T C A Srinivasa-Raghavan: India's accidental PMs

LINE & LENGTH

No other country gets prime ministers by chance or accident. India has had eight. Isn't that crazy?

There are thousands of things that happen only in India. One of them is that we are the only country in the world to appoint/elect completely accidental prime ministers. Some political scientist should write a book about this. If nothing else, it will throw light on the political dynamics that allow such accidents to happen "" a script, if you will, for a documentary like the ones on air crash investigation on the National Geographic channel on TV.

I proposed this to a political scientist friend. Her immediate response was to pooh-pooh the idea. What more can be said, she asked, than what has already been said? On the accidental PMs themselves, in the sense of biographies, she is perhaps right. But what about the processes and the consequences?

Consider the list of the accidental PMs. Believe it or not, of the 13 prime ministers that India has had since 1947 (not including Gulzarilal Nanda because he was acting Prime Minister, though on two occasions), as many as eight have become prime minister by sheer accident in that they were not expected to become PM.

They are Lal Bahadur Shastri (1964-66), Indira Gandhi (in the 1966-71 phase), Charan Singh (six months in 1979), Chandra Shekhar (six months in 1990-1991), Narasimha Rao (1991-96), Deve Gowda (1996-97), Inder Gujral (1997-98) and, of course, Manmohan Singh (2004-). I am not counting those who were expected to become prime minister in the fullness of time. They are Jawaharlal Nehru, Morarji Desai, Rajiv Gandhi, V P Singh, and Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

It is also interesting that of the eight who became accidental PMs, the governments of four have been dependent, in some form or the other, on the Communists. The first was the minority government of Indira Gandhi during 1969-71. The second and the third were the UF governments of Deve Gowda and Gujral during 1996-98 (which some Commies actually joined) and the fourth is Manmohan Singh's (it must be said here, though, that the Rao government could win the vote of confidence in 1991 because the Left abstained from voting). These have been bigger disasters than the others which did not depend on the Communists. But the alternative, depending on the Congress, was not much better: four of them (Charan Singh, Chandra Shekhar, Deve Gowda, and Gujral) lasted about six months each.

Let us consider each of these episodes in turn and see what emerges.

Lal Bahadur Shastri (1964-66): If one goes by the account of the period written by, say, someone like D P Mishra, who was one of the most powerful politicians in the Congress then, the party devoted itself mostly to sabotaging Shastri and groups developed that would create problems. They were decimated by another accidental PM in 1969.

Indira Gandhi (1966-71): Like Shastri before her, there was huge internal party strife that led to the Congress splitting in 1969 because one set of plotters and manipulators turned out to be more adept at avoiding scruples. The split led to bureaucratic socialism, nationalisations and finally the conversion of a proud party into a royalist one in which only the dynasty matters.

Charan Singh (six months in 1979): The less said the better. He didn't even face Parliament to prove a majority because the Congress didn't let him. The Congress created the chaos by withdrawing support when India was in deep economic crisis caused by a drought and the second oil shock. But for him, it is unlikely that Indira Gandhi would have returned to power and that India would be saddled with a royalist party.

Chandra Shekhar (six months in 1990-91): An amazingly successful PM who has not been given the credit he deserves. He was brought down by a nervous Rajiv Gandhi for absolutely no reason at all, that too in the midst of India's worst economic crisis ever and against all advice. That speaks volumes about Rajiv.

Narasimha Rao (1991-96): Another accidental but very successful prime minister who was done in by the inner-party intrigue encouraged by a dowager queen. Recall that Arjun Singh and N D Tiwari split the party hoping that the Lady would lead with a kindly light. She got cold feet and dropped them into the political void. But the key point is inner-party resistance and consequent intrigue a la 1964-69.

Deve Gowda and Gujral (1996-98): Like Charan Singh before them, they paid the price for giving the scorpion a ride. Both were brought down by the Congress, on whose support they depended. But this time the Lady was not to blame.

Manmohan Singh (2004-): There is no inner-party intrigue against him but that is only because no Congressmen regards him as the prime minister. As befits a royalist party, that honour is reserved for Sonia Gandhi. However, their government is dependent on the Communists. That part, too, it seems runs in the family.

What can we conclude from this very brief account?

First, accidental prime ministers generally fare worse than previously designated ones but not always.

Secondly, the Congress is the most unreliable partner amongst all political parties.

Third, Communist support helps the Gandhi family but not anyone else.

Fourth, top-class intriguers "" Indira Gandhi, Chandra Shekhar, Narasimha Rao "" make better accidental prime ministers than the ones who are not as good at intrigue.

Lastly, poor governance has much as to do with structural reasons as with the way in which we choose our prime ministers.