A servile PM
Excellent Editorial in Samachar.com on the Prime Minister. Many do think that he is the father of reforms, but actually he is not.
-------------
Back in the 70s when Mrs Gandhi was putting artificial clamps on economic growth in the name of `garibi hatao’ and implementing her own peculiar brand of socialism, it had become second nature for her followers to dub anyone talking economic sense as an agent of capitalists. Dhirubhai Ambani had yet to make his first million.
Invariably, it were the Tatas and the Birlas who were caricatured on the stump by Congressmen and Commies as if they were carnivores feasting on the cheap labour of toiling Indians. Of course, the crazy imagery was meant only to fool the great unwashed masses into keeping the corrupt rulers in power indefinitely.
Therefore it was poetic justice when in the early 90s under the intense pressure of the IMF-World Bank combine the same party was obliged to abandon its socialistic straitjacket and embrace the cause of economic liberalisation, nay, pragmatism.
Manmohan Singh as an economic bureaucrat had rather enthusiastically tightened the screws on corporate India in the name of socialism, impeding its growth potential. He had been a senior economic bureaucrat in successive governments in New Delhi. And done everything to raise the socialistic content in state policy at the behest of his political masters.
Now in his new avatar as Finance Minister in the Narasimha Rao Government he was made to dismantle a good part of the very license-quota regime he had himself helped put in place. While keen observers noticed the sharp U-turn he had taken in first enforcing strict production and distribution controls and then removing them in the post-90s phase, he himself seemed blissfully unaware of the inherent irony in his professional career.
Only weeks before he became the Finance Minister of India, and in that capacity felt obliged to embrace the path of reforms and liberalisation, he had argued forcefully in favour of socialism at a South: South seminar.
Amazingly, he did not protest when they sought to make him out as if he was the real father of reforms. He wasn’t. He was merely following the dictates of his latest masters who this time were in Washington and not in New Delhi. Economic bankruptcy had stared India in the face in the early 90s. The Fund-Bank agreed to rescue provided India opened up its economy.
In other words, Singh can be relied upon to do the bidding of his masters, whoever they might be. Therefore it was not surprising at all that be it Goa or Jharkhand, Bihar or Quattrocchi, the gentleman Prime Minister did not bat an eyelid, dutifully doing the bidding of those who had catapulted him into the prime ministerial `gaddi’.
Since even his worst critics concede that financially he stood to gain nothing from monkeying around with the constitutional law and norms in pushing the partisan interests of the Congress leadership in all the above cases, it is clear that he has a strong `jee-huzoor’ trait in his mental make-up which makes him obey blindly his masters of the day. Thus everything Sonia Gandhi wants him to do, he does without a murmur of protest.
After all, as Finance Secretary under Charan Singh he had slapped high duties on soaps and toothpaste and such like items of daily use only because the late BLD leader wanted him to attack what he had perceived to be the urban constituency of the BJP. Singh willingly enforced the late PM’s diktat because questioning his superiors is not part of his character.
The latest reshuffle of the Cabinet further underlines a complete lack of vertebrae in the prime ministerial body. He was well aware that Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Law Minister Hansraj Bhardwaj had caused him much embarrassment, but he could not, would not, move them out of their current ministries for fear of annoying their real boss in 10 Janpath.
As Home Minister, the blame for Jharkhand, Goa, Bihar, et al must be laid at the doorstep of that colourless and clueless Patil. As for Bhardwaj, it is public knowledge that he went to great lengths to ensure that Rs 21 crores of the Bofors loot was finally delivered to that Italian fugitive from the Indian law.
Dropping Bhardwaj from the Cabinet was never on the agenda of the helpless PM. But the spineless PM could not even replace the crude Bhardwaj as Law Minister with an able and well-regarded Kapil Sibal. L. K. Advani has a point when he insists that Manmohan Singh is the weakest PM the country has had.
This can only tarnish the image of the country and hold it back from attaining its full economic, social and political potential.
Send in your comments on this article to samachar_editor@sify.com
-------------
Back in the 70s when Mrs Gandhi was putting artificial clamps on economic growth in the name of `garibi hatao’ and implementing her own peculiar brand of socialism, it had become second nature for her followers to dub anyone talking economic sense as an agent of capitalists. Dhirubhai Ambani had yet to make his first million.
Invariably, it were the Tatas and the Birlas who were caricatured on the stump by Congressmen and Commies as if they were carnivores feasting on the cheap labour of toiling Indians. Of course, the crazy imagery was meant only to fool the great unwashed masses into keeping the corrupt rulers in power indefinitely.
