Opinion

The moulting of Manmohan Singh

Indian PM Manmohan Singh appears to have undergone a moulting, silencing critics with his cricket diplomacy.

Jyoti Malhotra March 27, 2011

Can poetry change the course of war? Can the iambic pentameter, irrespective of language, extract the sting from the frontal assault but nevertheless ensure that the message reaches home? Can the hero reach out to the bad guys and change the ending of the formula film?

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who has appeared singularly lacklustre or damaged or both in recent weeks, ruling over a disparate coalition that is at once corrupt and seemingly bereft of ideas, looks like he has undergone a moulting in the last 48 hours. And surprisingly, it was an Urdu couplet that came to his desperate rescue.

Imagine if you will, an unlikely opposition consisting of both the left and the right, whose strength is inversely proportional to the determined suicidal tendencies of the government. First, there was the utterly scandalous matter of the Commonwealth Games last year, in which senior Congress party members have been caught with their hands in the till. Then, the Congress party in power wanted to appoint a tainted man as the country’s top vigilance bureaucrat. As if all this wasn’t bad enough, India’s fantastical economic growth story took a big beating when it was found that former telecom minister Andimuthu Raja had siphoned off a few hundred crores from the sale of precious spectrum for expanding national mobile telephony, without as much as batting an eyelid.

Was this the same prime minister who, as finance minister in 1991, launched the economic reform that had set India upon its path of self-confident growth? How could Manmohan Singh, circa 2011, condone this rank and unadulterated mess?

No wonder Sushma Swaraj, senior leader of the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party, taunted him in parliament: Tu idhar, udhar ki na baat kar/yeh bata ki kaafila kyon luta/Hamein rehzanon se gila nahin/teri rehbari ka sawaal hai.

As the House erupted in derisive laughter, the PM got up to reply, his voice soft and hesitant as he read his defence from a piece of paper. That was only to be expected, the barely-controlled chortling indicated. Then Manmohan Singh put the piece of paper down on the table and invoked Iqbal: Maana ki tere deed ke kaabil nahin hoon main/Tuh mera shauq to dekh/mera intezaar to dekh

Sushma Swaraj began to smile, LK Advani hid his own behind his hand, Sonia Gandhi was suppressing a grin — but the packed House had no such compunctions. The sudden gust of relief underwrote the triumphant comeback. The PM had belied all his opponents, that too in the idiom of the day. He had won. The Congress party had succeeded in putting the opposition in its place.

Within the next 36 hours, as Yuvraj Singh played his bit role in the larger picture of returning the people-to-people relationship between India and Pakistan to its rightful place — at the centre — and gave India a shoo-in at Mohali — the PM played his second card: He invited Pakistan’s president Asif Ali Zardari and his counterpart Yousaf Raza Gilani to watch India and Pakistan in combat.

Make no mistake, the Mohali match is war by another name, especially since this is the first time that both countries are confronting each other on the sporting arena since the Mumbai 2008 attacks. But the question is, how badly can you behave when the top leadership of both countries are watching from the same box?

Since cricket is religion in India/Pakistan, all the political heavyweights are bound to be at the stadium too. Can both sides do what they have been claiming on the front pages of newspapers forever, which is to separate the desires of ordinary people — play cricket, travel to each other’s countries, perhaps to Moenjodaro, or Ajmer Sharif, go out for dinner in Lahore or Amritsar — from the high politics of government?

If the ball is at silly point, how long before both leaderships are leg before? The short lesson is that Singh seems to have realised that this is his last shot at the history books. Perhaps Gilani can take a page from the same tomes?

Published in The Express Tribune, March 28^th, 2011.

COMMENTS (23)

AnIndian | 13 years ago | Reply @ G.Din Bro, I withdraw the remarks I made about you using the word Sardar. I feel you are giving far less credit to these personalities and their achievements... However, given the ground we are standing, let's agree to disagree...

