Politicking Began With India’s Very First President

From

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/politicking-began-with-indias-very-first-president/?emc=eta1

Politicking Began With India's Very First President

By

SAMANTH SUBRAMANIAN

 

Courtesy of Photo Division, Ministry of Information and BroadcastingRajendra Prasad, the first president of India, ratifies the Constitution of India, Jan. 26, 1950.

The Long View

Current events through the lens of history.

A few weeks ago, when the names of the candidates in India's presidential race were only just beginning to be chalked onto the tote board, I was speaking with Chintamani Mahapatra, a professor of political science at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

When, I asked him, did parties start politicking so intensely over the appointment of the president – over a post that was mostly ceremonial?

Mr. Mahapatra traced these intrigues back to the beginnings of coalition governments at the center. "There are multiple parties competing, with no party getting the clear required majority," he said, and in such cases, the constitution left it to the president's discretion to invite a party to form the government. "There's no statute to say that if Party A has 160 seats and Party B has 161 seats, that the president has to choose Party B. Party A could, with coalition allies, still form a government."

But the ability to install a president is also a mark of political prowess, and where there has been the potential for a power game, there has been politicking – even as far back as the election of India's first president, Rajendra Prasad.

After India became independent, C. Rajagopalachari – Rajaji, as he was widely known – served as the titular head of state, holding on to the Raj-era designation of governor-general as the country transitioned into a republic. In the mind of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajaji was also the best candidate for India's first president.

Courtesy of Photo Division, Ministry of Information and BroadcastingJawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India, in conversation with C. Rajagopalachari at the prime minister's residence in New Delhi, Nov. 15, 1949.

"'Rajaji' was an urbane scholar with whom the prime minister then got along very well," Ramachandra Guha writes in "India after Gandhi." But Nehru's rival power center within the Congress Party, Sardar Valabhbhai Patel, thought differently, and while niggles of disagreements had always plagued the Nehru-Patel relationship, the issue of the presidential election generated, in 1949, the singing heat of full-blown friction.

Mr. Patel's choice for president was Mr. Prasad, a teacher and lawyer who had just presided over the assembly that drafted India's constitution. This frustrated Mr. Nehru, who tended to be annoyed by Mr. Prasad's public religiosity – by, for instance, his stated dedication to renovating the Somnath temple in Gujarat.

The media picked up on the tension; in June 1949, Blitz magazine wrote: "Rajaji's supporters argue Rajendra Prasad [is] physically unfit for a strenuous job of this nature, while the other camp is raking up the past to damn C.R. as the man who paved the way for [the creation of] Pakistan."

In trying to quench such speculation, however, there began a furious triangular bout of letter-writing between Mr. Nehru, Mr. Prasad and Mr. Patel, each trying – with exquisite politeness – to get his way.

In early September, Mr. Nehru revealed his hand fully. In a letter to Mr. Prasad – excavated for me, along with other such correspondence, by the historian Srinath Raghavan – Mr. Nehru wrote:

…we felt that the safest and best course from a number of points of view was to allow present arrangements to continue, mutatis mutandis. That is that Rajaji might continue as President. That would involve the least change and the state machine would continue functioning as before… Also in a way to push out Rajaji at this stage would be almost a condemnation of his work. That would be most unfortunate.

Mr. Nehru perhaps expected Mr. Prasad to back down, in the face of such a loud and clear vote in favor of Rajaji. Mr. Prasad did not – because, quite possibly, he knew he had the staunch support of Mr. Patel. Writing back to Mr. Nehru – and Bcc'ing Mr. Patel, so to speak, on all these letters – Mr. Prasad pushed back:

You say that my election would involve change and rearrangement and that it would almost be a condemnation of Rajaji's work. It is not clear why change and rearrangement in this respect should be avoided, when the whole Constitution under which we have so long worked is going to change… There is no condemnation involved or implied if a man is not reappointed to a post…on the expiry of the term of his office… Please excuse the length of this letter and the feeling that I cannot help entertaining that I deserved a more decent [exit], particularly when I did not want an entry.

Through the latter half of September, while Mr. Nehru was visiting Great Britain and the United States, Mr. Patel kept up a stream of assurances to Mr. Prasad. Simultaneously, Mr. Nehru grew more acutely aware of the mood within his party. "I am told that very active and vigorous canvassing has taken place on this subject and there is a large majority who favour Rajendra Babu," he wrote to Mr. Patel. "This is not merely a question of favoring Rajendra Babu but rather of deliberately keeping Rajaji out."

