IMPLEMENTATION: THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE TO DEVELOPMENT

The idea of state led development which has been a progeny of the strong democratic currents sweeping modern societies has made it important to see development in conjugation with the political thought and the administrative setup of a society. Most importantly, after the Second World War, development has always been seen synonymous with the State and the larger political system. This is so because in democratic nations it is well established that ‘what’ and ‘where’ of development are ab-initio political questions. Further the socio-economic development has always been viewed as one of the major planks to wield power. As a result expenditure marked for development was seen in a positive light with little suspicion by both auditors and people at large. However, lately this sentiment is fading because of association of populism and several forms of politico-administrative corruption involved in the implementation process.

     If we look minutely, one of the concerning issue is that of linking development with populist politics. This is something that takes place at the planning and policy level and is for everyone to see. But no political party can challenge it since it has got the sanction of the ruling political class catering the needs of an influential interest group of the society. Any party that tries to revoke it shall be ready to face its electoral consequences. One such example can be the implementation of Mandal Commission report by the V. P. Singh government paving a way for perpetual ‘quota system’ in each and every field. Any party which tries to revoke it, shall risk its existence.

      Populism in development programmes can be understood in terms of the idea that when the government of the day, in order to please a particular electoral constituency decides to roll out freebies to them, without taking into account the long term consequences. Populist programmes are often dubbed as temporary compulsions and part of immediate relief package plans. MGNREGA, DCT, FOOD SECURITY ACT, etc. are the various populist programmes of the UPA government meant for socio-economic development.

       UPA government’s flagship programme MGNREGA, which was started in 2005, won the praise of one and all in the sundry. Yet it goes without saying that if on the one hand this programme has helped in bringing more money to the villages and the hinterlands, at the same time, it has been one of the major drains of the exchequer and has contributed extensively to the huge fiscal deficit. This is one of the reasons for the prevailing high inflation, which translates into giving money by one hand and taking it away from other. A good example is this story from Benagadia village of Nayagarh district of Odisha. Under the NREGA scheme, a water reservoir is being constructed for which few men from the village have been employed. The villagers are quite content with the income they are getting, while not realizing that such limited incomes would start proving insufficient very soon with the rising inflation. No additional skill set is being inculcated by these men. The government has set a fixed wage for manual work. This would be highly detrimental to the quality of work force and the economy at large in the near future. Incentives, skill upgradation, incremental wage would make the purpose of such schemes more prudent and beneficial.

In the same context, we can quote other programmes such as ‘farm loan waiver’ schemes which aim at financially helping the farmers at the time of drought and scarce rainfall and eliminating farmers’ suicides. Here also it is the wealthy farmers that benefit from such waivers and the novel idea is paralysed. The politician-bureaucrat-contractor nexus is a classic version of ‘pork barrel’ politics. The RTI/NGO/Human Rights activists who advocate the proper implementation of NREGA are being attacked and killed.

         Coming to the ‘Direct Benefit Transfer’ scheme, which replaced the ‘in kind transfer’, the idea was good but the government failed miserably to implement it. Firstly, it was aligned with ‘Aadhar’ which itself was a big failure. Envisioned on the lines of SSN (Social Security Number) in US, crores of rupees were spent on this project. But the administration and the government failed to convince the people about its utilities and benefits as witnessed in US. With pan cards, driving licence already available for identification purpose , why would one go for another card? Also certain section of people had security apprehensions. These issues should have been addressed in an effective manner, which was not the case. In DBT, the major constraint of lack of penetrative and inclusive banking system was to be compensated through BCs (Business Correspondents). But the lack of vision on the part of the bureaucrats and the will on the part of the BCs paved the way for another poor implementation of a major scheme. Colleges offering Rural Management courses face the ordeal of lack of interest from the students. These management graduates, who are supposed to be the connecting link or in fact the tool to implement the government policies in the rural areas refuse to work there. To address this issue, the government should be proactive by giving added incentives to provide a major fillip.

