Opinion The beginning of a breach

In subsequent months,relations between the two were somewhat strained,but each showed the other all courtesies. She continued to be a member of all the important committees of the cabinet. Shastri additionally entrusted her with the stewardship of the committee on the sensitive demand for the formation of a Punjabi Suba over which the Sikh minority in bilingual Punjab was greatly agitated,especially after linguistic states had become the order of the day. The only other bilingual state,Bombay,was bifurcated into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960. But this hardly helped. For,as Indira Gandhi often grumbled in the presence of her confidants,the courtesies and even deference shown to her were “on the surface only”; she was given little say in the making of high policy.

Ironically,on the language issue and the policy to be pursued by the Union government on it,there was no difference between the two leaders. What irritated Shastri was that while rioting lasted,Indira Gandhi had all but “upstaged” him. The facts are complex and need to be put in perspective.

It was Jawaharlal Nehru’s unchangeable practice to rush to the venue of any major crisis or disaster. Though holding no governmental office,Indira Gandhi would also go,either with him or by herself. Shastri believed in acting in consultation with state chief ministers and major party leaders. When Tamil Nadu exploded,Congress president Kamaraj,then considered “uncrowned king” of the state,advised the PM to let the state government cope with the situation,and not appear to be interfering with it. Indira Gandhi’s approach was completely opposite. The moment virulent violence erupted in the streets of Madras (now Chennai) and other Tamil cities and towns,she took the first available plane to the trouble spots,argued with the enraged protesters and helped calm the situation.

Once again,Shastri did not say a word to her,but allowed his acolytes to spread the word that she had “jumped over the prime minister’s head” which was “not proper”. When I went to her for her reaction,she flared up. She said she did not look upon herself as a “mere minister of information and broadcasting”,for she was one of the country’s leaders. “Do you think this government can survive if I resign today? I am telling you it won’t. Yes,I have jumped over the prime minister’s head and I would do it again whenever the need arises”. I reported all this in my next political commentary in The Statesman attributing,at her behest,her remarks to “sources close to her”.

Soon enough she was as good as her word. When,in August 1965,first reports came in of large scale paramilitary infiltration from Pakistan into Jammu and Kashmir,she flew to Srinagar,encouraged the security agencies fighting the infiltrators and addressed huge gatherings to maintain the public’s morale. Actual hostilities began shortly afterwards. Indira was back at the battlefront,much to the nervousness of the generals. The troops,however,were greatly enthused by her presence amongst them. This was the moment when she was paid the left-handed compliment that she was the “only man in a cabinet of old women”.

On returning to Delhi she wrote a short paper on the conduct of the raging war and handed it to the PM at a meeting of the cabinet’s emergency committee. In her words,“Shastri held the paper gingerly,as one would a dead rat by its tail,and asked: ‘Iss ka kya karain’ (What should we do with it)?” Cabinet secretary Dharma Vira,she added,suggested that the paper should be given to him and “this was the last I heard of it”.

The 1965 War with Pakistan was a major turning point. India’s victory on the battlefield may have been marginal. But its resounding success in thwarting Pakistan’s frantic attempt to “wrest Kashmir” sent Shastri’s prestige and popularity soaring sky high. This ended the period when Indira Gandhi (or anyone else) could upstage him. Indeed,as she and one or two other senior ministers discovered to their dismay,they could no longer have free access to the PM.

Even before her father’s death,Indira Gandhi had been confiding to her American friend Dorothy Norman that she wanted “to leave everything” and go to live in London,“even if for a year”. In the autumn of 1965 this urge became much stronger,partly because she didn’t like the “shabby treatment” she felt she was being meted out,and partly because both her sons were in England at that time. (See Indira Gandhi: Letters to A Friend that Norman published in 1985). Fully aware of this,Shastri had quietly decided to offer her the post of high commissioner in London after his return from the Tashkent talks with President Ayub Khan of Pakistan.

In this context,the last day of December 1965 became the proverbial last straw on Indira’s back. She had conveyed to Shastri that she had to see him about Punjabi Suba before he left for his journey. He told her to stay on after the meeting of the cabinet’s emergency committee. When the meeting ended,she found that then Finance Minister T. T. Krishnamachari had been asked to do the same thing. She got up and left. An hour later TTK arrived at her house to announce that “in sheer disgust”,he had resigned. “I will be the next to be thrown out” was her instant and angry response. “It is not a cabinet worth staying in”.

Who could have known that Shastri would return from Tashkent in a wooden box,and that Indira Gandhi would succeed him?

The writer is a Delhi-based political commentator