Mr Chidambaram, can the... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ February 17, 2013

Mr Chidambaram, can the nation’s poor have more on their plates please?

Dear PC,

I have known you for over 30 years now. As a lawyer, you have brilliantly fought both good and lost cases and causes; as a politician-economist, you’ve been a forceful advocate of opening economic boundaries. I have been witness to your journey that started as a minister of state for internal security in the Rajiv Gandhi government and through all later governments, barring the NDA. Even when circumstances forced you to change parties, your faith in the economic ideology you initially embraced sustained. For the first time since Independence, we now have political parties of varying hues resorting to good economics even if meant bad politics at times. It is this glitter of economic reforms which makes for the cohabitation of confrontationist politics with consensual economics.

The past three decades have seen Indians becoming the most respectable economic identities globally. We may be having more poor people than the whole of Africa but we also have more billionaires than Britain. Every year at Davos, more Indians arrive in their private jets than people of most other countries. Scores of Indian companies have become multinational corporations. Where we once had to settle for either an Ambassador or a Premier, now we have the option of buying any car, any model. Last year’s list of $1 billion-plus High Net Worth Individuals (HNIs) has 68 Indians, third only behind the US and China.

This wealth, and the level of luxury it gives them, could not have come but for the fiscal policies of successive governments whose policies helped them expand their businesses and become globally competitive. Two decades of economic liberalisation has drastically changed the perception about India. Earlier, we were known as a rich nation inhabited by poor people. India is now a poor country in which few rich people live and who enjoy disproportionately higher control over capital market and natural wealth and resources. In the past two decades, India was perhaps the only developing economy in which more than 50 per cent of the GDP came from services sector. Share of both the manufacturing and agriculture sectors is shrinking.

On the eve of your last regular budget, it would not be an exaggeration to say that the expectations from you are so high , anyone else in your place would have run scared. It is your last regular budget before the next Lok Sabha elections. So far, the prime minister kept hoping that the positive effects of economic reforms would trickle down. They haven’t. And it’s easy to see why. The top is stone-hearted and is loathe to let some of the wealth roll down to the deserving. Worse, subsidies for the poor are being gradually withdrawn to make way for increased incentives for the rich. Both the prime minister and you have been talking about pruning subsidies on everything which the lower and middle class consumes. At the same time, the UPA government has been quite liberal with funding social schemes which dole out thousands of crores to the poor but not productive jobs. Fiscal policies have encouraged conspicuous consumption by the super-rich who jet around on private crafts, buy villas in exotic locales, hold birthdays and weddings in Venice, Paris and London while the lower middle classes struggle to buy even single-bedroom  flats in any city. While public authorities have abdicated their responsibility to provide affordable housing for the poor and the middle class, avaricious builders have been given liberal loans at low interest rates to construct condominiums for the rich.

The ordinary people can only hope that you will at least keep them somewhere in the back of your mind when you formulate your budget policies. They want quality education and healthcare, potable water and sanitation. You may argue that these are state subjects, but let us face it, it is the Central tax structure that determines how investors choose to put their monies. It has not gone unnoticed that while average price of middle segment cars haven’t risen for the past five years, fuel prices have gone up by almost 60 per cent during the same period. They are not able to understand why an ordinary investor who makes few thousand rupees on the stock market pays the same percentage of tax as a person who makes millions as dividend from his own company. A middle class family has to now pay service charge on almost all services, from a train ticket to getting the house repaired.

Your frustration with shrinking sources of additional resources mobilisation is quite understandable. The states aren’t willing to expand their tax net because they rightly or wrongly feel that the Centre has usurped most of their powers. Some of them, however, have a point. Rising income of the Centre is being spent on schemes which the states feel are meant to get more votes. The states expect that they should get a better share of the Central funds. Even your ministerial colleagues are mounting pressure on you to be liberal in allocating money.

I am aware that your job is such that you are constantly walking on the razor’s edge. Now the time has come for you to make a choice. Don’t forget that your own party admitted that it were the pro-rich economic policies that were responsible for its defeat during 1996. You have to prove that even good politics can deliver better economic results. You have to reduce the cost of governance, tax conspicuous consumption, and create more employment opportunities. The last three decades have seen successive government initiating policies that turned millionaires into billionaires. You have a chance now to convert the poor into middle class and the middle class into rich. And unlike the rich and mighty, they are not fair-weather friends. Give them something, they will reciprocate.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabwhuChawla

Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard/ August 26, 2012

UPA’s zero intolerance games can subtract from its fortunes, not add

Only zeroes and losers, and not heroes and doers, in public life resort to numeric nuances to counter a nemesis of numbers. When Finance Minister P Chidambaram claimed that there was a zero loss” to the public exchequer in the arbitrary allotment of coal blocks, he was speaking more like an advocate than an achiever. It wasn’t expected from a successful former home minister to simply copy the idea of “zero loss” from fellow lawyer-turned- Union Minister for Communications Kapil Sibal. It was he who authored the principle of ‘zero loss’ in the allotment of 2G licences but cleverly refrained from repeating his opinion after much media and political bashing. Yet another erudite colleague, Law Minister Salman Khurshid, who sat next to Chidambaram, chose to keep quiet on the zero sum game. However, Coal Minister Sriprakash Jaiswal was totally at sea as he couldn’t defend the actions that were taken during the period when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was in charge of the coal portfolio.

Chidambaram should have realised that he was chosen to fight and win a battle of perception, and not performance. For the past two years, UPA II has been paralysed and has been prevented by both its allies and the Opposition from taking any productive decision. The government has to deal with innumerable scams that keep tumbling out of the CAG closet and from elsewhere. While the Opposition is ratcheting up its mission to tar the government’s image successfully, UPA leaders are fighting a losing battle by resorting to zeroes again and again. The Opposition has mastered the art of inflicting wounds in a calibrated manner. They first trained their guns on a weak UPA ally in the 2G scam—the DMK. Then they made former Maharashtra chief ministers soft targets to reinforce the ruling party’s tainted image. To demolish the UPA’s credibility, now they have singled out Manmohan Singh, the clean and honest face of the government. Ministers like Chidambaram have an uphill task of not only defending the indefensible but also of saving and salvaging the image of those who have won or influenced the outcome of elections in the past. Since the finance minister’s name is being whispered as one of the prime ministerial candidates, he has been given an envious task of protecting his own political relevance.

Undoubtedly, genuine questions can be raised about the figures concerning the monumental loss the government would have suffered by avoiding the coal block auction route. Chidambaram rightly put it when he said that if the mines were not mined, then where is the loss? But there is equally strong counter-argument. According to Naresh Gujral, senior Akali Dal Rajya Sabha member, the share prices of most of the listed companies who got the coal blocks rose by 100 to 800 per cent soon after they received their allotment papers. The government may not have lost anything but the companies made humongous gains. According to Gujral, JSPL’s share value rose from Rs 46 in July 2006 to Rs 550 in December 2007; Sterlite’s from Rs 70 to Rs 270, JSW Steel’s from Rs 200 to Rs 1,400 and Reliance Power’s issue price was fixed at Rs 450 against its face value of Rs 10.

Chidambaram was at his best defending the government, especially soon after the Supreme Court rejected petitions seeking his inclusion as an accused in the 2G cases. He enjoys credibility and dependability for the delivery of what he promises. During his three-and-a-half-year tenure as home minister, no major terror attack happened in India. Earlier, as finance minister, he introduced innovative economic reforms. He is a master number-cruncher and an exceptional combination of a legal eagle and a creative argument-smith. But his political loyalty betrayed his confidence in algorithmic reality. Around 600 AD, Aryabhata invented the zero as part of his positional decimal number system that later used the letter “kha” as a placeholder. But it was Brahmagupta who developed the concept of the zero as an independent number and wrote rules for adding and subtracting it from other numbers—a zero can’t be used independently. It can either be added or subtracted from a number. The zero is a positive numeral and not a negative one. The CAG may have added few extra zeroes in its quest to calculate presumptive losses, but the loss itself can’t be denied. It is like saying the government hasn’t suffered any loss because the thief hasn’t sold any public property so far.