            The second major bottleneck to implementation is corruption. Corruption persists hierarchically in our society and system. Right from the grass root level to the  bureaucratic-political level, the developmental schemes are maimed by the menace of corruption. The responsibility of implementation of various state as well as centrally sponsored schemes lies on the state government. The institutions performing the social audit are remote controlled by the state executive machinery. Hence there has been an eternal call for auditing by non partisan institutions like CAG, etc. The idea could be lucidly explained by looking at a case study in Odisha. In an awareness program conducted by an organization under the banner ‘Right to Food’ campaign, the loopholes of implementation have been exposed. Many affluent families have more than one BPL/RATION card, while most of the poor people were still deprived of the Ration card. It was also found out that most of the people were given incomplete ration cards (like without their photos on it). Participants expressed their helplessness and agonies regarding the indifferent attitude and corrupt practices (demanding favours in exchange of cards) of the government officials towards their concerns. This is just one of the numerous case studies demonstrating the administrative weaknesses which could be attributed to a large extent to the corruption present at the administrative level.

           Having said all this, it is important to note that the picture isn’t that gloomy as is being portrayed in this article. Every scheme has its success stories too and the loopholes can be plugged. India has a huge, diversified population; hence satiating everyone is surreal. As an outsider, it’s important to accentuate the drawbacks. But there are honest, dedicated officers too. The positive development that we all want to see is not possible without the necessary political support which could be developed when there is a strong political will in bringing development to the masses at the grass root level. This statement itself explains the importance of politics and the administrative apparatus in the concept and the process of development. The new government that has come to power on the agenda of development, should realise the importance of implementation without falling prey to the ‘myopic’ veil of social schemes.

VICES OF COMPETITIVE EXAMS IN INDIA

          

Last year the first cut off list for non commerce students in DU (for commerce subjects) touched 100%. The news was quite astonishing for the common mob. The extent of absurdity regarding this issue should come under close surveillance. The varsity authorities cannot be blamed for this scenario since there has been a catastrophic rise in the number of students who have scored more than 95% as compared to last year. This trend has been continuing. Hence the blame of the present predicament cannot be entirely put on the college for setting the cut off marks so high. This rate of competition gives goose bumps to many parents and is quite unnerving. With the kind of population explosion that we are experiencing in our country now, coupled with the enhanced competition, soon we are going to witness demand exceeding supply and students will have to study as they have never done before (just to get a seat in their desired college).

     This brings our educational system or in fact our educational infrastructure into close scrutiny. The underlying reason for high cut offs in institutions pivots around the fact that India lacks adequate high standard colleges which meet the aspirations of many students. There aren’t many colleges that can meet the demands of the twenty first century modern generation students (and also their parents) and provide them with satisfactory infrastructure.

       The HRD ministry’s vision to set up an Ivy League standard educational system remains a thing to be implemented. But do we possess the requisite infrastructure to create such a system? It is quite bewildering that when the private institutes can set up such an infrastructure and attract students purely on the basis of advertisement and benefits, then why can’t the government achieve such a feat? Also for a varsity to be successful, a lot depends upon the kind of faculty it has. But the fact that the Indian varsities lack credible faculty cannot be denied. Many of the brightest minds of our country like Dr. Amartya Sen, Jagdish Bhagwati, etc. are professors in foreign varsities. Are the Indian Institutions not good enough for them or are our own institutions prejudiced indifferently by our own men?

         The plight of other examinations looks bleak and gloomy. For a young mind, the first national level examination (after 12^th) is the engineering or the medical examination. Then comes the CAT exam which paves your way to the IIMs. The students get under the skin of these examinations to come out victorious. The number of institutions (or seats) do not commensurate the number of students aspiring to occupy those seats. This leads to a ‘rat race’ that often proves detrimental to more number of students. Now coming to the mother of all examinations, the civil services examination, (the IAS examination) is considered to be the most difficult ordeal in the field of academics. People from all background viz. science, arts, commerce, etc. appear for this exam. It is a tedious and grilling process that tests your patience and keeps nagging and prodding your sub conscious mind. With the advent of financial crisis looming in the global market, and the innate urge of certain section of people to go for ‘sarkari’ jobs, the number of applicants are increasing year after year. Here a candidate is tested physically, morally and mentally through a series of robust examinations.