Mr. Patel responded diplomatically, calling the situation "very complicated" and "rather baffling." The atmosphere, Mr. Patel wrote, "stinks in my nostrils and I wonder to what depths of intrigues and manoeuvrings [sic] we have lowered ourselves."

Even well into December, Mr. Nehru continued with his campaign to keep Rajaji on as president. In a long letter dated Dec. 8, 1949, he all but urged Mr. Prasad to drop out of the race immediately:

…[I]t would be an unseemly sight for the country and for the Congress for two of our most eminent leaders to contest against each other… What then can we do? It is patent that there are only two persons who might be chosen as President of the Republic – yourself and Rajaji… One of these two should, it seems to me, take the initiative in declaring that he will not stand for the Presidentship… I should be very grateful if you could advise me in this matter.

Mr. Prasad did not wilt:

I agree that a decision regarding the Presidentship of the Republic should be taken without any further delay… For some reason or other – justified or wholly wrong – there is a considerable opinion among the members of the Assembly who insist on my accepting the Presidentship… [I]t appears my not accepting the offer will be looked upon by them as a 'betrayal'… The inference that I draw from this is that the election of Rajaji will not be smooth even if I were to withdraw and propose his name.

In the end, the will of the majority of the Congress Party – and of Mr. Patel – prevailed. "Nehru would face not only one of his earliest major rebuffs over an executive appointment but also was to be given a head of state that for the first time truly tested the constitutional relationship between the head of state and the prime minister," the political scientist Harshan Kumarasingham observed in an article in Modern Asian Studies in 2010.

And while Mr. Nehru had to accept the choice of his party, he didn't have to like it. In "The Prime Minister and the President," James Manor recounted: "Prasad enraged Nehru by suggesting a change in the date of Republic Day … because it was astrologically inauspicious. He also tried unsuccessfully to include Hindu rituals in his presidential installation ceremony."

On Jan. 26, 1950, at 10:24 a.m., Mr. Prasad was sworn in as India's first president, the oath administered to him – ironically enough – by Rajaji, the retiring governor-general. The very next day, on a flight back to Madras, Rajaji wrote a short and supportive letter to the new president, displaying some of the tact and pragmatism that once earned him the description of "the wisest man in India."

My dear Rajen Babu,

My thought goes back naturally to you all whom I have left behind… May you find all the strength and the support you require! I go out with joy in my heart at the beautiful manner in which the little changeover has taken place. There was nothing to mar the beauty of it. God bless you all.

And then, after a signature, Rajaji added a postscript that can only be read, in the light of the events that preceded it, as a final burst of mischievousness:

P.S. Please show this to Jawaharlal and Vallabhbhai. I am not writing separately to them. – C.R.

 

Dr Kalam – people’s President, politician’s nightmare!

 

The reasons surrounding the decision of Dr Abdul Kalam to opt out of the presidential elections say it all – that the country does not want nor accept the best and the eligible ones. The so-called social justice that is keeping away the best and the eligible ones from education and jobs is at work as Political Justice also - in matters pertaining to the self interests of the politicians. They do not want the best and straight forward persons to deal with. They can get along only with those people who know the language of  2C – Corruption and CBI net.

The irony is that his religious identity as a Muslim did not carry any value in these political circles. Last time they ditched him out to make way for a 'woman' President, but accepted a Muslim Vice President. The same Vice President could have been elevated as the President on the Muslim tag, but Kalam spoiled it. The root cause of the disdain for him is that he would not become a Rubber stamp – the exact job that the Congress bosses want the President to do. The scenario is such that the upcoming years would see a role for the President as a Rubber stamp. Clearly Kalam does not fit in the bill.

The first salvo against him was expectedly from the Emperor of Corruption, Karunanidhi.  Karunanidhi made a nasty and uncharitable remark that Kalam means Kalagam. Almost all the news reports translated Kalagam as confusion whereas the actual meaning of that word is 'mischief'. It really surprised me that no one corrected it and no writer or editor condemned the uncharitable remark of Karunanidhi. That he could say this in spite of his exploitative politics on Muslim and Tamil tags goes to show how the media and the constituencies that he is supposed to nurture through minority and Tamil politics are dumb and are the pawn in the games of Karunanidhi. No Tamil and no Muslim from Tamilnadu took him to task for maligning Kalam's  name like this, while the fact is that  'Kalam' in his name is  not a Tamil word.  It is a Muslim name, though a word called Kalaam exists in Tamil.

