11-08-2005, 11:07 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Failing in a crisis
Swapan Dasgupta
Monday, November 07, 2005Â 21:43 IST
Regardless of whether K Natwar Singh remains as India's external affairs minister or departs, kicking and screaming, the events of the past 10 days have sullied India's reputation as a mature democracy. It is not the allegations of receiving bribes and paying kickbacks that alone should prompt outrage. The Paul Volcker report makes it quite clear that financial hanky-panky was by no means the prerogative of India. Indeed, compared to politicians and business groups in the countries which constitute the permanent membership of the UN, India was a bit player. If it hadn't been for the accident of Natwar being the highest serving politician compromised by Saddam Hussein, the Volcker report would have been relegated to the inside pages of Indian newspapers.
The issue, in a sense, extends beyond the idiosyncratic ways of the last Nehruvian in South Block. The way the Volcker controversy has played out in India is a commentary on the serious deficiencies in our political culture. It is these systemic flaws which will play out much after Natwar becomes either history or a footnote.
At the heart of the problem is the inability of the present UPA Government to handle a crisis. First, the entire government was one in attempting to underplay the significance of an international probe headed by a distinguished former chairman of the US Federal Reserve.
It was simply astonishing that the prime minister initially chose to give a clean bill of health to his cabinet colleague on the strength of the inadequacies of Table 3 of the report. It required the media to inform him that Natwar was being flayed not only on account of Table 3 but also on account of the damning details in Table 1 and 5. The rigour expected from the political head of a country aspiring to be a superpower was completely lacking.
Second, once the grave implications of the Indian references in the Volcker report became clear, the government was completely paralysed. This had very little to do with the UPA government being a multi-party coalition. Apart from the Left, who are not strictly in the government and who were brought into the picture by a beleaguered and disoriented Natwar, the other UPA partners were not party to the decision-making. <b>The Natwar problem was essentially a Congress problem and the party exposed its inner weaknesses to the world. </b>
By mid-week, especially after the report had been thoroughly dissected, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) was convinced that Natwar's continuation in government, or at least in his present job, was untenable. This was also the view of prime minister's senior colleagues. Then, all the government's energies went in trying to persuade Sonia Gandhi that she would have to jettison an old retainer. The PMO knew it lacked the political authority to force a decision. So it went along helping the media create an environment that would make Natwar's continuation in office impossible. In effect, the PMO was reduced to the pathetic position of actually encouraging the media and opposition onslaught on Natwar.
That process took a further three days, by which time Natwar went completely berserk and made inflammatory comments that had the potential to undermine India's diplomatic initiatives with the US. To complicate matters further, the Congress Party, on the advice of a senior lawyer in the cabinet, made a laughing stock of itself by threatening to sue the UN. To compound the mess, Natwar triggered a grave crisis by choosing last Sunday to defy the prime minister's suggestion to submit his resignation. He more or less proclaimed to the whole world his disregard for the authority of the prime minister. This may not save him his job but his show of belligerence has definitely undermined the position of Manmohan Singh.
<b>Regional players like Lalu Prasad Yadav, Sharad Pawar and M Karunandhi, not to speak of the Communists, are certain to draw the relevant conclusions from the complete absence of a coherent command structure in the Congress. </b>
If the prime minister has been shown to lack the gumption to tell a cabinet colleague â that too a man who lacks any political base â to go and jump, and Sonia Gandhi has been exposed as a wavering novice, shifting positions depending on who spoke to her last, there is a clear message for all those intent on extracting their pound of flesh.
The Left realised this some time ago. With the Natwar drama, the weakness and vulnerability of the Government is now an open secret.
From: http://dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=8833&CatID=19
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reponse from a member:
Let us be clear about the facts. We are dealing with a criminal case endangering the financial security of the nation. Why is Finance Minister attending the meetings leading up to the partial ouster of Natwar Singh? The report by Volcker is NOT a US command performance. It is a report of an international commission appointed under UN auspices. [That UN has misued the Oil for Food funds to finance the Commission is a non-political issue and is related to misdemeanour of the international bureaucracy. Sure, Kofi Annan should quit.]
We are concerned about the loot of Bharatiya treasury. As Subramanian Swamy noted, this is a criminal case -- defrauding the exchequer of the nation -- and Sonia as Congress Party President, should be named in an FIR (First Information Report) by the police. Muddled Hon'ble PM Manmohan says that anyone can name a name. Sure, Manmohan ji. In this case, the naming has been done an international commission. Do you remember that you, like me, worked in an international financial institution? There are some norms of financial propriety and accountability. You know them, right?
In this case, Natwar Singh was carrying a letter from the Congress President, Sonia Gandhi and vouchers were issued to the Party. Is he being allowed to continue as a Cabinet Minister without Portfolio since he is a retainer? How can a person under a cloud who is unfit to be Foreign Minister be allowed to participate in Cabinet meetings? The muddled Manmohan has lost all sense of perspective in making his Cabinet a laughing stock of the world.
In all this skull-duggery, how come the Congress Party is still hanging on to the leadership of an Italian Antonia Maino who has evinced no sense of political propriety, excepting playing to the clap-trap of Prakash Karat and his comrades. Natwar Singh behaved as though he was a plant by the Communists in the Congress, revolution by stealth indeed. Since Prakash Karat is the indigenous expert on oil deals, thanks to his pow-wow with Hugo Chavez of Venezuele, he should have been appointed as a one-man committee to exonerate Natwar Singh ! That would have been poetic justice to this communist-controlled UPA government. The Government is a national security risk. Chinese-Comintern, your future is unsafe in the hands of the likes of Natwar Singh and Prakash Karat.
