AP ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS 2024.-MY COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLE WRITTEN BY PARAKALA PRABHAKAR -THE WIRE MAGAZINE.

Parakala Prabhakar comes from a staunch Congress family. Both his father and mother had been Members of the Legislative Assembly representing the Congress. His father held cabinet positions 3 times in the AP Assembly.

Prabhakar is from Narasapuram and he did his BA from Andhra Loyola College, Vijayawada. Then he did his MA and M Phil from JNU, Delhi. He later took his doctorate from the London School of Economics in 1991. 

Parakala Prabhakar and Nirmala Sitharaman met when they both were studying at JNU and got married in 1986. On political ideology, they are dead opposed to each other. Although Nirmala Sitharaman never makes any public statement against his beliefs, Parakala Prabhakar overdoes that and is highly critical of her party, the BJP. Despite his vehement criticism, the marriage endured for 29 years now and that is a testament to her patience because I have not seen her giving a single public comment about his political views while he excels at it. Each to their political opinion, and no one bothers but when they start airing their opposing political views in public then it can lead to many interpretations.

After education Prabhakar never took up any job despite being a Phd from London School of Economics and chose to remain merely as a political commentator. He was a communications advisor to the YSRCP Government between the years 2014-2018. He is called an Economist but I have not seen any of his works as an economist at all. He is only good at criticism and offers nothing constructive. His prominence was merely because he is the husband of Nirmala Sitharaman. Had that not been so, probably no one would have noticed him.       

Parakala Prabhakar chose to write a note on the Assembly elections of AP held in 2024 titled “Is there Mischief Behind the Miracle of the 2024 Polls”.

Now as for my political belief, I prefer Jagan to Chandrababu as CM, however, truth is truth and it cannot be seen through the political spectrum and get colored accordingly. I strongly feel Parakala Prabhakar had done a grave injustice to truth by this article and want to put the position straight by commenting on it below:

Before we go to examine the issue of the allegations of Parakala Prabhakar, let us take the figures first from his own write up. Because based on those, he wove a web of concocted stories trying to implicate the Election Commission in malpractices. 

I give a link to his article below:

https://thewire.in/government/is-there-mischief-behind-the-miracle-of-the-2024-andhra-pradesh-polls

As per his own figures

But before commencing on the critique I have to admit that the Election Commission, be that of AP or the ECI has committed a monumental blunder in announcing figures without properly taking in the figures reported and consulting each other. I cannot say whether the blunder is from the AP EC or the ECI because they are contradicting themselves because the former said it was 68% by 5 PM, while the latter said it was 68% by 8 PM. So both the figures cannot be correct and one of them has to be compulsorily wrong. This is fact that cannot be denied and such uncoordinated actions by the state and National Commissions is totally improper and it gives chances for such interpretations like that of Parakala Prabhakar. All one needs is one inconsistency like in this case and the issue can be blown up to accuse the EC itself of favouring one party at the expense of the other.   

The figure that initiated all this controversy was the voting figure released by the AP EC as 68.04% up till 5 PM on that day. On this figure he did not give any press statement or apress note or a tweet, but merely stated it to the press.

Now let us have a look at the figures                     

Before we go to examine the issue of the allegations of Parakala Prabhakar, let us take the figures first from his own write up. Because based on those, he wove a web of concocted stories trying to implicate the Election Commission in malpractices. 

But before commencing on the critique I have to admit that the Election Commission, be that of AP or the ECI has committed a monumental blunder in announcing figures without properly taking in the figures reported and consulting each other. I cannot say whether the blunder is from the AP EC or the ECI because they are contradicting themselves because the former said it was 68% by 5 PM, while the latter said it was 68% by 8 PM. So both the figures cannot be correct and one of them has to be compulsorily wrong. This is fact that cannot be denied and such uncoordinated actions by the state and National Commissions is totally improper and it gives chances for such interpretations like that of Parakala Prabhakar. All one needs is one inconsistency like in this case and the issue can be blown up to accuse the EC itself of favouring one party at the expense of the other.   

