Excerpted from ‘Twisting Facts To Suit Theories’ And Other Selections From Voxindica. (2016). Authors Press. New Delhi. pp. 429–434
One may not agree with Lord Birkenhead’s view that ‘India is a land of mobs’ (1930, Turning Points in History), but it is a land of inconsistencies. However, he might not have been far off the mark when he said that ‘more than any [other] country in the world, single individuals of outstanding personality have been able temporarily to impose their will upon its destiny’. A Prime Minister might be ranked third in India’s official order of precedence but a Sonia Gandhi took precedence over the Prime Minister for ten years of its recent history. Her son-in-law did not need any official order of precedence to be treated as a ‘more equal’ citizen at airports and for Chief Ministers to kowtow before him.
One may not agree with Lord Birkenhead’s view that ‘India is a land of mobs’ (1930, Turning Points in History), but it is a land of inconsistencies. However, he might not have been far off the mark when he said that ‘more than any [other] country in the world, single individuals of outstanding personality have been able temporarily to impose their will upon its destiny’. A Prime Minister might be ranked third in India’s official order of precedence but a Sonia Gandhi took precedence over the Prime Minister for ten years of its recent history. Her son-in-law did not need any official order of precedence to be treated as a ‘more equal’ citizen at airports and for Chief Ministers to kowtow before him.
In the official
order of precedence, No. 5A was inserted to accommodate the Deputy Prime
Minister (probably after Vallabhbhai Patel became the first Deputy Prime
Minister in 1950) and No. 7A after the institution of the Bharat Ratna in
1954. Article 18 (1) of the Indian Constitution prohibits the use of Bharat
Ratna as a title and therefore, it cannot be used to prefix names, despite
its general misuse. Its recipients are known as laureates.
As an aside it
might be mentioned that Article 18 (2) prohibits Indian citizens from receiving
‘any title from any foreign state’. This precluded Sunil Gavaskar from
accepting a British Knighthood but it did not prevent Sonia Gandhi from
accepting the Belgian title, Order of Leopold.
Thus Bharat
Ratna, which officially, cannot be flaunted as a title, accords its
recipients precedence over Ambassadors, Chief Ministers and Governors of states
who are, in that order ranked at No. 8.
Indians
generally rue the omission of Mahatma Gandhi from the Nobel roster but
there have been several notable omissions from the list of Bharat Ratna laureates.
One of them was Sathya Sai Baba who was passed over, presumably because he was
a Hindu god-man. One can say without any exaggeration, that Sathya Sai
Baba’s service to humanity was (and is) unparalleled anywhere in the world. He
established world-class schools, colleges, universities and hospitals all of
which provide free services to the poor. Thousands of devotees who flock to his
ashram daily are provided free food.
Under the ‘Sri
Sathya Sai Drinking Water Supply Projects’ he constructed a drinking water
project at a cost of US$ 63 million to supply drinking water to 1.2 million
people in 750 villages of the arid Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh. Similar
projects supply drinking water to drought-prone villages in Mahabubanagar and
Medak districts in Telangana, and Chennai. His super-specialty hospitals in
Puttaparthi and Bengaluru conducted 24,473 open-heart surgeries between November
1991 and October 2014, without charging a dime. They were all free. They
continue to do so.
The other
notable exception is that of former Prime Minister, P. V. Narasimha Rao. In
order to understand the magnitude of his contribution to national revival, the circumstances
that prevailed when he became Prime Minister should be viewed in perspective.
In point of fact, the year 1991 marks the beginning of a new epoch in
independent India’s history. Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination brought to the
nation’s helm a man who was preparing to quietly walking away into the sunset.
Narasimha Rao had been in politics since independence and served as Chief
Minister, Union Home Minister, Foreign Minister and Defence Minister.
The economic
crisis that came to a head that year was looming large on the horizon for
years, fuelled by bureaucratic sloth, economic profligacy and political myopia.
The economy was floundering on account of a depreciating rupee, billowing external
debt and the resultant balance of payments crisis. The last straw on the
proverbial camel’s back was the dramatically rising oil prices caused by the
1990-91 Gulf War. In order to cope with the crisis, the Chandra Sekhar
government had to first sell twenty tons of gold (on which India had a
repurchase option for six months) to raise $400 million in May that year and the
successor government had to pledge a further forty-seven tons in July to raise
a further $200 million loan. It was a national shame for a culture that treats
gold as goddess Lakshmi, to part with family gold for daily necessities.
