The Black Man in a White House - a journey

The world was transfixed by one man: Barack Hussein Obama!

His rise began during the 2004 election and soon grew into a global story - not simply about American politics, but about the prospect of the first African‑American president of the United States. That destination he eventually reached. 

But the victory itself, while historic, tells only part of the story. The deeper elements of his journey - how he captured public imagination and overcame entrenched skepticism are themselves worthy of admiration.

By the mid‑2000s, American power had begun to look reckless in moral and ethical terms. The nation that emerged triumphant from the Cold War had lost goodwill through a string of scandals and policy failures. Osama bin Laden remained at large despite massive resources. President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky had eroded trust in political leaders, and the U.S. launched the Iraq War without United Nations approval. The subsequent “war on terror,” driven by George W. Bush, proved costly and poorly defined. Then came the financial meltdown following Lehman Brothers’ collapse and the largest bailout in history. Public cynicism toward career politicians ran high.

It was into this dark backdrop that Obama stepped onto the stage. He quickly became a focal point for the world’s hopes. International observers, unable to vote but free of partisan bias, cheered as he spoke. 

At first glance, Obama seemed an unlikely contender. He was a slender Black man with an unfamiliar name and a Muslim middle name at a time when America was embroiled in conflict with parts of the Muslim world. Born in remote Hawaii, with limited political experience, little wealth, and no political godfather, he barely registered on the national press radar. Yet he used his gift of speech, intelligence, and an affable dignity to outmaneuver opponents. 

Only two major rivals remained: Hillary Clinton and John McCain - both formidable.

Hillary Clinton brought familiarity, experience, and political clout. As former First Lady and a long‑serving senator, she had the resume of someone ready to become the nation’s first woman president. 

John McCain offered seasoned leadership: a respected bipartisan figure, Vietnam POW, and proven patriot - qualities voters prized amid wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a resurgent Russia. McCain’s simple slogan, “Country First,” captured that mood.

The Democratic primary offered a pivotal moment. Struggling financially and under pressure, Clinton reportedly suggested Obama withdraw in exchange for the vice presidency. Obama refused and prevailed, leaving Clinton politically and financially depleted.

Obama then focused on McCain. He built a refreshing, reassuring brand that positioned him beyond the usual political mold. He surrounded himself with talented strategists who sweated the details. Even cultural gestures mattered: when India’s Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw died, Obama promptly sent condolences, winning favor among NRIs who might otherwise lean Republican. Sensing public disdain for career politicians, Obama converted grassroots anger into a positive force. His one‑word campaign slogan was “Change" - captured the yearning of a nation. 

He also refused donations from large lobby groups, relying instead on small donations that made supporters feel invested; grassroots fundraising helped him raise roughly $650 million, about twice McCain’s total and far more than Clinton’s exhausted campaign. 

Obama’s campaign offers a leadership case study: he chose innovation over security, stayed authentic, showed grit and restraint, learned continuously, listened actively, and spoke with eloquence and conviction.

When the votes were counted, Americans, by demanding change - put country first. Voters chose character and vision over familiar identities and made history: they sent a Black man to the White House!

The rest is history, and the moment remains a triumph of the human spirit. 

Barack Hussein Obama - Yes He Did!

Bolo Vansh-wadi Politics Ki .... Hai Ok Please !

Yashwant Sinha said that "My son is incompetent, thus was removed from the finance ministry"

Harvard Business School educated son Jayant Sinha, who has been entrusted the mammoth task of the newly launched UDAN Scheme to connect entire India by low cost flights said "My father is from older generation, he simply doesn't understand the new economy of New India' - a free lance consultant, a time shared person or an Uber driver are unemployed according to my father."

This tells us that what's consuming the Indian public - not a debate on the economy or their future, rather it's just plain vanilla ill will among father & son duo that's spewing out in the public domain under the media glare.

That brings me to my ponder. 

The Mulayam and Akhilesh fuelled 'parivar me diwar' gave Modi his bigger than expected victory. 

And then we have Lalu Prasad Yadav, supposedly a shrewd person with a keen political acumen, who, for the love of his son Tejaswi, threw away the last straw of power he was holding - c/o Nitish Kumar.