The figure that initiated all this controversy was the voting figure released by the AP EC as 68.04% up till 5 PM on that day. On this figure he did not give any press statement or apress note or a tweet, but merely stated it to the press.

Parakala Prabhakar, in his haste to prove the EC guilty takes the flawed figure of 68.04% given till 5 PM as the basis of his entire calculation. This figure was never put out as a tweet or as any press release by the AP EC. He merely mentioned it to the press reporters who were eager to grab it and transmit it all over.  

Another important number Prabahkar puts in the AP ECs mouth on which his entire calculation is based is that large voter queues are there only in 3500 booths. What the EC of AP mentioned was that even at 5 PM large queues of voters are there in many booths and he never mentioned that figure of 3500. Parakala Prabhakars entire calculation is based on these 3500 booths which never came out of the EC’s mouth. Only some officials indicated this 3500 figure to the press. Some official telling something to the press is not official news coming from the EC of AP.  

Prabhakar also assumes that polling has concluded at 11.45 PM and bases his Calculation on that. The ECI never said that polling had concluded when it gave a press release on the 11.45 PM figures.

If these factors are taken into consideration, then Prakala Prabhakars theory falls flat on its face. No doubt the EC of AP quoted a polling figure of 68% till 5 PM, while the ECI said it was 68% only by 8 PM. Such mistakes are not at all expected from poll bodies at the state and the centre and they have certainly bungled on that.

The ECI had been very consistent on reporting of poll percentage as 68.12% at 8 PM, 76.5% at 11.45 PM and finally 81.79% at conclusion. There is no such thing as only 3500 booths on which Prabhakar fully bases his calculation on.

Also regarding the small differences in reporting, consider this. Each EVM is a standalone machine and is not attached to any other by way of either a connecting chord or a Wifi. The isolation of the EVM’s has been deliberately done by the EC because they should not present any chance of getting hacked online.

That means each booth has to manually report the figures to the polling station in charge. He/she in turn would have to report the figures to the AP EC and the reporting is not automatic. Obviously the EC of AP would have software to collate all the individual data that is coming in from the polling stations.

But the weak in this chain is the Polling station in charge who has to manually feed the data into the software supplied by the AP EC or get it fed by another person because the EVM’s cannot be linked to any other device. At the time of this entering of data mistakes can take place because there are 46,389 polling stations and that many individuals feeding the data.

Based on that, intermediate duration data would never be accurate because different booths can have different voting patterns with each of them registering voting at different times and also reporting at different times. So the intermediate data is only an approximation and can never be perfect. So the ECI, to make sure that such interpretations as that of Parakala Prabhakar arise due to doubt and also bias, and has to make sure that either they report the data or the concerned state EC’s do it. If both lack the coordination, then it would end up only in such a fiasco.  

Then there is another important factor which Prabhakar has conveniently forgotten or chose to ignore deliberately. Each booth has agents of all major parties and the EVM’s after completion of voting are sealed in their presence.

The sealed EVM’s in turn are moved to highly guarded strong rooms in the district in the presence of party agents and the rooms are sealed in their presence. The strong rooms are again opened in the presence of party agents. So how can any malpractices or tampering can be done in this operation?  Unless, of course the agents of all parties compromise at all the strong rooms in unison and the officials too collude in it. Is such a thing possible without a leak from thousands of people? The chances for this not even 1 out of 1 crore or even more.

So, yes there are inconsistencies in the statement by the state Commissioner for AP and the Election Commission, and that should be condemned for creating a doubt in the minds of the people, but that does not compromise the election in any way at all.   

SINGAPORE THE ASIAN TIGER-HOW IT GOT THERE?

