 "Narasimha Rao, a raconteur's view")
1991: How P V Narasimha Rao Made History
Author: Sanjaya Baru
Publisher: Aleph
Pages: 224
Price: Rs 499
Now that we know that Manmohan Singh was the "accidental prime minister" - well-meaning yet buffeted by pressures beyond his control - in Baru's earlier work (The Accidental Prime Minister, Penguin India), he goes further down memory lane. Here, the focus is on how the reforms were pushed through and P V Narasimha Rao's role in the scheme of things. Though some continue to believe that Singh was the architect of India's economic reforms, Rao's proactive and behind-the-scenes role is what the author focuses on. That part is not quite as enticing to me as the author thinks it should be. Rather it is the role of the other personalities, ranging from Naresh Chandra to Chandra Shekhar, which makes for some interesting reading.
There is a lot of reportage, which could be gossip, facts or slight mutation of the latter. Who is to know? To the author's credit, much of it ties in well with other accounts. And it is undoubtedly quite an enjoyable read. The author clearly enjoys recounting what happened and why, and that seeps into his writing and the reader's experience as well. Taken together, the 160 pages and eight chapters make for an interesting, easy and smooth reading.The rather long Presidential Address at the Tirupati Plenary Congress meeting in the Appendix and the notes add up another fascinating 50 pages.
Now that all the good things have been said, is there anything else? The year 1991 was an important one ; there was much that had occurred in terms of both political and economic events. India had had to mortgage its gold reserves to keep creditors at bay, and there perhaps had been no bigger humiliation post the Public Law 480 days. Rao became the prime minister, perhaps more accidentally than Singh, and managed to keep matters under control politically. But what he did economic policy-wise had a massive impact. He was doubtlessly an uncharacteristic firefighter and a very surprising reformer. But, he is not as well-recognised for saving India from disaster as he should be.
Baru, I believe, could have gone far deeper. He would have found even bigger riches had he done so. But he lets his personal likes and dislikes get in the way. There are comments where none is warranted, there are instances that serve no function. This only takes away from the momentum that sometimes builds up well. And unfortunately, it creates doubt in the reader on the veracity of some of the facts he writes about.
Once I remove the authors' judgements from his facts, another interesting story emerges - one that someone should tell, and it would perhaps be Baru himself in his next venture. It is now well known that reforms in India had started in different ways from even before the Rajiv Gandhi era. During his time, V P Singh's budgets were quite reformist and got him much fame. Gandhi himself had brought in many changes in India's mindset through his many missions and acceleration of technological changes. Chandra Shekhar, a self-proclaimed socialist, was surrounding himself with all kinds of bureaucrats and economists who would later be called reformers. In fact, much of Rao's bureaucratic team was taken from Chandra Shekhar's team, including Manmohan Singh.
In all the reform stories one hears, the bureaucracy is given least credit and everyone appears to credit their favourite political personalities. Baru's work also suffers from the same flaw. But if one removes the clutter, the story that comes forward is how each of India's prime ministers was aware of the serious economic problem, and market-oriented economic policies were no longer an anathema. Each did what they could but within their own political compulsions.
I get the feeling that all raconteurs of the reform story have let their personal biases overshadow the most committed behind-the scenes reformers- India's senior bureaucrats. I G Patel, the economist-bureaucrat, had helped place many economists in strategic positions. Naresh Chandra had manoeuvered deftly through Chandra Shekhar's socialist instincts. Yashwant Sinha, the finance minister in the Chandra Shekhar government, had completed the IMF negotiation and was himself an ex-bureaucrat. And then there was Amar Nath Verma, Rao's principal secretary and the man who eventually got the industrial policy through.
Read the book, with and without paying heed to the personality-based clutter. India's economic reforms occurred under Rao, who took some highly original decisions. But the framework was ready before he took over ; the economists and bureaucracy who had all the right experience and orientation were all around him. And they were ready for him; they had done some of the paperwork as well. Was Rao responsible for the reforms? Or was it the bureaucratic elite that had convinced India's political elite? Either way it is an interesting story.