The government is justified in finding fault with the numbers, but it has launched a vicious campaign against the institution of the CAG and given a potent weapon to the Opposition to damage the UPA further. With election-wary allies, the government may not fall even if BJP MPs resign from the Lok Sabha. However, its authority and acceptability will be further eroded if it is not able to fight its adversaries politically. With a divided Opposition like the BJP and NDA, the Congress and Chidambaram do not need an enemy. They need a new idea and not just a zero. Chidambaram could have come up with a brighter idea—buy back the coal blocks from the allottees after returning the allotment fee along with simple interest and then auction them according to rules. Adding one zero to another will only yield more zeroes.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ January 15,2012

Uttar Pradesh Elections are Over for Big Two Even Before Polling Day

As the countdown to the five state Assembly polls begins, both ideologies and credible individual leaders are conspicuous by their absence. With the collapse of central authority and direction in all political parties, a few individuals are dictating the political discourse only to be disowned immediately by their respective High Commands. A couple of political incidents that took place in the last two weeks in Uttar Pradesh reflect the complete disconnect between the Central and state leaderships of two mainstream national parties — the Congress and the BJP. Both are in the fight not to win but to keep their current rankings in the Assembly. While the BJP with 51 seats occupies third position, the Congress with just 21 MLAs stands fourth. However, the confusion was much more pronounced in the Congress as its chief Sonia Gandhi took a backseat, leaving election management and manipulation to her son Rahul and a few other individuals. As its election strategy unfolded, it was evident that the party had taken a plunge without defining the tide. It is perhaps for the first time a statement made by a Union minister during the elections was rejected by his own party and a claim made by the most sought-after AICC office-bearer was dismissed by his government. There was yet another surprise in store for the voters. Home Minister P Chidambaram slaughtered the three-year-old campaign launched by party General Secretary Digvijaya Singh aimed at capturing the minority vote.

It was the home minister who changed the direction of his own party’s Uttar Pradesh campaign. Diggy Raja always suspected the Batla House encounter in New Delhi on September 19, 2008, in which a Delhi Police officer lost his life, as staged. He made it an issue in Uttar Pradesh in which Muslims can influence the poll outcome in over 75 Assembly seats. Since Diggy has emerged as the most powerful Thakur leader who espouses the minorities’ cause than any other, he was expecting rich dividends. But the home minister not only rejected Diggy’s theory about a fake encounter, but also ruled out reopening the case. It is a different matter that both Chidambaram and Digvijaya have been at loggerheads on various issues. But questioning one of the most powerful Congress functionaries during election time, reflected the division between the party and the Government on sensitive issues.

The Chidambaram-Diggy episode symbolises the vulnerability of the ruling party in using the minority card. It was also reflected when Congress spokesperson Rashid Alvi declared the statement made by Union Law Minister Salman Khurshid on minority reservations in government jobs was not the party’s view. Later, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh put Khurshid in an awkward spot when he assured the chief election commissioner that the commission was totally independent and not supervised by the Government as Khurshid had claimed in an interview. Even the law minister had no defined script to follow for the elections. With Rahul ploughing a lonely furrow in the mushy fields of Uttar Pradesh, most Congress leaders were inventing their own slogans and stories to win seats for themselves and their kin. The party that began the state elections with a bang seems to be losing its carefully crafted plot. The Congress offence was replaced with defence. Instead of taking on its opponents on issues like the aborted Lokpal Bill, corruption and an irresponsible BSP government, the party was faced with the most serious charge of dividing the country along communal lines.

Fortunately for the Congress, its national rival, the BJP was also in a similar state of political paralysis. Its central leaders were hopelessly divided on the induction of tainted defectors from the BSP. They were confused about their enemy No. 1. While the state leaders targeted Mayawati and Mulayam Singh Yadav, its central leaders were obsessed with the Congress. From the tone and tenor of their speeches, it was obvious they were fighting the Congress to only protect their number three position in Uttar Pradesh. Like the Congress, the saffron party was also caught in caste conflicts while projecting its leader during the run-up to the elections. An upper caste combination and elitist leaders dominated its central leadership, while its state unit was controlled by backward class and middle class leaders who wanted one among them to be projected as the potential chief minister.

With the national parties struggling to find their feet, both the SP and the BSP are better placed in terms of their mission and means. They are fighting to retain or wrest power. However, they too are caught in the defection game, unsure about either their manifesto or election machinery. However, both have left the national parties far behind. It is quite clear: the Centre can’t hold it any more.prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com
Follow on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

POWER & POLITICS/ The Sunday Standard, October 2, 2011

MANMOHAN'S WOUNDED CABINET HAS GONE BEYOND THE POINT OF RECOVERY

Classical liberalist Earnest Benn once said, “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” It aptly describes the current state of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government. His singular success in the past few months has been looking for trouble, making an incorrect diagnosis and worse, opting for the wrong remedy. Last week, when he forced Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee to distance himself from a mischievously timed but wisely worded note, the Prime Minister added yet another minister to the long list of senior colleagues who have lost their credibility. As one wicked leak after another tumbled out of the closets of power, Manmohan and his A-Team couldn’t find a mechanism to plug or prevent them from damaging the Government’s image. Instead of burying their personal or ideological differences and facing all attacks in a united fashion, the ministers resorted to the time-tested technique of passing the buck. But since so many bucks were moving around, every one of them stopped at the desk of one minister or the other.

Home Minister P Chidambaram, and Mukherjee have been the most productive and effective ministers of the UPA government. Both are members of the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs which takes all crucial political and administrative decisions. Last week, they lost most of their hard-earned reputations. Corporates hastily distanced themselves. Political followers of the ministers were feeling let down. It is perhaps for the first time that a government had to defend its own home minister in court. For over a week, Manmohan chose the seemingly best option of not taking a decision, expecting the issue would become irrelevant with time. It proved disastrous. While Chidambaram’s personal integrity was being questioned, so was the motive behind the Finmin note. When the Prime Minister showed no hurry in resolving the crisis, it was left to Sonia Gandhi to crack the whip and direct the duelling duo to sort things out or face the consequences. She also conveyed to Manmohan in unequivocal terms that the mess in the Government has to be managed immediately. Within hours, they all fell in line. Since it was wholly a politico-legal issue, Manmohan deputed Law Minister Salman Khurshid and Communication Minister Kapil Sibal to help Mukherjee find a face-saving device. The Three Wise Men met in the PMO premises and drafted a statement that brought truce. But this only hastened the erosion of their credibility.

Mukherjee and Chidambaram are not the only ones who have suffered a plausibility crisis. The first casualty was Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar. When anti-graft crusader Anna Hazare made fun of Pawar’s membership of the GoM dealing with black money and corruption, he instantly resigned. Instead of backing his efficient colleague, the Prime Minister accepted his resignation, signalling the victory of Civil Society and the fall of a Titan. A few weeks later, the Minister of Heavy Industries Praful Patel was accused of destroying Air India and promoting private airlines. Earlier, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna was the object of ridicule for defending the Sharm el-Sheikh fiasco, pleading for favourable treatment for Pakistan. If that wasn’t embarrassing enough, he read the wrong speech at an international forum. A few months later, a question mark was raised on Sibal’s credibility when he famously commented on a no-loss in the 2G scam. Minister of Science and Technology Vilasrao Deshmukh and Power Minister Sushilkumar Shinde were linked to the Adarsh Society scam. More recently, all political parties in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have stopped trusting Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad for failing to deliver on the creation of a separate Telangana and fighting for the Sri Lankan Tamils.