Swapan Dasgupta
Monday, November 07, 2005Â 21:43 IST
Regardless of whether K Natwar Singh remains as India's external affairs minister or departs, kicking and screaming, the events of the past 10 days have sullied India's reputation as a mature democracy. It is not the allegations of receiving bribes and paying kickbacks that alone should prompt outrage. The Paul Volcker report makes it quite clear that financial hanky-panky was by no means the prerogative of India. Indeed, compared to politicians and business groups in the countries which constitute the permanent membership of the UN, India was a bit player. If it hadn't been for the accident of Natwar being the highest serving politician compromised by Saddam Hussein, the Volcker report would have been relegated to the inside pages of Indian newspapers.
The issue, in a sense, extends beyond the idiosyncratic ways of the last Nehruvian in South Block. The way the Volcker controversy has played out in India is a commentary on the serious deficiencies in our political culture. It is these systemic flaws which will play out much after Natwar becomes either history or a footnote.
At the heart of the problem is the inability of the present UPA Government to handle a crisis. First, the entire government was one in attempting to underplay the significance of an international probe headed by a distinguished former chairman of the US Federal Reserve.
It was simply astonishing that the prime minister initially chose to give a clean bill of health to his cabinet colleague on the strength of the inadequacies of Table 3 of the report. It required the media to inform him that Natwar was being flayed not only on account of Table 3 but also on account of the damning details in Table 1 and 5. The rigour expected from the political head of a country aspiring to be a superpower was completely lacking.
Second, once the grave implications of the Indian references in the Volcker report became clear, the government was completely paralysed. This had very little to do with the UPA government being a multi-party coalition. Apart from the Left, who are not strictly in the government and who were brought into the picture by a beleaguered and disoriented Natwar, the other UPA partners were not party to the decision-making. <b>The Natwar problem was essentially a Congress problem and the party exposed its inner weaknesses to the world. </b>
By mid-week, especially after the report had been thoroughly dissected, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) was convinced that Natwar's continuation in government, or at least in his present job, was untenable. This was also the view of prime minister's senior colleagues. Then, all the government's energies went in trying to persuade Sonia Gandhi that she would have to jettison an old retainer. The PMO knew it lacked the political authority to force a decision. So it went along helping the media create an environment that would make Natwar's continuation in office impossible. In effect, the PMO was reduced to the pathetic position of actually encouraging the media and opposition onslaught on Natwar.
That process took a further three days, by which time Natwar went completely berserk and made inflammatory comments that had the potential to undermine India's diplomatic initiatives with the US. To complicate matters further, the Congress Party, on the advice of a senior lawyer in the cabinet, made a laughing stock of itself by threatening to sue the UN. To compound the mess, Natwar triggered a grave crisis by choosing last Sunday to defy the prime minister's suggestion to submit his resignation. He more or less proclaimed to the whole world his disregard for the authority of the prime minister. This may not save him his job but his show of belligerence has definitely undermined the position of Manmohan Singh.
<b>Regional players like Lalu Prasad Yadav, Sharad Pawar and M Karunandhi, not to speak of the Communists, are certain to draw the relevant conclusions from the complete absence of a coherent command structure in the Congress. </b>
If the prime minister has been shown to lack the gumption to tell a cabinet colleague â that too a man who lacks any political base â to go and jump, and Sonia Gandhi has been exposed as a wavering novice, shifting positions depending on who spoke to her last, there is a clear message for all those intent on extracting their pound of flesh.
The Left realised this some time ago. With the Natwar drama, the weakness and vulnerability of the Government is now an open secret.
From: http://dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=8833&CatID=19
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reponse from a member:
Let us be clear about the facts. We are dealing with a criminal case endangering the financial security of the nation. Why is Finance Minister attending the meetings leading up to the partial ouster of Natwar Singh? The report by Volcker is NOT a US command performance. It is a report of an international commission appointed under UN auspices. [That UN has misued the Oil for Food funds to finance the Commission is a non-political issue and is related to misdemeanour of the international bureaucracy. Sure, Kofi Annan should quit.]
We are concerned about the loot of Bharatiya treasury. As Subramanian Swamy noted, this is a criminal case -- defrauding the exchequer of the nation -- and Sonia as Congress Party President, should be named in an FIR (First Information Report) by the police. Muddled Hon'ble PM Manmohan says that anyone can name a name. Sure, Manmohan ji. In this case, the naming has been done an international commission. Do you remember that you, like me, worked in an international financial institution? There are some norms of financial propriety and accountability. You know them, right?
In this case, Natwar Singh was carrying a letter from the Congress President, Sonia Gandhi and vouchers were issued to the Party. Is he being allowed to continue as a Cabinet Minister without Portfolio since he is a retainer? How can a person under a cloud who is unfit to be Foreign Minister be allowed to participate in Cabinet meetings? The muddled Manmohan has lost all sense of perspective in making his Cabinet a laughing stock of the world.
In all this skull-duggery, how come the Congress Party is still hanging on to the leadership of an Italian Antonia Maino who has evinced no sense of political propriety, excepting playing to the clap-trap of Prakash Karat and his comrades. Natwar Singh behaved as though he was a plant by the Communists in the Congress, revolution by stealth indeed. Since Prakash Karat is the indigenous expert on oil deals, thanks to his pow-wow with Hugo Chavez of Venezuele, he should have been appointed as a one-man committee to exonerate Natwar Singh ! That would have been poetic justice to this communist-controlled UPA government. The Government is a national security risk. Chinese-Comintern, your future is unsafe in the hands of the likes of Natwar Singh and Prakash Karat.