Speaking in the one of his last few press conferences as Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh said he believed he had been judged too harshly and may be viewed more kindly when the history of this period is written. But will history writers be as kind to Singh's legacy, as he hopes they will be?
"History will judge him as a man with some talent but as a timid person. History will record him as a person who is an expert in passing the buck," Vinod Mehta, editorial chairman of the Outlook Group told CNN-IBN during a panel discussion on the show India at 9. The other panelists weren't much kinder.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Image courtesy PIB
"He is a rather pathetic and tired prime minister. He did not have very much to showcase and therfore he left it to the historians to judge him. Singh will be compared with his predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the one who follows him as prime minister. For being an artful dodger he will not be judged mildly in history but may be somewhat kindly for being the architect of liberalisation in India," said senior journalist Swapan Dasgupta.
Some believe that Singh may be judged more kindly than in the present day but he may not get as complete an absolution as he hopes for.
"History will judge him more favourably than he is being judged today by the media or by anyone else but it will be a mixed judgement," N Ram, former editor-in-chief of The Hindu, said,
The principal opposition party, BJP, believes that he will be seen as a political survivor and not as a great leader.
"Singh remained as prime minister in office but was never in authority. He was more concerned that he should be judged by history and not by the people of the country. For us history will preserve him as the great bureaucrat politician who was a great survivor. But it is a different matter that he will only get a footnote in the history books," Ravi Shankar Prasad of the BJP said.
The Prime Minister has constantly maintained that he was in no way involved in the scandals that his government and fellow ministers have been accused of, unfortunately it is the inability to prevent them that may cost the Congress dearly in the upcoming general elections. While some felt it was the very same failing seen in the Prime Minister's press conference, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi felt he had addressed all criticisms in a straightforward manner.
"The prime minister is humble and honest. He talks about specifics. He is very clear and straightforward," Singhvi said.
So who is to blame for shackling the Prime Minister, who claims he wanted to do the right thing at all times? Was it Congress president Sonia and Rahul Gandhi? No it was entirely his own inability to take harsh decisions, said Ram.
"Sonia Gandhi never crossed the line. She always maintained a cordial relationship with the prime minister. She often referred to the prime minister on key issues. He did not assert himself enough," Ram said.
Ram said he was appalled that the prime minister even today attempted to protect the corrupt with the victory of the Congress party in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections.
"Prime Minister Singh should not have defended the indefensible. The fact that corrupt actions took place during the tenure of UPA-I and despite they were voted into power to form the UPA-II do not undermine the wrongs that were done. Actually it took a while to unravel the irregularities and get the whole thing exposed be it Commonwealth Games, 2G scam or the coal block allocations. Winning an election cannot defend the illegal deals that were made. Defending the indefensible makes him less than honest," Ram said.
Columnist Dasgupta agreed with this and said that he believed the press conference held by the Prime Minister was merely a means to prop up his credibility.
"The goodwill he had in 2004 and 2009 has been squandered. The purpose of today's press conference was to prop up his own credibility but he failed to do that. The way he handled (BJP leader) Arun Jaitley's letter on alleged corruption by Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Virbhadra Singh that he did not have the time to apply his mind into the contents of the letter is a sad state of affairs," Dasgupta said.
However, Singhvi argued that the Prime Minister had never shied away from taking decisions, no matter the consequences.
"The prime minister is taking responsibility and accountability. He is never evasive on corruption. Had it been so, so many people would not have lost their posts or the documents would not have come out in the public domain," Singhvi said.
"The prime minister's authority can be asserted in a quiet manner and he need not be rhetorical," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment