FOCUS

NEHRU TO NARENDRA MODI
WHERE HAS THE CONCILIATORY SPIRIT GONE!
Come 14th Nov. 2014, it’s the Children’s Day in memory of chaachaa Nehru, as Jawaharlal Nehru was called, for his fondness of children. Of course, he is not alone, there are millions the world over who are fond of children. But then as a leader of an important country, in the global context, probably not many are known to be fond of kids.
While every year, the schools across the country observed Children’s Day on 14th Nov., this time round, besides its solemn observance in schools, a completely avoidable controversy was introduced by the two major political players of the country. It was petty and appeared a bit sectarian too.
Of course the controversy surrounding the celebration of the great man is not new. Surely, many Indians would remember the issue of Nehru Centenary Celebration Committee formation. Rajeev Gandhi, the then Prime Minister, riding on 400+ seats in the Loksabha had announced that Amitabh Bachchan would chair the committee. There was an understandable furore    in the socio-academic circle. Rajeev Gandhi beat a hasty retreat with Bachchan name. Right enough, Amitabh Bachchan, with his mega cine-status, was simply not the right choice.
So, a quarter century later, the controversy came back to haunt Congress.
This time round probably Congress didn’t ignite the controversy. But then, it was clearly a case of one-up manship, and completely avoidable at that. There was no earth shattering reason. If the party perceived the BJP actions as petty, there was no need for a tit for tat. Which in the ultimate analysis did not help the Congress image at all.
However, BJP led by Narendra Modi contributed its own brand of controversies by trying to appropriate Patel legacy by portraying him that, Nehru and by extension Congress, did not give Patel his right due. Of course, Patel being a Gujarati may have had a role in Modi trying to usurp for the so-called Gujarati pride!
Coming to the claim that Sardar Patel did not get his well deserved place in the public space may have some logic. So also the accusation that Nehru, as Prime Minister did not give Sardar Patel his due, may also have some takers. But, may be Modi’s antipathy for Nehru could also be the reason for Modi to drive a wedge between Nehru and Patel. The claim by BJP that ‘Had Patel been the PM of independent India, India would have been different’ also have takers, for whatever it is worth. But then, it was the choice of Mahatma Gandhi to make Nehru, the  PM. Besides, according to available sources, despite differences there was mutual respect for each other. Reportedly, Patel wrote in 1949, and we quote “Contrary to the impression created by some vested interest, we have worked together as lifelong friends and colleagues, adjusting ourselves to each other’s point of view…. It is difficult for people to imagine how much we miss each other when we are apart and unable to take counsel to-gether in order to resolve our passing problems and difficulties”.
Here it is very important to note, that Sardar Patel was the first one to ban RSS, post Mahatma Gandhi assassination. Yet courtesy Modi, Sardar Patel is back on national page.
The proposed mega ‘Statue of Unity’ planned as a monument to  Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel has its ‘nay’ sayers, besides a whole lot of supporters of the project. While it is perfectly legitimate for any government in Gujarat to  think of a monument on one of India’s greatest sons from Gujarat, it is the scale of the executive involvement, that is a bit disquieting.
As the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, who is presently the Prime Minister of the country, laid the foundation stone on 31st Oct. 2013, which also happens to be the 138th birthday of Sardar Patel. On completion, it is expected to be the tallest statue in the world. The question is, why so huge? It is planned to be 182Mtr tall on a base of 58mtrs. So from the ground it is 240Mtrs, spread over an area of 20000 square meters, surrounded by an artificial lake, a bridge connecting the mainland, a memorial garden, a convention centre, a research centre, a hotel and an amusement park.  The contract has been awarded to Indian engineering giant Larsen & Turbo at a bid of Rs: 2989 crores, for design, construction and 15 years post completion maintenance. The cost is expected to be met under PPP model. Gujarat Govt. has already allotted Rs: 600 crores. Union Govt. has allotted in 2014-15 budget Rs: 200 crores. Private contribution is expected to be more than government share. Hence, indeed why this heightened projection of Sardar Patel? Is it Gujarati pride or there is an element of leadership ego?
While it is very important to create an aura around Sardar Patel for what he represented on the national landscape, so also it may be an attempt to correct a wrong or a perceived wrong, it is certainly not a national priority. Of course, it needs to be reiterated that the memory of Sardar Patel has to be etched in the national consciousness for the information of posterity, it was simply not needed on such a mega scale. We have an example of Tamil chauvinism in Kanyakumari, where the statue of Thirukkural completely dwarfed the Vivekananda Rock Memorial constructed much earlier.