G. Din | 13 years ago | Reply @AnIndian: I am grateful for your detailed history of our tribulations under Nehru and his dynasty. Mind you, I am not blaming him for bad intent or faith. He was a great man and did the best according to his best lights. But, he was essentially a benevolent dictator. It must be said to his credit that he made effort to restrain himself from such dictatorial tendencies. He knew those existed as he acknowledged in a piece written in third person in the British magazine "Punch". We gave him unquestioned adulation, so it was our fault, too. But the discussion here is about MMS. You misunderstand when you say "The appellation “Sardar” denotes a tinge of racism". It is not racist because it is with some pride and personal gratitude to Sikhs that I pointed out how as a Sardar, known for their bravery, he acts atypically timidly in a faminine manner. Please don't blame me of sexism now. A man who refuses to let go of power when he has been rejected by the people and who prefers to come to his "kursi" every morning by the back door is, in my book, NOT an honourable man. No matter how brilliant he may be, I can assure you that there are, if not smarter, at least as smart people in plenty in India. India is hardly a one-man show! We do not have to be beholden to a man who looks upon our democratic institutions as merely inconvenient and bypassable. You say:"at least he didn’t come by money power or family legacy." Unless we expect India to be feudal, shouldn't that be the normal way of reaching high office? Has he done us some sort of favour? But, the whole Indian nation knows that he occupies the office, which was once occupied by far greater men than he, only as a place-holder. That my country is being governed this way is profoundly disgraceful and outrageous to me.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

AnIndian | 13 years ago | Reply @ G.Din I am glad you probed deeper – now let’s prober even deeper. While I appreciate that you have brought pertinent points which I too share concerns; I’m afraid, you have made certain sweeping conclusions. The beauty of the economic History of modern India is in the details... The story started in 1947 in what was predominantly a Agricultural feudal economy. Serious land reforms, was need of the hour throughout Asia. If Mao brought it through communism, Nehru realized it through “Nehruvian Socialism.” Under Nehru’s umbrella, geniuses like Mahalonobis (who founded our Indian Statistical Institute) established a planned economy and institutionalized it through the Planning Commission). Large scale irrigation projects, power projects, mineral industries, other industries were made possible only through this centralized planning. I will agree with you if you say that this institution has degraded by ineptness and corruption; but, it was certainly not true at that time. This economic model had the endorsement of many reputed economists even from western countries. While Rajaji and certain economists like B. R. Shenoy were skeptic about this system, the people of India at that point of time were in romance with Socialism and it did serve them well at that point of time. The biggest socioeconomic debacle for India because of partition was the loss of rich agricultural lands. In an instant, partition rendered India from being a food surplus country to a food deficient one. It was taken care under the auspice of Planning commission and under the leadership of Lal Bahadur who said: Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan. Under geniuses like Norman Borlaug and M S Swaminathan (who, I have special affection for) the green revolution was launched and by the time of Indira’s rule we became partly attained food security. So what “utter lack of attention to agriculture” are you talking about? Indira, to the chagrin of the communist parties, in the 1970’s brought about the beginning of the liberalization era, by adopting some recommendations of the World bank including devaluing the Indian rupee, and making Indian rupee a partial-float currency. The Janata party in the late 1970’s began to move closer towards the capital western civilizations with respect to policies. These achievements do deserve recognition. Having said this, I will say that beginning in the early 1960’s the darker side of this model of economy started to emerge more and more blatantly – red tape. The legacy of socialism in India, is thus a mixed one. To say it is a “mad legacy” is surely uninformed and hasty. There was a real need to address the issue of license raj. It was not done until the time of PV. It is wrong to say that the economic change was the result of economic and political compulsion. Contrary to popular perception, that was not the first time India got bailed out. Numerous times, International institutions and foreign countries have bailed her out and set policy guidelines (This is what you seem to call as “firman”. Do you think all countries do what IMF tells them to do, when it bails them out? Did Pakistan implement the most recent “compulsions” from IMF?). What is required for change is political persuasion and economic formulation. This is specifically what I give enormous credit to Dr. Manmohan Singh for. Having served in various capacities, in UN economic forums, as RBI governor, as the deputy chairperson of Planning commission, he knew what he was doing. PV Narasimha Rao was receptive to the idea and provided the political might – for which he deserves applause. My dear bro, he is no ordinary babu, as you seem to imply. I give kudos to Manmohan for what he did and NOT as a poster boy of the UPA. And, not for an instant did I say “solely responsible”. I do share your feeling about Narasimha Rao. In my own hometown Hyderabad, it pains me when the international airport is named after the Rajiv bloke and not PV. But, the word “dishonorable” to refer to Manmohan is misplaced. The appellation “Sardar” denotes a tinge of racism. I suggest you refrain from applying it. I ask you to accept that at least he didn’t come by money power or family legacy. There are many, many things, I wish to say: Alas, space and time constraint!

