Of Offensive Defence Minister, Sandwiched PM!

Lessons from the past: wobbly coalition, threats of resignations & pressures on PM

By S.Narendra

(Former Information Adviser, Principal Information Officer and Govt Spokesperson)

It was close to 9PM The prime ministerial   delegation was at Palam airport. The special protection group (SPG) had lined up the convoy of vehicles, at PM’s residence-7 Race Course Road for  taking PM Inder Kumar Gujral  to the airport on his way to  New York  via Germany. And, then, I was asked to convey to SPG that the PM had postponed his trip. Read on.....

Contrary to his claim, Gujral was under
a tremendous coalition pressure

The United Front government headed by Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral (1997-98) was a wobbly coalition, and had come to be perceived as a government in transition. On one side the Congress president, Sitaram Kesari, who was supporting the coalition from outside, was nursing his own prime ministerial ambitions.  Within the coalition, Mulayam Singh Yadav of Samadwadi party, had a grievance against Gujral. Yadav had almost become prime minister when Devegowda resigned in Apirl 1997. But the CPM guru,  Harkishan Singh Surjeet had manoeuvred to put Gujral in front of Yadav at the last minute. A sullen Yadav had to accept the post of defence minister under Gujral. His tenure as the defence minister (in-absentia)  was  mostly spent in Lucknow, plotting against his arch foe,  Mayavati ( of Bahujan Samajwadi party), who was the chief minister of UP. Yadav had vowed to oust Mayavati by hook or crook and was exerting almost daily pressure on Gujral to dismiss Mayavati government and impose the president’s rule.

A Foreign & Domestic Crisis: The coalition was lurching from crisis to crisis and was literally living on borrowed time. The central government employees had threatened to go on strike over a pay dispute arising out of the 5th pay commission. The prime minister had told the settlement negotiating team of cabinet ministers that the strike should be averted at any cost as he was scheduled to address the annual UN General Assembly and also meet the American president Bill Clinton in September. The government had reached an expensive settlement (that cost over Rs 10,000 crore, over and above the pay hike recommended by the pay commission) with the employees, by virtually ignoring the finance minister P. Chidambaram who had the difficult task of balancing the budget. This expensive give away upset states’ finances as well, as the latter had to extend similar pay benefits to their employees.

As one shadow on the PM’s proposed trip to the US, preceded by a two-day visit to Germany, was removed, another dark shadow was hovering above the coalition. The defence minister Mulayam Singh Yadav wanted the prime minister to dismiss the UP government of Mayawati before his departure. The central home and Law ministries and the UP governor, Romesh Bhandari  were under considerable political pressure to find some valid reason to destabilise the elected UP government in order to accommodate a rebellious ally.

PM sandwiched: The most complicating factor was that the parties forming the Janata government , while in opposition, were  vehemently  critical  of the way  the previous Congress governments had  misused the Article: 356 for dismissing  non-Congress state governments. Such misuse of had  also been taken to the  Supreme Court and the latter had now laid down strict guidelines  to be followed before dismissing any state government .

The prime minister was really in quandary because of yet another reason. A new President, K.R.Narayanan, was now in Rashtrapati Bhavan and he was  reputed to be a stickler for constitutional propriety. Any recommendation made by the Prime minister and his cabinet to dismiss Mayavati government had to have a legal basis and fulfill the Supreme Court guidelines as well.

Mulayam - Hard Stand

Among other things, the Supreme Court had laid down that the state governor recommending the dismissal of a government must establish with facts that the government in power had lost its legislative majority. And the only way the governor can come to that conclusion is after the government seeks (and loses), a vote of confidence in the Legislature. In this case, Mayawati had solid majority behind her. The PM was between a rock and a hard place.

Shadow Play:  The PM convened cabinet meeting after cabinet meeting and some of them were huddled inconclusively for several hours. Such meetings were mere shadow plays. Ministers and  we officials who attended such meetings knew the futility of such exercises, However, the  meeting  kept  Mulayam Singh Yadav’s  hopes alive and the PM was buying time. The governor, an adroit political player, who was under pressure from the defence minister would send copious faxes narrating the on-going horse trading in Lucknow but would not contain the crucial recommendation for imposition of the President’s rule. The Home Minister Inderjit Gupta (of CPI) was deadly opposed to imposition of the president’s rule, without the governor’s recommendation. After each inconclusive meeting, I was required to brief the media about the cabinet decision (without mentioning the deliberations and differences of opinion).

Mayawati - had the last laugh!

PM Cancels Foreign Trip: The day of PM’s departure had finally arrived. The cabinet met intermittently from morning till about 7.30 pm. In his private conversation, Gujral had told me that he was inclined to recommend the President’s rule and pass the buck to the Rastrapati Bhavan. But his home minister Inderjit Gupta of CPI was strongly opposed to it. The day’s cabinet proceedings were mostly devoted to persuading Inderjit Gupta to bail out the PM, who was to board the plane around 10 pm.

Gujral summoned me to 7, Race Course Road and I went to meet him around 8 pm. I conveyed to PM that the latest media gossip indicating  that the defence minister had planned to announce his resignation the next morning, when the PM was stepping into Germany on the first leg of his visit abroad. The PM got greatly agitated by this piece of news and we discussed the possible course of action available in the circumstances. While discussing the political mess, I submitted to him that since the centre piece of his trip was the address to the UN General Assembly, and the scheduled meeting with the US President Clinton, he should try to save that end of the trip. It was possible to buy some time by skipping Germany. The halt at Germany halt which was a little more than a refuelling stop, en-route to New York.  The available time could be used to explore the possibility of using  the  good offices of the CPM chief minister,  Jyoti Basu of West Bengal and others to bring round the Communist party’s home minister Inderjit Gupta  to agree to recommend the president rule over UP.

.

PM’s Delegation Disembarks at Palam: This suggestion appealed to the PM and he readily instructed me: “inform the Special Protection Group that I have postponed the visit”. The SPG officials who were  waiting outside with the convoy to take  PM  to Palam airport could not believe their ears when I told them that the PM has postponed his trip and they should inform the PM’s principal secretary and others who were waiting to board the plane at Palam about the decision.

I was told that the external affairs ministry was very upset about the cancellation of the visit to Germany. The principal secretary N.N.Vohra, however, appreciated my suggestion to PM to sort out the political knot before his departure for a more important diplomatic engagement.

The Author
(sunarendra@gmail.com) 

President says ‘NO’: To complete the story, the following day, after day-long deliberations, the Union Cabinet recommended the imposition of the President‘s rule in UP, and I was instructed around 1 AM to announce it to the media. Everyone knew that this recommendation would be returned without approval by the President. Before daylight, K.R.Narayanan had sent back the cabinet recommendation for reconsideration, raising some questions for which the government had no satisfactory answers. 

And this paved the way for the PM to board the plane for New York.

As information adviser and Government Spokesperson, sometimes one had to stray into  the role of a political consultant as well - because,  information, media and politics are first cousins.  

He said and he didn't! Britain, a 4th Rate Power?

And how I survived the litmus test for PR credibility!

By S.Narendra

(Former Advisor to PM and ex-spokesperson, Government of India)

Ceremonial visits are normally filled with visually rich ceremonies and banquets and above all photo ops. When the British Queen Elizabeth’s  visit to India was proposed  in 1993, during prime minister John Major’s  India tour, it was supposed to be a goodwill visit filled with symbolism and sentiments for strengthening  a historic partnership. But when the visit actually happened in 1997 October, it was trailed by controversy and left a further trail of avoidable bitterness.

Right to mediate in Paradise on Earth?

The then Labour government of Tony Blair in London had openly declared its intention to play a mediator’s role in the Kashmir dispute between India and Pakistan. What was more galling was that this government had claimed that such a role falls naturally on Britain as a former ruler of the sub-continent! And this stand was being articulated by its foreign secretary Robin Cook, who was to accompany the Queen during her India itinerary that coincided with India’s 50^th anniversary of independence. Another sore point with India was that the Queen was arriving in India after a visit to Islamabad, where Pakistan was bound to put the Kashmir issue in front.

Gore-Bhoot: In Delhi, the British envoy was Sir David Gore-Booth, had not endeared himself to both the British and the Indian media with his public pronouncements on the Kashmir issue and his unwelcome comments on the Punjab people’s demand for a royal apology for the atrocities committed by British officials at Jalianwalabagh in 1929. While the British media referred to him as blumbering Sir David, the Hindi media had begun to refer to this envoy as ‘Gore-bhoot’ (white ghost).