And how can India's privileged raja-beta be forgotten? 

In America, RaGa-baba justified dynastic rule by giving examples of the fractured & bruised and also his lost UP election partner Akhilesh Yadav. To add poverty to his already poor example, he cited the supper flop son Abhishek Bachhan of the evergreen performer Amitabh Bachhan and said "This is how India works".

The compromised media & a few gullible lapped it up and put their approval stamp on the meaningless trip of the child-man. Some termed it as a success, as he made only a partial fool of himself !

It is altogether a different matter that perhaps all the regional parties may have taken an excuse & buried their guilt - of promoting their own family members, after witnessing the rotten practice of Congress, the oldest party of India & supposedly belonging to the freedom fighter creed.

Enter the stage Narendra Damodardas Modi and the man changed the rules of the game. One of the first rules that the New India's PM made for BJP functioning, is that - no two persons from the same family shall simultaneously hold any position of power.

RaGa-baba's examples are akin to pointing at a broken down clock, which also shows the correct time twice in a day.

And the round the clock working PM is showing them all - on how India should really be working by making himself, the first citizen, as an example worthy of emulating. 

Bolo Bharat Mata Ki.... Jai Ok Please !

Bolo Vansh-wadi Politics Ki .... Hai Ok Please !

Holi idhar hai, par Modi-ji kidhar hai? !

Just after winning the historic mandate in 2014, Narendra Modi said "Mera samay ka har kshan kshan, aur sharir ka har kan kan - is desh ko samarpit hai". He became a "Pradhan Sevak".

India was at once divided into believers and the non-believers.

The words drew tears from the eyes of the former and jeers from the rest. That gap has never been filled. We see the so called experts and opinion makers, especially those who have a grip on the English media and representing the latter, continue to question Modi's every word and move with utter contempt. That, even when they're proved wrong again and again.

Be it their speculation on where will Modi's first foreign trip be just after being sworn in or how much Obama is likely to ignore the once visa sanctioned ex-CM or how much will RSS influenced PM be unleashing intolerance of the dissenters, to what will be the impact of hiz supposed mega-blunders of not renewing Raghuram Rajan's tenure and imposition of DeMo on the hapless poor.

These elite thinkers feed each other, reference one another and when that is not enough, quote editorials from western liberal newspapers or criticism of his governance by NRI's living in distant land, who unsurprisingly never miss an opportunity to opine in their near retirement age. What they all collectively fail to comprehend is that, their scale for measurement of the Moditva doctrine are outdated and their methods are long due for recalibration.

They are always found several steps behind him.

They don't know if he can be labeled as a nationalist or an internationalist. He confuses them as he oscillates among his peers by being an absolute traditionalist to then easily transforming into a gen-next future ready techno-geek. He advocates yoga and serenity by sitting still in meditation and then demonstrates himself as the jet-set man on the go, crisscrossing across the Indian sub-continent, the globe included. He can easily be classified as a capitalist, a suit-boot sarkari-man and yet be a poor man's favorite, peddling socialism & guardian of the jan-dhan. Is he a leader of the party known to represent the upper caste or a champion of those like him, who are born in backward class? For a moment you can win a bet by proving that he's an indulgent megalomaniac and the next moment lose the wager to one who says he's an avowed simpleton. And is he that celebrity that basks in self adulation or one that stays away from the daily riff raff of prime time T.V. and practices austerity, "maun" and "upwas" !

A municipality school educated Modi is a thought leader and his vision so vast and deep, that they fail to grasp it, even when it's unfolding right before their eyes. His razor sharp focus on both distinct entities i.e. India and Bharat simultaneously, is simply not understood by the media fellows, all who are too distracted and soaked by their own preconceived notions of what an Indian PM must be focusing on. After all, only strength recognizes strength and it's an uneven match between the giant and the myopic media.

As an example, for growth, the entire world is competing by printing money and installing a disproportionately loose monetary policy, but the Modi-man on the other hand, withdrew a chunk of it from circulation - 86% to be precise. To usher in a digital economy, Modi did not remonetize it all back in the form of hard cash.