G. Din | 13 years ago | Reply @AnIndian: "I totally agree with Ashok Sai – that this kind of debate here will be “counterproductive”. " Well, if we accept that premise, we should not have started it by advancing extravagant claims of the "genius" of MMS here. But, once you did start it, you should expect challenges if such claims are spurious. "What is the big deal if Dr. Singh gets to be in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha???" If there was no big deal, then the Constitution, in its lofty wisdom, should not have opted for a bicameral legislature. The function and the duties of the two houses are entirely different. It is vitally important that those who are in the decision making positions be members of Lok Sabha. Otherwise, the governance of India will go highly skewed. Right now, MMS may be allowed to participate in discussions in Lok Sabha, he is forbidden to vote. Do you see the anomaly here? Now about those extravagant claims as to his "brilliance" or "originality" or whatever. Those who make such claims will be sorely disappointed to be told that MMS was not the one who thought up those reforms. Back in 50's of the last century, there was a group of visionaries which saw where Nehru's "socialistic pattern of society' and utter lack of attention to agriculture was leading the country to. Bankruptcy! They resigned from the Congress Party and formed another party, the Swatantra Party. It was led by such hard-core patriots as Rajaji (C.R) and Minoo Masani, amongst the many. The party espoused the concept of western capitalism, suitably modified to Indian conditions. As you can see the seeds of the revolution of 90's were already sown then. We knew what we needed to do. MMS was nowhere in that picture. The new party did not last much longer because Nehru's star was still shining over India, lonely and bright. Nehru's daughter did not help the matters either, by her nationalization of banks and other foolish economic policies. Now, here was a party in power that was flaunting the legacy left by its all-powerful grand daddy, do you think that a timid, "soft-spoken" soul like MMS would have had the courage to trash that legacy, and single-handedly reverse the course of India? This is a man who wiggles from head to toe like a fair maiden when in the presence of foreign leaders. So, how did the reforms get launched in 90's? We were broke by then. The government was led by that highly under-appreciated man, K. Narsimharao. When IMF was approached for help, it agreed if the government would trash Nehru's mad legacy. So, when the firman came from IMF, a political decision had to be made. MMS was the Finance Minister at the time. It was the PM, Narsimharao that stuck his neck out and decided to bury Nehruvian economic policies, much to the chagrin of numerous Nehru orphans. Since MMS was the Finance Minister, he was given the ball and asked to run with it. How in the name of everything that is holy, can MMS be given the credit for the reforms? He had absolutely no hand in making any decision. Do you think that a timid Sardar (an oxymoron it might be), a lifelong bureaucrat used to taking orders, a servile quadruped in the stables of the Dynasty, would have the gumption to reverse and trash the legacy of the grand daddy who was the founder of that dynasty? In my opinion MMS is basically an opportunist and a dishonourable man who keeps diplomatic silence when given the credit he does not deserve. An honourable man would have come forward disowning the credit and giving it to the man who really deserved it -Narsimharao. India's rise has been acknowledged as phenomenal. If this man was singularly responsible for it, he should have been nominated to receive the Nobel Prize for Economics. He has not been, nor will he be.

AnIndian | 13 years ago | Reply I totally agree with Ashok Sai - that this kind of debate here will be "counterproductive". @ G. Din: I usually see your comments as being sensible. But, I am not able to understand your concerns! What is the big deal if Dr. Singh gets to be in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha??? (And, I will say this: I agree with you and I have total contempt for the dynastic nature of the Congress party.)