It is in the context of this ‘Statue’ politics, Nehru has been, kind of pushed to the background by BJP under Modi. Here we need to understand the impressions both Sardar Patel and Pandit Nehru have left on the national psyche. However, it is indeed true that Pandit Nehru has been extensively written about, unlike Sardar Patel. This also means that, the allegation that he has not got his due in the public space may not be wrong after all.
Delivering a talk at the “Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Memorial Lecture” under the auspices of All India Radio, on Oct. 30, 1992 eminent lawyer and former Indian ambassador to the US Nani Palkhiwala remarks “As you cannot conceive Solar system without the Sun, you cannot conceive a modern India without Sardar Patel”.
Comparing India & emergence of US, and how events in the respective countries had thrown up men of talent with sterling character, Mr Palkhiwala stresses ‘undoubtedly Sardar Patel was in the top rank’. According to him “Sardar Patel was a true Karma Yogi. After he became a widower at the age of thirty three, the only love in his life was his motherland to which he passionately devoted”. Probably this is what inspired Modi to remain celibate, despite marriage and remain committed to his motherland. Writing on the unifying role of Sardar Patel, Mr Palkhiwala quotes ‘The Manchester Guardian’ which commented “Without Patel, Gandhiji’s idea would have had less political influence and Nehru’s idealism less scope. Patel was not only the organizer of the fight for freedom but also the architect of the new state when the fight was over. The same man is seldom successful as rebel and statesman. Sardar Patel was an exception”. Similar was the response of Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev when he visited India. He expressed surprise that ‘India had managed to liquidate the princely states without liquidating the Princes’, and there were 554 Indian Princely States! Mr Palkhiwala also mentions that both IAS and IPS were the brain child of Sardar Patel, meant as instruments of strong civil service. Dismissing the talk of Hindu Rajya of RSS, he reiterated “If the government could not act as trustee of the entire population irrespective of caste, religion or creed, it does not deserve to continue for a single day”. Since Patel was a very secular person, as the Home Minister he had the courage to ban RSS, hence it is wrong to portray him as being anti-Muslim, says Mr Palkhiwala.
In a situation of rampant political interference in the bureaucracy, Sardar Patel stood out, informs Mr Palkhiwala and he quotes Sardar Patel “the most dangerous thing in a democracy is to interfere with the services”.
Thus, there is enough and more to write home about Sardar Patel. Only problem has been that the charm which Nehru held for media, Patel didn’t have and has therefore remained without the media patronage and hence in public space, there is less on Patel unlike Nehru.
As Mr. Palkhiwala concludes, he quotes Lord Wavell, the last Viceroy to India before Lord Mountbatten. According to him “Sardar Patel is certainly the most impressive of the Congress leaders and has the best balance”, and Mr Palkhiwala bemoans “Our greatest tragedy is that the lessons taught by this outstanding Indian and statesman who unquestionably ranks in the world class, are so little remembered to-day”. Hence, whatever the present dispensation in New Delhi is trying to do is to perpetuate the memory of the Iron Man of India who unfortunately passed away in little over 3 years of our political independence, on 31st Dec 1950.  
Coming to Nehru, Sir Mark Tully, of BBC fame writes “his charm, integrity, his intellectual stature and westernised sophistication, did single him out as the public voice of the nation” and he quotes Taya Zankin, then ‘The Guardian’ Correspondent in India, “Nehru was immensely inspiring. He was not only very good looking, but he spoke superb English and was a good writer. Everybody was vaguely in love with him in a platonic sort of way. He was an idealist”.
‘However the most widely held criticism of Nehru was that he vacillated and procrastinated, lacking the single minded determination, (which Sardar Patel had) that a situation demanded’, writes Sir Mark Tully. His eclectic liberal political philosophy, influence of Marxist theory which saw some success in Stalin’s regime in the erstwhile Soviet Union led to a kind of Fabian socialistic policies. This led to jungle of laws, regulations and controls which Sir Mark Tully thinks “provided a happy hunting ground for corrupt politicians and bureaucrats” and the legacy continued for a long time, even after the death of Nehru in 1964.
Hence, while the popular acceptability of Pandit Nehru was a fact, his style of administration & governance didn’t much help the socio-economic evolution of the country over a long period of time. This is where the Sangh Pariwar, who had no love lost for Nehru, looked around and latched on to beat him and his legacy. Sardar Patel, thus became an instant choice and an aura was built around him “If only Sardar Patel was the Prime Minister during the early part of post independent India”!