So, what is the mental make up of the thiz Modi-man? It is said that you are - what you were. And what was Modi-boy like? He was a child, born in poverty and nurtured by nature. Before Modi rose up the political ladder through sheer kinetic energy, he was marinated in unconventional childhood.

Let's look at what forces might have worked on him.

While helping his father to make ends meet, he sold tea to passengers from a fragile shop at a railway station. In that, he once experienced serving tea to the jawans heading to the border, some to maybe not return. Maybe, that experience nurtured his love for India. 

It is believed that one can defeat the nature's forces that constantly act on you, by subduing and controlling your own personal nature. To do that, for centuries ascetics of the eastern faith often indulge in penance or self pain, by denying themselves even the basic needs. A teenaged NaMo had for months given up salt - the basic ingredient of food. Maybe, this taught him will power i.e. to act against instinct, an endowment available only to the highest order of life.

In his quest to learn the 'truth', hardly an adolescent, he left home in pursuit of a guru who can show him the way. He adapted the monks life for a while. Maybe, that taught him to connect with his soul and understand that it's all just a "moh-maya", making him a super optimist even in the face of biggest disappointments.

Then as a young man, he traveled the length and breadth of India, meeting different people for very long months. At the time, he never once did sleep under the same roof and ate whatever waz handed to him. Maybe, that gave him the cutting edge insights into the human thinking & behavior.

As a young RSS recruit, he was handed the first task of cleaning the place, every room, serving food and making arrangements for visitors. He used to wake up early and the drill of simple daily chores went on till the end of the day. He was well appreciated. Maybe, that taught him that to rule the world, one must serve it.

Notwithstanding the fact that there is no requirement of nationality in the Indian constitution, there was great hue and cry when Sonia Gandhi was likely to make a claim to be India's prime minister. People could not accept her as she was not born in India & that could be measurable viz evidence of her childhood passport.

What makes Narendra Damodardas Modi so unique, is that though he is acceptable for being born on this soil - this Indian prime minister, the first one to be born in independent India, is not the typical Indian that any Indian has ever met before. 

Those who attempt to bracket him into one or other entity or refer to him as just another Indian - are wrong even before they start.

NaMo may have been fated to be born in India but he is destined to be a global player. He is as much his mother's boy, as he is a nature's child. 

He was omnipresent & sprinkling his star dust till the day of the UP election. Ever since the astoundingly favorable results have come in, he is absent from the scene.

So as the media goes about creating employment for itself through election result analysis and the jubilant crowds go around beating the victory drum, eating saffron colored "laddus" and throw color on each other in Holi celebration; we can be sure that even before that dust settles down, Modi, not the one to spend time in merriment - may already be investing his time on planning his next grand move in solitude.

Most of us simply go about leading a purpose-less life. At least we can take heart in the fact that we're led by a man, who has truly found his.

Can Status Quo, ever be the other name for God?

Can Status Quo ever be the other name for God? 

I ask that, as most seem to be following that & with great faith. 

The inherited customs, conventions, protocols, and policies go on & on. 

Status Quo is actually the other name for Devil. 

Decision-making builds character. 

Good decisions, good character. Big decisions, big character. 

There is God in great character & thus so rare.

The capacity to take decisions is now almost lost in our modern world.

Individuals have been replaced with committees for check & balances. In the bargain, what we have achieved is the opposite of the intent. We wanted less of wrong decisions, instead, what we have is - more of no decisions. 

The Brexit referendum waz an outcome of just that, where the learned British parliamentarians left the all-important decision on the ignorant guy on the street.

It seems to me that at the very kernel of all decision making, there is either greed or fear or indifference but seldom any courage of conviction.

Decision-making, esp. for public good is complex & thus esoteric in nature.

One cannot hope to resolve it with a committee. 

Ah committee !

Committee is a "group of people who individually cannot do much, however, collectively decide, that nothing can be done !"

All big public decisions are not only open to be challenged today but are precedence setting & likely to become future citations and reference points. 

So, even when problems are born today, their proposed solutions could have far-reaching consequences in the future. 

Thiz requires that such problem solving decisions be taken by the visionary, who are willing to let go the immediate personal gain for future security of the many. 