G. Din | 13 years ago | Reply @ashok sai: All I commented about were some tall and quite extravagant claims on behalf of one who is just a "babu". It would benefit us all to know what the bases of such statements were. If MMS had even one-tenth the accomplishments claimed for him to his credit, he would not have faced the traumatically ignominious defeat in a "safe" constituency of Sikhs. Indians are a generous people. If Sonia Ghandy gets elected every time with no accomplishments but just the connection to the Dynasty, why was our own scholarly stalwart defeated? OK, It might have been because of the 1984 pogrom of Sikhs by Congress Party (Should he have continued his membership of his party after that atrocity and not resigned on principle?) But, what prevents him from fighting an election from any one of thousands of "safe" constituencies of India? His conduct has been shamelessly opportunistic in sticking to a loophole in the Constitution which does not at the present time require the membership of the House of the People. With all due respect to you and the two gentlemen, but not to MMS, this is dishonourable conduct and demeans the high office of the Prime Minister of India, once adorned by no less than a giant amongst men, Jawaharlal Nehru.

AnIndian | 13 years ago | Reply @ Vin: Your contempt for Democracy and admiration for Military Dictatorship is so reminiscent of Nazism... @G.Din: The economic policy revolution done under his leadership removed the government hindrances to development. Since then, we have reduced poverty rates to half, enhanced literacy rate by 20%, and, increased the per capita income to four times. Today, India's growth story (which needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, I concur) is an inspiration for all countries in the sub-continent and the developing world. It is in this sense, that I said, "his contributions to Indian economy have stirred the sub-continent awake." @Warris: Because we Indians, unlike you, do NOT identify people by religion, we have had leaders like Abdul Kalam and Manmohan. Our first PM Nehru was a avowed Atheist/Agnostic. Forget Hindus and Sikhs, it is even difficult for Muslims belonging to other sects of Islam to become a successful politicians in your place.

Arun (Mumbai) | 13 years ago | Reply I couldn't help but smile at the optimism of this article. Sure his party may be filled with corrupt people but he is personally incorruptible. In the rough and tumble of Indian politics, it's a surprise that he has survived thus far. He created history by opening up India's economy. I hope he creates history again by bringing lasting peace with Pakistan.

Waris | 13 years ago | Reply No need for such nationalistic sentiments. Dr. Singh is a sikh and a friend of Pakistan. Even Pervez Musharraf held him in high regard, especially when it came to Kashmir issue. But like all honest and full of integrity politicians, Dr. Singh still has to answer to 800 million nationalistic hindu's, and so he cannot be overtly hospitable to pakistani's for long without the BJP or Shiv Sena burning Congress effigies. The economy of India has only risen due to a person like Dr. Singh. It was he who opened up India in the 90's. Always remember there is a black hand in politics and Dr. Singh knows this. In fact, I bet you, our leaders will not be treated as affectionately outright, but behind closed doors, will be welcomed as brothers. Pakistan and India may never re-unite, but we will always be children of a common mother. No wars will ever change that.

ashok sai | 13 years ago | Reply @G. Din: Sir, these kind of statements are all counter productive, if you have any thoughts, we will share it on our ground, lol.

G. Din | 13 years ago | Reply @AnIndian: "...his contributions to Indian economy have stirred the sub-continent awake..." Re you sure? If so, how so, AnIndian? @John: "...Singh already wrote the history of modern India..." WOW! How so, John? Do not get carried away and indulge in hyperbole!

Vin | 13 years ago | Reply Manmohans Singhs only qualification for the post of PM is his Sycophancy and Babugiri that bows down to politicians... he is the custodian of the "Kursee" for Rajkumar of India the Rahul Gandhi..... India is no better that Egypt/Libya only in the garb of democracy... Pakistan you are much better off with Military Dicattorship atleast then its only one person looting, here in india its thousands of PUBLIC SeERVANTS that loot.... Democracy works for an educated society not for one's like ours...rather its becomes the most devestating form of governance..see China for example

abhinav | 13 years ago | Reply Very wise move by inviting pak PM and President. He should have invited ISI cheif Pasha and Gen Kayani as well.

Scorpio | 13 years ago | Reply All this 'cricket diplomacy' does not work. Manmohan and Gilani will exchangeUrdu couplets, pose with Sheila and Munni but nothing will change on the LoC or India's stance on Pakistan cricket. They will not play in the IPL, neither will there be any India- Pakistan tours in the near future. Pakistan were confined to Sri Lanka for their earlier matches and are only coming to Mohali on merit. If The West Indies had qualified instead of Pakistan, Manmohan Singh would not have even remembered Gilani's name. This is an international tournament...not a bilateral friendship series. All the politicians should stay home.

ashok sai | 13 years ago | Reply If the ball is at silly point, how long before both leaderships are leg before? But the Pakistan's partner (terrorist) at the other end, keep hitting the ball(bomb) all over the ground (word), what will bowling team India can do?