Various sections of society are losing confidence in the UPA government because it is reneging on its promises. Industry is upset because the Cabinet succumbed to a junior minister’s pressure and delayed the new manufacturing policy that was drafted after consulting all stakeholders. Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh authored a Land Acquisition Bill which, if passed, will make it almost impossible for any new industry to come up in the private sector. Powerful ministers in the presence of the Prime Minister foiled Sports Minister Ajay Maken, who is now roaming around like a wounded tiger after his attempt to rid the sports bodies of the sports mafia failed. The state of the UPA Cabinet is exactly similar to that of the Indian cricket team. All top players, including the captain, are either hurt or have lost their playing skills. Now India is led by an under-performing political skipper who leads a group of wounded colleagues. Team Manmohan is unlikely to recover because their injuries are caused mainly by their leader’s inability to provide the needed safety cover.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com

Race Course Road/The Sunday Standard Magazine, October 2, 2011

Sonia Leaves Cabinet Illness to the Doctor

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh may pooh pooh all charges of growing dissension within his Cabinet, but the conduct of his senior colleagues leaves little to the imagination. Most are not on speaking terms; they communicate only during Cabinet meetings or through written notes opposing each other. Last week, the Congress party was pushed into a corner when a note written by a junior finance ministry official—concerning Home Minister P Chidambaram and spectrum pricing—to the Prime Minister was leaked. Both Manmohan and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee made all the right noises defending Chidambaram. Pranabda even called his “valued colleague” Chidambaram from the US, as well as from New Delhi after he returned, but apparently did not have the inclination or time for a face-to-face meeting. He refused to make any statement on the note, even as other ministers and Congress functionary came out openly in the beleaguered home minister’s support. It was evident that even Congress President Sonia Gandhi is aware of the soured chemistry between the two UPA top guns. When matters careened out of control, she decided to play mediator. But Sonia discovered it would be calamitous to summon both to discuss the contentious note together. Perhaps she knew confabulations would be impossible with both Mukherjee and Chidambaram present at the same meeting. She didn’t want a third party around either. So, she decided to listen to each one individually. It is not clear whether Sonia was already in possession of the voluminous correspondence between the PMO and the finance ministry on the issue because both Chidambaram and Pranabda spent hardly 20 minutes each with her. It was their first meeting with Sonia after her surgery. According to insiders, both exchanged pleasantries with her and gave a short brief on the controversy. Chidambaram insisted that the finance ministry take some sort of action to remove the cloud of suspicion hanging over him. But Pranabda did not budge. Instead, he sent a long letter to the PMO supporting his ministry. Sensing a major confrontation, Sonia has now left it to the Prime Minister to clean up the mess and restrain his ministers from washing dirty linen in public.

Steel frame on show in America

PMO officials were baffled to see former foreign secretary and now India’s ambassador to the US, Nirupama Rao, in New York during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit. Rao was not only present at the airport to welcome Manmohan, she also made it a point to attend all non-official functions held for the Prime Minister or External Affairs Minister S M Krishna. Normally, the Indian ambassador is not a part of India’s official UN delegation during the visit of the Prime Minister. Rao may not have contributed to the deliberations on Manmohan’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly, but she did provide gracious company to Gursharan Kaur, the Prime Minister’s wife. Rao sat next to her all through the Prime Minister’s speech. Along with her husband, Rao also checked into the same hotel in which other dignitaries were staying. She wasn’t the only senior Indian official hanging around in New York; around six Cabinet ministers also were present. Around half a dozen senior babus also found their way into Manhattan on one pretext or the other. It is evident that as the political leadership gets weaker, bureaucracy is regaining its steel frame once again.

Rahul sticks to comfort zone

Rahul Gandhi’s final destination may be 7 Race Course Road, but for the time being he has decided to stay away from India’s great plains after the rather rowdy welcome he received at a Delhi hospital following the High Court blasts. Instead, he has chosen to visit only those states which have Baba-friendly chief ministers. After keeping a low-profile for a few weeks, Rahul surfaced in Gangtok, Sikkim, last week to meet earthquake victims. Since he wasn’t entitled to official transport for what was a purely political visit, it was left to Sikkim Chief Minister Pawan Chamling to organise a helicopter for Rahul’s visit to the forward areas. Normally, the Prime Minister or Sonia Gandhi visits areas hit by natural calamities. Since neither could go, the Gandhi scion stood in. But Rahul sprang another surprise by landing in Srinagar without a formal programme. He visited the university in jeans and a kurta. He also followed the age-old Gandhi tradition of paying a visit to Hazratbal shrine. Rahul was the first Gandhi to go to the shrine after his father Rajiv visited Hazratbal in 1986. There is no record of Sonia ever having gone there. But Rahul wasn’t able to visit the Kheer Bhawani temple where his grandmother Indira Gandhi would pray without fail. But Rahul’s Kashmiri pedigree did help him in connecting with the local youth.

All leaks and no work in UPA

With the wicked leaks on the 2G Scam inflicting serious wounds on many UPA ministers, their babus have chosen to remain totally neutral and stay away from the corridors of power. For the past few weeks, no bureaucrat has sent any important file to their ministers for a decision, only routine files. Even senior secretaries have stopped looking at the Congress manifesto to draw up notes for legislation promised by the party. Over a dozen important ministers dealing with key social and infrastructure ministries haven’t been able to finalise a single note for the Cabinet to take a final call. Most of them don’t even go to work, visiting office only to meet important visitors. Chief ministers have stopped calling on Union ministers, including the Prime Minister, because they don’t get any response. Even the meetings of the Committee of Secretaries that handles inter-ministerial disputes have been rare as nothing is brought for discussion. The agenda for the Cabinet is shrinking faster than the image of the UPA government.

Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard /September 25, 2011

Between the Lines Wicked Leaks Saga is Collective Irresponsibility

If one goes by the antics of our politicians during the past few months, it seems Indian politics will soon be made compulsory reading in social science studies in all universities. It is a fascinating study in the Art of Impossibilities. Those who wrote the Indian Constitution laid down the principle of collective responsibility for all members of the Union Cabinet, including the Prime Minister. But now what we are witnessing is a new democratic mantra of collective irresponsibility: no one is held accountable and punished. Not a day passes without a minister in the UPA government blaming another one for inane wrong doings or committing administrative improprieties. Some of them even accuse their colleagues of taking decisions which could lead to criminal culpability. The latest round of note-leaking involving Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee and Home Minister P Chidambaram on the highly sensitive 2G Scam reflects the growing pass-the-buck tendency among even those who are considered to be the UPA government’s most productive assets. Both had earlier been in the news for the wrong reasons. While Pranabda suspected that he and his trusted aides were under electronic surveillance, Chidambaram was hurt by unsubstantiated insinuations made against him. But there seems to be some method behind this so-called Cold War between the two giants who owe their political rise to two generations of Gandhis. Mukherjee was discovered and promoted by Indira Gandhi and he became the most powerful Minister of State for Finance ever, during the Emergency. Chidambaram, a wealthy and well-spoken Chettiar advocate from Tamil Nadu, was patronised by Rajiv Gandhi. Coincidentally, there is also a similarity between them. Both left the Congress party briefly to join or promote their own regional parties. But the reasons were different. Mukherjee left because Rajiv ignored him. Chidambaram joined the Tamil Manila Congress only after Prime Minister Narasimha Rao implicated him in a stock scam. While Mukherjee has always seen himself a strong contender for prime ministership, Chidambaram does not nurture such an ambition. In fact, there was strong speculation about Mukherjee making a strong pitch for the top job soon after Indira Gandhi’s tragic assassination, which was nipped in the bud by the then President Giani Zail Singh who swore in Rajiv without the formality of even a formal Congress Parliamentary party meeting.

