Between Jawaharlal 038; Sonia

Are Manmohan8217;s first 3 years as PM that different from Indira8217;s? But are PMO and party talking now?

While celebrating the third anniversary of the United Progressive Alliance8217;s government in New Delhi, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears to have received more brickbats than bouquets. On the strength of 8220;robust economic growth8221; and 8220;high investment8221;, the UPA has given itself high enough marks. But the principal opposition party, the BJP, has declared it to be a 8220;failure on all fronts8221;. The Leader of the Opposition, L.K. Advani, has, once again, pronounced the good Doctor to be the 8220;weakest prime minister8221;, a view apparently shared by most TV watchers. For, in all talk shows 72 to 84 per cent of those voting have gone along with it. Incidentally, no TV channel discloses 72 or 84 per cent of how many. Several critics have accused the prime minister of allowing the 8220;dignity8221; of his office to be 8220;lowered8221;, by letting the allies run their ministries as personal fiefdoms and permitting his Congress colleagues to upstage or even openly defy him. On one point, however, there is not a single dissenting voice: the PM8217;s sterling personal integrity.

In my view the best way to assess and analyse the rival verdicts would be to discuss them, not in isolation but in the perspective of the highly colourful procession of the 14 prime ministers we have had since Independence. The first lesson of such an exercise would be that prime ministers 8212; even when belonging to the same family, leave alone the party 8212; have been as diverse as the country itself is. Second, the same prime minister has appeared to be totally different at different times in his or her career. And third, one should not try to compare apples with oranges. All prime ministers are shaped by the circumstances and ambience in which they ascend to power, and these have varied vastly, especially after the demise of the single-party dominance.

Against this backdrop, let me assert that Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister, who ruled for 17 long, unbroken and formative years, remains the tallest of them all, and the emergence of anyone even remotely comparable to him seems unlikely. This does not mean that his premiership was flawless and smooth. For two and a half years after the tryst with destiny he had to share power with Vallabhbhai Patel. Their relationship was usually tense because of a complete difference of outlook. Yet, in India8217;s service, their partnership was most productive. The same, alas, cannot be said of the partnership between Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Advani, notwithstanding then BJP president Venkaiah Naidu8217;s rhetoric about the 8220;joint leadership8221; of Vikas Purush and Lauh Purush. After the Chinese debacle in 1962 Nehru was a shattered man. Yet even in the tragic twilight years, he bounced back to enforce the Kamraj Plan to cleanse up the Congress to the extent possible.

Nehru8217;s successor, Lal Bahadur Shastri, was very conscious of the fact that the shoes he had stepped into were too big for him. His party denied him the support he merited. Nehru8217;s sister, Vijayalakshmi Pandit, called him a 8220;prisoner of indecision8221;. Yet the brilliance with which led the country during the 1965 war with Pakistan and brought it back to peace barely a few hours before his death has ensured him a niche in Indian history.

Enter the redoubtable Indira Gandhi, who was to dominate the national stage whether she was in power or out of it. But please look at the first three years of her first innings. All through this period she was derided as 8220;goongi gudia8221;. When the cow-worshipping sadhus wrought havoc in Delhi and she decided to sack the then home minister, Gulzarilal Nanda, she also wanted to drop two other ministers. The Syndicate of Congress bosses, headed by Kamaraj, wouldn8217;t let her. She had to wage a Herculean struggle for five years before she could establish her supremacy. Compared with the first three years of Indira8217;s premiership, do the past 36 months of Manmohan Singh look as bad as his numerous critics are making them out to be? Especially when he was never a prime ministerial candidate or aspirant and was requested to accept the post only because Sonia Gandhi, for her own reasons, did not want the job that was rightfully hers?

The flip side of the coin, however, is that two centres of power are inevitably built into the situation. On paper the division of labour is that Sonia Gandhi would lead the Congress and chair the UPA while Manmohan Singh would run the government. To the best of my knowledge and belief, relations between the Congress president and the prime minister are of the best. She has, moreover, always shown him due deference. However, problems do arise when a carefully taken government decision, say, on petroleum prices, can be hurriedly 8220;rolled back8221; because of a 8220;two-paragraph letter8221; from 10 Janpath. Nor is it a secret that almost all Congressmen, including cabinet ministers, believe that their future lies with the First Family, not the leader of the government, and therefore behave accordingly. Yet, running a country as vast and complex as India and the Congress party organisation, such as it is, requires a lot more than periodic and cordial meetings between the prime minister and the Congress president, with or without the 8220;core group8221;. What is needed is constant synergy between the party establishment and the Prime Minister8217;s Office. This is sadly lacking.

As far coalition governments not just after 1996 but even earlier go 8212; to talk of 8216;coalition dharma8217; is profane in the Indian context 8212; they are all alike. What coalition could have been stronger than the Janata that rose to power amidst tremendous goodwill after the Emergency? Yet it collapsed in 30 months flat under the collective weight of the clashing ambitions of the three old men leading it. In 1989-90 V.P. Singh8217;s coalition disintegrated in just 11 months. Charan Singh, Chandra Shekhar, Deve Gowda and Inder Gujral can be mentioned only in the also ran category.

Story continues below this ad

Today, if Karunanidhi decides that Dayanidhi Maran must go, and some others should get in, he is doing nothing different from what Bal Thackeray used to do in Atalji8217;s time, brandishing his famous 8220;remote control8221;.

The writer is a political commentator