Saturday 17 May 2014

When would Dr. Manmohan Singh shed his Modi phobia?

                                             Image Courtesy: PIB
The outgoing Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has been found wanting on many occasions. And he was found wanting too in his last address to the Nation that he delivered on 17th May 2014 before submitting his resignation to the President.
He today avoided mentioning Mr. Narendra Modi, who as Prime Ministerial candidate of BJP brought about a paradigm shift in the Indian polity. He lacked the courage to either acknowledge Mr. Modi’s achievement as a global marvel or to reiterate his outrageous perception about Mr. Modi as prospective Prime Minister.
On 3rd January 2014 at the televised national press conference, Dr. Singh had stated: “I have full confidence that the next Prime Minister will be from the UPA coalition, and that without discussing the merits of Mr. Narendra Modi, it will be disastrous for the country to have Shri Narendra Modi as the Prime Minister.” 
Answering a question on BJP’s allegation that he was the weakest PM, Dr. Singh had stated: “I do not believe that I have been a weak Prime Minister. That is for historians to judge. The BJP and its associates may say whatever they like. But if by “strong Prime Minister”, you mean that you preside over a mass massacre of innocent citizens on the streets of Ahmedabad, that is the measure of strength, I do not believe that sort of strength this country needs, least of all, in its Prime Minister.” (http://nareshminocha.com/index.php/polity/1613-pm-should-cast-off-modi-phobia-answer-his-failure-on-federalism)
By failing to make amends for his provocative allegations against Mr. Modi, he sounded hollow in his exit speech. He lacked conviction when he stated: “Today, as I prepare to lay down office, I am aware that well before the final judgment that we all await from the Almighty, there is judgment in the court of public opinion that all elected officials and governments are required to submit themselves to.”
He continued: “Fellow citizens, each one of us should respect the judgment that you have delivered. The just concluded elections have deepened the foundations of our democratic polity.”
Instead of pontificating to the public, Dr. Singh should have congratulated Mr. Modi and made amends for his “disastrous” comment, which was made not in the electoral heat but in a cool, intellectual ambience. He ought to have admitted that the electorate has given thumbs down to this remark. Had the PM done so, he would have respected the people’s verdict. He thus this time also failed to connect with the public.
The supporters of Dr. Singh would point out that he did congratulate Mr. Modi through the twitter. The tweet from PMO on the 16th May reads as: “Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh calls Shri Narendra Modi and congratulated him on his party's victory in the Lok Sabha elections.”
If a tweet can substitute what is said at a televised national event, then Dr. Singh could have very well delivered his listless, last address to the nation via the twitter, which is not accessed by majority of the electorate.
 By not forthrightly admitting that the public has proved him wrong, Dr. Singh has once again confirmed that he lacks statesmanship. (http://nareshminocha.com/index.php/polity/1177-public-expects-pm-to-rise-like-a-statesman-or-quit-naresh-minocha)
This reminds one of the famous quotes from the American author Dale Turner.   He once stated: “It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character.”
Dr. Singh infirmity is that he lacked intellectual honesty to stand up against what is wrong. He preferred to remain glued to the chair instead of risking his job by upholding his conviction.
Or, how does one explain his decision to acquiesce Rahul Gandhi’s diktat to increase in the ceiling on number of LPG cylinders to 12 from 9/family in January this year.
About two years back, Dr. Singh had strongly defended the Government’s decision to introduce the cap of 9 cylinders. Addressing the nation on 21st September 2012, PM had said: “Let me begin with the rise in diesel prices and the cap on LPG cylinders. We import almost 80% of our oil, and oil prices in the world market have increased sharply in the past four years. We did not pass on most of this price rise to you, so that we could protect you from hardship to the maximum extent possible. As a result, the subsidy on petroleum products has grown enormously.  It was Rs. 1 lakh 40 thousand crores last year.  If we had not acted, it would have been over Rs. 200,000 crores this year.”
He added: “Where would the money for this have come from? Money does not grow on trees. If we had not acted, it would have meant a higher fiscal deficit, that is, an unsustainable increase in government expenditure vis-a-vis government income. If unchecked, this would lead to a further steep rise in prices and a loss of confidence in our economy.”
Dr. Singh’s inability to uphold the stature of the chair he occupied not only led the public into losing confidence in his governance skills but also in his political leadership.
The verdict of scientifically minded historians and the Almighty on Dr. Singh’s prime ministership is unlikely to be different.
                                     