Political observers are now trying to find the genesis of the undeclared war between the two leviathans, which has led to a dangerous erosion of the Government’s authority. What baffles the Congress party veterans is the finance minister’s use of petty and middle-level officials to fight his proxy war. Even in the chewing gum controversy, it was a coterie of junior finance ministry officials that implanted a fear psychosis in Pranabda’s mind. He first hired a private detective agency to investigate and later wrote to the Prime Minister, instead of taking his colleague Chidambaram into confidence. The Prime Minister worsened the situation by asking the Intelligence Bureau to give its report directly to the PMO, and not to the home minister. It was obvious that even the Chief Executive of the country wasn’t aware of the concept of collective responsibility. At that time, Pranabda described the entire bugging episode as a non-event and made fun of the media.

Things haven’t changed. A lowly factotum writes a verbose note on 2G policy, making indirect comments about former finance minister Chidambaram’s role in the scandal and sends it to Pranabda through proper channels, for his eyes only. It is then dispatched to another joint secretary in the PMO. Finally it finds its way to the media through an RTI activist. Never before in the history of Independent India have Union ministers sought a certificate of good conduct through widely leaked official correspondence on controversial issues. Earlier, it was work done that spoke about the performance of each. But now, written words against each other differentiate the bad from the worse. Pranabda and Chidambaram aren’t the only ones to be caught in the Leakstorm. Others like Rural Development Minister Jairam Ramesh, Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan, Minister of State for Industries Ashwani Kumar, Telecommunications and HRD Minister Kapil Sibal, Tourism Minister Subodh Kant Sahai, Corporate Affairs Minister Veerappa Moily as well as senior law officers of the Government have been in the headlines for writing or speaking against each other, or for making controversial statements. Unfortunately, the art of governance has taken such an ugly turn that it is the posture of denial than the grace of owning up a mistake that has become the parameter of permanent political success.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com

Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard Magaine/August 28, 2011

LOKPAL CRISIS AMPLIFIED BY PM'S DISCONNECT WITH PARTY

“Success comes in cans, failure in can’ts” goes the saying. The utter collapse of the authority of the Prime Minister and his Government stems from their inability to think out of the box. The handling of Team Anna and their agitation will, perhaps, become one of the most popular case studies in ‘How to Convert an Opportunity into a Threat’. Undoubtedly, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is equally, if not more, committed to strike at the roots of corruption. His track record is his great asset. But degree and pedigree don’t guarantee success in political management; instead, both have been a liability, as is evident from the bruised image of the Government and its leadership. With well-spoken and highly educated ministers like P Chidambaram, Kapil Sibal, Salman Khurshid, Pranab Mukherjee, Jairam Ramesh and others batting for it, the Government was much better placed than Team Hazare. But a 74-year-old village-educated mass leader mauled all the wise men because they believed in their own words of wisdom rather than well-tested political tools. Instead of chanting the “Yes, we can” mantra, their chorus was, “No, they can’t do this, and that.”

To begin with, the Prime Minister and his colleagues refused to talk to Anna. Then, they gave in, sitting with his team to draft a Lokpal Bill. When Anna sat on fast to protest the Government draft, the UPA first refused to consider the Jan Lokpal Bill—only to be back on its knees within a week, pleading with Anna to give up his fast, saying it would consider his bill too. Earlier, it had ignored the entire Opposition and told Team Anna that it didn’t need them. But within a month the Government had to beg all political parties to bail it out of a mess of its own creation. Almost 75 per cent of Parliament’s time was wasted in harangues between the Government and the Opposition.

While the civil society leaders came out of the crisis smelling of roses, the Congress and the Government was still struggling to salvage its reputation and credibility. Most senior Congress leaders blame the Prime Minister and his advisers for keeping the party out of the dialogue. This is not for the first time that the Congress has faced a serious threat to the institution of the prime minister and the government. Indira Gandhi did twice: in 1974, Jai Prakash Narayan led a movement that paralysed the government. Again in 1984, Indira was confronted with the Punjab terror menace that eventually led to her assassination. Three years later, Rajiv Gandhi had to face serious challenges from within on corruption; his finance Minister V P Singh revolted on the Bofors issue which snowballed into a national protest. Though both suffered electoral humiliation, they used the party to their full advantage.

It is surprising that Manmohan hasn’t involved the party and Congress chief ministers in his battle against Team Hazare. With 13 chief ministers, the Congress could have mounted a major offensive against the Opposition and Team Anna. In the past, the strategy followed by all prime ministers facing popular dissent was to orchestrate a full-throttle campaign by issuing statements against their adversaries, organising demonstrations in their favour, and prodding opinion-makers to make powerful counter-arguments. According to Congress insiders, its earlier prime ministers could control politics because they had aides like R K Dhawan and M L Fotedar who could mobilise important Congress leaders at short notice. But retired civil servants and technocrats control Manmohan Singh’s office. When the Anna situation worsened, technocrats like Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of the Planning Commission, and Nandan Nilekeni, chairman of the Unique Identity Authority of India, were the ones drafted to support the Prime Minister.

This raises pertinent questions about the relationship between the Congress and the Government. With Sonia Gandhi recuperating in the US, Manmohan hasn’t been able to rally the Congress in the Government’s favour. Worse, no Congress chief minister has spoken against Hazare. On the contrary, a few young ministers and MPs have expressed their disapproval of the way the Government is dealing with the issue. Barring a couple of meetings of the core group, neither the Prime Minister nor the party thought of calling an extended meeting of the Congress Working Committee to discuss ways and means of dealing with the challenge. A section of the party believes that by depending on non-political persons, the Prime Minister has lost an opportunity to unite the entire political system. Most parties are against many of the clauses in the Jan Lokpal Bill. The Prime Minister could have turned them into allies by involving them in the dialogue process right from the beginning, and not mid-way. At the end of his seventh year in office, Manmohan is yet to learn the rules of the political game, let alone play it better than his foes. The time has come to prove that he failed not because he didn’t try. But because he tried his best.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com

Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard Magazine/ July 24, 2011

Our diplomats Speak for the Government, Not the Nation

Diplomacy is an abstract art; and diplomats across the world its perfect practitioners. They talk a lot but say nothing; they keep all options open. But Indian diplomats are fast becoming the exception to the rule. Of late, most of them have been specific, even explicit, in their assertions even if these are not in tune with national sentiment. The recent utterances of some of our senior-most diplomats make it clear that they enjoy being politically correct even it means being diplomatically incorrect. Consider the recent statement on Pakistan-sponsored terror by Nirupama Rao, our ambassador-designate to the US, on CNN-IBN. Rao asserted, “I think the prism through which they (Pakistan) see this issue has definitely been altered.” Later, she talked about the need to tackle only non-state elements and ignored the active support that the terrorists enjoy from official agencies. As if to prove her wrong, terrorists struck Mumbai just 10 days later and killed 18 innocent people. Two died later of their injuries. On what basis the outgoing foreign secretary gave the ‘character certificate’ to what Home Minister P Chidambaram calls the “global epicentre of terrorism” is known only to her.