         Coming to the stress factor, the HRD ministry has proposed and implemented various plans. A single examination for admission into engineering and medical colleges (JEE and NEET) has to a certain extent reduced the stress and level of competition that the students have to go through. A ‘grade’ system replacing absolute marks has brought smile to many parents. It received the allegiance of a certain section of students but derived scepticism regarding the various repercussions that it may bring out. Suicides haven’t died out but definitely reduced. Such a prudent act of the ministry has to be appreciated, which had otherwise stagnated.

        

          With the evolution of society, the common man which was earlier hen-pecked, is more knowledgeable regarding the

Opportunities that can be grabbed. The aspirations and ambitions of a middle class man have enhanced considerably and he has the access to various help which earlier looked distantly possible (the expensive coaching classes, the eBooks, internet, etc.). The privileged ones refuse to be one among the herd and transgress the stereotypic paths. With various anomalies and aberrations, he chases his dream and passion and is ready to take the plunge. With such a mentality, cut throat competition is untenable. It will be highly unpragmatic and juvenile on our part to imagine such a scenario unless the government is proactive and makes radical changes in the robust educational system in our country. Proper counselling needs to be done to sedate the volatile adolescent minds to deal with failures. It is imperative to improve the educational infrastructure both in terms of quantity and quality to accommodate such a large demography.

        

WHY DO CRICKETERS FROM ODISHA DON'T PLAY FOR INDIA

Sitting in my living room and watching IPL, I witness the immense talent and potential in our domestic players. Many players, who are yet to represent India, have become household names through IPL. They not only get the exposure, but also share the dressing room with cricketing icons and international stars. As an Odia, it is a matter of great pride for me to see Mr. Ranjib Biswal( Rajya Sabha member) as IPL chairperson. But this season, there are no players from Odisha playing in the IPL this season ( Pragyan Ojha made into the Indian team and IPL by representing Hyderabad). Last season, Biplab Samantaray, our Ranji Trophy captain played for Sunrisers Hyderabad and performed really well. It was a deal negotiated by the Odisha Cricket Association last year, which hosted a couple of home games for Hyderabad. Players like Haldhar Das have also played in the IPL.

       The million dollar question to be asked is why do players from Odisha do not go on to play for India? People don’t even remember the players who have played for the country ( Debasish Mohanty, SS Das and Sanjay Raul have represented the country). A big state like Odisha, where cricket is a part and parcel of every household, has failed to produce international level cricketers. Is it the lack of talent or simply put the inability to perform at the ‘required’ level? A state boasting such a high population, where cricket is not only the dominant sport but has been internalized in the culture of the people, doesn’t have an international cricketer. Albeit hockey is prominent in certain areas of the state and among certain section of people ( in the tribal areas of Roulkela and Sundergarh), cricket is a pseudo religion among the youth masses. It is equally popular among both the urban and rural masses. If one visits the nooks and cronies of the cities or the vast barren lands in the villages, one will always find people playing the game with great fervor and passion. There are a lot of cricket clubs spread all over the state, conducting many local level tournaments. It provides an opportunity to all the young budding cricketers to hone their skills and prepare themselves for the bigger battle ahead. The presence and participation of Ranji cricketers augment the process of their evolution.

           Hence it is clear that there is no dearth of passion and commitment from the side of the players. Then what is holding us back at the national and international level? The reason may be threefold- infrastructure, performance and clout.

