Jhatka is Better than Halal, Gujral Ji

(Originally appeared in the 1990s in the Times of India, as published in M. D. Nalapat's book "Indutva", Har-Anand Publications, 1999)

Mid-November, and the Lok Sabha session has begun. BJP, Shiv

Sena and Samata party members flock to the well of the House,

waved there by their leaders, and soon begin hurling projectiles

at the Congress and UF members, In a trice, led by defence

minister Mulayam Singh Yadav, those attacked fight back.

Projectiles careen through the air, screams of the injured rise

above the din, and pools of blood form everywhere.

Soon the BJP members and their allies leave for Rashtrapati

Bhavan, there to demand the dissolution of the Lok Sabha on the

Romesh Bhandari model. In a Mulayam-Kanshi style of

inattention to constitutional niceties, they threaten that Parliament

will not be allowed to function until fresh elections are announced

under a care-taker government comprising members of all major

parties.

Had the Congress party, led by Sitaram and Sonia, succeeded

in getting the Kalyan Singh ministry dismissed on the grounds

of the very violence instigated by it, this could have been what

the nation would have witnessed in a few weeks time. In

between, the cities of India would have been in chaos as the

BJP - barred from democratic forums by its opponents - would

have taken to the streets to hit back. All efforts by finance

minister Chidambaram at economic stabilisation would have

dissolved in the face of the Parliamentary deadlock.

Those who are today venting their anger at the correct

decision of the Gujral government to retreat from its earlier

impulsive decision to impose President's Rule in UP should ask

themselves whether they would approve of the dissolution of the

Lok Sabha after violence generated by Opposition members. For

that would be a mirror analogy of Tuesday's developments in

the UP assembly.

Revolutionaries such as Kanshi Ram or Sitaram Yechury

may not regard laws as worth upholding. For them what counts

is victory, no matter at what cost. Thus a Yechury who would

(one presumes) oppose the removal of the Basu government in

Bengal because goons often beat up Congress workers, is unhappy

at the reprieve given to Kalyan Singh. Likewise, while he

approves of the feverish attempts by Jyoti Basu to bring foreign

investment into India, he is against any other state adopting a

similar policy.

As for Mulayam Singh Yadav, for him the only constitution

that needs attention appears to be his own. One cannot blame

these worthies. During the decades of Nehru family rule,

institutions got drained of substance and personalised decisions

became the norm. Sitaram Kesri, looking over his shoulder at

Sonia Gandhi, is only trying to live down to such a legacy.

Self, then, becomes more important than country. If Deve

Gowda does not show Kesri "proper" respect, he must go. Now

that Inder Kumar Gujral has followed President Narayanan's

lead and upheld the Constitution, he should be destabilised.

Should the Congress Working Committee once again threaten

withdrawal of support, it is in danger of becoming as popular in

the rest of India as it has become in UP and Bihar. Economic

factors dictate that the present government should run for at

least three years. They dictate that the “dream budget" of

Chidambaram I should be followed by Chidambaram II and

Chidambaram III.

If Prime Minister Gujral draws the correct conclusions from

this crisis, and realises that compromise breeds instability, not

firmness, it may prove a blessing to the United Front. Should he

be more decisive, then yes, there is the chance of a sudden jhatka

as those angered by this may combine and strike. But that would

be preferable to the slow halal that is draining away the good

name he has accumulated over decades.

Indeed, the odds are the popularity he will get as a result of

sensible policies firmly pursued may shield him from the chop.

More than places of worship or divisive appeals to caste, region

and community, what will work wonders on the electorate is

economic progress. Unless bold steps are taken on infrastructure

and on freeing the economy from the colonial system of over·

regulation, the 9 per cent rate of growth that is needed for

political triumph will not come. Narasimha Rao made huge

fiscal compromises in his final two years. They did not save his

party. On the other hand, bold steps—as he took during his first

two years in office—may have worked.

Rather than be seen as perpetually at the mercy of others, 

I. K. Gujral needs to become his own man, and go about his duties

with a resignation letter in his pocket. That is the best way of

ensuring that it may never be needed.

In his first interview after becoming PM—incidentally to the

present writer—the Prime Minister had spoken of clearing away

the colonial cobwebs that constrain activity and enterprise in

India. So far those have remained just words. Hopefully he will

take heart from President Narayanan’s courage and follow the

Rashtrapati's example of boldly doing what is right, no matter

what the self-seekers say.

Strong action on Bofors, a drive against the mafiosi that .

dominate Mumbai and are now spreading their tentacles to

Bangalore, effective laws and enforcement against the drug

trade, open development of the nuclear deterrent: these are a few

of the measures which alone will give Gujral’s combination a

chance against the BJP.

Apart from the residual mistrust of the minorities towards it,

there is nothing to fault the B]P. Apart from its minority-friendly

image, there is sadly not much that is positive about the

"secular" coalition. And what of Sonia and Sitaram? Put India

before Ego, if you can, and before voters pounce on your party

and demolish it totally. A democratic Congress has the chance

of emerging as one of the poles in a two·party system. A dynastic

or autocratic Congress, never.