Therefore it was poetic justice when in the early 90s under the intense pressure of the IMF-World Bank combine the same party was obliged to abandon its socialistic straitjacket and embrace the cause of economic liberalisation, nay, pragmatism.
Manmohan Singh as an economic bureaucrat had rather enthusiastically tightened the screws on corporate India in the name of socialism, impeding its growth potential. He had been a senior economic bureaucrat in successive governments in New Delhi. And done everything to raise the socialistic content in state policy at the behest of his political masters.
Now in his new avatar as Finance Minister in the Narasimha Rao Government he was made to dismantle a good part of the very license-quota regime he had himself helped put in place. While keen observers noticed the sharp U-turn he had taken in first enforcing strict production and distribution controls and then removing them in the post-90s phase, he himself seemed blissfully unaware of the inherent irony in his professional career.
Only weeks before he became the Finance Minister of India, and in that capacity felt obliged to embrace the path of reforms and liberalisation, he had argued forcefully in favour of socialism at a South: South seminar.
Amazingly, he did not protest when they sought to make him out as if he was the real father of reforms. He wasn’t. He was merely following the dictates of his latest masters who this time were in Washington and not in New Delhi. Economic bankruptcy had stared India in the face in the early 90s. The Fund-Bank agreed to rescue provided India opened up its economy.
In other words, Singh can be relied upon to do the bidding of his masters, whoever they might be. Therefore it was not surprising at all that be it Goa or Jharkhand, Bihar or Quattrocchi, the gentleman Prime Minister did not bat an eyelid, dutifully doing the bidding of those who had catapulted him into the prime ministerial `gaddi’.
Since even his worst critics concede that financially he stood to gain nothing from monkeying around with the constitutional law and norms in pushing the partisan interests of the Congress leadership in all the above cases, it is clear that he has a strong `jee-huzoor’ trait in his mental make-up which makes him obey blindly his masters of the day. Thus everything Sonia Gandhi wants him to do, he does without a murmur of protest.
After all, as Finance Secretary under Charan Singh he had slapped high duties on soaps and toothpaste and such like items of daily use only because the late BLD leader wanted him to attack what he had perceived to be the urban constituency of the BJP. Singh willingly enforced the late PM’s diktat because questioning his superiors is not part of his character.
The latest reshuffle of the Cabinet further underlines a complete lack of vertebrae in the prime ministerial body. He was well aware that Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Law Minister Hansraj Bhardwaj had caused him much embarrassment, but he could not, would not, move them out of their current ministries for fear of annoying their real boss in 10 Janpath.
As Home Minister, the blame for Jharkhand, Goa, Bihar, et al must be laid at the doorstep of that colourless and clueless Patil. As for Bhardwaj, it is public knowledge that he went to great lengths to ensure that Rs 21 crores of the Bofors loot was finally delivered to that Italian fugitive from the Indian law.
Dropping Bhardwaj from the Cabinet was never on the agenda of the helpless PM. But the spineless PM could not even replace the crude Bhardwaj as Law Minister with an able and well-regarded Kapil Sibal. L. K. Advani has a point when he insists that Manmohan Singh is the weakest PM the country has had.
This can only tarnish the image of the country and hold it back from attaining its full economic, social and political potential.
Send in your comments on this article to samachar_editor@sify.com
at 7:09 PM
2 Comments:
Krish
All people are not born leaders. M. singh was raised from ordinary family and went on to become RBI governor. He did that by following orders from his superiors ( politicians). During 1990, even politicans recognised there are no easy ways to escape the economic problems. So N. Rao authorised M.Singh to do whatever is required. M.Singh using his knowledge/experience took some steps to start the liberalisation. you have to give him credit for that. He could have seen nice answers to his boss and survived. But he did things which he believed was in india's best interest.
Vijay,
There are many leaders born and raised from ordinary family and reached even greater heights without compromising what they felt & believed strongly about.
He has been compromising (or agreeing to ) in several aspects and he is not an assertive leader. He can't even control half of his cabinet or even the erred people like Buta Singh, (it required the highest court). If he can't do his job properly, there is no point in just hanging on to that job. I'm sure any assertive leader or manager won't. He couldn't even touch the law minister after what he had done. He is a mere puppet Prime minister.
Topping all these, He lied when he told the American president that the entire parliament was behind him but for Vajpayee on the N-Deal. It was a blatent lie. There had been no debate in the parliament atleast by then and most of the scientific community is not in favor of the deal.
Post a Comment
<< Home