           Firstly, the lack of infrastructure in our state may have given a major jolt to the aspirations of the cricketers here. There aren’t many stadiums in the state. Most of the motley clubs are concentrated in Bhubaneswar and Cuttack. The plight of other districts is not worth mentioning. Cricket in the state also suffers from lack of funds and finances. Our players go to Kolkata to play in their league to earn some money for subsistence. Besides, the local clubs here are not maintained properly. There is this innate lack of ‘turf wickets’ which deprives the cricketers from getting a taste of real pitches. The Odisha cricket is dominated by ‘matting wickets’ which is not where the Ranji and international matches take place. The lack of turf wickets make the transition an Achilles’ heel for cricketers who have played the entire season on matting wickets. Suddenly they are put on virgin areas which in turn become detrimental to their self confidence. Also there are no sports academies in the state. The edifice of a nebulous career is put at a young age. But there is no sign of prudence with respect to harnessing such talent. Most of the clubs have coaches who are past cricketers, many of whom are not even Ranji players. They impose their own archaic methods and thinking, which was prevalent during their time on these youngsters. No new ideas emanate from these coaches. Their reluctance to reinvent themselves by undergoing ‘Level A/B ‘ course depicts the lack of efficacy of the system. Cricket is no more a physical game; it is more a mental game than a physical game now. The psychological aspect of the players is neglected. The coaches, not only lack the ability and acumen to deal with the psychology of players, are not committed enough to master the art. The propensity of the coaches to remain in their bubble and not come out of their comfort zone has cost the players dearly.

            Secondly, coming to the performance of the Odisha players in the past few seasons, it can be dubbed as ordinary. As Sachin Tendulkar has said “performance in the domestic circuit cannot guarantee you a spot in the Indian team, but can surely bring you into reckoning.” Not only have the Odia players failed to earn a spot in the Indian team, very few have made it into the ‘reckoning list’.  According to current Ranji trophy selector P. Jayachandra( a member of the team that made it to the semis) the current players who have made it to the ‘reckoning list’ are Natraj Behera, Biplab Samantaray, young Gobind Poddar and paceman Basant Mohanty. These players have shown glimpses of brilliance but nothing eye catching. Their inability to perform consistently has not attracted any starry eye from the national selectors. Since only three players have played for India, and Odisha has never won the coveted domestic title, the players suffer from the implicit indigenous problem of lack of belief. The kind of background and psychology that is ingrained in most of these players prevents them from dreaming big. They are drained by their ambition and aspiration to play for the state team; anything above that is a bonus. This lack of belief needs to be changed. Dreams should be high and one mustn’t relax until one has represented the country.

Another point that I had made earlier was performing at the ‘right place’. People play well at the Ranji level and then go on to represent zone, India-A and subsequently India. Odia players play well at the Ranji level, but at a higher level where the stakes are high, they flop. In 2001, Debasish Mohanty had taken ten wickets in an innings against south zone (which had Rahul Dravid in the side). Then when he played for India-A against Australia, he went wicket less. Laxman scored a hundred and Harbhajan took a fiver in that match; both of them got selected into the Indian team. The epic 2001 Australia series followed and both of them became legends. The debacle of the 2002 West Indies tour resulted in the ousting of Shiv Sunder Das from the Indian team. But later he was made the captain of India-A squad that toured England. Although the team did well but he failed to score runs and was never seen in India colors again.

          Coming to the third point, there is considerable clout exerted by boards of Mumbai, Tamil Nadu, and Delhi in the administration as well as the selection process. Odisha belongs to the nadir group in the hierarchy. The state cricket is run by the whims and fancies of two people- Shri Ashirbad Behera and his son. They decide who to select as captain, coach, support staff, etc. Right from the U-15 level to the senior level, it is ‘they’ who run the show in the state. Mr. Behera’s son ‘Budha Behera’ owns the rising Student Cricket Club in Cuttack. Players from all over the state come here in the hope of making it to the state team. The propriety of selection of players in the entire hierarchical level rests on him. But the media and the district associations have failed to accentuate it. It’s high time we take note of this culture. The callous nature of the administrative officials has cost the career of many.( Sanjay Satpathy being a notable one)

On the national level, we have got familiar with Shri Ranjib Biswal as the man who was carrying the national flag in Sachin Tendulkar’s world cup winning victory lap. Mr. Biswal had held many a post of prominence ranging from NCA Director, national selector, manager and finally IPL chairman. Being such a powerful person on the national level, what is his contribution towards Odisha cricket? He could have recommended few names. Natraj Behera this season has scored four back to back hundreds, but does he feature in any of the IPL teams? Surely the players could have performed better, but Mr. Biswal could have squeezed in 1-2 players!! How many times have players like Ajit Agarkar or Murali Vijay made international comebacks? What are the extra ordinary performances of players like Mohit Sharma and Stuart Binny that earned them a national cap?