 

Singapore is a great country/city in the world and there is none to equal it in many ways. Singapore consists of 63 islands. It has a population of 61 lacs and is multi religious and multi ethnic with Buddhism being the leading religion with 31% following it. 20% people do not follow any religion, 19% follow Christianity, 16% follow Islam, 9% follow Taoism & 5% follow Hinduism.  On ethnicity, 74% are Christian, 14% Malay & 9% Indian. That means there are 550,000 Indians in Singapore of which 198,000 are Tamils. Tamil is one of the official languages of Singapore. 

If one checks the countries in the world with over 100,000 in population, then the list on nominal per capita is headed by Ireland with USD 129,132, followed by Switzerland with USD 111,047 and the 3^rd place is taken by Singapore with USD 94,481. Of course among the bigger countries the US stands unequalled on nominal per capita with USD 89,599. Singapore is also ranked as one of the most expensive cities in the world for expatriates & foreign workers. Singapore is the world’s 3^rd least corrupt country after Denmark & Finland. Incidentally on this corruption index, of the 180 countries India is ranked 96, Pakistan 135, Bangladesh 151, the 178, 179 & 180 ranks go to Venezuela, Somalia & South Sudan respectively.   

On PPP per capita Singapore is the country with the 3^rd highest in the world with USD 157,000 only after Monaco & Liechtenstein where the latter 2 are very small countries with about 40,000 populations each. Singapore is the only country in Asia with a sovereign credit rating of AAA from all major rating agencies. There are only 10 such countries in the world on AAA rating and 8 of them come from Europe and the rest 2 are Australia and Singapore.

Singapore was supposedly founded by Sang Nila Utama, a prince from Palenbang in Java in 1299 AD. It was a Hindu-Buddhist kingdom. It was originally known as the Kingdom of Singapura. After coronation Nila Utama’s official adopted title was Sri Tri Bhuvana. Singapore in the 14^th century was known as Temasek and was part of the Indosphere.

                            INDOSPHERE IN ORANGE. 

Indosphere is a term used for areas of Indian linguistic influence in the neighbouring Southern Asian, Southeast Asian, and East Asian regions. It is commonly used in linguistics in contrast with the Sinophone languages of the Mainland Southeast Asia linguistic area of the Sinosphere.

In the 14^th century Singapura’s  ruler Parameswara was attacked by the Javanese or Siamese kingdoms and was thrown out. In 1613 AD Portuguese raiders burned down the settlement. For the next 2 centuries Singapore was under the Johor Sultanate and the Dutch conquered it when they conquered Malacca in 1641 AD. The British arrived in the island in 1819 and the then the sultan of Johor gave them rights to establish a trading post in return for USD 5000 per year. In 1824 another treaty with the British made the entire island a part of the British Empire. When the British first arrived in 1819 there were hardly 1000 people living on the island. By 1860 this has boomed to 80,000. Later Singapore grew rapidly.

In the 2^nd World War the British suffered their worst defeat in Singapore when 60,000 British forces surrendered, and 5000- were killed and wounded. The British forces planned to liberate Singapore in 1945/46, but by that time the war ended on account of the Atom bombs. The British, Indian and the Australian forces under Mountbatten accepted the surrender of the Japanese forces.

Much of the infra of Singapore was destroyed during the 2^nd World War, Shortage of food led to malnutrition, disease and rampant crime and violence. A series of strikes crippled the economy. However, by late 1947 the economy began to recover.

The failure of Britain to successfully defend Singapore in the war made the image of the British tarnished in the eyes of Singaporeans. On 1^st April 1946 Singapore became a British crown colony. During the1950’s the Chinese Communists waged a war in the state. In 1959 the British agreed to give full independence to Singapore except in defence and foreign affairs. This happened days before the general election when the PAP (People’s Action Party) party of Lee Kuan Yew won a landslide victory.

Lee was an outstanding scholar and earned a double starred first class honours at Cambridge which showed his consistent academic excellence.  He was also a brilliant lawyer who defended radical students and postal and port workers at the same time not losing the confidence of the establishment.  In 1959, when PAP won 43 seats out of the total 51, Lee himself drove his car to the Government house to be sworn in as PM.

