Nitish natak

There have been at least six instances in the past 11 months when Union Railway Minister Nitish Kumar could have usefully submitted a resign...

There have been at least six instances in the past 11 months when Union Railway Minister Nitish Kumar could have usefully submitted a resignation letter and driven home the message of public accountability. On September 10 last year, when 130 people died because the Howrah-New Delhi Rajdhani derailed at Rafiqganj. Then again two months later, on December 21, when the Kachiguda-Bangalore Express jumped off the track killing 20. On January 3 this year, when 20 died in a collision near Ghatnadur, Maharashtra. Then there was the incident in May when 34 were burnt to death after the Frontier Mail caught fire near Ludhiana and, a little over a month later, when the Karwar-Ahmedabad holiday special derailed resulting in 53 casualties and, ten days after this, when the Golconda Express fell off a bridge near Warangal killing 18. On none of these instances did the Nitish Kumar feel sufficiently stirred to present a goodbye letter to the prime minister as he does now when faced with opposition from within his own party.

So what does this say about the nature of coalitional governance 8212; when a national government is held hostage to the intra-party wrangling of one of its small constituents and, more specifically, what does it say about the professional commitment demonstrated by a senior minister like Nitish Kumar? Only this, that the resignation drama does nothing to enhance the image of either the NDA government or the railway minister. Why should the people of this country have to be saddled with a sulking minister holding an important portfolio because he wishes to bring those opposing him within the Samata Party to their knees? Both Prime Minister Vajpayee and Samata Party President George Fernandes have thus far displayed exemplary patience in dealing with Nitish Kumar. While Fernandes8217;s forbearance is understandable, given the fact that his party8217;s future hinges crucially on how this crisis plays out, the prime minister8217;s is less so. Vajpayee should, in fact, let it be known in no uncertain terms that there is a limit to such tantrum-throwing. If Nitish Kumar continues to sulk, he should be told to go.

Such firmness would have the important effect of nipping the present crisis in the bud and deterring those who hope to employ a similar ruse in the future from undertaking such a step. It is, indeed, a piquant situation that the prime minister is confronted with today, considering that Nitish Kumar8217;s predecessor in Rail Bhavan is now jobless and more than willing to help out by taking back her old portfolio. But nobody knows better than the prime minister that if Nitish Kumar can indulge in a good-sized tantrum, Mamata Banerjee has the capacity to stage the mother of all sulks.