Even with his credentials, Mr. Biswal is an outsider in the state and has wielded negligible power in the state administration machinery due to the father-son duo. If players are selected to the national team, the credit would go to Mr. Behera. The tussle between the two groups has lead to the parochial scenario in the state.

        This being the scenario, the only option that the players have is to score tons and tons of runs in the domestic circuit and hope to catch the attention of the national selectors. The quagmire squalor of the state cricket officials would lead them no where. They must decide their own fate and hope for the best

DAWN OF THE DAUGHTER

Move over ‘shezada’ Rahul and ‘ma’ Sonia; ‘behen-beti’ Priyanka has arrived and here to stay. To look for logic in politics is an absolute waste of time. But even if one accepts such a premise, that doesn’t explain the late arrival of Priyanka Gandhi on the campaign scene. On the other hand, which ostensibly might be the actual reason, it was Priyanka’s own decision to jump into the scene to help her brother and mother, that’s another story.

      Priyanka in the past has limited her political activities to campaigning in Amethi and Rae Bareli. She interacts with the locals there and extends a considerate and sensitive ear to their problems and the social issues. She always had a personal touch, a ‘connect’ with the people and an intoxicating demeanour that attracts the masses towards her. She definitely possesses the elusive x-factor i.e. the charisma which is lacking in his brother. Rahul has got a vision of his own which is still not lucid enough to interpret. Either he lacks clarity or he is far ahead of his time. It is the impressive political acumen of Priyanka and the ability to attract crowds that the floundering congress party is trying to exploit to challenge the star presence of Narendra Modi. Priyanka would have been the perfect image booster for congress provided she would have been unveiled in time.

         The last few days, we have witnessed a war of words, the exchange of barbs between Narendra Modi and Priyanka Gandhi grabbing the headlines. There has been a shift of paradigm and the focus of the media has shifted from NaMo-RaGa battle or Modi-Kejriwal tussle to Narendra Modi vs Priyanka Gandhi battle. There has always been a tacit understanding between the two major political parties that they wouldn’t drag the family members of the senior party leaders. But when Modi decided to break this trend, by accentuating the illegal land deals of the ‘jamata’, Priyanka came out of her civility cloak with all guns blazing. Robert Vadra, for obvious reasons, is an easy target for BJP. The reason why Priyanka is reluctant to take the ‘plunge’ is to enjoy a peaceful, private family life. But when her own husband is made a subject of ridicule and attack, she didn’t mince her words which subsequently led to the acrimonious verbal duels. Nobody had anticipated the full frontal attack on Vadra. Perhaps, this is what did it. The shackles were broken and out came the ‘political’ Priyanka. In the age of 24*7 media coverage and social media penetration, it is almost impossible to remain private. Priyanka had managed to do that up to now, but had to relinquish it.

          In a series of aggressive comments, she has not pulled back her punches on Modi and the BJP; instead she has gone on the offensive over repeated attacks on husband Robert Vadra. “They are scrambling like panic-stricken rats. I know they will repeat their bunch of lies. I’m not afraid of anyone” she added. Worse, she is repeatedly showing Modi as ‘child like and immature’. The ‘Amethi beti’ addressed “arey PM banne ki aas rakhte ho toh bachpane main kyun padte ho?” Moreover, she has broken convention and crossed the familial lakshman rekha by criticising brother Varun for straying from the secular path.

          Priyanka, who bears a striking resemblance with her grandmother, is viewed by congressmen as the best hope to revive the party’s fortunes and the torch bearer of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty following Rahul’s lack lustre campaign and failure to woo the voters. Even Indira Gandhi, a few days before her assassination, had said that the 21^st century would belong to Priyanka. She could see her own reflection in Priyanka. Hence it is no secret that over the years, time and again, there has been a demand from the congress workers to induct Priyanka into the party and lead from the front. Like Indira, she has the clarity and confidence and could give her opponents a run for their money.