Singapore had strong links with Malaya (now Malaysia) and the PAP leaders believed that their future lay with Malaya. In 1961 Malaya offered a federation named Malaysia of which Singapore would also be a part with high autonomy. Singapore accepted that after a referendum. Indonesia was against this arrangement.

However, in this federation Singapore was discriminated against and there were lots of political and economic differences between Malaya and Singapore. In August 1965 Singapore separated from the Malaysian Federation and became an independent country with Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister.

In 1967 Singapore co-founded the ASEAN. Lee’s emphasis on rapid economic growth, racial integration, promotion of business entrepreneurship and curbs of democratic freedoms by governing with extensive legal powers shaped Singapore’s policies for the next half a century.

Steady Economic growth continued throughout the 1980’s at 8% with the unemployment rate falling to 3% and continued till 1999. Lee’s government developed Singapore port into one of the world’s busiest ports and service and tourism industries also expanded significantly during this period.  

The PAP under Lee has remained in power since 1959 and is the political party in power with the most longevity in the world. 

As usual opposition political parties view the PAP as having tight regulation of political and media activities along with its stringent laws as an infringement on political rights.

In 1990 Goh Chok Tang became the 2^nd PM of Singapore after Lee. Goh had to face two crisis’s; the 1997 Asian Financial crisis & the 2002-04 SARS outbreak. In 2004, Lee’s son became the 3^rd PM of Singapore. After mismanagement of the economy by him the PAP had the worst victory in the elections ever in 2011. Of course that was a good 60% vote share though. In 1968 elections the PAP had the best ever tally of 87%. Lee Kuan Yew’s death in 2015 brought back the PAP with a 70% vote share in the elections held that year. In 2024 Laurence Wong of the PAP became PM.

The PAP stormed into power in 1959 and has never looked back since. In 1968 it won with a massive 87% vote share and no party could ever defeat them till now. That is the real magic of Lee Kuan Yew. PAP ruled Singapore for 67 years in succession without a single defeat and the least percentage of vote share they ever got in an election was 60%.

How did that happen? Singapore was described by a British politician as a “Pestilential and immoral Cesspool”. From there it transformed itself into a powering tiger marching forward nonstop.  

This was because of the amazing first leadership of Lee Kuan Yew provided to Singapore, which built a lasting legacy that could not be erased from people’s minds. When he died in 2015 Singapore mourned the loss of a great leader which shaped its destiny. But he must have died a truly happy man for his achievement of making Singapore a great country and gave his countrymen what they wanted. That is a glorious death which is not possible for everyone.

But he was pretty strict in Singapore and also authoritarian. The sole opposition MP J.B. Jayaretnam at one time was ruined by continuous lawsuits. A political activist spent 32 years in detention. Lee believed that good governance did not depend on human rights or liberal democracy. I am completely with him on that. He never accepted the press as a guardian of the nation as he felt the media houses were too corruption ridden.

Tom Abraham was India’s first High Commissioner to Singapore. He was a lifelong friend of Lee. He said of Singapore that he knows about all the beatings and tortures and what happened in Singapore but despite all that the PAP has done a remarkable job. No doubt about that at all because the worst vote share PAP got in their elections was 60%. So, there is not a shred of doubt about their delivery. 

Singapore is one of the 4 countries in the developed world to retain the death penalty. Apart from it, only the USA, japan and Taiwan have retained it. Singapore levies a death penalty for drug trafficking on which Amnesty and Human Rights Watch cry hoarse about. They want human rights for drug traffickers.

This is what AI says about Lee; 

"Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's founding father, was a notoriously tough, pragmatic leader who transformed a vulnerable, resource-poor island into a global economic powerhouse. He wielded significant, sometimes authoritarian power, acting as a "benevolent dictator" to enforce discipline, root out corruption, and drive rapid modernization, often using an "iron" will to secure the nation's survival." 