It requires for people in high position to be wise, brave & take risks. 

Who that person is, cannot be decided by democracy. 

Enter Narendra Damodardas Modi !

As a student of leaders, the 'DeMo by NaMo' is worthy of affectionate praise. Hiz capacity to take a solo decision, as huge as that & talking directly to the citizens of India via TV during prime time, shows us how tall a leader he is. 

If he had set up a committee, notwithstanding the secrecy issue, the pygmies would have told him all the reasons on why it can't be done. That done, he would be almost bound by their advice & the decision to DeMo would have demised.

For decision, one needs - intent, idea, & implementation.

Nobody can cast a doubt on the giant's intent. 

The idea of demonetization is not hiz, waz in discussions for the last few decades, but none before him had the guts. 

Implementation can be discussed & debated till the cows come home, but the flaws if any, seem small compared to the colossal decision the Modi-man haz taken for a better India.

Bolo Bharat Mata Ki ..... Jai Okay Please 🙌🏼🇮🇳

For this media, "Love all" makes a lousy score to report

When George Bush introduced Dr. Manmohan Singh to his wife Barbara, he purportedly said "Meet Dr. Singh the Prime Minister of India, a country with the highest number of Muslims in the world, but not a single Al Qaeda operative there."

Fast forward to our current times and the world is a different place and how !

An Indian government with Dr. Manmohan Singh as it's head, has been replaced with one that is christened as - the Modi Sarkar. Narendra Modi is known for what he is, but courtesy domestic media, not so much within his own country. And he will surely not need nor get the Al Qaeda referenced introduction & nor would that be fair. Modi is a man of his own, an assertive Indian government is being groomed under his strong leadership.

And of course we also have amongst us the likes of Dr. Zakir Naik, who sell hate soaked in religious bigotry to supposedly over 15 million of his global followers. Some among them are applicants for a job at the ISIS, an organization that not long ago declared the formation of the outlawed caliphate called "Islamic State", just about after the exit of Dr. Manmohan Singh in 2014.

As opposed to the soft & accommodative Dr. Singh, Modi is perceived as a strong man, especially against terrorism. On global forums, he is heard advocating that "Terrorism is the single biggest challenge for the world."

On the other side of the globe we have a Donald Trump that's running for the American presidency with a constant anti 'Islamic-terrorism' rhetoric.  Regrettably Trump's perspective, built around sensationalism, works well. Since today's popular mainstream media has gone topsy-turvy, like tabloids, it chases news that gives it the maximum eye balls and not necessarily relevance. Trump is thus getting far more coverage than Modi, both within America & across the world. He is fast influencing the western nations' value system, which now speaks less of what it is & more of what it is against.

That should not have been the case with India, but unfortunately, she too has succumbed to the media's pandering. The Moditva Doctrine is not common knowledge & so can easily be misunderstood as Trump's echo. The twist in the irony is that Modi was labeled a 'Muslim-hater' by the politically motivated & compromised Indian media & so Modi, the then democratically elected Chief Minister of Gujarat, was denied a visa to enter the US, even without ever being proven guilty in any court of law. It was an abject and an unprecedented travesty of justice, which was largely buried by the Indian media & so bypassed the attention of some of the most educated but yet politically unconscious Indian masses. If elected, Trump wants to allow entry of only non-Muslims into America. So on the face of it, both leaders should be natural allies.

Well they are in fact, diabolically opposite.

For a moment let us accept that Trump is right i.e. less of Muslims equals more of peace. But then India with the largest Muslim population in the world, with their strength of over 200 million in India or almost one in every five Indians, should make this nation the most dangerous place in the world - but it is not. Most attacks on India are from infiltrators from Pakistan, as apparently they cannot find die hard "fidayeen" fighters across the length & width of India. Having said so, we have now seen shoots of home grown Indian Muslims, who have become subscribers to the ISIS ideology. For reasons best known to the media houses, that terrorist organization is regularly introduced to the general population through the media updates of their daily atrocities. The ISIS makes the Al Qaeda that Bush referred to while introducing Dr. Singh, look rather pale.