           But the question remains whether she will occupy a big, fat political post after the elections? Will Sonia and the higher congress bastion allow a passing of baton from Rahul to Priyanka? To answer these questions, one has to read between the lines and draw hypothetical conclusions. If Sonia brings Priyanka to the party as demanded by the rank and file, it would be tantamount to implicitly accept the failure of Rahul Gandhi as a leader. It would be like admitting that Rahul lacks the ability to lead the party, thereby undermining his ascent to the Nehru-Gandhi throne. Albeit Sonia is Italian, she whole heartedly embraced the Indian culture. She readily became Rajiv’s wife, Indira’s daughter-in-law, and mother to Rahul and Priyanka. Unlike Maneka Gandhi, she preferred to remain in the back stage. Hence she is well aware of the fact that Rahul is the elder son and he should be the heir apparent. Also with such a system around, it would create three centres of power. It would lead to more confusion as different factions would owe their allegiance to different power centres. Also, Priyanka’s entry to the party would be vehemently opposed by people like Jairam Ramesh, Montek Singh and Sam Pitroda, who have become very close to Rahul Gandhi.

        On a personal note, Priyanka and Rahul are both very close to each other. They are not antagonistic; they complement each other. Priyanka would never do anything that would jeopardize her relations with her brother. The entry of Rahul Gandhi into Indian politics in 2004 was meted with same hype, fervour and expectation as witnessed now in case of Priyanka. But Priyanka has confined her campaigning and political activities to Amethi and Rae Bareli. It would be interesting to see her impact on a more larger national scale. And finally, whether Priyanka herself would want to enter the political field? Given that the Gandhis have always been reluctant politicians, and she wanting to lead a private life, will she bite the bullet? Robert Vadra has become the biggest liability and a baggage to the party. Her entry into active politics would in turn highlight his misdeeds.

        What course of action will Priyanka take is a matter of conjecture and pondering. But one thing is sure that the ‘political’ Priyanka has arrived. But she has a long way to go and prove herself despite the claims by senior congress leaders. Even as if she represents a rainbow on a distant horizon for the congress party, she connotes an ephemeral reality.

DECODING THE ENIGMA CALLED MANMOHAN SINGH

At a meeting of business leaders from India and Southeast Asia in Kuala Lumpur in 2005, the secretary general of ASEAN introduced Dr. Singh as ‘the world’s most highly qualified head of government’. Leaving the London G-20 summit in April 2009, US President Barack Obama went to Germany where a young school student asked him which politician he admired; Obama’s instant reply was that he admired Dr. Singh the most.

        Such was the perception of Dr. Singh in the eyes of the entire world. Out of the 193 countries, he is arguably the most prized head of government. His career has been brilliant by any reckoning. He holds a first class first degree in economics at Punjab University. Along with that he holds degrees from both Oxford and Cambridge. Before entering 7 RCR, he has held many positions of eminence such as RBI governor, Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission, UGC Chairman, Finance secretary and finally Finance Minister. He was the main architect of liberalization of Indian economy. It is untenable not to be in awe of him. No congress leader, including both Sonia and Rahul Gandhi can match his unique combination of personal integrity, administrative experience, intellectual stature and political appeal across a wide swathe of public opinion. Then how can a man with such credentials and once revered by all, be brought down to his knees?

          To understand him better, it is also instructive to listen to those who have followed his career since the 70s. These officials, some of whom worked closely with him opine that being assertive or leading from the front was never a part of his value system. A self effacing man, Singh survived the political era of Indira Gandhi, Janata party, Rajiv Gandhi and finally that of Narasimha Rao. To these officials, being a seasoned bureaucrat, Singh inculcated in himself the ‘apolitical virtue’ to survive in the political arena. As evident in case of civil servants, he was cautious, loyal and flexible to his political master. In no job, did he do anything outstanding except to seek the next appointment. To others, his career graph is a reflection of a lack of intellectual integrity and a trait of being opportunistic. He owed his allegiance to his ‘position’ and escaped the slur and the malicious attack of his political counterparts