Zaheer Abbas | 13 years ago | Reply Amazing.......Keep it up.

voxpopuli | 13 years ago | Reply Instead of tricking each other, the leadership of both the nations should take some concrete steps,sincerely, for a change !

ani | 13 years ago | Reply The short lesson is that Indian PM seems to have learnt nothing. It is always the "last" shot by Indian PM's whether in chaste Hindi or Urdu. Look at their history of futile attempts at peace: Shastri at Tashkent; Indira at Shimla; Rajiv at Jaipur; Vajpayee at Minar-e-Pakistan (Lahore). They went to seek peace and got war in return. They signed agreements that were excercises in the doctrine of Al Taqiyya by Pakistan. The words secular, tolerance, equality, peace have different meanings to the values of Indians and Pakistanis. For one they are collective expressions of live and let live; for the other they are catalysts for appropriation from the enemy. Unless there is complete calibration and alignment of language and its meaning, there can be no peace. The twin escalators of Islamic superiority and hatred keep Pakistani leaders and society (by and large) on a path of enmity with India. They neither want to nor can they let go. Mohali is just another step in letting Indians deceive themsleves. That is the point and it is silly. May that not come in between a great sport and its two legitimate contenders.

Venky | 13 years ago | Reply Wow, what an article of optimism. Compare this with the article on the same day from Mr. Jawed Naqvi in Dawn, an article of full pessimism. What Manmohan Singh is doing is just building trust not diplomacy..

skee.ee | 13 years ago | Reply dayr aye, durust aye ... aye tou sahi The fervor around Pakistan Vs. India Semi-final match has already dwarfed excitement around the whole world cup ... the most intense rivalry in cricket is no longer Eng vs. Aus, i dont see it being between South Africa vs Zimbabve Vs Kenye ... its never really ever was new zealand vs australia ... it may never be Sri lanka vs Pakistan vs Bangladesh Vs india vs watever ... The most intense rivalry IS Pakistan Vs India and this needs to be realized! Politics and Politicians can play their luck at the art of the possible but let, ordinary cricket lovers, have our fix ... let this rivalry nourish itself ... commoditization of this rivalry (like ashes forexample) has a HUGE return potential .... Indian and Pakistan teams have a lot of individuals who are brands in and of themselves ... Afridi, Yuvraj, shoaib, dhoni - these guys are not just good at cricketers ... they are highly marketable personalities ... celebrities ... And together Pakistan and India is about 1.5 billion people ... as a market 1.5 billion people is INSANE! ... and these are not just random 1.5 people who are somewhat interested in sports... these 1.5 bill are diehard cricket fanatics ... cricket is religion for us ... let us have more of it! It might not make political, diplomatic, international relations, Raw vs ISI, sense ... but it makes sense from a peoples perspective .. and it make senses from a money perspective ... Manmohan, even though I doubt ur invite initiative was purely for the sake of cricket ...I can keep my cynicism in check and appreciate your gesture - ... Good job!

John | 13 years ago | Reply Singh already wrote the history of modern India. Mahali game is an epilogue.

Arindom | 13 years ago | Reply There is no mention of the Generals who call the shots to Pakistan. Without them on board - this is all futile...The Generals seem to be playing some other game right now - is it ice-hockey?

AnIndian | 13 years ago | Reply Yes, Manmohan is not an excellent orator. Yes, Manmohan is small in stature within his own party. Yes, Manmohan is covering up the mistakes taking place under his very nose, because of political compulsions... BUT, make NO mistake. Dr.Manmohan became the PM by his own merit - not because of his father, husband or wife. Dr.Manmohan integrity is unimpeachable. Dr.Manmohan is one of the most intellectually accomplished leaders of his time, a fact endorsed by World leaders. Dr.Manmohan's knowledge on Economy and his contributions to Indian economy have stirred the sub-continent awake. His academic qualifications has very few parallels among all people in politics. Dr.Manmohan's biography is an inspiration for all people in developing countries. And no one questions, to this day: the commitment shown by Vajpayee and Manmohan in bettering India-Pakistan relations...

Replying to X