Indian politics is always a bit raucous, sometimes rude and occasionally offensive. But no one, at least no prominent politician, has ever argued in any fashion and in any context that his opponent can die for his alleged errors of judgment. Fernandes’s apologists — can there be any? — would say he was talking about China. They and he should be told we don’t care about what the Chinese allegedly do. India is not China. In India you simply cannot even say some of the things they may do in China. If some energetic political opponent of Fernandes uses his press release to press for legal proceedings, on charges of incitement to violence against the PM, it would, frankly, be understandable. If some others remind Fernandes that during his defence ministership the army had to fight the Kargil battle severely under-equipped, and that presiding over such a state of affairs puts a question mark over his effectiveness in defending the nation, that too would be understandable.

And NDA leaders Vajpayee and Advani should understand their arguments against the nuclear deal will be compromised as long as Fernandes’s remarks are not explicitly denounced by them. You can question Manmohan Singh’s negotiation skills and judgment by being perfectly civil — Arun Shourie of the BJP is doing that in this newspaper. This newspaper doesn’t agree with Shourie on this issue. But we find his argument as adding value to the debate; as something we, who disagree with him, should read and understand. But can you blame Congressmen if they ignore the research by Shourie and say the NDA’s position is defined by the rubbish peddled by Fernandes? Fernandes has given his own side a huge credibility problem. What do they do in China to leaders who do this?