T N Ninan: Make it a habit

WEEKEND RUMINATIONS

Most people would have been pleasantly surprised by Manmohan Singh's reply to the parliamentary debate on the Indo-US nuclear deal, on Thursday night. He was forceful and forthright, clear in his thinking and precise in the formulation of issues, passionate about his own position and responsibility, and credible in his rebuttal of criticism. He spoke with authority and conviction, and at the same time with civility and balance. In short, he was completely prime ministerial. The pity is that he does not do this often. His Independence Day speech just a few days earlier, by way of comparison, had substance but was delivered in a colourless way, and he did not really connect with his audience.

On Thursday, Dr Singh said history will judge whether he had been weak or strong. That is of course true, but it might be argued that the strong Prime Ministers of the past have not left such a glorious legacy, so "strength" may not necessarily be a virtue. Perhaps the more useful epithet to strive for would be "effective" leadership. That was very much in evidence in the heady days of 1991-92, when a passionate Dr Singh in his role as finance minister went about articulating the case for economic reform. He chose his own team in the ministry, he laid out the agenda and spelt out the vision, he gave interviews, and he took on all the criticism head-on. And when things were going wrong in the closing stages of the Rao government, he had the courage to speak out against crony capitalism. That kind of performance has been missing in his prime ministership, perhaps because he has chosen consciously to adopt a low profile (that Sonia Gandhi is the real political power cannot be wished away). But in a game without rules, perhaps the only rule in politics is that those who don't exercise power will find challengers who want to seize it. If Dr Singh does not lead from the front, and shows everyone that he is doing so, there will be challengers of all kinds""even unlikely ones like Arjun Singh and Natwar Singh, and Prakash Karat.

The cop-out would be to argue that there is little that Dr Singh can do when neither the UPA allies nor his own Congress party is a great votary of further economic reform, when he is hobbled by the mandate given to him through the Common Minimum Programme, and when every ally in the UPA can hold him to ransom. Indeed, Dr Singh may not know it, but his own senior Cabinet colleagues admit privately that the useful life of this government is over, because every initiative is blocked by one or other interested party. All these handicaps are there and real, but the challenge of leadership is to cut through the knots. And that is not possible if the Prime Minister is not seen or heard publicly, and when the only voices on economic issues are those of the Left and of the critics.

In short, Dr Singh needs to bring the same passion and conviction to articulating his views on the many challenges facing the country""and then back those positions with action. While he may not be a popularly elected leader, the fact is that he has a strong constituency that is frustrated by the inaction. Also, he is the most acceptable leader today, other than Sonia Gandhi herself, and he can and should capitalise on that. He should not have to worry about what Sonia Gandhi might think if he gains in stature, because she is not threatened by him. And if he takes the lead, others in his government who share his convictions will feel emboldened to speak out in public. Dr Singh in fact has a rare blessing: alone among all governments of the past four decades, his government is not faced with a mid-life crisis; all that it needs to do is avoid mid-life paralysis. And that can happen if Manmohan Singh makes it a habit to deal with all issues in the way he has handled the nuclear deal.