Why Intertwined Lives is a must read

Jairam Ramesh's latest book is necessary reading for those who need to be informed how a civil servant must never behave

It might be an odd thing to claim but, occasionally, a biography can leave behind a very different impression of its subject to what its author intended. I write this with specific reference to Jairam Ramesh’s latest book Intertwined Lives: P. N. Haksar and Indira Gandhi and, in particular, the 200-odd pages he was keen I should read. Ramesh sees Haksar as one of the great heroes of yesteryear. Unfortunately, I’ve come to a very different conclusion. 

The book is a meticulous and detailed chronological catalogue of the correspondence between Haksar and Indira Gandhi. Practically everything they wrote to each other finds mention. However, because it has no clear structure or narrative — but is still comprehensive — the reader is left to draw whatever conclusion he deems fit. 

Ramesh’s intention is to portray Haksar as an omniscient polymath. A man with encyclopedic knowledge and the source of deft advice which was always precisely delivered and invariably correct. A guru or an oracle, although Ramesh doesn’t use those terms.

My interpretation is different. Haksar was a career civil servant. He served as Secretary and, then, Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister. Yet, to my horror and dismay, Ramesh repeatedly and in great detail reveals the extent to which Haksar had no compunction whatsoever breaching the cardinal principle that a civil servant must not indulge in politics or trespass, even accidentally, into the political life of the ministers he serves. Haksar did this blithely. 

In April 1969, when Indira Gandhi broke with the Syndicate, Ramesh writes “Haksar had equipped Indira Gandhi with adequate arsenal to counter-attack.” In July of that year he was “the pivot … who gave shape, structure and substance” to her ‘Note on Economic Policy and Programme’ sent to her party. In August, when “a war of letters” broke out within Congress, Indira Gandhi’s were “crafted and drafted by Haksar”. There’s even a detailed memo dated 30 August wherein Haksar tells Gandhi how to handle Congress legislators. 

This sort of undisguised and unashamed intervention in Gandhi’s political life spans the entire period of six years Haksar worked with her. After the Congress split, of November 1969, Haksar wrote her AICC speech. In 1970, he drafted the foreign policy resolution for another AICC session. In June 1970, he gave her “a set of proposals involving a thoroughgoing reshuffle of the cabinet”. In 1972, he did the same again, this time with an 11-page note. In between he advised her on the appointment of governors and judges, and encouraged her to nationalise oil-refining companies and urban land.

Even at election time, Haksar’s hand was all too visible. In 1971, “Haksar was fully involved in the campaign at every step — writing substantial parts of the manifesto, suggesting possible candidates and getting feedback from his band of political and non-political friends in different states.” When the states went to the polls in 1972, he “played a major role in finalising the Congress party’s manifesto”.

This is unforgivable behaviour in a civil servant. Yet Haksar had no qualms about breaching propriety. He cannot but have been aware of his moral and ethical transgression, yet it seems he was unconcerned about it. Even if on the odd occasion he wrote “it’s not for me to draft resolutions for a political party” that did not stop him actually doing so.

What is perhaps more surprising is that Ramesh accepts this without demur. As far as I can see, he doesn’t raise any questions about Haksar breaking the cardinal rule that should determine a civil servant’s behaviour, the need to be politically neutral and above the partisan fray.

When I spoke to him, Ramesh did not deny Haksar betrayed these values and behaved more like a politician than a civil servant. I guess Ramesh sees no fault in that. But would he accept a similar crossing of red lines by Nripendra Misra, Narendra Modi’s Principal Secretary? Logically speaking he would have to. Although I didn’t ask him that question, I doubt if he actually will.

I recommend this book for reasons very different to Ramesh’s and which, no doubt, will upset him. It’s necessary reading for those who need to be informed how a civil servant must never behave.