 |
||
|
||
|
||
Introduction: The congress was vehemently opposed to Shri Alexander’s candidature on the silliest and most unacceptable grounds, namely, that he was a Christian! Also there was every likelihood of Sonia Gandhi being proposed to the Prime Ministership and how would the voter like to see Christians holding the two topmost posts in the country? If this is true, Sonia Gandhi has shown herself to be the worst communalist in India.
Powerful though the Prime Ministership of India may be, the most prestigious elective post is that of the President. And election to that post should normally be non-controversial. There should be a general consensus among political parties as to who should be India's number one citizen, considering the respect and admiration in which it is held. In this matter, sadly, the present resident of Rashtrapati Bhavan goofed-and goofed badly. It is painful to say so, but he let down the country by his indecisiveness. Or could it be that his attachment to the kursi was so deep that he failed to understand the damage that he was doing to the presidentship by his tactics? With the exception of Dr Rajendra Prasad (January 26, 1950 to May 13, 1962) no other citizen has held the post for more than one term. And even in Dr Prasad's case it is well-known that Jawaharlal Nehru was unhappy about the former being given a second term. But such was Rajendra Babu's standing both within the Congress party and in the nation that Nehru's objections had to be quietly set aside. But consider the others; Dr Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (May 13, 1962-May 13, 1967), Dr Zakir Hussain (May 13, 1962-May 13, 1969), Varahagiri Venkata Giri (August 24, 1969-August 21, 1974), Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed (August 24, 1974-February 11, 1977), Neelam Sanjiva Reddy (July 25, 1977-July 25, 1982) Giani Zail Singh (July 25, 1982-July 29, 1987), R. Venkataraman (July 25, 1987-July 25, 1992), Dr, Shankar Dayal Sharma (July 25, 1992-July 25, 1997)- All served for just one term. Shri K.R. Narayanan should have observed the tradition meticulously without trying to be coy. To say that he would stand for re-election only if he is the unanimous choice of all parties was neither here nor there. By playing this silly game he was trying to place himself above his more distinguished predecessors. In his approach there should just have been no ambiguity. He should have asserted himself in saying that he was standing down and nothing on earth would move him from his resolve. But it is clear that he wanted to stay on and allowed himself so he a pawn in the Congress and Opposition-game. He had yet another chance to quit gracefully after Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee paid him a personal visit and told him in no uncertain terms that the NDA did not want him. It was clear from news reports that Shri Vajpayee did, not stand on ceremony and was pretty blunt in conveying the NDA's views to Shri Narayanan. For-the second time Shri Narayanan dithered. Perhaps Shri Vajpayee was too impulsive in floating the candidature of Maharashtra's Governor P.C. Alexander to the presidentship, before testing the waters. It turned out that the Congress was vehemently opposed to Shri Alexander's candidature on the silliest and most unacceptable grounds; namely, that he was a Christian! India never had had a Christian as a president and it would have redounded to the Congress credit if it had seconded the BJP's choice. One is led to believe that the Congress resentment against Shri Alexander was irrational. According to one source, Snit Sonia Gandhi had a personal dislike of Shri Alexander and could not bear the thought of her having to be deferential towards him.
The argument was also adduced that there was every likelihood of Sonia Gandhi being proposed to the Prime Ministership by another coalition, following the next general elections, and how would it sound if the voter was told whether he would like to see Christians holding the two topmost posts in the country? If this is true, Sonia Gandhi has shown I herself to be the worst communalist in India.
In the first place for her to think that she would ever become the Prime Minister of the country is to live in a dream world. Is India with its one billion people so utterly bereft of leadership - that it should look to an Italian-born to be its Prime Minister? In the second place, with the Kashmir issue moving slowly but surely towards an amicable settlement after more than fifty years, a victory for the BJP at the polls is a foregone conclusion. Let this be said quite clearly: The NDA government has played its cards brilliantly in the last six months and has succeeded in –pushing Musharraf-and Pakistan-into a corner. And with peace abounding, the Congress does not stand the ghost of a chance to breast the tape. It will be, at current rating, the BJP winning all the way. But even presuming that Sonia Gandhi has a chance to lead the country and not just her party, why should she presume that the country would be opposed to her candidature as Prime Minister merely because she is a Christian and that the President, too, is a Christian? Who, pray, is communal?
Shri Alexander would have made an excellent President had he been given a chance. In her vain desire to brook no opposition, Sonia Gandhi did great harm to the country. What is worse is the argument put forth that because Shri Narayanan happens to be a dalit he should be given a second chance. What has caste got to do with, 50-year old tradition? The very fact that he was voted to be President should suffice to show that the Indian voter is capable of rising over caste considerations. But having succeeded in scuttling Shri Alexander's candidature, in which Sonia Gandhi showed her pettiness and total lack of magnanimity, she-and her party-should have quickly agreed to Shri A.P.J. Kalam's candidature. Again, she-and her party-faltered. It showed a lack of statesmanship and grace on the part of the Congress leader that surely would long be remembered by the voter.
In projecting Shri Kalam as the
next President, the BJP, in one stroke, has checkmated the Congress. The
BJP has also shown that it can rise above narrow caste and religious considerations.
Nobody can ever accuse the BJP of being narrowly communal. But that can
certainly be said now of the Congress. Sure, Shri Kalam is a political
novice but the best constitutional advice is available to a president at
a moment's notice. And may it be said, Shri Kalam is not exactly dumb.
A scientist of repute, he surely can see through any political trick that
a fractious Parliament can play? Moreover, what better tribute can the
country give than to elevate a Bharat Ratna to the first citizenship of
the land? It is entirely to the credit of the BJP, no matter what diabolical
intentions assigned to it by a frustrated Opposition. By any reckoning
Shri Kalam should turn out to be an ideal President and a fit reply to
the BJP's detractors and the Musharrafs of the world. If this is Hindutva,
one might even add, let us have more of it. It is in any event better than
the 'secularism' that the Congress showed in shooting down Shri Alexander’s
chance-because he happened to be a Christian. Who will trust Congress in
the future or accept its pretensions to secularism when, in the present
instance, it has betrayed it so badly?
|
||
|
||
|
||