The Sting Of Flint

By M H Ahssan

For all those who regarded Dr Manmohan Singh as a mild-mannered, professorial sort, unlikely to engage in the rough and tumble of political pugilism, the last few weeks have come as a revelation. Recuperating from a successful heart surgery and yet brimming with the confidence of being ‘the chosen one’, the prime minister has demonstrated a rolled-up-sleeves muscularity that few would have suspected him of possessing.

He has taken on the BJP’s PM-in waiting, Lal Kishen Advani, frontally, verbally pulverising him in the process. To accusations that he has been the "weakest PM ever", that he seeks permission from 10, Janpath even to drink a glass of water, he has hit back, pouring scorn on the mazboot neta who has promised the people a nirnayak sarkar.

"Mr Advani has the unique ability to combine strength in speech with weakness in action. This is not the kind of strength we need," Manmohan said in Mumbai, stressing that, "unlike the NDA’s prime ministerial candidate, I won’t be found weeping in a corner while hoodlums tear down a centuries-old mosque. Nor will I be found wringing my hands in frustration while one of my CMs condones a pogrom targeted at minorities."

And these were not off-the-cuff remarks. Manmohan had come prepared to take on the BJP. Indeed, whether it was on the occasion of the release of the Congress manifesto, or his successive interactions with journalists recently, Manmohan has been unrelenting in his criticism of Advani.

Now, it is the BJP—rather than the Congress—which wants to terminate the war of words. Indeed, former prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee felt constrained—on the eve of the first day of polling—to issue a double-edged endorsement for his long-time comrade-in-arms. "Mr Advani," the appeal reads, "is a sensitive and extraordinary person whose best is yet to come. When he becomes the prime minister, his achievements will be before the people." Well, we have Vajpayee’s word for it.

Of course, what has given Manmohan even greater confidence is the way in which the Congress’s first family has rallied around him. "There can be many candidates for the post of prime minister but nobody stands in front of Manmohan Singh," Sonia Gandhi said, while responding to a question on the party’s nominee for the top job. "He has both experience and competence." Priyanka Gandhi, campaigning in Amethi, went a step further: "You cannot judge a person’s strength from his external personality. Mahatma Gandhi was so gentle but was so strong from inside. Manmohan Singh is very strong and determined." And Rahul, whom many in the party would like to see as prime minister, has repeatedly said, "My prime ministerial candidate for the coming Lok Sabha elections is Dr Manmohan Singh."

Apart from the endorsement, what has also strengthened Manmohan is that despite the BJP’s propaganda, there have been no signs of dissonance between the two centres of power in the Congress.

There has been a sharing of power, a division of labour, but no turf war. In fact, the two have managed remarkably well," points out a senior civil servant. "Compare that with the Jaitley-Rajnath battle fought in full public view."

Clearly, at the end of his long-running verbal duel with Advani, both in his choice of words and facts, Manmohan has emerged the victor. But the question is: why did the BJP single him out, rather than focus on its favourite whipping boys and girls—the Gandhi trio of Sonia, Rahul and Priyanka?

"It would have been counterproductive to target the Gandhis," a Union minister told Outlook, "once Sonia Gandhi had made it clear that neither she nor Rahul were in the running for PM." A long-time observer of the BJP’s campaigns told Outlook, "Having positioned its own leader as a mazboot neta who will provide a nirnayak sarkar, it was imperative to provide a suitable foil: project the PM as weak and indecisive."

But the BJP’s attempts thus far to portray the prime minister as weak or indecisive have failed, because Advani has been found wanting on those very indices. "The PM has merely held up a mirror to Mr Advani," information and broadcasting minister Anand Sharma said. "And he has shown the world that he (Advani) is incapable of providing strong leadership."

Concurring, mnister of state in the prime minister’s office, Prithviraj Chavan, told HNN, "Mr Advani is living in a glass house—anyone can throw stones at him. He must come clean on Kandahar. How can he say he doesn’t remember what happened at the meeting of the cabinet committee on security? He may be troubled by the decision he took but he can’t resort to selective amnesia."

Finally, the BJP has tried to give a presidential feel to this election by juxtaposing Advani with Manmohan because it does not have a pan-Indian issue. The UPA government’s swift response post 26/11—changing the home minister, promising a tough new terror law, and Pranab Mukherjee’s tough diplomacy with Pakistan—neutralised the BJP’s terror card. Similarly, the BJP’s attempt to highlight rising food prices is being countered by the UPA’s social agenda: schemes like the NREGA, farm loan waivers, and increase in the MSP for various crops appear to be resonating with the voting public. The Ram issues—temple and Setu—are there in the BJP manifesto, but Hindutva is perforce being played low key, now that its candidates—from Varun Gandhi in Uttar Pradesh to retired ips officer Ashok Sahu in Orissa—have faced the wrath of the law for hate speeches.

By comparison, the prime minister, who began with the disadvantage of being a "nominated" rather than "elected" leader, has demonstrated, through his success in steering the coalition government through a difficult period that he, too, has leadership qualities.

"The PM has a special USP all his own," Union minister for science & technology Kapil Sibal told HNN. "He has enormous acceptability among the people. He has successfully run this government for five years, and attacking Advani actually accentuates his positive qualities, for Advani does not have a similar acceptability." The manner in which he pushed the Indo-US nuclear deal through, virtually single-handedly, in the face of scepticism in his own party and opposition from political allies and rivals alike demonstrated tenacity, even cussedness. And the way in which he inducted the Samajwadi Party into the UPA to compensate for the Left parties’ exit underscored that, behind that tentative manner, there was steel—and an understanding of politics and a willingness to muddy his hands.

Putting the prime minister’s appeal in context, a civil servant who has observed him closely told HNN, "He is seen as a sagacious man, whose steadying hand can steer the ship of state safely through tumultuous waters. Simultaneously, he is seen as an aspirational figure, despite his age, by the increasing numbers of young people who are making public opinion. Manmohan strongly believes that opportunities can change lives—this links him to the mindscapes of the young. That is why he has laid emphasis on quality education." He points out that the prime minister often refers to his modest beginnings in a village and how he has been able to rise through the opportunities that came his way.

Indeed, Manmohan has touched more lives than even he might have imagined. Two weeks ago, while travelling through central and eastern Uttar Pradesh, where the contest is essentially between the BSP and the Samajwadi Party, the question, "Which party would you like at the Centre?" evoked a remarkably similar answer from potential voters. Cutting across the urban-rural barrier, religious and caste lines, a majority said, "The Congress and Manmohan Singh." Why Manmohan Singh? Even in rural areas, the answer was remarkably uniform—in this era of an economic meltdown, it was important to have an arthshastri at the helm of affairs; at a time when India was engaging with the world, India needed a leader who could converse with world leaders on equal terms.

Perhaps, the last word on Manmohan Singh comes from Rahul Gandhi: "A young person looks to the future, the old look to the past. Our prime minister looks to the future. When he introduced economic reforms in 1991, he looked 20-30 years ahead. If you sit with him, he will start telling you one, two, three, four, five, six, seven—his plans," Rahul said in Kochi. And then without naming Advani, he continued: "His opposition is a person who harks back to the past, to 2004.He only speaks of what has been done—there is nothing about the next five years."