The author is an economist
Author: Sanjaya Baru
Publisher: Aleph
Pages: 224
Price: Rs 499
More From This Section
Sanjay Baru is almost the ultimate insider-raconteur. He knows people across the political spectrum, appears to be quite close to more than one leader and does not shy away from the occasional kiss-and-tell. But somehow, he seems to have taken a dislike for the "family" and a few other people, and that shows up loud and clear. This is not good for an insider, and that is why I believe he is "almost" a raconteur.
Now that we know that Manmohan Singh was the "accidental prime minister" - well-meaning yet buffeted by pressures beyond his control - in Baru's earlier work (The Accidental Prime Minister, Penguin India), he goes further down memory lane. Here, the focus is on how the reforms were pushed through and P V Narasimha Rao's role in the scheme of things. Though some continue to believe that Singh was the architect of India's economic reforms, Rao's proactive and behind-the-scenes role is what the author focuses on. That part is not quite as enticing to me as the author thinks it should be. Rather it is the role of the other personalities, ranging from Naresh Chandra to Chandra Shekhar, which makes for some interesting reading.
There is a lot of reportage, which could be gossip, facts or slight mutation of the latter. Who is to know? To the author's credit, much of it ties in well with other accounts. And it is undoubtedly quite an enjoyable read. The author clearly enjoys recounting what happened and why, and that seeps into his writing and the reader's experience as well. Taken together, the 160 pages and eight chapters make for an interesting, easy and smooth reading.The rather long Presidential Address at the Tirupati Plenary Congress meeting in the Appendix and the notes add up another fascinating 50 pages.
Now that all the good things have been said, is there anything else? The year 1991 was an important one ; there was much that had occurred in terms of both political and economic events. India had had to mortgage its gold reserves to keep creditors at bay, and there perhaps had been no bigger humiliation post the Public Law 480 days. Rao became the prime minister, perhaps more accidentally than Singh, and managed to keep matters under control politically. But what he did economic policy-wise had a massive impact. He was doubtlessly an uncharacteristic firefighter and a very surprising reformer. But, he is not as well-recognised for saving India from disaster as he should be.
Baru, I believe, could have gone far deeper. He would have found even bigger riches had he done so. But he lets his personal likes and dislikes get in the way. There are comments where none is warranted, there are instances that serve no function. This only takes away from the momentum that sometimes builds up well. And unfortunately, it creates doubt in the reader on the veracity of some of the facts he writes about.
Once I remove the authors' judgements from his facts, another interesting story emerges - one that someone should tell, and it would perhaps be Baru himself in his next venture. It is now well known that reforms in India had started in different ways from even before the Rajiv Gandhi era. During his time, V P Singh's budgets were quite reformist and got him much fame. Gandhi himself had brought in many changes in India's mindset through his many missions and acceleration of technological changes. Chandra Shekhar, a self-proclaimed socialist, was surrounding himself with all kinds of bureaucrats and economists who would later be called reformers. In fact, much of Rao's bureaucratic team was taken from Chandra Shekhar's team, including Manmohan Singh.
In all the reform stories one hears, the bureaucracy is given least credit and everyone appears to credit their favourite political personalities. Baru's work also suffers from the same flaw. But if one removes the clutter, the story that comes forward is how each of India's prime ministers was aware of the serious economic problem, and market-oriented economic policies were no longer an anathema. Each did what they could but within their own political compulsions.
I get the feeling that all raconteurs of the reform story have let their personal biases overshadow the most committed behind-the scenes reformers- India's senior bureaucrats. I G Patel, the economist-bureaucrat, had helped place many economists in strategic positions. Naresh Chandra had manoeuvered deftly through Chandra Shekhar's socialist instincts. Yashwant Sinha, the finance minister in the Chandra Shekhar government, had completed the IMF negotiation and was himself an ex-bureaucrat. And then there was Amar Nath Verma, Rao's principal secretary and the man who eventually got the industrial policy through.
Read the book, with and without paying heed to the personality-based clutter. India's economic reforms occurred under Rao, who took some highly original decisions. But the framework was ready before he took over ; the economists and bureaucracy who had all the right experience and orientation were all around him. And they were ready for him; they had done some of the paperwork as well. Was Rao responsible for the reforms? Or was it the bureaucratic elite that had convinced India's political elite? Either way it is an interesting story.
The author is an economist