The word Kalaam was used in Tamil Literature in a different meaning. The popular literary work called Pazhamozhi ( adage)  has a verse (verse 215) that mentions "Vey kalaam veRpa' in which the word kalaam is used to mean 'fitting' or suitable' or 'merging with' .

215	சிறத்த நுகர்ந்தொழுகும் செல்வ முடையார் அறஞ்செய் தருளுடைய ராதல் - பிறங்கல் அமையொடு வேய்கலாம் வெற்ப! அதுவே சுமையொடு மேல்வைப்பா மாறு.     Explanation:-

அமை - கெட்டி மூங்கில். வேய் - உள் துளை உடையது. செல்வத்தின் பயனாகிய இம்மை யின்பங்களை அவர் அடைந்தொழுகலான் அறஞ்செய்து அருளுடையராகி மறுமையின்பமும் பெறுகவென்று கூறியவாறு. 'அமையொடு வேய்கலாம் வெற்ப' என்பது, இன்பமாய நாட்டை உடையவன் என்பதைக் குறித்து நின்றது.)

If Karunanidhi wanted to discourage Dr Kalam from entering the fray, he could have done it in other ways, but not by using a meaning that is not appropriate and in no way reflective of Dr Kalam's character. It is really shocking to see Karunanidhi get away with what he has said as no one has challenged him.

The Muslim saviour Mulayam finds it comfortable to see Kalam as a closed chapter. The Congress spokespersons accused Kalam in the TV debates of craving for post and as one who could not even contest a Gram sabha. Strangely I did not come across any eminent writer or editor or magazine speaking for Kalam's candidature. It is certain that all these people would have been up in arms to defame Dr Kalam in every possible way if only Dr Kalam had agreed to contest the Presidential poll.

He backed out of the race which is hailed by many as right or wise decision. The Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari calls it as an appropriate decision. In the worst ever Editorial written in the recent past, The Hindu praised Dr Kalam for backing out and not giving into the self serving political motives of his supporters whereas the politicians who benefited from Kalam's exit were those belonging to the Congress and its supporters. The same Editorial says that Kalam enjoys the love of the people and he is heard wherever he goes. What then made the Hindu editor think that Kalam is not the right person for the post?  (Hindu Edit given below)

This kind of adversarial postures of the politicians of 2C and their supporters in media forced Dr Kalam out of the contest. Yes, I would say that he was forced out of the fray. He did not leave because there was no guaranteed support for him.  The campaign of character assassination started even before he could be convinced to contest. By sullying his image, the ruthless politicians have achieved what they wanted – of making him quit the contest. The "totality of the matter and the present political situation" that he mentioned as the causes for his decision were indeed paved by the advice of his two mentors, his elder brother and his teacher who told him  , "If you contest, then political parties will try to damage your image. So it's better if you keep away from it," Perhaps his mentors sensed a tit for tat in the game let loose by Sonia who wanted to deny Presidentship to Dr Kalam in return for what he did to her as a constitutionally driven decision.

 

This news did not appear in most newspapers of India but found its way into the TOI of today. A President's post is not a political post. There need not be any stake being invested on that post. But the way the Congress had chosen its nominee and discouraged Dr Kalam from contesting shows that we are definitely going to see a degradation of the President's role within the next 5 years. If this is the way a non political post is getting filled up, how are things going to be in the coming years? If this could happen to a person like Dr Kalam, how are we going to inspire the likes of him to enter into public service and politics?

From another angle, I would say that if only Dr Kalam had entered the fray, the political dynamics would have changed by a pitched campaign by the people of India themselves through all possible forums.  Persons like Karunanidhi could have been made to think of a possible backlash  before making such remarks. A strong public opinion could have been created forcing the non congress politicians to support Dr Kalam. All these could have become possible if the BJP and Mamata planned well in advance and projected Dr Kalam ahead of everyone else.

