Why is the New York Times Editorial Board passing judgment on candidates running for office in INDIA?

[mota bhai 2,675]

EDITORIAL

Narendra Modi’s Rise in India

By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

Published: October 26, 2013

In 2002, rioters in the western Indian state of Gujarat savagely killed nearly 1,000 people, most of whom were part of the Muslim minority. Now, barely a decade later, Narendra Modi, who was the chief minister of Gujarat at the time and still holds the office, is a leading candidate to become prime minister of India.

...

His rise to power is deeply troubling to many Indians, especially the country’s 138 million Muslims and its many other minorities. They worry he would exacerbate sectarian tensions that have subsided somewhat in the last decade.

Supporters of Mr. Modi argue that an investigation commissioned by India’s Supreme Court cleared him of wrongdoing in the riots. And they insist that Mr. Modi, who is widely admired by middle-class Indians for making Gujarat one of India’s fastest-growing states, can revive the economy, which has been weakened by a decade of mismanagement by the coalition government headed by the Indian National Congress Party.

There is no question that the Congress Party has failed to capitalize on the economic growth of recent years.

...

But Mr. Modi’s strident Hindu nationalism has fueled public outrage. When Reuters asked him earlier this year if he regretted the killings in 2002, he said, if “someone else is driving a car and we’re sitting behind, even then if a puppy comes under the wheel, will it be painful or not? Of course it is.”

...

Mr. Modi has shown no ability to work with opposition parties or tolerate dissent.

...

His economic record in Gujarat is not entirely admirable, either. Muslims in Gujarat, for instance, are much more likely to be poor than Muslims in India as a whole, even though the state has a lower poverty rate than the country.

India is a country with multiple religions, more than a dozen major languages and numerous ethnic groups and tribes. Mr. Modi cannot hope to lead it effectively if he inspires fear and antipathy among many of its people.

And an Indian publication (pro-Modi) rebuts:

New York Times and the unfounded Modi paranoia

by Dhiraj Nayyar

Oct 28, 2013 #BJP

The Editorial Board of the venerable New York Times does not want Narendra Modi to become India’s Prime Minister. The paper is, of course, entitled to its view. One only wishes its argument was more sophisticated, and the evidence more compelling.

...

The New York Times has a one-dimensional view of Modi. It cites the Gujarat riots of 2002 as the chief reason for the fear that Modi inspires among India’s religious minorities. Just so that the argument doesn’t seem dated by a decade, NYT picks on the “puppy” metaphor (it calls it incendiary) used by Modi to express pain for the Gujarat riots in a recent interview to Reuters. Of course, it conveniently does not mention that Modi, in the same interview, also said that religious should not be an instrument of state policy.

...

A 360 degree view of Modi also requires an explanation on why he inspires hope among so many Indians. Opinion poll after opinion poll rates him as the most popular choice for Prime Minister. Even if you take opinion polls with ounces of salt, there is no denying Modi’s popularity – just look at the massive turnouts at his political rallies, even in places like Tamil Nadu where his party has a negligible presence. Now, would NYT argue that his popularity has everything to do with his “denigration” of minorities and muscular, majoritarian Hindu Nationalism? If it did, it would be an unreasonable argument. The fact is that Modi has emerged as a pan-Indian leader because of his message of development, economic growth and jobs which resonate with a nation that is young at its core – 2/3rds of Indians are under 35.

...

Gujarat 2002 is a blot on Modi’s record, but it is worth remembering that at the time it happened he was only five months into his first stint as Chief Minister ... Modi has spent all his time in office since shoring up his administrative abilities. They have been no riots in Gujarat for over a decade. Some people, including senior members of his own BJP, responsible for the riots have actually been imprisoned ... Unfortunately, Modi’s critics will not even give him credit where it’s due.

...

The NYT tears into his governance record (particularly with regard to Muslims) by peddling a Planning Commission report from 2012 which shows the high level of poverty of Muslims living in Gujarat compared to other Indian states. The NYT failed to do due diligence. The methodology for calculating poverty used in the report, using the controversial Tendulkar methodology, has been junked by the Union Government’s Planning Commission, which prepared the report in the first place ... The editorial board of the NYT would have benefitted from reading a piece written by the eminent Indian economist Surjit Bhalla in The Indian Express on October 26, in which he shows (statistically) that Gujarat among all Indian states has actually shown the second fastest relative decline in poverty among Muslims in the decade that Modi has been in office.

Edited October 28, 2013 by amriki bhai

[JohnR! 5,495]

Because they are protected under the First Amendment.

This is America. Everyone has an opinion!

[mota bhai 2,675]

Because they are protected under the First Amendment.

This is America. Everyone has an opinion!

Yes, but the NYT Editorial Board rarely (if ever) wades into the elections of countries like India.

Clearly, someone is very upset about the possibility of a Modi victory.

[Sarah Elle-Même 660]

Someone paying (or buying up a lot of ad space) to coax the editorial board into publish foreign electoral politics pieces is more likely.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Sarah and Adnan

[Darnell 8,478]

I think it's a new Anti-Muslim conspiracy, fueled by and paid for by Muslims, who, of course, cannot stand Modi.

[mota bhai 2,675]

Ok, assuming Muslim organizations are behind this Editorial... do they really think it will work? The appearance of a western publication opining on an Indian election will only make Modi stronger. Indians are generally very sensitive to Western interference.

[Darnell 8,478]

hahahha.

I don't know what 'they' think, nor do I care.

What is puisinaminously funny, however, is that they be trying.

[mota bhai 2,675]

Yes, trying to influence an Indian election through the Editorial pages of the New York Times is pretty funny.

The Indian electorate by and large doesn't even care what the Editorial Boards of Indian English-language newspapers say. They are seen as the voice of the elite. No one cares about them, except for the elite.

An American paper holds even less influence.