Notwithstanding, India is still the safest country in the world, at least if we choose to view her through an American lens that for convenience & simplicity conjoins the Muslim community & terrorism into a single hyphenated phenomenon i.e. the "Islamic-terrorism". Considering their vast strength in numbers, even if a chunk of Indian Muslims were truly to be influenced by the terror marketers, at best we would have a disaster on hand & at worst a mayhem.

So even when a giant nation like India is largely peaceful, the question before us should really be - can we then discount the ISIS influenced Muslims, as mere fringe & simply call it an aberration among just a handful of misguided youth?

No. We should not ignore them, no matter how small it's impact today.

All & especially the Muslims themselves, must first accept that there is a problem within their community. The terror attraction is a manifestation of their inability to reform with time & that can happen to persons of any faith, irrespective - if they remain frozen in the past.

For most Muslims, religion even today is not about a personal spiritual experience in solitude, but the faithful are expected to visibly practice the rituals in a manner that makes their religiosity a central life theme. That gets further rekindled at the almost mandatory weekly Friday mosque's mass congregations. As a result, Muslims encounter many modern day requirements that cannot be compatible with their daily mandated religious routines. Being accommodative, would attract scorn from the community peers or make them feel incomplete Muslims. Thus most cannot convince the world at large that they are beyond & larger than their self imposing religion bearing identity. In a fast globalizing world where cultural assimilation is an expectation, interdependence a maturity and gloss & glam a norm, their inflexibility to adapt to the order of the day renders them somewhat unemployable & their school of thought as obsolete.

Not willing to bow out as misfits in the fast paced modern society, some staunch Muslim community leaders have lately been instigating a retaliation, rather than reform. These so called leaders don't seem to resonate with the likes of say Abdul Kalam the former president of India or the Khan trio Bollywood superstars or A R Rehman the master music composer or Bismillah Khan the instrumental music Ustad or Sania Mirza the tennis ace or Azharuddin the cricket captain or IH Latif the ex-air force chief or Ahmedi the ex-justice at Supreme Court - to just name a few of the Muslims, that have negotiated with their personal space to reach great heights & become entire India's favorite. It is not even in their reckoning that this makes India perhaps the most unique country in the world where a minority community has achieved so much & in so many spheres. For them, the heroes to emulate are perhaps foreigners like Osama Bin Laden or even Burhan Wani, a Pakistan declared "martyr".

Some parents too get influenced and so fail to teach their children, that there is solace in societal achievements and not in being a claimant of perpetual victim-hood by it.

At such a delicate time, the ISIS has now confidently raised it's head and is demanding that the faithful to Islam must not wait to be affected in order to retaliate. It wants the Muslim community to become aware & focus on the minutest ideological differences that exist between the Muslims and non-Muslims and eliminate all and any nonconformity, including the neutral or benign.

They are in fact the echo-in-action, to the hollow war-on-terror cry made by Bush at the UN, who had reportedly thundered "Either you are with us or against us". To some, the ISIS brand of terror appears mesmerizingly attractive and an opportunity to subjugate the world to the puritanical Muslim way.

Now when a population with a particular belief - say, any explosive idea (affinity to the ISIS kind of terrorism being the case here) goes 'unopposed' from a very tiny fraction to about 3% of people, the tipping point may not be far. Studies show that the time taken for a radically different idea to take grip of even just that 3% of the population is very difficult in the beginning i.e. it takes 90 % of the time to reach that threshold number. From there on however, to move to a higher critical mass % of population, it will take only 10 % of the time, after which that idea can no longer be ignored as it would become trend setting. So if it is going to take 9 years to radicalize 3% of the Muslims into motivated terror elements, it will take just 1 year to reach a higher damaging number, after which the entire society would have to deal with them on almost a daily basis.

This should explain where the ISIS itself came about from, so suddenly & out of nowhere. In reality, it is not as sudden as it feels. For years it was simmering in the back burner unnoticed, but after the forced departure of Saddam Hussein, there was a local leadership vacuum & that problem got compounded further by the American bombing. It has now came out in full force to actually form a caliphate of its own.

Thus, even when home grown terror is next to negligible in India, the opposition to the concept of terrorism should be early on i.e. radicalization of the Muslim youth, no matter how significantly insignificant now, should not be allowed to transcend unopposed and definitely not among the young Muslims with impressionable minds.

