Business Standard

Aditi Phadnis: Sound and fury...

PLAIN POLITICS

Image

Aditi Phadnis New Delhi
Natwar Singh's vented his spleen at everyone, but stopped short of the Big Chief
 
Gone is the swagger, the braggadocio, the squared jaw, the pugnacious stance. What is left behind is a querulous Lear-like character wandering about the corridors of Parliament House, talking to men who have the stature of mice.
 
K Natwar Singh, who mounted the shortest-ever rebellion in the history of the Congress, is back in from the cold, with many dents in his self-esteem and many more enemies. His credibility is shot, but even minus membership of any committees, and stripped of the membership of the Congress Working Committee, he remains a Congressman. Amen.
 
The man has suffered. There is no doubt about that. There is no one "" not even his worst enemy "" who could have charged him with corruption either when he was in the Indian Foreign Service, or when he was a minister in the Rajiv Gandhi government. He is justifiably proud of his scholarship and the fact that in a world of unlettered and illiterate policymakers, he can recite John Donne and quote Han Suyin and E M Forster (personal friends) with equal felicity.
 
Sadly, there is no evidence that son Jagat, (who, frankly, does him no credit at all) has any of his father's graces. The airs are there for all to see. If Singh is acquisitive, it is learning he's greedy about, not money "" though a little bit of the latter does no harm.
 
This is what hurts. Because, for all his arrogance, Singh is actually an enlightened leader who is eager to experience and experiment. When he became foreign minister in the UPA government, at one of his first interaction with reporters, he tried very hard to appear to be humble. "I realise things have changed a lot since I was in this office last," he said. "There has been a communication revolution, there is much less patience all round..." he said.
 
He'd put his finger on it. In the intervening period, he was disarmingly honest, especially with those he trusted. On the morning of February 1, 2005, he admitted that India was terribly worried about the situation in Nepal. In the afternoon, the King of Nepal had suspended the constitution, ended fundamental rights and put representatives of political parties in jail.
 
And the minister, he admitted, had known nothing about it. Not an easy admission to make. He said India and China could have a common nuclear doctrine. It took a lowly Chinese vice foreign minister to put paid to that plan. It was wishful thinking, deriving from the vision of another, better world. But whoever said wishful thinking was a crime?
 
In this new world lay a minefield of true lies and Singh overreached himself. That's the simple truth. But this story is as much about him as it is about power play between the government and the Congress Party.
 
"Natwar Singh did something wrong. And now, he expects the party to step in and save him. Otherwise, he threatens he will do terrible things," said a party whip, laughing. But it is Singh who is having the last laugh. Because the party has stepped in to save him from unwholesome friends.
 
Only "" at what cost? Singh was feeling injured and angry. He said a whole lot of things about three members of the Cabinet Committee on Security, the highest decision-making body in government. He said the prime minister couldn't win a municipal election if he wanted to and charged that the PM knew nothing about foreign policy. He called Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee a chaar-futiya (four-feet tall) leader who also couldn't win elections. And he charged that Finance Minister
 
P Chidambaram was part of a conspiracy to deliberately malign him. In short, he acted to comprehensively lower the image of the government he was part of till he was asked to resign.
 
Granted that he was under pressure. But what did the party do about it?
 
A show-cause notice was issued to him "" not because he had lowered the prime minister's image and had filed a privilege notice against him. It focussed on his dealings with Iraq. So it is okay for a former minister to run down his colleagues and insult the prime minister.
 
What is punishable is misconduct as a member of the party. Minister of Personnel, Suresh Pachouri, who opened negotiations with him could not have done so without the go-ahead from party president Sonia Gandhi. How could the party have discounted Singh's statements against the PM?
 
Isn't this monstrously unfair on the PM and his colleagues? It is not hard to see what will happen next. Singh and the party will have a tearful reconciliation. After about six months, the Disciplinary Action Committee will quietly drop charges against him and who knows, he might even return to the government.
 
The lesson is: say what you want against the PM because all that will cost you is a light tap on the wrist. But misuse your position in the party at your peril.
 
Even now, the irony is: it is not the Congress which is asking him to apologise to the prime minister and other colleagues. It is ally CPI(M) which has advised Singh to hold his tongue. And now, because the Congress Party is feeling the heat, it is plea-bargaining with him. The feelings of the prime minister and his colleagues don't appear to matter.
 
It is not Singh's conduct that is important here "" those who know him know that his bark is worse than his bite. What is important is how the party has handled the episode. And to watch what the party will do with Natwar Singh next.

 

Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper

Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel

First Published: Aug 12 2006 | 12:00 AM IST

Explore News