Surprisingly, no global leader shares her perception or even the formulations on Pakistan expressed by External Affairs Minister S M Krishna during his interactions with Pakistan leaders and at various other international fora. Even visiting US Secretary State Hillary Clinton was much more indiscreet when she spoke about Pakistan. Despite the friendly and strategic US relationship with Pakistan, Hillary was quite harsh on our neighbour. In fact, she warned Pakistan that “they cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists anywhere” and “when we know the location of terrorists whose intentions are clear and need to work together in order to prevent those terrorists from taking innocent lives and threatening institutions of the state”. Interestingly, while Hillary was talking tough on Pakistan in New Delhi, back home the Federal Bureau of Investigation arrested Ghulam Nabi Fai, executive director of the anti-India Kashmiri American Council. He was charged with being an ISI agent and involved in a conspiracy to influence key US officials on Kashmir policy. Compare this with our diplomats, who were not even willing to hazard a guess about the possible involvement of the ISI in the Mumbai attacks. For the past one week, Indian diplomats have weakened India’s case against Pakistan by letting an impression grow that the Mumbai incidents may not have been sponsored from across the border.

So, while the world is looking at Pakistan with suspicion, Indian diplomats and some leading politicians are still talking about dialogue and debate. From President Nicolas Sarkozy of France to Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, most powerful world leaders have slammed Pakistan for harbouring and exporting terrorism. Last year, Sarkozy set the tone against Pakistan when he said, “It is unacceptable for the world that terrorist acts should be masterminded and carried out by terrorist groups trained in Pakistan.” Our foreign office mandarins, in contrast, can’t even ask Pakistan to wind up the terror camps operating inside the country. For the past few months, the foreign ministry has followed up the home ministry’s request to Pakistan to hand over the fugitives hiding there. Rao—while addressing a London-based think tank—made a strong case for a stable Pakistan which she hoped would act as a “bulwark against terrorism”, quite forgetting the categorical point made a few months ago by Hillary that “America cannot and shouldn’t solve Pakistan’s problems. That’s up to Pakistan.”

This stance of our diplomats baffles the political leadership. Some of them see it as the emergence of an alternative centre of power within the foreign office, which is following its own agenda. They see the diplomats taking advantage of a weak yet gentlemanly foreign minister and ignoring sensitive issues raised by the other ministries. While Pakistan diplomats are aggressively fighting for their country in global capitals, our ambassadors are either silent or making politically correct noises. Instead of isolating the country at world forums, our diplomats have allowed Pakistan to acquire the status of a victim of terrorism. Even after so many months, the foreign office hasn’t been able to get full access to Tahawwur Rana and David Coleman Headley, both accused in the 2008 Mumbai attacks in which 180 people were killed. The ministry has also failed in persuading the American establishment to force Pakistan to punish the perpetrators of the Mumbai carnage. None of them has made any impact on the American establishment in reviewing its relationship with Pakistan and supporting India on ISI-funded and sponsored violence in Jammu and Kashmir.

Indeed, with Indian diplomats becoming more vocal on international issues, there appears to be a reversal of roles. Earlier, it was the political leadership which would determine foreign policy and the diplomats would only implement it. India’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, who had veto power to decide on the contours of India’s external relations, allowed powerful diplomats to advise but not dictate to him. Those who succeeded him followed the same path, never allowing civil servants to take the lead. However, with the non-political Manmohan Singh as prime minister and a hands-off external affairs minister in South Block, the diplomats have

chosen to speak for the government but not for the nation.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com

Race Course Road/The Sunday Standard/July 10, 2011

Fill in the blanks and you get the reshuffle

Opposition parties are calling Manmohan Singh India’s weakest prime minister. But they are missing the trees for the woods. As the frivolous cacophony over the New Look Cabinet gets louder, Manmohan’s spin-doctors are busy spinning their own yarns about its real purpose. Is it meant to fill up vacant slots? Or to drop the tainted and the old, and induct the clean and the bold? Is it meant to appease the allies or to rein them in? Or is it meant to induct Rahulites who will carry his agenda forward? Since nobody except the Congress president and the prime minister are aware of the compulsions, composition and contours of the reshuffle, party spokespersons, media pundits and even the potential ministers are at sea. If newspapers and TV are to be believed, the prime minister is unlikely to change any member of the Cabinet Committee on Security that includes P Chidambaram, Pranab Mukherjee, S M Krishna and A K Antony. He is also unlikely to change ministers heading Commerce, Petroleum, Communications, Law and Fertilisers & Chemicals. It leaves Manmohan with very few options. Rejuggling Tribal Welfare, Child Development, North-East Affairs, Social Welfare, Medium and Small Scale Industries, and Minority Affairs, Manmohan would invite ridicule that his has been the most immobile Cabinet since 1980 with the balance of power remaining static. Most ministers running Railways, Petroleum, Commerce and Industry stayed on for more than three years. The last Cabinet reshuffle on January 19 saw no dismissals; it was a game of musical chairs in which over two dozen ministers moved from one office to another. Political observers are debating on both the timing and desirability of the new look.

From all indications, the primary criterion for keeping or dropping a minister has little to do with age or performance. Most members of India’s largest, and perhaps most aged, Council of Ministers owe their berths to caste, community or loyalty to the Congress high command. This leaves the prime minister with limited manoeuverability. Since Manmohan doesn’t control the Congress party, he has been waiting for the list of ministerial names from 10 Janpath. He had toyed with the idea of inducting technocrats or professionals like Montek Singh Ahluwalia into the Cabinet, but didn’t press further.

Undoubtedly, there is a pressing need to induct new ministers to fill the vacancies caused by the resignations of Mamata Banerjee, A Raja and Dayanidhi Maran—all UPA allies. The prime minister could have asked the allies for replacements and be done with it. Constitutionally, the prime minister chooses his colleagues, but it’s not the political reality. Barring some individuals, Manmohan has never been permitted to choose his own Cabinet. He needs a lean, mean and clean Cabinet. But it is likely that the nation will only get more of the same.

But First, a Clean Sweep of Things

Though it is the prime minister who sends the list of ministers to the President for induction into the Cabinet, it is the Cabinet Secretariat that provides the full dossier on each to the PMO. Since Cabinet Secretary A K Seth is new to his job, it was left to his office to discreetly dig out the details of those on the probables list. The purpose behind the PMO and Congress President Sonia Gandhi gathering all this information is to avoid future embarrassments over corruption. Over a dozen names from Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal and Punjab are under the scanners of the IB and other investigating agencies. The message was clear: the prime minister will not induct any new politician with deal-making tendencies. Even names suggested by the allies were sent for extensive scrutiny at the state level. Earlier, well-connected and resourceful candidates could influence the agencies but this time around, the exercise was kept a well-guarded secret. Even in the case of existing ministers, a fresh round of checks was conducted through direct and indirect means. No wonder, many aspirants were seen wooing those who could give them clean chits while ignoring those who appoint them.

The Man They Sent to Tell Maran

For the Congress, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar is the most untrustworthy of allies. Not for the prime minister. According to party insiders, when its core group decided to get rid of Textile Minister Dayanidhi Maran, it couldn’t find the means to convey it to the minister. Manmohan has always been wary of conveying bad news to his colleagues. Former prime ministers Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, P V Narsimha Rao and Atal Bihari Vajpayee used their political aides like R K Dhawan or M L Fotedar, Jitendra Prasada or Brajesh Mishra to extract resignation letters from allies or party colleagues. Manmohan usually depends on Pranabda to do the dirty work, who didn’t oblige this time. Manmohan drafted Pawar in to persuade Maran to quit before last Thursday’s Cabinet. Maran sought at least a month to decide, but Pawar cautioned him against the negative political impact on the UPA. A stickler for rules, the Maratha leader had spoken to Karunanidhi before phoning Maran. Though the final deal between the DMK and the Congress will unfold only after the reshuffle, Pawar kept alliance interests in mind. Because he didn’t want the Congress party to decide the fate of ministers belonging to regional parties, Pawar is believed to have assured Karunanidhi that Pranab Mukherjee will personally meet him and explain the future course of action. By obliging the Congress, Pawar made sure that the formula and the principle of power-sharing wouldn’t change for him.

Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard Magazine/May 08, 2011

Congress Senses Victory, but That Could Be The Easy Part

When Home Minister P Chidambaram quite confidently told me “Let us wait for May 13,” the day when the counting of votes for the five Assembly elections takes place, he sounded quite confident about the verdict. It wasn’t just an off-the-cuff remark. It came from a home minister who thinks twice before speaking even once. He was predicting a clean sweep for the Congress.
After an hour-long interview — the first given to a media organisation since the election process began — Chidambaram defined the contours of post-election politics. As the home minister, he has access to umpteen sources, known and unknown, as well as credible and discredited sources of information. He was also one of the star campaigners for his party in most pollbound states. From his body language, it was evident that he felt the civil society movement against corruption, coupled with the detention of former ministers and Congressmen, wouldn’t affect the party’s credibility with the masses. Though he didn’t elaborate, it was obvious that the Congress was expecting a surge to power in the company of its allies in West Bengal, Assam, Puducherry and Kerala but perhaps not Tamil Nadu. An opinion poll, however, conducted by a TV channel predicted a victory for the DMK alliance and further boosted the UPA’s morale. A Congress win in four states will not only change the tone and tenor of the political discourse in the country, but will also make the party much more arrogant and intolerant as both an ally and an adversary.

Chidambaram’s confidence was reflected later in the aggressive posturing of Congress leaders against PAC chairman Murali Manohar Joshi. For the past few weeks, the Congress party has been on the offensive against its opponents in every part of the country. Over half-adozen cabinet ministers led by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pawan Bansal and Communications Minister Kapil Sibal have not missed a single opportunity to take their adversaries head-on. Even the discreet Vayalar Ravi, the Union Civil Aviation Minister and former trade union leader, decided to teach agitating Indian Airlines pilots the lesson of a lifetime, ignoring a possible adverse impact on the party’s electoral prospects.

The Congress is betting on regaining its lost moral authority once the state elections results come in. For the past one year, the UPA has been at the receiving end of national and Opposition disapproval. Many of its leaders, including a chief minister, lost their jobs over corruption charges. Due to a concerted Opposition attack, even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s credibility was eroded. Sensing the public mood, the Congress High Command didn’t involve him in electioneering. But the UPA is confident that happy days will be back again. Waiting to be armed with a popular mandate, the party is gearing up to tackle its opponents from its newly acquired moral high ground.

On the other hand, all the opposition parties have suddenly lost their bite and shine. The BJP mumbles half-heartedly about forming an AGP-BJP government in Assam. The CPI(M) is demoralised at the prospect of losing both West Bengal and Kerala to the Congress and its allies. If it happens, the Left would be left with only tiny Tripura in its kitty for the first time in three decades. The Congress party’s buoyant mood stems from the massive turnout of voters in all the five states. Moreover, the Election Commission was able to contain the misuse of money and state power in all the states. It is for the first time in three decades that the Congress didn’t complain about rigging in the West Bengal elections. With a voter turnout of over 80 per cent — the highest ever since Independence — the party expects the Reds to be reduced to less than 50 seats in West Bengal.
The looming poll verdicts are significant in more than one way. Even if the Congress wins all, its dependence on regional parties for survival at the Centre and ensuring good governance will become much more precarious. The UPA is already a minority government that has survived only thanks to outside support from other parties. With Mamata Banerjee as the chief minister in West Bengal and J Jayalalithaa in Tamil Nadu, the UPA government may face a powerful duo who could dictate the national agenda. Even a demoralised DMK may assert itself and demand its pound of flesh. If all of UPA’s allies come together on a common platform, they can make life much more difficult for the prime minister than what he has been facing before the states went to the ballot box.

A visibly victorious Congress may in reality be a helpless one while persuading its allies to push through Parliament various legislations such as labour reform, the Land Acquisition Act, Foreign Direct Investment in retail, the entry of Foreign Universities and environmental issues. Most allies are disinclined to support the Congress on many of the proposed economic reforms. For the Congress, the biggest headache would be to bring all its allies on board to get its nominee elected as the next president of India. The outcome of the Assembly polls will change the complexion of the Electoral College, which is slated to elect the new president in July 2012.

In 2007, the Congress managed to get Pratibha Patil elected only because of the support it got from the Left that had over 60 MPs and controlled two big states. Now the Congress will have to talk to many more parties in order to reach the magic majority number not only in Parliament but also in all the states. The Congress rules only in 12 of the 28 states and seven Union Territories. Having less than a third of the voting strength needed to secure the presidential election, the party will have to walk that extra mile to persuade others to support its candidate. After all, a president neutral or hostile to the Congress will be a cause of discomfiture to a party that will seek to retain its post-election halo. As the 2014 election countdown begins, the Congress will need all the lights on in Rashtrapati Bhavan if it wants to shine.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com

Interview with P Chidambaram/The Sunday Standard/May 01, 2011

'Money power is poll panel business'

Union Home Minister P Chidambaram speaks about the ongoing Assembly elections in an exclusive interview with Editorial Director Prabhu Chawla. Excerpts:

Wooing voters with money power is a law and order issue, which was rampant in Tamil Nadu elections.
That is the Election Commission’s business, not mine. Money power has nothing to do with security of the state.

But (UP chief minister) Mayawati has accused your party all the time about various other things…don’t you think Tamil Nadu...
Let’s talk about security and law and order. Don’t mix up other issues.

Politics matters…
How does that concern security or law and order? Those are political issues which will be answered by the political party.

The Lt Governor of Puducherry came to you. What did you advise him—to resign, not to resign—or are you leaving it to agencies?
The agency wanted to question him, so we asked him. He said yes, I am ready to be questioned. So we went through the required constitutional arrangements and the agency has questioned him. Now we will have to wait for the agency’s report.

But he met you twice …
I am not going into the subject matter of the issue. That is not my business. The agency wanted to question him. He has made himself available for questioning, the questioning has taken place… let us wait.

You did not advise him either way.
Let the agency report come. What is there to advice without knowing what the agency has found?

Congress has always been quick enough in taking action against people against whom charges have been levelled.
No charge has been framed. The agency wanted to question him, he has been questioned. You will have to wait for the agency’s report.

Are you not disturbed with what has happened to the image of the government during last few months?
This is your perception of the image. Wait for May 13 and we will know what the people think.

Wait for May 13! You are talking of winning election, obviously.
You have a perception of the image of the government, which I respect. But let us see what peoples’ perception is on the 13th of May.

Let us use it as hypothetically again because you have challenged that May 13 is coming…
I want to know what the people think…

If they reject you then will you admit ….
Obviously, if the people vote against us then we would have to conclude that in the peoples’ esteem we have failed…in people’s estimate we’ve failed, we have to admit that with humility. But I am confident that on May 13th, results will show that the people do not share the perceptions which are run on the media most of the time. Media’s perception and the people’s perception are not necessarily the same.

May 13, you think, will explode that myth.
You are putting words in my mouth. What I am saying is media’s perception and people’s perceptions are not always the same.

But you always follow the media closely.
We do not follow, we watch the media.

Whether it is the arrest of Kalmadi or chargesheeting of Kanimozhi…
Media is a pillar of our social structure…you cannot deny that.

Are you saying that media is telling lies?
I am not saying that media is telling lies. Media has a perception…

Which you think is not correct?
I didn’t say that. I said you would have to wait and see whether media’s and people’s perception is the same. I am not passing any judgement. I am saying media has a perception. Let us see what the people’s perception is. Ultimately what matters is not anyone’s perception but the people’s perception.

If the people reject you?

If the people vote against us, obviously, in the esteem of the people we will have failed.