This is where it gets tricky. We must keep in mind that the approach to opposition of all & any type of terror network must be prompt & yet in an evolved manner, using soft power which involves all the stake holders, especially the peaceful Muslim majority, who have the most at stake. If not done that way, you are no different than the agents of terrorism themselves.

The means to get to the objective are as important as the goal itself.

The acerbic, blunt & direct Trump-ism or the war-on-terror through remote controlled drones, may produce the sounds & sights of halting it but in reality, it is still akin to allowing a poor concept to perpetuate unopposed. The reason is, if anything, bitter criticism of the Muslims by painting them all with the same black brush is playing into the enemy's cards. In fact that only strengthens the resolve of the terror group leaders, who may no more need to distort facts to portray a fake & a supposed grim picture to prospective young Muslims in order to coax them into joining and participating in a 'them-vs-us' mission.

Donald Trump's jibes or the no-hijab law in France are perfect examples of achieving the exact opposite of the intent, by adding nobility to an otherwise heinous ideology. The routine incitement through insults of Muslims & their prophet is alienating & silencing the vast number of Muslim liberals, presumably, also scared of the Muslim radicals. These Muslim liberals are being driven away, who otherwise would have been as good partners as influencer, in positively countering the dark shadow of ISIS on their own youth, that is stealing away their future.

Americanism & the western culture at large with it's overbearing 'my way or the highway' attitude regularly line up battery of university professors on CNN or BBC with fancy titles like "Middle East expert" or "Islamic scholar". These TV regulars severely fail to understand the brewing angst in the post-Saddam Muslim world, when they ridicule & attack the region, it's people & their faith. They fail to capture the fervor which is emanating from a deadly concoction of two extremes, that from of a sense of - super despondency due to social ostracism at hands of modernity on one end & ultimate hope in some make believe Islamic salvation on the other.

So below the surface of it's sophisticated view points that are enveloped in euphemisms and conveyed to the world through its global media footprint, the entire western world is no different - it provokes more than it convinces. The western bravado is in fact giving a helping hand to a mission that otherwise was attempting to defy gravity. It would have easily died under it's own weight, as the call by ISIS for killing all non-believers, including the moderate Muslim families with their women & innocent children in tow, is repugnant to the human senses, irrespective.

One's strength is in knowing one's weakness and avoiding it. Attempting to match madness with insanity is America & it's allies current weakness, but they just don't seem to get it. They are in pursuit of that race to the bottom.

So how does one reverse this crazy war? The solution lies outside the military 

establishment.

If a frail man in a loin cloth could push back an expanding empire with the greatest armory at the time, it was due to his cutting edge insight into the human behavior & applying the same on fellow humans.  The concept has been tested again & again and even successfully imported in America itself, when it manifested & unleashed itself through Dr. Martin Luther King, who won the 'white hearts' for the cause of race equality, using the Gandhian principles of humanism in practice. Nelson Mandela too won over his oppressors, when he "shocked them with compassion."

These innate human endowments are valid across geographies and peoples and are timeless. If ever there was a need to embrace them by world leaders, it is now.

Universality got established, when we take the example of how Modi in India recently made a huge breakthrough to resolve one of the oldest insurgency problem that India faced. In Nagaland he signed a peace accord with the Naga tribes, without redrawing the state's border ( the long demand of the insurgents ). He made a deal that involved creating an institutionalized mechanism that allowed dignity & autonomy for the Naga tribes living across in Manipur. In fact, Modi had announced a few hours before he signed the accord, that some great news will be shared by him. As expected, the Indian media however was not interested in giving it the due coverage, as there is no profit to be made in peace, besides the TRP enhancing Islamic hue was missing.

So when one is so very vulnerable, the odds are so against you, what have you been left with besides attempting to convince the other side, to appeal to his higher moral values & make him drop his arms?

