|
|
||||||
|
News Supplements
Express Interactive
|
Surely
there’s life beyond Bofors Being the leader of the Opposition entails more than opposition for opposition’s sake; the occupant of the post would do well to display maturity A new year is traditionally the time to make new resolutions. Here is mine: do not take Sonia Gandhis promises at face value! A fortnight ago, I wrote in this column that I saw some faint hopes that Indias leaders had learned to stand together in the interests of the nations. Let me admit it right away: I goofed. As I write, we are plunged, literally and metaphorically, back into the darkness. Union Power Minister Suresh Prabhu put the finger for Delhi blacking out on a bus fault at the Panki sub-station in Uttar Pradesh. It seems funny to think that something so far off could plunge even the prime ministers residence into darkness. Not so weird, however, when we realise that events shaping up in Malaysia could affect the lives of thousands in Manipur. To recap: The situation in Manipur is bad and getting worse. Ministers are alleged to be hand in glove with militants, the bureaucracy has been cowed into obedience, and ordinary citizens find there is no government worth the name. But Presidents Rule is not an option unless the Congress (I) is prepared to back the Vajpayee ministry. (The National Democratic Alliance lacks a majority in the Rajya Sabha, which must ratify any such measure.) Sonia Gandhi does not deny the gravity of the situation in Manipur. But she cannot bring herself to support the government either. On December 21, when the prime minister and the home minister spoke with the Congress boss, she hemmed and hawed over the issue. When asked, bluntly, about her stance, she responded by asking for an all-party meeting. This is a measure to gain time and nothing more. If the Congress (I) wants to discuss anything then Parliament is as good a forum as any. In any case, what exactly is an all-party meet expected to achieve if the largest party in the Opposition does not have anything worthwhile to say? If the Congress (I) backs the National Democratic Alliance in the Rajya Sabha it does not matter if the other smaller parties oppose the government; conversely, it is impossible to use Article 356 in the teeth of Congress opposition. That, in essence, was the point made by the home minister to Sonia Gandhi. The president of the Congress (I) did not deny the truth of these assertions. Failing an all-party meeting, she could only state that she would have to consult her colleagues in her own party. Close to two weeks later there is no further response from Sonia Gandhi; the consultations are presumably still in progress. Actually, this might be a first flash of an undisclosed phenomenon? Sonia Gandhi possessing a sense of humour. It is a joke to think that a Congressman would find the guts to oppose a party president belonging to the Nehru-Gandhi clan. And who would La Gandhi consult even if she were seriously inclined to do so? The Congress Working Committee presumably, but in state after state Congress committees have begged her to forget about elections and just nominate all the members herself. Must a puppeteer consult her dolls? But let us push aside this farce and see what is really going on. Up to December 20, Sonia Gandhi was willing to support the Vajpayee administration if it chose to ask for Presidents Rule in Manipur. What led to the leader of the Opposition to changeb her stance when the prime minister and the home minister spoke with her on December 21? The
only event of note that took place was that Ottavio Quattrocchi was
arrested in distant Malaysia on December 20. This happened as the result
of a long-standing agreement between India, Malaysia, and Interpol.
Is that what led to the chronically suspicious Congress boss withdrawing
into her shell? (Even the leaders of the Samajwadi Party took her to task for her bad manners on the occasion; having deputed Jaipal Reddy to speak in the Ayodhya debate, one wondered, why she waited so long to unsheathe her claws?) Not so incidentally, the Italian businessman made a significant statement when the Malaysian authorities laid hands on him. He was, he claimed, being persecuted only because of his friendship with Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi. Was this an implicit threat? Or perhaps a reminder to someone that friendship means knowing some secrets? At this point, I really do not want to get into reciting the saga of Bofors. But let me recap the facts. First, there is a dangerous situation in Manipur. Second, Sonia Gandhi knows the facts. Third, she is not prepared to openly back the Government of India on a matter of national security. The post of leader of the Opposition is an important one. The man or woman who holds the office is under the spotlight, allowing the people of India to judge if he or she has what it takes to be prime minister. The job entails more than opposition for oppositions sake; the occupant would do well to display maturity and bipartisanship. The problem is that Sonia Gandhi today is offering neither opposition nor a friendly hand. She is mired in a sterile, stubborn, suspicious, uncooperative mood, scared to take any decision. Manipur is a test case of sorts. There are other problems looming ahead, some where the smaller parties might voice an opinion. (There are not too many of them interested in distant Manipur.) Is, for instance, Sonia Gandhi prepared to stand up and be counted if the Womens Reservation Bill comes up for voting? Or is the Congress (I)s support for the measure so much hot air? What if the time comes for the Government of India to take some stern measures against the ISI? Will Sonia Gandhi again seek refuge in confusion and silence? There is a life for both the Congress (I) and its dithering Supreme Leader beyond Bofors and beyond Quattrocchi. But what will it take to convince Sonia Gandhi of that?
Other columnists: |
|
||||
|
|
||||||