Author: Praful Shankar
Publication: Friendsofbjp.org
Date:
URL: http://www.friendsofbjp.org/content/selective-silence-dr-manmohan-singh

These are indeed troubling times for India.

The past few months have been witness to the alarmingly quick unraveling of the India growth story. Vicious riots have been unleashed in Assam that had equally revolting repercussions in regions as far of as Mumbai and Bangalore. And finally, the largest democracy in the world was treated to the knowledge that after having reached previously unimaginable levels of corruption in the 2G Spectrum case, it’s tottering UPA government had also presided over an even bigger loot of the exchequer while allocating another precious natural resource – coal blocks.

Surprisingly, the leader of the republic, the much indulged Dr Manmohan Singh has had a similar reaction to each and every one of these tragic events and the political scrutiny that came with their occurrence – silence. In fact, in a signature oratorical move that is fast growing tired, the PM even recited a couplet that justified, if not glorified, his questionable silence on key issues that concern the welfare of the nation he is responsible to serve. It is a different matter that the UPA government unleashed an ultimately unsuccessful rearguard through its official and unofficial spokesmen that ranged from the bizarre (zero loss) to the devious (questioning the CAG). But all the while, when his trusted lieutenants where ambushing the media with “hazaron sawaal”, the PM and his office chose to maintain their “khamoshi”.

But, as India is slowly realizing, the UPA has different rules for different people.

Faced with a humiliating but sadly, honest appraisal of the PM by a leading American magazine, the PMO responded with surprising bluster and belligerence. The Indian PM, who previously felt that the numerous questions and allegations leveled against him by the opposition, media and the entire country did not merit a reply because his was an exalted office, decided to speak out against an article that appeared in a magazine that carries absolutely no relevance to the common Indian.

Ever since he was severely criticized by the Supreme Court for his blatant inaction during the 2G spectrum allocation controversy, the image of Dr Manmohan Singh has plummeted to depths unimaginable even in May 2009. Articles and comments aimed at his cold silence and inaction during turbulent times and criticism leveled at his tendency to tolerate gargantuan levels of corruption have regularly appeared in leading Indian newspapers, magazines and television shows. Speech after speech made by leading political leaders have castigated him for being at the helm of the most corrupt and one of the most listless governments in the history of India. Each of these criticisms have been met with either a stoned silence or a weak yet Machiavellian defense playing on his supposed honesty, coalition compulsions and biting comments on the ambitions of opposition leaders.

Yet the PM seemed to care enough about the comments of the Washington Post to not just contradict the article but to suggest that an apology was in order. Certainly, the opinion of a foreign journalist seems to matter to the leader of India than that of his own media and countrymen. Perhaps he feels it would be awkward the next time he meets President Obama or Hillary Clinton. Or maybe he feels hurt because of the betrayal of foreign media since he has repeatedly favored them over his Indian counterparts ever since he took office.

In any case, the reactions of the PMO and the UPA have unknowingly revealed where their priorities really lie and who they believe actually deserve to be listened to or won over. It has also revealed an enormous misreading of the public mood in India. It may seem fine for the UPA to believe that the Indian public has bought their defense on the Coal Block allocations and their self righteous lecturing to the BJP on parliamentary conduct, but the ground realities are far different.

Part of the reason for this is that fact that the UPA’s urbane brigade has consumed, in bountiful amounts, the cool-aid fed to them by their glowing admirers both in high society and the English television media. This is a group that somehow believes that having a debate of the floor of the house would bring back the money looted from the Indian exchequer and that despite the fact that only the Central Government has the authority to allocate coal blocks, there has to be some level of blame apportioned to State Governments also, in a decision where the latter have absolutely no say.

Another reason is the absolute reverence with which the UPA establishment, tuck in the License Raj times when foreign opinions mattered more that local ones, still seems to treat foreign journalists, diplomats and opinion makers. Somehow it seems as though the UPA leadership is more concerned with its image abroad than in India, not realizing that a great discontent swells in the country after being treated with utter disdain by a government that promised much but has delivered very little.

A quick glance towards other democracies in the world today would demonstrate how seriously political leaders take local public opinion. The Prime Minister of Britain, David Cameron, sensing the high levels of public outrage during the aftermath of the Rupert Murdoch scandal, volunteered to depose before a public committee willingly. Across the Atlantic, Presidents are made and unmade by the effectiveness of their ability to respond to and shape public opinion. Presidents like Reagan and Clinton earned public support for their policies and built their legacies through effective public outreach. Even the much maligned George W Bush understood the need to communicate with his electorate and used this with remarkable efficiency to build public support for even the most dubious of his endeavors.  Countries like Russia and China, so often castigated for dictatorial politics, may exhibit great disdain for foreign criticism but within the confines of the boundaries the matter is entirely different.

Nations are not built with political will alone. No country becomes great without the active and committed participation of its citizens in the vision and goal that its leaders set for them. The late 1990s and early to mid 2000s saw the emergence of modern India on the world stage as a country of great ability and promise. It can be of no coincidence that during this period, India was led by two of its greatest modern leaders – Atal Behari Vajpayee and Dr Abdul Kalam. The positivity and integrity they exuded along with the efforts they made – in different styles – to communicate their belief in the greatness of the nation and their vision for India’s future to the common man played a great part in the emergence of what some called, the new India - free from the self defeating complexes of the past.

For the past 8 years, the Indian public has suffered a leadership that has often treated them as not meriting an intelligent conversation. While the all powerful leadership of the Congress never speaks with any level of clarity or purpose, the intellectual delegated to lead the Government only responds to voices that are do not belong to his own people. There has been a complete lack of clear communication on what vision the UPA and the Congress has for India. Do they see India as a liberalized state free from the shackles of the Nehruvian economic model that shackled us for decades? What are their plans for reducing an awesome fiscal deficit that threatens to ruin the financial health of our nation? What are their ideas to tackle corruption and crony capitalism? Do they believe Maoists are terrorists or victims themselves?