Dr. Manmohan Singh who became the finance minister in the successor government
did not have the heart to use words like ‘sell’ or ‘pledge’ when he informed
the parliament about the transactions in November 1991. Instead he said ‘sent
abroad’ and ‘export’!
Following the
crisis, the Narasimha Rao government initiated a series of steps to redeem the
economy. The steps were a radical departure from the pernicious ‘Nehruvian socialism’
and set the nation on a track of progress. Those who do not want to credit the
progress to Narasimha Rao, ascribe the economic policy to Manmohan Singh’s
genius. Yes, the policy framework could be designed only by an economist with vision
but it required Narasimha Rao’s sagacity to give political cover for its
implementation. Second, he needed the boldness first to sell the reforms to his
own party which considered any departure from Nehru’s policies a sacrilege and
then to the nation. The validity of the argument could be seen when we notice
Manmohan Singh could not continue with his reform policy when he himself
was the Prime Minister for ten years.
While Narasimha
Rao’s economic policies are willy-nilly acknowledged there are two other areas
of governance in which he left an indelible stamp on the history of the nation.
The first was
defeating the Khalistani movement, which ‘had consumed 21,469 lives
before it was comprehensively defeated in 1993’. The principal protagonists of
the operation were K. P. S. Gill who as Counter-terrorism Chief of Punjab
mercilessly and relentlessly executed it and, Beant Singh, who as Chief Minister
of Punjab and Narasimha Rao as Prime Minister gave him political cover. Citing
Julio Rebeiro, former Director General of Police, Punjab, Gill has this to say
of the genesis of the problem:
“I
regard Operation Bluestar and the November 1984 massacres as the two most
important victories for the cause of ‘Khalistan’ […] not won by the militants,
but inflicted […] upon the nation by its own government […] These two events, in
combination, gave a new lease of life to a movement which could easily have
been contained in 1984 itself.” (Gill, K.P.S. “Endgame in Punjab 1988-1993”. South
Asia Terrorism Portal. Accessible from http://goo.gl/83qUhW
By the by, the political
authors of Operation Bluestar and the 1984 Sikh genocide had both received
the Bharat Ratna! Gill elaborates why stern counter-terrorism measures
were needed to eradicate the scourge:
“The
defeat of terrorism in Punjab, and I have said this before, was unambiguously
the result of the counter-terrorist measures implemented in the state by the
security forces. Moreover, the use of this coercive force was (and is) not just
a necessary expedient, but a fundamental obligation and duty of constitutional
government, and its neglect inflicts great and avoidable suffering on the
innocent and law abiding.” (Ibid.)
Lest anyone had
any doubt about the political processes (pursued by the aforesaid political
authors of Operation Bluestar and the 1984 Sikh genocide) having achieved
the objective of annihilating terrorism in Punjab, Gill clarifies:
“One
of the dominant myths that these propagandists have tirelessly, and in some
measure successfully, circulated is the idea that terrorism in Punjab was
defeated not because, but in spite of the use of armed force against the
militants. No evidence is ascribed to shore up this claim, but a variety of
nebulous theories—essentially populist and politically correct slogans—are
propounded regarding a ‘people’s victory’ or a ‘political solution’ that
brought peace to the strife-torn province.” (Ibid.)
Had the
political master not had the vision to support the stern measures to put down
terrorism with an iron hand we would have had another festering wound in the
west in addition to the ones in the north and the east, the existence of which
is undoubtedly owing to another Bharat Ratna! Who knows, had Narasimha
Rao had another shot at power, he would have had some out of the box ideas to
contain them!
Another bold
step Narasimha Rao took was in the area of foreign affairs by establishing full
diplomatic relations with Israel. Although India recognized Israel in September
1950 (a little over two years after its formation), it was not until February
1992 that full diplomatic relations were established. Considering the benefits
a bilateral relationship with Israel could provide in the areas of agriculture,
defence and counterterrorism, this was inexplicable. The overt reason for India
not establishing full diplomatic relations with Israel was that it would displease
her Arab neighbours, but the unstated reason was to placate the Muslim vote
bank in India. As by the time India established full diplomatic relations with
Israel, the Narasimha Rao government was in office for just over eight months,
the decision must be said to have been taken very quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment