SARDAR PATEL's LEGACY
Who owns Sardar Patel’s Legacy? Every Indian. But, both
the PM and the PM aspirant were owning the Sardar’s legacy separately – which
was ridiculous.
The PM says – “Sardar patel was a Congress man. And I
am proud to be a member of a political party with which he was associated.” Did
Sardar Patel belong to the same Congress Party to which Dr.Manmohan Singh
belongs? Absolutely not. Does he not belong to a congress party which imposed
Emergency in India? Does he not belong to a Congress party which was
responsible for large scale anti-Sikh riots in India? And - did he ever belong
to the Congress Party when Sardar Patel was around?
In reality - Congress party and BJP both have undergone
tremendous changes from 1947. Mahatma Gandhi had recommended dissolution
of Congress Party after Independence,
only to avoid this crisis of Identity. In accordance with Mahatma’s wishes, the
then congress should have been dissolved
and people in Congress should have been allowed to float their own Political
parties to fight elections in Independent India. If that had happened, who
would have been in which Party is definitely difficult to guess. Sardar and
Nehru may have floated 2 different Parties ; or stayed in same party. Who
knows?
Since 1947, Congress has been changing and changing with every Prime Minister.
Nehru’s era was a distinctly socialist era and had reasonable level of
democratic values in it. When Morarji came around, supported by the elders of
Congress like Kamaraj Nadar, the Nehruvian Policies were continued. But, when
Indira Gandhi came, all those Policies got dumped like household waste.
Nehru would never have reneged on the promise made to the erstwhile princes – by
arbitrarily abolishing the privy purses , which was hardly Rs.5 crores. The
nation should have been grateful to the princes – at least till their life
time, for the sacrifices made by them in favour of a united India. I was a
small kid by then. But, I could never stand or understand the absurdity of a
nation going back on its own promises. Satyameva Jayathe looked a farce to me –
as Government itself was going back on its promise.
Nehru was a perfect democrat, Greatly honest and admirably
Gandhian. He was a true National leader. He was not sectarian in any sense.
Neither caste nor religion nor region nor language could make him differentiate
his people.
But, Nehru’s failing was - he was not equal to China’s
challenge. In fact, he did not understand the Chinese ambitions. From Nehru’s
time to Manmohan Singh’s time, the Congress never took sufficient steps to
equal China. It could have; but, it didn’t. In Nehru’s time, it was only
territorial aggression and occupation. Now, Chinese products are dominating
Indian market and are posing huge economic challenge. It is becoming
increasingly difficult to find Indian Products in India. Congress is not even
close to understanding the implications of this economic occupation by China in
India.
It is time that India strives to grow taller than
China. It can. It must. We can’t be killing our soldiers through the hands of a
smaller country like Pakistan and
grumbling always about it. It is shameful. Pakistani non-state and state
actors must be afraid of even stepping an Inch into India for any anti-Indian
activities. That must be the Image of India. India needs that Image. Not its
present Image of always grumbling of losing its Soldiers’ heads to Pakistani
actors – state or non-state.
Bank Nationalization by Indira Gandhi was good and
needed. But, whoever owned the Banks back then, should have been paid back
their invested monies as sufficient compensation. Till Nehru lived, he always
stood by the premise of Just Compensation. But, not Indira Gandhi. She stood
for acquiring anything, with any paltry compensation, which is not just.
But, Indira Gandhi did a number of good things for the
poor of the country through the nationalized Banks. This said - the way she
dumped all the Congress Old Guard, who fought for Independence by the side of
Nehru – does not definitely belong to the Nehruvian Congress.
When Indira Gandhi promulgated Emergency and was later
assassinated, a section of Congress showed its ugliest face in the anti-sikh
riots. This too was Congress. Is it not the same congress which perpetrated
these religious riots pointing accusing fingers at Modi for the 2002 incidents,
which were very localized and the handiwork of a few enraged people.