I personally think that the policies followed by Lee were perfect for a developing country. While for a developing country, providing living security and governance to its population should become the primary task and freedoms should take a backseat.

For a developing nation the priorities are different with policies hinging on development with selective curb on freedoms. This does not mean that dissenting people should be tortured but certainly they should be dealt with firmly because they act against the larger goal set for the country. 

China succeeded because of following this policy and so did Singapore while great colonial powers like the UK and France which had immense resources at their command could become prosperous only in hundreds of years while both Singapore and China took far less than a hundred.    

Once the country develops then the security issue gets sublimed with that of freedoms and then they become important. Having no freedom for a developed nation is bad and the people would be disillusioned.

Amazingly Lee visited India 17 times during his tenure starting in 1959. In contrast he visited China only in 1976. When the then Chinese premier gave him a copy of “India’s China War” of Neville Maxwell telling Lee that it was the correct version,  Lee politely returned the book stating that it was Chinas version and there was another Indian version.

Lee was a man who recognised India’s potential even before Indians themselves did. It was he who introduced India to the ASEAN. 

Even before the ASEAN he wanted involve India in the region and suggested to Indira Gandhi that India should enforce a Monroe like doctrine to Asia. 

He warned south East Asian students in 1962, with China rising, unless India emerged “Asia would submerge”. He attributed his strategic vision to Nehru and KM Panikkar. He spoke with reverence of Indian civilization and that it played a role in Asia as Greece and Rome have done in Europe. He always alluded to Singapore’s Sanskrit name Singapura. For him Nehru was his failed God who failed because of allowing populist politics to erode his promise.

 

HOW MANY PEOPLE CAN SLEEP SAFELY IN AN AIRTIGHT AIRCONDIONED ROOM FOR 8 HRS.

 

Once I had a discussion with someone as to what happens if the doors of room are kept closed for a long time with a person inside it. How long would he be able to sustain his breathing? When I enquired on that I found the following facts.

A room can be of different sizes and can contain different quantities of Oxygen. Let us take a room of 10*10*10 (length 10 feet, width 10 feet & height 10 feet) with an area of 1000 cubic feet or 28.31 Cubic Mtrs.

The density of air is 1.225 Kg/m ³. So a room of 1000 ft³ would have 28.31*1.225 or 34.68 Kgs of air. Now we think that air is weightless, so this weight surprises us.  

Air contains 21% Oxygen, so a room of 1000 ft³ would have 34.68*21/100 or 7.28 Kgs of Oxygen. 

A person consumes about 700 gms of Oxygen in 24 hours’ time or thereabouts. So if he sleeps in a completely closed room (air conditioned) with an area of 1000 ft³ without opening the doors then the Oxygen in the room would be sufficient for 7280/700 or 10 days. But there are other factors that have to be taken into consideration. 

Humans consume only 5% of Oxygen per breath and of the 21% we breathe in 16% is exhaled out as the human body does not require it. So as long as the concentration of Oxygen in the air does not drop below one fourth there would not be any discomfort for a person in a completely sealed room that is airtight. 

However, there is another important factor to be considered and that is Carbon Dioxide because we give out CO2 while breathing out. Atmosphere contains .043% of CO2. 4% CO2 in the air is dangerous for humans and 10% is fatal. Each inhalation of ours gives out .04 gms of CO2.  An adult inhales 0.5 ltrs of air per breath while at rest. Exhaled air consists of 4% CO2. 

Considering the above factors, It has been estimated that in a closed room of 1000 cubic feet a person can remain safe for 2-3 days. So if 6 people sleep in such a room that is air conditioned which is airtight for a night (8 hrs) they would have no problem. Since the area of the room is so small, no way more than that number can sleep in it. An air conditioner does not make any difference to the equation as it only compresses the refrigerant and transfers the heat in the room outside and merely circulates the air in the room and does not bring in any fresh air. But even if the door of the room is opened once air from outside the room flows in and extends the safe time.