Power & Politics / Mail Today, July 26, 2010

THE JOB profile of the Union home minister has never included the word “ diplomacy”. Palaniappan Chidambaram knows it better than any of his predecessors, including that old hawk Lal Kishen Advani. When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh decided to send Chidambaram to Pakistan to do some plain speaking to his counterpart, Rehman Malik, the idea was to convey the message that henceforth, at least as far as Indo- Pak ties were concerned, domestic politics would dictate diplomacy.

After the fiasco of foreign minister S. M. Krishna’s Islamabad visit last week, in hindsight, it appears that whoever advised Manmohan Singh to draft Chidambaram in the new diplomatic offensive must be an expert in innovative disruptions. After all, never before has a visit by the home minister preceded that of the foreign minister as part of confidence building measures. North and South Blocks stand barely 100 metres apart on the Capital’s Raisina Hill, but it appears that the disconnect between the two imperial era buildings that house the foreign and home offices is too wide.

Dealing with a hostile and ever unpredictable neighbour like Pakistan would tax the most suave of diplomats. Seasoned foreign office mandarins have told me that to be part of a dialogue team with Pakistan is akin to inviting distress.

This was quite evident last week when officers on either side of Rajpath were engaged in blame game for the disastrous visit of foreign minister Krishna to Pakistan. Bureaucratic turf fights are nothing new but at issue now is the conflict between diplomacy and domestic politics which is now fodder for the media.

Chidambaram’s trip to Islamabad was disruptive innovation at its best, aimed at bypassing the conventional dialogue mechanism which was stuck in the past.

The home minister landed in the Pakistan capital with a mandate from the government to address the concerns of the home constituency. What he told them was bitter, yet true, of the clear involvement of their defence officials in the many terror attacks on India, particularly 26/ 11.

These weren’t just dossiers compiled by the investigating agencies but revelations made by David Headley to Indian investigators in the presence of FBI officers in Washington. Chidambaram’s plainspeak had put the Pakistan establishment on the defensive and interior minister Malik was condescending enough to tweet that “ Chidambaram was a very intelligent politician”. It was widely believed that Chidambaram’s triumphant return to New Delhi would be followed by a final assault on the Pakistan establishment.

So were home secretary G. K. Pillai’s comments on the day G. K. Pillai when Krishna was to leave for Pakistan part of the disruptive agenda?

Shortly before Krishna arrived in Islamabad, the Indian media quoted Pillai saying that from the confessions of Headley, it was clear that Pakistan’s ISI was behind the 26/ 11 attack. His remarks are now said to be the reason for the talks getting stalled even before they could begin.

Back in India, a red- faced Krishna says that everything Pillai said was right, but its timing was the reason the talks failed.

Pillai, an upright civil servant whom any bureaucracy would be eager to embrace, is now said to be so downbeat that he contemplates putting in his papers.

Why didn’t the mandarins in the foreign office pick up the signal — that his exercise was meant to bring Pakistan back to the unfinished agenda of the home minister’s visit? But our diplomats refused to pick up the signals. They converted Krishna’s visit into just another aimless bilateral engagement.

It gave Pakistan a chance to pay back by disrupting the conventional dialogue. Pakistan foreign minister S. M. Qureshi even questioned Krishna’s authority to take decisions. Krishna’s humiliation was complete.

It is the first time that there have been two high profile ministerial visits to Pakistan. It is also the first time it has led to domestic political crises of such magnitude and divided the cabinet and the bureaucracy right down the middle.

The decision to send Chidambaram to Islamabad cannot be faulted and is among the boldest and most innovative steps that this government has taken. But it failed because one side kept up the pressure while the other preferred the status quo.

At the SAARC heads’ meeting in Bhutan a couple of months ago, the prime minister, in hindsight it appears, rather unwisely said that we will continue to talk no matter what happens.

The foreign office seems to have adopted that credo and chooses to walk the talk all the time, unmindful of the vast quantities of yolk that accumulates on its face.

Power & Politics/ Mail Today, April 12, 2010

UNION home minister P. Chidambaram has acted with honour and integrity and set an example by offering to resign after the massacre of 76 security men by Maoists in Dantewada in Chhattisgarh last week. By his action, PC has set a precedent for his colleagues. More important, he has consolidated his position within the government hierarchy. The Congress “ appreciated and commended” his “ buck stops at my desk” statement but would not go beyond saying that the resignation would not be accepted.

What came as a surprise though was the reaction of the opposition BJP which would normally have used an occasion such as this to go for the government’s jugular. “ We have not sought Chidambaram’s resignation or want him to resign on his own. He has to continue the country’s fight to the finish and our party would extend ( the) support he needs to defeat the forces backed by foreign states”, BJP spokesman Rajiv Pratap Rudy said. These are words that Rudy couldn’t have afforded not to utter. Chidambaram succeeded the effete Shivraj Patil as Union home minister in the wake of 26/ 11 and since then there is a near cross- party consensus that the lawyer- economist- politician from Sivaganga is the best CEO for India’s law and order machinery. That India did not witness a single case of terrorism for the next 14 months is testimony to that. The spotless record was somewhat blemished by the attack on the German Bakery in Pune in February this year; yet there is acknowledgement of the broad success of his strategy to snuff out threats from across the border. Indeed, so convinced was PC about the success of the path he chose that just a couple of weeks ago, he stated in an interview that he would wipe out the Maoist menace within the next three years.

Why then has he offered to resign? Has he thrown in the towel? I hope not, just as I am sure do a majority of our countrymen. At a time when the vandals rule a third of the country’s 600- odd districts, India needs a man like him who carries no ideological baggage, has chalked out a clear agenda and goes about it with clockwork precision. PC uses both the carrot and the stick in equal measure.

In the last few weeks, on more than one occasion he signalled the government’s willingness to open dialogue as long as they “ abjured” violence. Like any tough administrator who sets out to change the rules of the game, PC has run into hurdles.

There is no shortage of bleeding hearts within and outside the government who’d rather that the state go soft on Maoists and adopt a twopronged strategy that includes both carrying out anti- extremist operations and addressing their socio- economic issues.

It is PC’s contention that, far from yielding results, this strategy has proved costly, both in
terms of men and material. Since 2005, 1,800 paramilitary personnel have met their death at the hands of extremists; 140 in the last months alone. PC has probably taken a cue from Y. S. Rajashekhara Reddy and N. Chandrababu Naidu, two men who otherwise followed policies that were as different as chalk and cheese. But on Naxalites, they — one a Congress chief minister and the other from the Telugu Desam Party and the bitterest of political rivals — were one.
They were ruthless in their pursuit of Naxalites and both had the full support of the Centre. It is no secret that during the NDA regime, Naidu had a carte blanche from the then home minister L. K. Advani to act as he deemed fit and it is largely due to their tenacity that the Naxalite menace in Andhra is no more what it used to be.

PC tried to establish the same kind of rapport with opposition chief ministers like Raman Singh and Naveen Patnaik. But he is being held back by the breast beaters in the government and professional human rights protesters.

There was no sight more shameful than one such organisation claiming last week that the jawans were ill- trained to tackle extremism. It is not about lack of training. What they need are weapons and most of all, a morale booster. And that can only happen if the state empowers them with both weapons and policies that make them feel that the state cares. For a start, politicians could start thinking beyond the vote bank and give them powers for preventive arrest and interrogation and even POTA. Give them autonomy; their demoralisation will vanish as will their death count.

As finance minister, PC had greater exposure and influence over the nation’s destiny. He missed the global stage and initially found it difficult to adjust to his new role in North Block.
He had just begun to assert himself when Dantewada happened.

He enjoys the confidence of both the PM and Sonia and by offering to resign, he stooped to conquer. He is indispensable now and his foes will think twice before engaging him in a bout.

