Should these editors be there?

IN Opinion | 14/07/2006

The issue was simple: should a prime minister whose writ does not run, stay on in office?

You don`t say!

Darius Nakhoonwala

For some years now I have maintained that most Indian editors have become so politically aligned or are themselves politicians or are looking for political rewards, that they have lost their ability for independent thought. Amazing evidence of this came last week over the prime minister`s handling of disinvestments. Except for two newspapers, every major English newspaper either chose to say nothing or talked about peripheral issues.

The issue was simple: should a prime minister whose writ does not run, stay on in office? Only the Telegraph and the Business Standard posed the question and left the reader in no doubt whatsoever.

The Business Standard was first off the mark. "Only a couple of weeks ago, the Prime Minister`s people were telling journalists that Dr Singh had got fed up with being pushed around, he would now be his own man and move ahead on long-delayed reform measures… And indeed, he stood his ground against a rollback of the increase in petrol and diesel prices, despite his own party calling for it, and then announced the disinvestment programme that now lies in a shambles. The problem is not just with the freeze on all disinvestment, following the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam`s opposition to selling shares in Neyveli Lignite Corporation. There is also opposition from the Orissa Congress unit to the proposed sale of a minority stake in National Aluminium, and the Left`s general opposition to all disinvestment. Then there is the protest orchestrated over inflation (a meeting of the Congress Working Committee, and then a conference of chief ministers, no less). So it is time he asked himself the tough question: Why am I here?"

The Telegraph was equally blunt the next day. "Mr Singh has bid adieu to his own past, or the most significant achievement of his political career. The author of economic reforms has been forced to strangle economic reforms. There is nothing more pathetic than this because Mr Singh had before him a very clear alternative: he should have said no to the attempt at blackmail and offered to quit as prime minister… his inexplicable propensity to cling to power at any cost is eroding fast his sole asset and his only support base. If he is willing to sacrifice economic reforms at the altar of coalition politics, then the only conclusion one can draw, alas, is that principles count for nothing with him. As prime minister, he cannot see himself as a mere Congressman. He must do what he thinks is best for the country. Mr Singh placed the survival of the United Progressive Alliance above his duty to the country and his own dignity. Let there be a prayer for the vertical man even if India knows only the horizontal one."

The Hindustan Times didn`t go that far but was clearly displeased. "Even so, the government`s decision to put the disinvestments process on hold has made it look weak and vacillating within the country and abroad." But for the rest it sang the virtues of disinvestments.

The Hindu, as usual turned sanctimonious and changed the subject. "The aam admi has restaked his claim to the Congress` affections, judging from the explosion of activity in party offices geared to addressing the problems of the common people — galloping prices, inadequate stocks in the public distribution system, and continuing farmer suicides. If three high-level party meetings within a week underscored Congress President Sonia Gandhi`s anxiety on the inflation front, the Prime Minister, for his part, forayed into chronically distressed Vidarbha.." blah,blah,blah.