Mixed messages

A sub-prime use of a prime-time opportunity

The debate among New Delhi’s more mature and non-partisan political journalists after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh concluded his 65-minute interaction with them, televised live, was whether he deserved 5/10 or 6/10 for his performance. This is not a bad outcome given that the Opposition would like to award him even less marks and few in his own party are doing much about defending him. The prime minister did not evade answering any question, nor did he try to spin out unconvincing answers. Even his claim that the alleged “revenue loss” from telecom spectrum licences was no different from the notional “loss” to the exchequer on account of a fertiliser or revenue subsidy is a credible argument, even if it was not adequately explained to a lay audience, giving the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party an opportunity to pooh-pooh it. Some of the information the PM gave his audience, for example the details about the movement of files pertaining to the Antrix-Devas deal could easily have been shared with the media by his officials, without the embarrassment of the PM reading from notes to explain what his officials were up to! The one claim that Dr Singh made which he need not have, and his critics did not miss the opportunity to attack him on that, was about the media demoralising the nation by its excessive focus on corruption in public life. The PM should have known that both inflation and corruption have become the two major concerns of middle class India, the prime audience of Indian television channels. Instead of thanking the media for its role in exposing a series of scams, some that have hurt even media celebrities, the PM seemed to admonish them. This was unfortunate.

On a range of other national issues, the PM showed that he was well aware of what was happening in the country and the world and he was very much in command, and not just in office. His assertion that he would last out his full term and that the question of who would lead the Congress party into the 2014 elections was open ended not only showed that he wished to end all the wasteful internal power struggles for succession within his own party, but also that he did not feel obliged to chant the party’s mantra that its general secretary Rahul Gandhi would lead the party into the next elections! It is a measure of how much the media is focused on domestic issues, especially corruption, that few questions were asked on foreign policy. The Delhi media’s favourite foreign policy subject — India-Pakistan relations — did not even figure in the press conference. However, in responding to a question on the popular uprising in the Arab world, the prime minister enunciated a new foreign policy thesis when he declared “we welcome the dawn of democracy everywhere”, adding the usual caveat that India is not in the business of exporting democracy. This is a thought that must be adequately absorbed within the external affairs ministry and within India’s foreign policy community, including in the PM’s own party. Though a 50 to 60 per cent result is probably a decent one under given circumstances, the PM might have been able to establish a better connect with the nation, while giving less time for his critics to hit back, if his press conference was telecast live at prime time!