This general election seems to be the one being fought by Congress, BJP, Communist and all other regional parties without any kind of wave nor a slogan, like for example Garibi Hatao of Indira Gandhi in the early 70s. If one remembers, it was a counter by the crafty, feline, Indira Gandhi to the war cry of the opposition, Indira Hatao. Thus, if the election slogan for the opposition was Indira Hatao, for the Congress it was Garibi Hatao. And, of course, in that election people probably thought the opposition was unfairly targeting the fairer sex as an individual, while that individual, Indira Gandhi, rose to an egalitarian height with a slogan Garibi Hatao intended to eradicate poverty from the country.

This gave a clear choice for the voter. He was either to “eradicate” one person of Indira Gandhi or to “eradicate” the staggering poverty of the country with his vote. Naturally, the voter’s choice was obvious to eradicate poverty. Not surprisingly, Indira Gandhi won the election hands down with a brute majority. The just - won war against Pakistan and creation of Bangladesh too helped her in winning the election. Yes, we do remember even at this distance of time what Dom Moraes, the famous journalist, wrote of Indira Gandhi: “Indira Gandhi not only created history but also geography”. The reference was to the creation of Bangladesh. Those were the days when there were not many political giants in the opposition parties and the tallest one was, of course, Indira Gandhi of Congress. The Empress as cartoonists often portrayed her. Times have since changed. Now we have tall leaders in three national political parties namely, Congress, BJP and Communist (of all hues). Sonia is the supreme leader of Congress while L. K. Advani of the BJP, filling the vacuum created by ailing Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The Communists, of course, have their Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee filling the vacuum created by the veteran aging Jyoti Basu. However, it is doubtful if communists in our country can claim to be a National party considering they are in fact confined to only two regions, West Bengal and Kerala.

Yet, there is a qualitative difference. It is only in Congress we find a divine right to its leadership. It is about the entitlement to head the party by only the Nehru - Gandhi family. In all other parties there is a kind of 'first among equals' principle in place. Another feature of this general election is the role played by the Regional Parties headed by regional political leaders who do not have any role in other regions of the country nor are they recognised as leaders by the people all over India. Largely these parties are of father-son combination like the DMK in Tamil Nadu and JD (S) in Karnataka, to give just two examples. However, this trend is seen with minor changes in all other regions like UP, Orissa, Maharashtra and some other States. Not that it was not there in the earlier election, but their presence was not as aggressively asserted as it is in this election. This is why a Lalu Prasad Yadav could defy the Congress at the risk of Congress spokesperson saying that Lalu cannot be part of any post- poll alignment as in 2004. This has since been reneged by the Congress saying there was “misinterpretation” Hypocrites.

Be that as it may, there were many issues bandied about before the electorate by all the political parties claiming why one should be preferred against all other parties. In the early days of campaigning it looked as if issues were of general nature like price rise, unemployment, social justice etc. However, the credit for bringing forth the major issues, nay, challenges facing our country namely, terrorism and black money stashed away in over 70 tax havens all over the world as secret deposits by our unscrupulous politicians, industrialists and bureaucrats (IAS, IPS, IRS officers) should go to BJP's L. K. Advani. As for terrorism, neither the BJP (NDA) nor the Congress (UPA) has acquitted themselves creditably nor could they defend their position and failure. Therefore, they are quits. A case of kettle calling the pot black.

Space here doesn’t permit me to traverse the whole gamut of the point and counter-point, the justification and counter-justification given by the Congress and BJP with regard to these issues. Just one example may suffice the hijack of the Indian Airlines with 155 passengers in Dec. 1999, which was allowed to land, of all places, in Kandahar, Afghanistan and the then External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh going there with cash and three dreaded terrorists, including Masood Azhar of Jaish – e - Mohammad who were in jail and handing them over to the hijackers. It was one of the most humiliating moments for any sovereign Government as also for self-respecting citizen. It only underlined the poor ability of our Government (which means the Ministers and bureaucrats) in negotiating with the hijacker - terrorists.

Notwithstanding all these, the point to ponder is the explanation and justification given by the BJP spokesperson. According to him, it was a question, at that moment, of saving the lives of 155 people by just releasing three prisoners. The suggestion was that it was a small price to pay in order to save 155 lives. But does one think of the moral boost such an act on the part of our Government gave to the terrorist organisations? They got encouraged and intensified their activities. Azhar’s name has subsequently figured in the December 2001 terror attack on Parliament and the attack outside Jammu & Kashmir Assembly in Srinagar in the same month. India might have lost more than 155 lives in these and other attacks because of Masood Azhar. No wonder Congress is reminding BJP about this at this time of election. And BJP counters the Congress' charges against it by questioning the way the Congress (UPA) has handled the 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack. Would war be an option? It was suggested that India should have at least undertaken surgical strikes on the terrorist camps, claimed to have been identified, that were located along the border and also in PoK. Here too the counter argument would be: Should India risk a possible war or counter - attack from Pakistan which would have taken many more lives than that was lost in the 26 / 11 attack, apart from the collateral damages?

So this kind of war of words by our political parties could go on no end to the point of ad nauseam. In fact it is an absurd exercise. The enactment of POTA by NDA (now annulled) and NIA (after 26 /11) by UPA would mean nothing if not enforced strictly. Its implementation should not pander to vote bank and verdict under this Act should be after a summary trial (if it is provided in the Act) so that the guilty need not wait in the jail or outside on bail for many years till another hijack happens! At present India seems to be "willing to wound but afraid to strike."