Bank Nationalization and Bangladesh creation were her
great contributions to the stability of India, while absolute aversion for any
criticism from any one was her single, most negative quality. How she treated
the Old Guard of Congress, the princes who gave up their kingdoms and the
entrepreneurs who had started the banks in Pre-Independence days was shabby
enough.
Graceful Politics disappeared with Nehru. Indira Gandhi
did not stand for any such Graceful Politics. That obviously shows, Mahatma
Gandhi’s, Nehru’s and Patel’s Congress was different – from Nehru’s Congress
and Nehru’s Congress was not the same as Indira Gandhi’s Congress. When Indira
Gandhi was assassinated and the anti-sikh riots happened, whose Congress was
it? P.V.Narasimharao may have expressed regrets. But, he was himself dumped by
Congress most unceremoniously. It is difficult to say that PVN represents
Congress as its head.
Rajiv Gandhi’s Congress was a capitalist congress. He
tried to promote Private Industries once again. It was an era of economic
liberalism, trying to do away with licence- permit Raj, which existed till
Indira Gandhi era. Indira always wanted more and more state control, whereas,
Rajiv wanted private entrepreneurship to assist in economic progress of the country. The
assassination if Indira was tragic and that of Rajiv more so. Rajiv would have
been a PM, but for his assassination. But for one or two stray incidents, Rajiv
was far more accommodating of criticism and far more democratic than Indira
Gandhi. How can both the congresses be considered the same? They were as far
apart as North and South Poles.
P.V.Narasimha Rao was PM but had no clout on congress.
He owned the Government but not the Congress. The Congress came under Sonia
Gandhi. Sonia did not know Governance and did not contribute to it at all. It
was PVN all the way, assisted by good people like Dr.Manmohan Singh, who were
also , namesake, congress leaders, but without following.
PVN contributed to country’s progress in a great way.
To some extent, he also made up links with the main Opposition party, the BJP,
through his friendly ties with its leaders like A.B.Vajpayee. Their friendly
co-operation was pulpable always in Parliament. PVN removed more and more
shackles on economic progress. But, he got dumped by Congress ultimately. It
was so-unlike of the Nehruvian Congress.
Dr.Manmohan Singh, as the head of UPA I was effective
in governance. But, the family of Soniaji was controlling the Congress and
Dr.Singh had no say in Congress at all. From the times of Indira Gandhi, the
state congress leadership in all states was weakened to such an extent, that
there was no mass leader in congress in any state.
Dr. Singh adopted strong economic Policies and the
telecom revolution, which was started in Vajpayee’s times, bore fruit. To some
extent, UPA I’s success was due to the strong foundations laid by Vajpayee’s
Government. But, the agility with which it was continued by Dr.Singh needs to
be appreciated. The RTI Act is itself a Great contribution from Dr.Singh.
UPA II has been a disaster. The credit for this should
be shared by Congress and its allies both. If transparency is a virtue of
Governance, the only thing that was transparent in UPA II was the level of corruption
and the brazen attempts to use state machinery to suppress criticism and shield
corrupt people.
Whether it was Team Anna or Baba Ramdev, they were not
initially against Congress. They just wanted a Lok Pal to deal with Corruption
and wanted Government to bring back black moneys. Their agitations were
perfectly peaceful and Gandhian. Nehruvian Congress would have implemented Lok
Pal in the face of such demand which was
not only Popular but was made by respected personalities. But, all that Congress and UPA II Government
did was to put all the state Machinery behind them – to discredit them. The
result is – (i) Arvind Kejrival entered into Politics and is well on his way to
become the Majority party in Delhi displacing Congress and BJP both, and (ii)
Baba RamDev is now the best crusader against Congress and in favour of the BJP
in all Northern states, apart from Modi himself.
The corruption scandals are legion. I don’t think, we
have seen the bottom of any of these scandals as of today. No money trail has
been investigated in full. No one has been punished as yet – except Lallu
Prasad yadav – and the credit for that goes to a single Individual called Rahul
Gandhi and not Congress. The full Political class was shamelessly behind Lallu
and his corruption. That shows the degeneration of the Political class and the
justification for the rise of Arving Kejrival.