Thursday 8 May 2014

   Pawar gives credence to Jairam’s charge that Political Sherpas failed to communicate

                                                        Sharad Pawer  image courtesy: NCP
The Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar or rather his Ministry has unintentionally substantiated the allegation that UPA top brass did not communicate effectively its achievements and this, in turn, has harmed its electoral prospects.
Before discussing Agriculture Ministry’s belated disclosure that justifies the charge of UPA leadership was uncommunicative, recall what Union Rural Development minister Jairam Ramesh recently stated while bemoaning that top Congress leaders (effectively UPA top brass) were found lacking in political communication. 
Mr. Ramesh reportedly told PTI on 4th May: “I always believed that one of the foundations of politics is communication and communication from the very top...by the ‘sherpas’ alone. So, political communication is very, very important but unfortunately we were found lacking.”
Last month, the prime minister's communications adviser, Pankaj Pachauri stated: “The government is working. Its achievements are not reaching you. As for the media, the priorities are different.”
And now consider the proof of UPA sherpas being uncommunicative.  Mr. Pawar/Agriculture Ministry sat on two major overseas communications hailing India’s achievements for more than two years. These should have been flaunted as global certification of India’s sterling attainments on the farm front under the UPA Government. The impact of communicating what reputed, independent entities say about the success is far more important than blowing one's own trumpet in the form of UPA's report to the people.   
The communications addressed to Mr. Pawar are actually two separate letters from the chiefs of UN Food and Agriculture (FAO) and Manlia-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). 
Both FAO and IRRI had lauded India’s exceptional success on the food production front achieved due to joint efforts of all stakeholders especially the Eastern region and small and marginal farmers. The Agriculture Ministry has only now made the two letters public when the Sun has already set on the UPA and the Lok Sabha polls are in the last leg. 
The notings on the letters show that the decision to make the letters public was taken on 30th April/1st May 2014. It is important to observe that the letters were written during the tenure of Mr. Pawar as President of International Cricket Council. Mr. Pawar has often been criticized for allegedly giving more priority to cricket administration than to his ministerial portfolio.
In a letter dated 2nd March 2012, FAO Director General stated: “I would like to congratulate your Government’s achievement last year in stabilizing food prices, improving public distribution of food grains for ensuring access to food and nutrition, but especially the achievement of exceeding, for the first time in history, 100 million tons of rice production and 250 million tons of food grains. These are remarkable accomplishments of India’s Central, State and local governments, and especially of your small and marginal farmers. Particular gains in several Eastern States demonstrate the importance of government production programmes, infrastructure improvements, and supportive policies.”
Similarly, IRRI Director General, in a letter dated 23rd February 2012, stated: “We are thrilled to receive the information that the record rice harvest surpassing 100 million tons in India during Kharif 2011. I congratulate you and Indian agricultural officials and scientists for this remarkable achievement. This will have a very positive impact on regional and global food security.”  
The letter adds: “The most heartening aspect of increased rice production is the fact that a major contribution has come from eastern India, which is predominantly rainfed and stress-prone. The region was little affected by the first green revolution.”
If Pawar/Agriculture Ministry originally felt that it was not worthwhile to share international jubilation over good Indian news, then why it has now decided to put these letters in public domain (http://nfsm.gov.in/Circulars_Notifications/2014-15/FOODANDAGRICULTUREORGANIZATIONOFTHEUNITEDNATIONS.pdf)? 
Is it Mr. Pawar’s involvement in global cricket administration that made him overlook the importance of sharing the international recognition of Indian achievement with the public?