the polls everybody had written off the Congress as a spent force. Newspaper headlines screamed the party was over.

But Sonia Gandhi took the party and the campaign into her hands. Rajiv Gandhi’s widow travelled across the country relentlessly, reaching out to voters in her heavily-accented but fluent Hindi, peppering her speeches with emotional references to her family, especially her husband who was killed by a suicide bomber in 1991.

Her children, Rahul and Priyanka, also joined the fray, campaigning for their mother in Uttar Pradesh where they always got rapturous receptions.

And it paid off.

The party won a stunning victory and for a brief moment, it even seemed like a Gandhi would get the prime minister’s job again. Sonia Gandhi eventually turned down the prime minister’s post, but the country’s first family has remained firmly in the political spotlight since.

As the elections rolled around this time, Sonia and her son, Rahul, hit the campaign trail again with emotional references to the sacrifices made by the Nehru-Gandhi family, particularly Indira and Rajiv, who were both assassinated.

And again, both drew enormous crowds as they campaigned in the heat and dust of various parts of the country, with people walking or cycling for kilometres just to see them.

But will the Gandhi name work again this time? Or will India’s voters look beyond dynastic politics at other more basic issues such as water, electricity, food prices and housing?

If India’s faceless bookmakers are any guide, the ruling Congress party will probably scrape through the current election with Manmohan Singh the firm favourite to retain the prime ministership.

But then again…

Much as he tries astrologer Rajan Chopra can’t keep the pride out of his voice as he speaks to me for the second time in 24 hours.

It’s victory march at 7 Race Course Road after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh wins a closely-fought vote of confidence 275 to 256 in parliament and the temptation for Chopra to say “I told you so” is overwhelming. But Chopra, a political and corporate astrologer who predicted yesterday that the government would win the trust vote, says “it’s a victory for astrologers as well”.

If popular predictions are anything to go by then stargazers say the strong Saturn in Congress President Gandhi’s astrological chart is to be thanked for the government’s victory and the Congress party will be wise to look heaven wards for further guidance before general elections next year.

“As I have said before, Samajwadi Party general secretary Amar Singh will play a very crucial role now, along with party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav,” Chopra says. “I am basing my prediction on three things - the chart of the Congress party, that of opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and of Sonia Gandhi.”

Don’t the stars of Manmohan Singh count for anything? His answer confirms something that non-stargazers suspected all along. “Gandhi is the main force behind him.”

Kanpur-based astrologer Ramesh Chintak who strongly believes there is no branch of astrology that can help predict the future of a political party or outfit, says Saturn is strong in Gandhi’s stars which may have led to Tuesday’s turn of events.

However, he cautions that astrological predictions of any single individual cannot be trusted to foretell the fortunes of the party as a whole. He prefers rather to strengthen his prediction with safer bets.

“I heard the speeches made by (leader of opposition) L K Advani in parliament and I think he indicated even then that the opposition may not in the end win the motion. You also have to take into account the general word on the streets that the government is likely to win the vote,” he says.

When I tell Chopra that India’s Science and Rationalists Association dismisses astrology as superstition, he assures me that he is “a scientific astrologer and a paramedic man on top of that”.

Chennai-based astrologer K.B. Gopalakrishnan was quoted on websites with astrological charts to bolster his claim that Manmohan Singh was safe on the trust vote. Although astrologer M N Kedar, a member of the Indian Council of Astrological Sciences, strongly predicted that the planetary position was not in favour of the government.

You could be forgiven for thinking that the civilian nuclear deal with the United States is all about whether India holds early elections or not.

Every newspaper is speculating if Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who has staked his personal reputation on the deal, will resign to disassociate himself from an administration that failed to save a pact keenly watched by the world.

But are these the arguments India should be debating in the short-term or should we be discussing the real benefits and drawbacks of the deal?

The communists oppose the deal, in large part because they see it as a front for Washington’s strategic bulwark against a rising China and increasingly unstable Pakistan.

Besides, they say there are many holes in the deal that Washington will use to manipulate India’s foreign and strategic programmes, and that nuclear energy is not a solution to the shortage of electricity in the country or rising oil prices.

Why? Because nuclear energy can not meet India’s huge oil consumption in the transport sector, is expensive to produce and will expose India to manipulations by a small international cartel of uranium suppliers.

But most Indians feel, if straw polls by newspaper and television channels are to be believed the nuclear deal is good for India: The agreement is meant to provide India with the means to produce clean energy — a key constraint to economic growth. And the rise in crude prices underlines need for diversified sources of energy (even if nuclear will take ages to fill the gap).

Internationally, the accord represents a long overdue acceptance of India as a responsible nuclear power.

From the pro-deal camp here are a few points to ponder:

* Even if relations sour with the United States, India can turn to France, Russia, Australia or other uranium producers for supplies, courtesy the waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group which is independent of the deal with Washington?

* Why should India not use the deal to get a waiver from NSG and the opportunity to clear its name as a nuclear pariah state?

If the deal falls through, it is unlikely Washington — or any other nuclear nation — will broach the idea of selling nuclear fuel to India anytime soon.

But will that outcome make India more dependent on outside sources for energy, and weaken its own economic prospects against the growing clout of China?

This is the kind of debate that India would benefit from. Focusing on elections may only reap short term political benefits.

Murmurs of discontent have risen in some ranks of the ruling Congress about the influence of the Gandhi dynasty in the party.

Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh criticised last week how decision-making within Congress was made in a “narrow context” — meaning the Gandhis. He quickly backtracked by swearing loyalty to the family, but only after being publicly snubbed by Sonia Gandhi.

This came amid a controversy over Rahul Gandhi’s very public trips around India — leading to him being called “Crown Prince”. Some said he was overshadowing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Clearly there is controversy over what should be the role of these two Gandhi’s – the heirs to the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty that has run India on and off since Independence – in an election year.

Around the same time I had been in Karnataka, spending a hot afternoon at a rally by Sonia while covering this key state election. Sonia spoke in Hindi to thousands of people who only understood Kannada, one of the languages of Karnataka. As a journalist, I found it difficult to find one exciting quote I could use for my story — something unusual for most politicians who understand like no one the value of the sound bite.

Sonia obviously struggles to be great public speaker, but I wondered why no effort has been made either to get a translator for the crowd, or for her speechwriters to present a more media-friendly speech for the Karnataka election.

As Sonia spoke, I turned around behind me to look at the faces of the crowd. Many were falling asleep in the heat, others chatted among themselves. Many people seemed eager to go home.

The next day Hindu nationalist BHP party aides told me they were rubbing the hands in glee at the lack of a strong message in Sonia’s speech.

The same aides were also happy that Congress had not put forward a candidate for the chief minister’s job, common practice in a party where the top brass plays a game and divide and rule with state-level officials.

While Congress may openly criticise Singh for betraying the family name, the more important question for Congress may be asking if the Gandhi name still inspires the kind of voters who attended this rally. They may need to worry about the loyalty of voters.

Few have a bad word for Sonia. But when I asked people why they had come, most said it was to glimpse her as one would turn out to see a Bollywood celebrity. Some said it was to see her “fair skin.” But it was not about politics.

Driving back from the rally, a journalist with 20 years experience in India told me that one could easily forget that Congress leaders in decades past could be awe-inspring public speakers that would draw tens of thousands of eager voters — He mentioned Indira Gandhi as one and he contrasted Sonia with the reception that BJP Narendra Modi had received in rallies.

The string of state election defeats show both Rahul and Sonia are clearly struggling to resonate with voters. One wonders if the time will come when more members of Congress start to ask if the Gandhi dynasty needs to make way for newer faces — a “Modi” equivalent for Congress.