The visits of ceremonial heads of states such as that of the Queen are largely surrounded by atmospherics and high but empty diplomatese. In this case the atmosphere was getting more and more polluted with indiscretions on both the sides. The advance party that came to India from the Buckingham palace were very arrogant and had obviously forgotten that India was no longer their colony. A brief circulated by them  to Indian business persons and others who were to interact with the visiting head of Britain contained tips like, when you meet the dignitary, address  her as ‘Your Majesty’ first time and then onwards ‘Ma’m’ pronounced as xxxx etc.

As they say when things go wrong, they tend to go very wrong. The government was keeping its   fingers crossed and was treading   very carefully to ensure that the Queen’s sojourn passes off without more controversy. In the meanwhile, there was news in media circles that a London based journalist of Indian origin, Shyam Bhatia (known for his off –beat new stories) was in the capital. He is the son of a great editor (late) Prem Bhatia whose columns were noted for their elegance as well as insights. Senior Bhatia belonged to a fast eroding generation of media persons who were sticklers for facts and propriety.  I had the privilege of knowing  him as an elderly friend, who would  make it a point to  seek an  appointment  with me every month  for a briefing. Senior Bhatia  was  a contemporary of  the then prime minister Inder Kumar Gujaral  as well his  family  friend from Punjab.

Back to Bhatia Jr. His presence in Delhi on the eve of the Queen’s visit shadowed by controversies  and I had requested   the prime minister’s personal office to inform me if  Shyam Bhatia  soiught a meeting  (as he was bound to do as a family friend) with Gujral. I learnt a few days later that Shyam Bhatia had departed, taking this matter off my mind.

The Queen’s arrival in Delhi was just a few days away.  On not-so fine morning around 5.30, Mike Wooldridge of BBC New Delhi bureau rang me up. He first apologised to me for phoning at such an early hour. The foreign correspondents rarely call at inconvenient hours unless the matter brooks no delay. Wooldridge of BBC, was indeed checking up  an important story circulating in London. He said: “Narendraji, has the prime minister called Britain, a fourth rate power? The Observer of London is publishing an interview of Prime Minister Gujral,  and if he has given the interview, BBC would like to use the story. London wants me to get confirmation’. Wooldridge also mentioned that the Observer seems to a have had a recorded tape of the interview. I requested the correspondent for 30 minutes to respond.

With some difficulty the PM was woken up (as I said in my previous column he was a late riser!) and I informed him of the interview. His first reaction was to deny the interview. When I told him that his interview was on tape, and gave him a gist of Wooldridge’s query to me, he seemed to be very upset.

Off-the-record, On the record

He told me that what he had spoken to Shyam Bhatia was not supposed to be on record. I submitted to PM that we cannot prevent BBC from broadcasting the story, since the Observer interview would be carried by almost all the British media. I suggested that during the course of the day we could perhaps say, as a face saving measure, that the PM has been misquoted. I also requested him to immediately advice the foreign ministry about the diplomatic steps they should take for damage control.

When I returned Wooldridge’s call and told him that BBC could go ahead with the story, he could not believe: “Sir, you are not denying it”.

Spokespersons’ Credibility: A government’s (or for that matter any organisations’) interests are best served, if and when it helps the Spokesperson retain his or her credibility, rather than make him defend the indefensible. A compromised news source is not an asset either to the organization or to the media. In the episode narrated here, if I had denied the PM’s interview or asked BBC not to use the story, not only my credibility as a Spokesperson would have suffered a major dent, but also any attempt to put pressure on the media not to use a factual story would have dissuaded the newspersons   from   contacting me for checking up facts or stories.

The author

Ours is a very difficult and delicate role where we have to guard (and balance) the interest of the organisation that we represent as well as the media person who is our gateway to the media world. During my stint as the Spokesperson of Government of India, I had tried to build a record of not misleading the media as well as not to put pressure on media when their facts were correct, except in cases where the very survival of the government was at stake or when it involved matters of national security.

When I took over as the Principal Information Officer and Spokesperson, I had announced to the media that I would be available on 24x7 basis for them to check any information relating to the government. As a result more than once (for instance during   the break-out of Surat Plague, seize of holy shrines in Kashmir), I was woken up by agencies at the dead of night for checking on rumours. The foreign correspondents stationed in India rarely picked up a story relating to government   from  Indian media or wire agencies before verifying its veracity from me. Because of my public announcement, no one in media could have an excuse for not checking up information before publishing a story (sunarendra@gmail.com).

.

.