The long dark tea time of the soul

Any individial who is above 35 years of age, and satisfies a host of other criteria can run for presidential election in India. More than 80 candidates tried their luck in this month’s  presidential elections, including a retired school teacher and a village sarpanch. Most of them  have their candidacy rejected. And India is caught between two persons least deserved, a woman who can talk to the dead, and a man whose past deeds as a communal chief minister has few parallels. One of them is bound to win and most certainly it will be Ms Patil. While it is supposedly a matter of pride that India is finally ‘ready’ for a woman president, in Pratibha Patil, we are rewarding a very bad example of a modern Indian woman.

Let’s drop the pretentions first. We are told that it is the UPA’s masterstroke in recommending a woman for the post of president, a result of some bright thinking by the chairperson.  We are told that doubts should not be cast on her excellency. We are told about her virtues, her success as a table tennis player and her hostel for working women. We are told that despite her doubts should not be cast on her character, because “she will be our next president”. We are asked not to lower the dignity of the post of president, not to indulge in slugfests and not to believe in petty rumour. In short, suspend all natural thoughts, because her excellency madam Sonia Gandhi has decided that Ms. Patil is the perfect woman to be the country’s symbolic head. And when things become indefensible, we are told that the president has no real power, and has to rely on paliament’s advice. Hence her pronouncements on veil, forced sterilizations, talking to the dead and the theory of 12 planets really doesn’t matter. What matters is her ability to sign on the dotted line.

Time for a quick update on facts. Ms. Patil’s name came up only after all other names proposed by madam Sonia were rejected by the left. And what names were they!!! Shivraj Patil, Karan Singh, Sushil Shinde!!! None of them inspire confidence. The congress could not move beyond these three, because other deserving congressmen are a danger to madam’s authority. Because other deserving congressmen can think on their own. The only honourable names that cropped up were that of Pranab Mukherjee and in some quarters, that of Manmohan Singh. Both were ignored. In the UPA-left meeting, after discussing and bypassing some other names, finally Mr. Bardhan suggested to think of some woman candidate. At that point the the names of Mohsina Kidwai and Pratibha Patil came up. Somebody said Nirmala Deshpande, but her name was immediately rejected. This is an old story. The moral is that Ms. Patil was chosen for president by an unfortunate coincidence of lot of people sitting in the same room who didn’t know a lot about her. She was chosen by default, and I am sure had the meeting taken place now and not then, Ms. Patil’s name wouldn’t even be mentioned. That tells a lot. More than the fact that the ruling party has nobody of stature, who is secular, uncontroversial and is popular among masses.

Although BJP was instrumental in bringing forth the charges on murder and embezzlement of funds (btw, how does that diminish the seriousness of these allegations? After all the concept of opposition in a democracy is to raise uncomfortable questions), they were substantiated by media reports, most notably by Indian express and CNN-IBN. Her comments on forced sterilization, reminiscent of Hitler’s 1933 law on racial purity, can appall any thinking individual. Her comments on veil and dead babas, subsequent to her selection, are cast aside by her media managers. Why should the citizen of India not expected to look upon a presidential candidate, to expect fairness and intelligence in whoever is chosen for the post? How is seeking explanation on her comments equivalent to lowering her stature? If anybody has lowered the stature of the presidency, it is her and her party.

Although the president has no real power, he/she can exercise a lot  of it. He/she can set the terms of a debate. He/she can be above partisan politics, and put a moral edge to executive and legislative affairs. Narayanan did this by perfection. Kalam has also given us enough examples. Yesterday he returned West Bengal power bill. He had sent the file of three controversial judges seeking the opinion of law ministry. He raised a very valid point in the office-of-profit issue. He was instrumental in quiet a number of public initiatives. Kalam had his shortcomings,he was obsessed with national security, he had narrow views on river linking. he refused to save poor Dhananjay Chatterjee from the gallows. A lot is expected from the next president. Will her actions inspire confidence among people? Will she ever be able to disassociate herself from the congress party and its president? Will she be able to save Md. Afzal from the hanging on moral grounds? Will she be able to return such deadly bills like CSPSA, AFSPA, and POTA? Will she be able to demand a humane treatment to all refugees in India and meet the internally displaced people? Will she be able to express cold horror at Nandigram like killings? Will she be able to have independent views based on facts? Will she be able to make a point on wider policy issues, on executive breach, or on legislative excesses?

Definitely not. Not unless she stops talking to the dead, or misreading history. After seeing 5 years of Narayanan followed by 5 years of Kalam as the nation’s first person, Indians have got their hopes high. They have become more demanding of their public leaders. Putting Ms. Patil at the country’s top position is the UPA’s way of showing us our place. To impose an exorcist as the president of our country, because of some ugly electoral arithmetic is not only morally dishonest, it is actually treacherous to the mandate.

Let her be happy with her exorcism. For the rest of us, let us forget that anything like the post of president exists in India and be happy. Of course, I would love to be proved wrong by Ms. Patil.