Congress was also seen accusing all regulatory bodies
like Election commission, Supreme Court and the CAG, when in fact, these bodies
were trying to bring back a semblance of
rule of law into Governance. CAG was identified with opposition – which
was ridiculous. Supreme Court too got criticized for so called Judicial
activism, when it was only correcting legislative opportunism. If Election
commission suggests right to reject, it was not acceptable. When SC says that
criminal Politicians can’t stand for elections, that was not acceptable.
There is too much nonsense of this type in Congress
right now – and if Rahul comes up with a young team to cleanse congress first,
the country may yet give him thumbs up – even if he is far less experienced and
far less capable than Modi.
So – my own view is – Sorry, Dr.Manmohanji, You don’t
belong to that Congress which had Nehru and Patel. You belong to Soniaji’s and Digvijay Singh’s Congress. But, if you too can
muster enough courage to call the bluff of the nonsense politics in Congress,
you may yet get thumbs up from the country.
But, all this doesn’t mean, Modi is very right about
Sardar Patel. I don’t think, we could say today – had Sardar Patel been our
first Prime Minister, things would have been different. This too is ridiculous.
We lived with Nehru for the longest time. India voted for Nehru, like it never
voted for anybody else later. India loved Nehru. Sardar Patel was the next best
choice. We cannot undo that people’s
choice of decades in favour of Nehru today and say Patel should have been our
first PM. Patel’s contribution to uniting the country was tremendous. But, he
did not live long enough to ensure further the country’s unity and progress,
with his admirable administrative skills.
So, all this means that – Dr.Singh is terribly wrong to
say that he is proud of belonging to a party to which Sardar Patel belonged and
Modi is terribly wrong to say that had Sardar Patel been our first PM, India
would have been different.
In the same way, RSS and BJP of today are much
different from anything that existed at
the time of Mahatma Gandhi’s Assassination. There is just no point in Godse’s Individual act being attributed to
any organization of that time and it is absolute fallacy to accuse Individuals
who are born much, much later than Gandhi’s death for Gandhi’s death.
It is just like blaming Indira Gandhi’s assassination
on all Sikhs and pursuing them and rioting on them. This blunt comparison must
make both Congress and RSS realize that both must come to live in today’s India
with today’s Indian aspirations. No one in India must ever be seen to be
justifying Godse’s act in assassinating the father of the Nation. I hope RSS
doesn’t. Also, it must come out of its Hindu Nationalism concept – which is
unnecessarily damaging its own otherwise, great reputation. Let everyone be a
Good Hindu, Good Christian, Good Muslim according to his religion and all be
good nationalists. The problem is, once someone catches a hot potato, it
becomes difficult to leave it. Huge Egos and fear of condemnation makes people
justify earlier wrongs. It requires huge honesty to admit past / present wrongs
and come out of it gracefully.
Likewise, Congress must never ever be seen to be justifying
Anti-sikh riots (or the Emeregency etc which preceded it). Congress must never
ever attribute the Godhra tragedy or Ahmadabad riots to Modi personally, when,
Modi’s regime very actively and very clearly pursued the investigations and got
the actual culprits punished, which the Congress has not done so far in respect
of Anti- Sikh riots. How many of these riot victims were compensated? How many
perpetrators were punished? Saying regret, is not enough alternative for these
acts required by Law and Justice to the riot victims.
We must all own the legacy of Nehru, Patel and Subhas
Bose. Modi also owns their legacy. It is
good that the PM and PM aspirant
came on a single dais to own his legacy. I wish to see them in ROLES REVERSED in
2014 – but behaving gracefully like PVN and Vajpayee. India needs this at least
for 60 months.
The tallest statue of Sardar Patel (182 Mts) reflects what Modi will strive to achieve if made the PM. India needs such great Monuments for the great leaders of our freedom struggle - Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Subhas Bose. Why can't we have world class statues for these world class leaders?
* *
* E N
D * * *