History ignored, who will tell the Americans that in spite of their grand military machinery, they are still weak & helpless? America is supposedly the leader of the global civilized community of nations & so it and it's allies must still - follow all the rules, respect human rights, maintain minimum civilian casualties and yet face full media scrutiny. Breaking the rules, wins it no friends & in fact exposes it's hypocrisy. The Islamic State and it's ambassadors are invisible & spread across the world & are not shackled by such self imposed restrictions. It was bound to be an asymmetrical war from the day it was so thoughtlessly called out by Bush.

The situation since, has got further exasperated by the media, that is relentlessly cooking up stories, by pouring the Arab oil into the fire that prepares the western world's bacon.

As a consequence, today we have a very peculiar situation at play. It's a vicious downward spiral with the following routine :

* Some modernity afflicted Muslims will indulge in a terrible act;

* Irrespective if it is true or not, ISIS will claim that it is it's doing;

* Some leader in the opposition or running for a post will hurl insults at the Muslims in order grab attention;

* The liberal Muslims will be embarrassed & defend with a "Islam is a religion of peace" argument;

* For the sake of law & order, those in office of authority will attempt political correctness & endorse the stand of the liberal Muslims;

* The TRP seeking media will play to the gallery as that earns it the maximum sales i.e. the photos of post attack aftermath will be pasted on front page, the angry reactionary statements by politicians will make for bold headlines, the knee jerk policies will be debated and either under reportage of those suggesting to make calm or condescending undertones of peace makers will make it to the weekend editorials;

* All that will collectively make deeper gashes in the relationship among all the players;

* More jilted Muslims will embrace radicalism;

* The next terror attack will ensue as a consequence & the cycle repeats.

The end result is that "hate-all" creeps in & media like an inert catalyst, will never be a suspect for the exothermic reaction that it actually aids.

All the parties will be the losers, the media being the exception as it shall continue to poke one & pinch other to seek out profit from pain. To add insult to injury, media which peddles misinformation entwined in half truths that are full lies, will claim pretentious nobility. It will skillfully suggest that it is not the creator of the dark picture but merely holding a mirror in front of the society, which is reflecting an attitude gone bad. Anyone that tries to curb the media will be attacked by the naive 'freedom-of-speech' crusaders.

At such a time we have a statesman in our midst, who is also a visionary, in the name & nature of Narendra Modi.

He is a powerful thought leader, not the one to be drawn into a mud slinging matches & ignores the cacophony, including personal attacks. He exhibits great patience & temperance in dealing with such matters. The Moditva Doctrine's approach on what is now being labeled as "The Muslim problem", is yielding dividends & results are note worthy.

The Moditva Doctrine :

A) Be tough on terrorism - He certainly wants a united global response & wants tougher laws to deal with the menace of terrorism. He does not mince words, in fact he has severely criticized the United Nations Security Council after the Brussels attack, for not waking up to the reality. He admonished that "United Nations has a documented definition, consequences & ways to prevent war, but has no structured response on terrorism. If UN does not soon come up with a suitable response, it might risk of becoming irrelevant."

That toughness is "directed at Muslims", is a figment of a perverts imagination & supported by the media. That has in fact been the oppostion's narrative all along, who are pandering to the "vote-bank politics" of appeasement to the Muslims on one hand and selling fear of "RSS controlled BJP" on the other. In an interview, when a foreign journalist asked Modi about his "Muslim bashing" speeches, he replied "Have you heard them, or have you just heard about them?" He further added "I am in the public eye for over 40 years. I have written on a host of subjects & have given innumerable interviews & perhaps delivered more speeches than any other Indian leader. Kindly, research & then make your opinion."

Modi was painted as a Muslim-hater, but the reality is that according to the UPA commissioned Sachar Committee to evaluate the well being of the Muslims across India, the Muslims prospered the most in State of Gujarat under the leadership of Modi, when he was the chief minister there.

B) Define terrorism - Modi is going about doing his job tactfully, appealing to the vast Muslim majority in the most subtle manner. He fully realizes that the issue must be dealt with utmost care as it is an emotive issue. To draw an analogy, we are trying to diffuse a high intensity time bomb and one wrong move could be crippling.

