Political doublespeak of a horrendous order is so commonplace today as to be near-acceptable. Yet, even people hardened by an overdose of political hypocrisy and rank mendacity must sometimes take pause to ask questions. One such is to ask M. Karunanidhi just what subtle transformation the United Front underwent in the last ten days to persuade him drastically to change his mind about it. Fresh from finding the UF unstable and headed by leaders with a personal agenda, the DMK chief and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister has suddenly discovered stability and cohesiveness in this grouping. Here is cause for I.K. Gujral to celebrate, but for how long? Can such fickle allies ever give confidence? Some reason -- no matter how patently false -- had to be found for this change, of course. So Karunanidhi has trumpeted the effectiveness of the ``shock treatment'' administered by him to the ragtag outfit which goes, without an apparent sense of irony, by the name of United Front. Is a nauseated country to plant a congratulatory pat on his back for instilling strength in a tottering coalition?

Without the benefit of the politicians' eyesight, it would seem to the lay observer that all that had happened to inspire the change in Karunanidhi was the safe installation of one Rabri Devi in the Chief Minister's kursi in Patna. It was disgraceful enough that the DMK chief should throw his weight behind a man who has plumbed new depths in India's abysmal standards of political behaviour. What is to be said when a slap in the face of democracy Laloo's proxy government in Bihar -- and the UF's inability to do anything about it should so cheer him?

It remains fashionable to run down the big parties for their scant respect for democracy. In truth the smaller ones are fast becoming the bane of the system. If the big parties misbehave they at least have the threat of decimation at the polls hanging over their heads. But what to do about parties that need only a minuscule number of seats to hold the system, such as it is, to ransom? The temptation for them to misbehave is so much the greater because the scale of risk is so small in proportion to the consequences of their actions. There is no answer in the way electoral rules can be structured to provoke greater responsibility. Any outlook for improvement can only rest on two hopes. The first is that the regional constituencies of these parties will someday be provoked enough by their outrageous behaviour at the federal level for that, rather than regional issues, to guide their voting decision. The other is for leaders of federal coalitions themselves to take the attitude of do and be damned. The current electoral arithmetic by definition makes for instability. What could make a difference is for leaders to appear not to care about survival, speak their minds and ask bold questions of those who would manipulate them. They could be surprised by how few would call their bluff if push really came to shove: small parties do not support them for charity. Even if not, there could be rich rewards in ensuing elections for those who made plainspeak and honesty their style.

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.