Narendra Modi, as a leader by his own right, exploited the Gujarati root of Sardar Patel to his advantage. Coupled with his personal clean image, he slowly and consistently tried to build his own image as another ‘iron man’ in the footsteps of Sardar Patel. Now that lot of success has attended his efforts, rightly or wrongly, he cannot be blamed if he sees himself as a replica of Sardar Patel for the future generation. Thus, ‘is this statue politics, an ego trip for Narendra Modi?’ This is a question only time will answer.
Reverting to the title “Nehru to Narendra Modi”, the two individuals, who have been the first Prime Minister and the current Prime Minister, in the same order, as the title, it may be of interest to know how both these personalities are comparable to each other.
Nehru, was with aristocratic background, whereas Modi is from the margins of socio-economic status. Education and upbringing was in line with the aristocracy and was exposed to western English public space unlike Modi, who had humble evolution with nothing to sing a song about. Modi grew up like vast majority of Indians with less means of material comforts. But, he consciously tried to walk away from the beaten path. Slowly but surely he made a unique niche for himself. If Nehru grew with all the attraction of youth being satisfied, Modi denied himself the worldly pleasures. Unlike Nehru, Modi grew like an ascetic, except of course his sartorial obsession. Nehru was more democratic, but there are allegations, that there were instances, that he frowned upon people resisting his authority. But Modi is not exactly on that mould. He is indeed a bit authoritarian within the democratic limit. However Nehru’s democracy failed to see the potential of India and Indians’ flourish, besides encouraging indiscipline. Modi is a no-nonsense type and hence discipline is his watch word. His public image and private life, there wasn’t much of a difference. Same may not be so with Nehru. In fact, there are accusations that Nehru’s friendship with lady Mountbatten interfered with some of our political decisions. No such thing can be expected from Narendra Modi. He has no visible vices as a mortal. He can set example of probity in public life, which is the most important quality Indians in general are looking for. Only comparable politician probably is Modi’s political idol Sardar Patel besides Lal Bahadur Shastri.
There can be no doubt on the genuineness of Nehru’s concern for the welfare of India and Indians, but he lacked the commitment of a serious player. Like Mahatma said “Nehru is a visionary thinker but Sardar is a doer”.
What India lacked for all these 60+ years is the leadership which was committed to ‘doing’. Certainly Modi means business, but there is a danger of overkill. This “Good Governance Day” on 25th Dec., is one such case of over enthusiasm.
Robert Lynd, was an English writer, who wrote a piece over a hundred years ago “Sermon on Shaving”. He expounds a theory, “to have a proper shave, not only one needs a good razor but also a good brush and good lather”. He was attempting to tell the reader that there need to be amalgamation of ideas to have a good and a working political doctrine.
Indeed our politicians like Modi, who is working overtime to give a working and result oriented governance, need to take leaf from all his predecessors, who are in their own way, role models. A little from Nehru, little from Patel and little from Shastri and some more from Vajpayee, can help Modi create a circular approach to the national plan of action. Will this happen?
The areas of concern however, more than governance, is the kind of noises of a section of Modi’s party that is causing worry. There is Giriraj Kishor, who said ‘those who do not like Modi go to Pakistan’. Now that is a pretty crude hero worshipping. Modi, not only did not caution him, instead he rewarded him with a ministry. This is simply not right. Of course, he made Saadhwi of Raamzaade/Haraamzaade infame, apologise to the parliament, so also he rebuked the Maharaj of Godse hype. But then, there has to be far clearer message of no-nonsense approach while dealing with his party foot soldiers who are in the sectarian promotion mode unlike Modi’s apparent good governance goals of development. Another aspect which is also worrisome is he has an impression of being business friendly in preference to people friendly. He must necessarily be all friendly. All governance and therefore the development has to be equity driven, which Nehru always advocated, but couldn’t achieve. His much hyped, but well meant all the same, Swachcha Bhaarath campaign has so far been only symbolic. There are many pockets in Gujarat, say Morvi, the ceramic factory to the nation, is probably the filthiest. It is here, informs a ceramic dealer that, private transport owned and operated by a Gujarat government minister is promoted at the cost of public transport. These are first hand information which need to be countered for the sake of larger pan Indian picture.
Of course, Modi deserves to be assessed over a longer period of few years at least, if not a full term. Then there can be a kind of gradation which can truly reflect his position in the contemporary history of the nation. Until then, its wishing all Indians a very good 2015, of deliverance from Narendra Modi & Company.
J.SHRIYAN

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FOCUS : APRIL- 2023 K. K MUHAMMED & SINU JOSEPH THEIR RELEVANCE TO INDIAN SOCIETY

Month-in-Perspective for October 2022

Focus for October 2022