           From 1991-1995, when he was appointed the Finance Minister, Dr. Singh was transformed from being ‘apolitical’ to being ‘political’. Although he remained a ‘backroom person’, he couldn’t insulate himself from the collaterals and vestiges of a cabinet post. It is this phase that moulded his nebulous political philosophy as well as his political ideology. He learnt many things from the treatment bestowed on his mentor P. V. Narasimha Rao by the party. Rao, after being chosen by the party to lead a minority government, soon took the reins of the party into his own hands. By doing so,  not only did he procrastinated the entry of Sonia Gandhi into the party but also tried to marginalise her. Such acts of dissidence against the ‘first family’ was meted with absolute disdain after the party lost the general elections in 1995. Dr. Singh realised the fact that any act of discrepancies against the Gandhi family would lead to scornful snub. The congress party didn’t allow Rao’s family to have a memorial in Delhi. (He was shifted to his home state Andhra) Despite Rao’s role in the 1991 reforms, he is not kept in high esteem by his own party members to avoid the ire of Mrs Gandhi. He was not bestowed with any major award while the previous PMs have been recipients of Bharat Ratna. These incidents moulded Dr. Singh’s incendiary political perception which eventually led to his complete subservience to the family.

          Albeit his credentials, Dr. Singh was very well aware of the fact that he was not a popular mass leader; he was not a member of Lok Sabha;  (He lost the 1999 Lok Sabha elections) he was offered the highest position in the country on a platter; he had compulsions of a  coalition dharma; he had ministers in the cabinet who were more senior to him. (Pranab Mukherjee was Finance Minister when he was RBI governor)

All these factors played a pivotal role in the way Dr. Singh conducted himself and managed the government. He had two options- either he would accept the post with all its limitations and encrypt his name in the history books of India (He is the longest serving PM not belonging to the Gandhi-Nehru family) or he would accept the post only if he were given  the authority. He knew he would be a ‘defanged bird’, but he chose the former.

            The key to ‘brand Manmohan’ was his projection as his ‘own man’. His Achilles’ heel was his equation with Sonia Gandhi. He would always be tormented by the question of whether he was his own man or just her puppet. His problem always was that he did not want to become more popular with the media and general public than Sonia Gandhi. His penchant for a low profile was seen in UPA-1 as a defence mechanism, part shyness and part self preservation, but in UPA-2 it came to be seen as escapism, as shrinking responsibility and an unwillingness to stamp his authority and take charge. The same trait of self effacement which was seen as a virtue in UPA-1 was seen as a weakness in UPA-2.

              Dr. Singh’s general attitude towards corruption in public life, which he adopted throughout his career in government, was that he would himself maintain the highest standards of probity in public life but wouldn’t impose this on others. In other words, he himself was incorruptible and also ensured that no one in his immediate family ever did anything wrong. He himself driving a Maruti 800(as an MP) was a legend in Delhi quarters. His daughters and son-in –laws are salary earning professionals (and not in real estate business). But he didn’t feel answerable for the misdemeanours of his colleagues and subordinates because he felt that he was not the political authority that had appointed them to ministerial positions. These ministers owed their appointment, loyalty and accountability to the party president and not him. Some ministers handpicked by Dr. Singh to the PMO (Prithviraj Chavan) and other cabinet ministers (Jairam Ramesh and Renuka Chaudhary) would often turn squealers against the PM to show their loyalty towards the party president. In other words, he turned a blind eye to the misdeeds of his ministers. He expected the congress party leadership to deal with the ‘black sheep’ in the government. While his conscience was always clear with respect to his own conduct, he believed everyone had to deal with their own conscience. But in UPA-2, when corruption scandals tumbled out, his public image and standing took a huge hit from which he was never able to recover. There was no parallel policy narrative in play that could have salvaged his reputation. At the outbreak of every scandal, the ministers and the leaders would huddle around to save the image of the party and its president, leaving the PM stranded alone. In other words, there were no positive acts of commission that captured the public mind enough to compensate for the negative acts of omission for which he was being chastised.