He has been saying the same thing as Trump and is yet so very opposite. Far from propagating a false notion that "All terrorists are Muslims", Modi was the first global leader to clearly delineate religion from terror. At his maiden G20 summit, without ever using the words "Islamic-terrorism", he called out for a need to go to war with those who are "against humanity" & that he has been repeating at every possible opportunity. He has removed hypocrisy from the hyper Islamophobia hype. His definition will make all accountable, not just the Muslims.

C) Engagement of the Muslims - He is seriously attempting to bring back the vast majority of disengaged Muslims for peace, back into the center fold. As a symbol of significance, he even addressed the Sufi forum at the Vigyan Bhavan in the capital & reminded the Muslims, that of the "99 names of Allah - none stood for violence." He took special efforts to remind the Muslims who they are and frankly that should shame most of the current crop of Muslim leaders. He touched upon their history as he reminisced about the entry of the Muslims into the Indian sub-continent, which was peaceful and is as ancient as the first millennium BC, when he presented a gold-plated replica of the Cheraman Juma Masjid from that era, to King Salman Of Saudi Arabia.

After all, the right way to engage the Muslim youth is to first show respect for their community at large. It is definitely less for the others and more for the Muslim elders themselves to stop their young from being wrongly influenced and securing their own future. One can only face one's future with confidence if he or she is first made to realize & shoulder the responsibility of continuing a peaceful, prosperous & purposeful past.

The Results of the Moditva Doctrine are note worthy both domestically and internationally. Modi is well recognized in the political circle for his freshness & boldness but the sold out Indian media seldom highlights the same in that manner.

To give a few examples, not withstanding the years of status quo on Pakistan, at the very start, Modi demonstrated that he is a non-conformist & risked inviting Nawaz Sharif for his swearing-in ceremony & later visited him unannounced.

On the domestic front, Zafar Sareshwala who once took Modi to the International Court of Justice for the 2002 riots in Gujarat, is now his greatest goodwill ambassador among the Muslim community. One of India's most prominent journalist M J Akbar was so impressed with Modi, that he joined the BJP & is now a spokesman for the party. Asifa Khan of Gujarat, who formerly worked for the All India Mahila Congress, is now the BJP's face in Gujarat & elsewhere, especially in the electronic media & Hindi TV channels.

World over the Indian diasporas of Muslim faith greet him warmly.

Modi was recently awarded the highest civilian award by Saudi Arabia, the epicenter of Islam. That makes him the first Indian leader to be conferred such an honor but sadly, the media forgot to showcase us that.

It may not be out of context to mention that the social liberals in India don't seem to understand the gravity of the situation at hand & are living in a fools paradise. They get fooled by the local media, that delivers news that is less insightful & instead more communally incite-full. They are using the liberals to push even the politically neutrals to the right of center. That done, media is laughing all the way to the bank, with the polarization of the society getting firmed up. It plays cheerleader to these so-called liberals, who are more than eager to hog the limelight by offering them a voice, often out of context. The liberals sadly get taken & join the manufactured pseudo "intolerance debate". They import Americanism & conveniently fail to understand the Indian secularism, where the law typically does not keep an arms length from all faiths but attempts to make a handshake with all. Thus, the liberals unnecessarily front issues such as the beef ban, while not even seconding the issue in favor of uniform civil code & triple talaq tragedy or speaking up against the irresponsible statements of the Hindu fringe, while keeping mum against the Muslim mainstream leaders out of fear; are examples of their irresponsibility.  They challenge ghar-wapsi but turn the other way when those following tribal religions, who lived next to Hindus for centuries, get converted en masse by NGOs financed by foreign money. As a result, many of the Hindus who are relatively indifferent to the religious preferences of their own or others in day to day matters, get infuriated and turn right wingers.

For a peaceful society one needs to understand the following 1) That faith is a fact beyond the reach of proof or reasoning, 2) That the security of any minority is in the goodwill of the majority, 3) That the civility of the majority is in its ability to accommodate the minority & 4) That media's freedom is a right but it's responsibility towards the national integrity is paramount.

Media however has failed the Indian state, it is time that it's freedom is curbed. If "Jaan" in Hindi means both life & information, then : Media to hai jaan ka dushman, hai hai !

Believe it or not, for a sustainable solution, in India at least - it should be Modi & Muslims vs. the media.