Power & Politics / Mail Today, February 15, 2010

WHEN IN doubt, set up a panel. Earlier this month, the UPA government constituted the BN Srikrishna panel on Telangana and last Friday, the Union home ministry announced its terms of reference. If the UPA government hoped these were enough to lull the Telangana agitationists back to sleep, its calculations have gone terribly awry. The TRS which is spearheading the agitation has already rejected the government’s initiatives and I suspect that the budget session of the Andhra Assembly which begins today will be stormy, even violent.

Governor EML Narasimhan is to make his maiden address to the assembly but, last heard, wasn't sure what he would say on behalf of the state government since the state cabinet headed by K. Rosaiah, which has to approve his speech, has nothing to say on the Centre’s moves. I cannot recall another occasion where the deliberations of the Union Cabinet or central government formed part of the Governor's address in a state which has a duly elected government. Normally, the gravity of the situation would have demanded that the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs be called to discuss the matter, but the central political leadership, which has been feeling the heat from Telangana for about four months now, tossed the ball into P. Chidambaram’s court. The home minister’s firefighting skills are legendary but there is only so much that even wizards can do and I fear that what the mandarins have devised is not a clear road map to settle the issue but a formula for more political acrobatics.

The seven point terms of reference is a classic example of both legal and bureaucratic creativity that totally lacks conviction. The official statement vaguely defined the work of the panel headed by the former judge and four other wise members. Former home secretary V. K. Duggal, who is member secretary in the new panel, discussed with Chidambaram five crucial aspects concerning the title, headquarters, accommodation,administrative and financial allocations for the panel.

Two joint secretaries have been assigned to assist Duggal. They are faced with an uphill task. To start with, they have not been able to decide if the office of the panel will be in Mumbai where Srikrishna resides or Hyderabad, the city where the fire rages. There is some “ progress” though.

The panel has decided to take “ blanket permission” from Union Ministry of Personnel, to recruit 15 Research Fellows who will be the main link between the issues and the committee. The panel has also decided it will need a conference hall, 15 stenographers, 50 computer terminals, 10 landline phones with STD connections, fax machines, internet connections, chairs, tables and video and slide projector equipment.

If you think this a joke, consider the next one which is hilarious, to say the least. “ Clause ( 4) of the Terms of reference will identify the key issues that must be addressed while considering the matters mentioned in Clauses ( 1), ( 2) and ( 3) above.” It is bureaucratic gobbledygook at its best and betrays the confusion that reigns at the top levels in the Congress party over the creation of the new state. Congress insiders tell me that it was due to pressure mounted by its allies like the DMK and Trinamool Congress that the government didn’t take a final call. Top central leaders such as law minister Veerappa Moily, finance minister Pranab Mukherjee and Chidambaram are all in favour of the government using the Telangana issue to set the tone for the creation of smaller states in due course, but the Congress leadership in the states stands divided on the issue. In almost all big states, the Congress faces the real threat of losing power to regional rivals which could in turn pose a threat to the government at the Centre itself.

Justice Srikrishna and Chidambaram are among the sharpest legal brains in the country and it is the Congress’ hope that between them, they will work out something that will find cross party acceptance. My own hunch is that whatever they come up with will not be enough to get the Congress out of trouble.

The TRS has already rejected the panel and is expected to intensify the agitation in the coming days. This in turn will prompt Mayawati to renew her demand for the division of Uttar Pradesh to put the Congress on the defensive during assembly elections in 2012.

Ultimately, the government will have just one option left: set up a Second States Reorganisation Commission. It will buy some time as well as help the party make up its mind. Till then, they should milk the political situation for all it’s worth.

Snippets / Mail Today, February 01, 2010

Narayanan’s departure heralds change

WITH the departure of MK Narayanan as National Security Advisor, the government has initiated the process of restructuring the security apparatus to fit the Chidambaram doctrine. Since he took over as home minister, his meetings with security and intelligence agencies have been on an almost daily basis and attended by, among others, the chiefs of RAW, IB, NSA, CBI and the Secretary ( Security). This has bogged him down in Delhi, leaving him little time to go around the country for a first hand look at things. Many are the times when he leaves the capital after one such meeting and visits three or four states before returning to New Delhi for the next day’s meeting.

This can tire the toughest of men and a search is now on for someone who is well versed in security management to take the responsibility for coordinating between the various agencies all matters relating to security and surveillance.

The candidate selection process will soon begin and the government is not limiting its choices to the establishment; professional security and strategic experts are also being shortlisted. The one who finally gets the job is likely to be given the rank of secretary and will be asked to head a new outfit which most probably will be called the National Security Group or Panel. The chiefs of the RAW, IB, CBI and others, barring that of Military Intelligence, will report to the NSG who will in turn report to the Home Minister. The restructuring ought to have taken place long ago since Chidambaram had planned these steps not long after he had taken over in the aftermath of 26/ 11. But stiff resistance from an entrenched cabal meant that his plans were put on hold for more than a year. Now that the obstacles are beginning to melt, he has lost no time.

More power to his elbow.

They are missing PC at Davos meet

FOR some years now, the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos has been one that no businessman from India worth his balance sheet would dare give a miss. Four years ago, the theme at the meet was “ India Everywhere” and Indian businessmen joined the government to launch a marketing blitz to convince global investors that India was the place to be. Since then, the world has been on a financial roller coaster but there’s no stopping India or Indians. This year, over 90 business honchos have joined ministers Kamal Nath, Anand Sharma and the Planning Commission chief Montek Singh Ahluwalia in the Swiss ski resort. And as usual, they are making a splash. Still, there is one man who is missed: P Chidambaram.

He has led the Indian team to Davos the last few years and is on first name basis with most government and business leaders. Of course they are aware that he has moved from finance to home, but many of them still thought that his credentials as a financial diplomat would have given the Indian team a much needed boost, especially in dealing with the Chinese.

Besides, there is the acknowledgement that in the current global scenario where matters relating to the economy cannot be delinked from those related to security, Chidambaram would have been an asset. But who is to tell them that we do things differently here? The division of labour among the UPA top brass is in stark contrast to the NDA government where a handful of senior leaders decided everything from economy to trade to terrorism to cricket. Pranab Mukherjee is among the best finance ministers we have had, but he is not the kind to want to rub shoulders with the high and the mighty in Davos.

He is more comfortable leading political firefighting operations at home along with AK Antony, Veerappa Moily, Digvijay Singh and Ahmed Patel. The economic pie is shared between Kamal Nath, Sharma and Ahluwalia who between them are doing an admirable job. Security remains the sole preserve of Chidambaram. The fatcats in Davos may be missing him but I am sure PC doesn’t miss them .

THE 15th Lok Sabha has the largest contingent of young members of Parliament and while many of them are yet to display their full potential on the debating floor, they seem to have reached a cross party consensus on one thing: food. One of the privileges of being a member of Parliament is that it enables you to tuck into just about edible matter at ridiculously low costs, thanks largely to the huge subsidy offered by the Indian Railways, official caterers to Parliament House. Things may change soon. The kitchen that serves Central Hall has been temporarily closed and the old kitchen inside Parliament House is being renovated and the babalog seem to have convinced the powers that be that it’s time to better the fare at India’s most exclusive club. Among those who have raised the demand for better quality and more variety in the daily fare are young MPs like Supriya Sule, Milind Deora and Jitendra Prasada.

The General Purposes Committee of Parliament is expected to take up the matter at its next meeting scheduled in March and if the proposal is accepted, large hotel and restaurant chains could be making bids to keep the honourable MPs gastronomically content. Mamata Banerjee shrieks each time someone tries to curtail her department’s powers, but with the railway minister sportingly acceding to the young MPs, the all new café could open as early as the next winter session.