            In 2004, when Dr. Singh became the ‘chosen one’ of Sonia Gandhi, the nation went into a state of hope, anticipation and expectation seeing an economist PM at the helm. Although in UPA-1, he yielded political space to ‘others’, he put his foot forward and stamped his authority while dealing the nuclear deal with US. In issues of foreign policies, he fought with the echelons and cabals of the party. It was the only niche area where he had complete control. Dr. Singh also had his way in the appointment of people to key positions like C. Rangarajan , extension of term of D. Subharao or bringing back the charismatic Raghuram Rajan back to India. Also the wily sardar was instrumental in the appointment of another ‘sardar’ to the key position of Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission. In UPA-1, the media focused more on his policy initiatives and his economic ideas, as the high growth rate had propelled India into imminent greatness. Hence the 2009 election victory was supposed to be Dr. Singh’s victory. He himself had this delusion too. With the nuclear deal going through, and the subsequent win of trust vote, coupled with a high economic growth rate, he had created history and the media had dubbed him ‘Singh is King’. The common mob when asked whom they are going to vote this time said “Congress ko, sardar ji ko”. He had the mandate of the nation and could have easily won a Lok Sabha seat., but the ghost of Narasimha Rao reminded him of the reality that garnering any political ambitions would lead him to the same fate as his one time mentor. Hence he refrained himself from contesting the Lok Sabha elections, which would later prove to be the biggest mistake of his political career. Congress won 206 seats largely due to the image and success of the PM. The urban middle class who had deserted the congress in ‘99 and ‘04 elections, returned to congress. But as expectedly, the onus of the victory went to the exemplary management and organizational skills of Rahul Gandhi. His appeal to the youth was the prime mover of such a success. Dr. Singh came into terms that there cannot be two power centres and that the party President was the centre of power.

            The UPA-2 was bombarded with a plethora of scandals and corruption cases which damaged the reputation of the government. Dr. Singh too was charged, not with corruption but with turning a blind eye to the corruption of others. Public opinion was not willing to excuse him for choosing not to claim and exercise the authority that was his due as PM. With the unfolding of such scandals, the PM should have acted against the tainted ministers in his cabinet or should have offered his resignation. He would have been hailed for being the first PM to voluntarily retire and would have become a global statesman. With the looming euro crisis affecting the Indian economy, the high growth rate plummeted. The government was on a policy treadmill-only motion but no movement forward. Being the ‘primus inter pares’, the reluctance to act cost the reticent PM a great deal. Initially, his subservience was seen as an aspect of his shy and self effacing personality, but over a period of time it might have been his strategy of political survival. Was it just unquestioned loyalty to the leader or a survival instinct that prompted him to remain silent and complete his term? He had already become the PM of India and had his name stamped in the history of this country. So why?

              Dr. Singh has always advocated that he expects history would be kinder while judging  him and his legacy.One wonders what history has in store for him. But one thing is for sure that the history books will always say that he was the longest serving non Nehru- Gandhi PM. May be for his innate bureaucratic trait of clinging on his position prevented him from abdicating his post or may be he was sceptical that the party would have hounded him for ‘letting the party down’. It would have then accused him of trying to occupy the high moral ground and quitting on principle to avoid being sacked for not delivering the goods (a fate met by Rao). When the horse that you are riding becomes a tiger, it is difficult to dismount.

               Now that on May 16, Dr. Singh is surely going to be history, (The Modi wave may seem to be chimera but is actually ubiquitous) he would one day sit in his study room and ponder of what went wrong or what could have he done different? The ramifications of ignoring the nefarious acts of his recalcitrant colleagues could have been avoided if he would have dared to be his own man. Why did the government take all the blame for the scams and the party all the credit for the social schemes? Why didn’t he reprimand the aberrant ministers? How could ‘someone’ dub an ordinance as ‘utter nonsense?’. What happened to the prudent, progressive reforms? How could he erode the credibility of the PM post?  These questions will malinger throughout his life and may be haunt him too. One feels for the shy, reticent and infallible sardar who eschewed his duty due to political compulsions, but one cannot afford to hate him. He is that good a human being. But it is beyond comprehension that how could the ‘accidental Prime Minister’ remain in his position with such fetters and with such indignation?