Bibek Debroy reviews 'The Accidental Prime Minister' by Sanjaya Baru

The accidental Prime MinisterThe accidental PM of 2004 became an incidental PM after 2009. If grist was indeed needed for rumour mills, two recent books by Sanjaya Baru and P.C. Parakh have provided it. Manmohan Singh's legacy can no longer be that of finance minister during 1991-96. Had he chosen not to be PM in 2004, he would, rightly or wrongly, have been remembered as one of India's better finance ministers. The "wrongly" needs explanation. Manmohan wasn't quite the "architect" of India's reforms. There was a blueprint and supported by P.V. Narasimha Rao, he implemented it. If there was an 'architect', it was Rao, whom Manmohan distanced himself from when roles of 'insider' and 'outsider' were reversed. That suggests traits about loyalty, or its lack, and turning one's back on a ladder once one has ascended.Manmohan wasn't quite an accidental PM in 2004. As long as it wasn't going to be from the family, if one factored in the family's threat perceptions, Manmohan suggested himself. In contrast, in 1991, he was an accidental finance minister. Rao's first choice (I.G. Patel) refused and Manmohan's name was suggested by Harkishan Singh Surjeet. Whether as chief economic adviser (1972-76) or as secretary-general of the South Commission (1987-90), Manmohan possessed no strong 'reform' credentials. His leanings were 'socialist'. By his own admission, his favourite teachers were Nicholas Kaldor and Joan Robinson. But his leanings were also malleable, depending on whether the boss was Indira Gandhi or Rao. The boss left the imprint, not Manmohan.Manmohan is now labelled as the worst full-time PM. Why are we surprised? What imprint did he leave as deputy chairman, Planning Commission (1985-87) or as governor, RBI (1982-85)? If one were to take votes on the worst deputy chairman or worst governor, Manmohan would be a strong contender. He was never CEO material. Honesty was also 'malleable', depending on how you define honesty. Beyond immediate pecuniary and personal honesty, there is no special evidence of honesty. There is a telling anecdote, repeated in Simon Denyer's new book (Rogue Elephant). This concerns Manmohan receiving illegal corporate funding for the Lok Sabha elections in 1999. "Singh would say he only wanted their best wishes, and the contributions would be handed over to his wife in another room." Turning a blind eye to wrongdoing isn't a new attribute either. If one is scrupulous, one doesn't successfully climb the bureaucratic and political greased pole. Thus, we knew what Manmohan was and we knew there was a price. The problem has never been with Manmohan, but with unreasonable expectations. To use the cliched expression, he has always been an underrated politician and an overrated economist.In 2004, it mattered less. The economy chugged along. There was the glory of the 2005 nuclear deal. The Indian PM was feted across the world. Nor (if one goes by accounts in these recent books) had the power centre clipped the PM's wings. We will never know Manmohan's motives. Why did he not push his economic reform legacy? Did he crave US recognition? If innuendo is to be believed, did he aspire to leave his mark on foreign policy (read Pakistan) and hope for adulation in Oslo? What's obvious is he was enamoured of the trappings of power. This was no longer a finance minister who would resign (1993). This was a PM who, barring the nuclear deal, wouldn't put his head on the chopping block. Had he opted out in 2009, there would still have been some blaze of glory. However, power did corrupt (in the non-pecuniary sense) him. For UPA 2, there is an alternative Lord Acton quote that's even better. "The strong man with the dagger is followed by the weak man with the sponge." Daggers being drawn didn't mean only PMO and Cabinet. There are instances (such as weakening of Appointments Committee of Cabinet) where Manmohan contributed to institutional degradation, without the power centre or National Advisory Council asking for it. Constraints do not absolve him of culpability.He has always had feet of clay. As the flood waters of scams and corruption submerged UPA 2, the clay was washed away and the image crumbled. Reportedly, Manmohan hopes history will judge him kindly. I doubt it. That would indeed have been the case had he quit in 2009. Manmohan is fond of the expression "Caesar's wife". As the twelve Caesars go, he reminds me of the Suetonius description of Claudius (not as Claudius actually was)-a person who was weak and consciously subjected himself to control, so that he could survive. That's the Manmohan Singh legacy. Why should we feel sympathy? He unhesitatingly lapped up the glory as long as it was there. The shame is for him alone to bear.Bibek Debroy is professor at the Centre for Policy Research, Delhi.To read more, get your copy of India Today here.Published By: AtMigration Published On: Nov 30, 1999 00:00 IST--- ENDS ---

Download App

Get 37% off on an annual Print +Digital subscription of India Today Magazine

Bibek Debroy reviews 'The Accidental Prime Minister' by Sanjaya Baru

Manmohan Singh has always been an underrated politician and overrated economist. His constraints in power do not absolve him of culpability.

PUBLICATIONS

TELEVISION

EVENTS

RADIO

GAMING

USEFUL LINKS

PRINTING

WELFARE

DISTRIBUTION

SYNDICATIONS

WEBSITES

EDUCATION