Poor S M Krishna. No Kannadiga would want to be in his shoes today. The man seems to be under a particularly bad configuration of stars. The Rajkumar kidnap saw him growing old before our eyes. Now this.‘‘This’’ is the tightest squeeze any chief minister has faced. If he obeys the Supreme Court, he will face the wrath of his people. If he stands by his people, he will face the wrath of the Supreme Court with all its dangerous implications. Rather unfair for a CM who had been doing well otherwise. Roads were modernised, business leaders were brought into agenda-setting for progress, a generally favourable climate of governance was created.But now that the moment of truth has come, the Karnataka Government will have to face some facts and Krishna will have to show qualities of a different kind of leadership. A tough situation demands a tough response.The first fact to face is that Karnataka has a dispute with every one of its neighbours—with Maharashtra over Belgaum, Andhra over Almatti, Kerala over Kasargod and of course Tamil Nadu over Cauvery. Rights and wrongs apart, is there something amiss in the basic fact that one state has so many quarrels?It does not follow that the other states are more sinned against than sinning. In fact Tamil Nadu has traditionally been more aggressive than all others in pushing its interests at the expense of its neighbours. It had gone to the extent of diverting streams from the border mountains of Kerala and even building dams to ‘‘take away’’ waters from the Kerala side. That such things became possible because of the incompetence of Kerala is another matter.Krishna must also face the fact that his padayatra was a mistake. For one thing, he made it a Congress party affair whereas in all matters pertaining to Cauvery till then he had acted on an all-party basis. For another, he should have known that a padayatra would only inflame passions.A leader must counsel his people to rise above emotion and look at things rationally. By failing to do so, Krishna reduced himself to the level of his tormentor in Tamil Nadu. If Jayalalithaa used unnecessarily belligerent language to play to the gallery, Krishna used an unnecessarily gimmicky show to win applause from the gallery. It was sleight of hand from both sides instead of at least a pretence of statesmanship.Jayalalithaa can gloat over the law being on her side. It may be that the law dwells in an ivory tower unmindful of ground realities, but it’s the law. Resignation by the CM, or President’s rule, or fresh elections will only prolong the crisis without solving the basic conundrum.What statesmanship requires is a solution to that conundrum. Which is entirely possible. Rivers like the Danube flow through several countries, yet there is no problem. After a lot of ruckus, India has a working arrangement with Bangladesh over the Brahmaputra. Even with Pakistan the arrangement over the Indus is working.If international problems can be contained, why not inter-state disputes? There must be a national policy that will permanently end inter-state fights over rivers, dams and border districts. A possible beginning is for chief ministers to depoliticise the issues and persuade their followers to be realistic and accommodating. Krishna can start by obeying the Supreme Court.Any other option bristles with dangers. Already business is at a standstill in key areas. Both states are losing heavily. The economy is severely strained. Hate grows in people’s minds. And that hapless man, into the third month of his kidnap, languishes in the forest. Poor Nagappa.