 

-          Jayasree

*******

From

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOICH/2012/06/19&PageLabel=7&EntityId=Ar00701&ViewMode=HTML

 

Kalam pulled out of Prez race on advice of his brother and teacher Karthick S & C D S Mani TNN Chennai: A combination of reasons, including advice from his 96-year-old elder brother, his school teacher and a few family members, prompted former President A P J Abdul Kalam to stay away from the contest for the President's post. Besides, there were pragmatic considerations, the main one being there was a compulsion to enter the fray only if there was a consensus for his candidature and the numbers were in his favour.     Sources close to Kalam said his Rameswaram-based brother Muthu Meeran Maraikkar and his teacher Reverend Fr Chinnadurai, who stays in the Dindigul Diocese Hostel, had been in touch with him over telephone for the past three days, counselling him not to contest the presidential election. They spoke several times on Sunday night and Monday morning, as pressure mounted on the former President to throw his hat into the ring. "Kalam has great respect for the views of his brother and teacher and always followed their advice," the sources said. "If you contest, then political parties will try to damage your image. So it's better if you keep away from it," is the gist of the advice given to Kalam by his teacher, it is learnt.     Over the past three days, insiders said, Kalam had been besieged by requests to contest the presidential elections as his supporters felt he could use the platform of a presidential campaign to address various issues confronting the nation and pursue his development agenda. Irrespective of whether he won or not, Kalam was sought to be persuaded that he could utilize the opportunity to unite development-oriented groups and political parties.     Kalam on Monday made it clear that he was not in the race for the post of President, saying his "conscience" did not permit him to contest. In a formal statement released to the media after communicating his decision to BJP senior leader L K Advani, the missile man from Tamil Nadu said, "Though I have never aspired to serve another term or shown interest in contesting the elections, the TMC chief Mamata Banerjee and other political parties wanted me to be their candidate. Many, many citizens have also expressed the same wish…this being their wish, I respect it… and want to thank them for the trust they have in me. I have considered the totality of the matter and the present political situation … and decided not to contest."     Though he is not in the presidential fray, Brand Kalam, political observers say, will continue to hold sway as his 2020 vision of India as a knowledge superpower with self-sufficiency in energy and extensive rural infrastructure has won him a legion of followers and admirers. Kalam's popularity across the society also stems from his single status, vegetarianism, educational initiatives and proficiency as a Veena player, observers point out.

 

***********

The Hindu Editorial

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article3543920.ece

 

Well done, Mr. Kalam

Political parties, as is their wont, play political games, whether in a parliamentary or presidential election. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who distinguished himself as one of India's most popular Presidents during 2002-2007, seems to have been quick to sense the designs of self-serving politicians who were seeking to drag him into another presidential contest. With the ruling United Progressive Alliance announcing Pranab Mukherjee as its candidate, and the opposition National Democratic Alliance divided over forcing a fight, Mr. Kalam would have been staking his personal prestige and international reputation in a presidential bout without standing a realistic chance of winning. Often celebrated as the People's President during his years in office, Mr. Kalam enjoys the love and affection of countless youth in the country. The octogenarian bachelor is seen as a selfless patriot standing apart from the much-derided political class. In 2002, when he decided to contest, the political circumstances were markedly different: both the major political formations, the NDA and the Congress, were with him, and only the Left parties put up a token fight. Now, with Mr. Mukherjee getting the support of even the Samajwadi Party — whose leader, Mulayam Singh, was instrumental in first proposing Mr. Kalam's name in 2002 and floating his candidature this time around too — the presidential race is as good as over. The Left parties will decide on their stand on June 21, but no matter what, they would be averse to backing an NDA nominee even if it is Mr. Kalam.

Mr. Kalam would surely have realised he would be placing his own legacy under threat if he were to contest again. As a former President, he is taken seriously wherever he goes. On the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant issue, his views had a bearing on the broader public opinion, even if not on the local populace. If West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and the BJP wanted him as President, it was only to serve their respective political ends. The BJP will do anything to embarrass the Congress, and Ms Banerjee will stop at nothing to stay in the spotlight and project herself as the prime mover of all things. To his credit, Mr. Kalam was able to see through the motives of his supposed backers, and resist the temptation to enter the fray. In 2007, when there was a similar move to make him contest again, he had rightly stepped back as he did not want to involve Rashtrapati Bhavan in any political process. Five years on, Mr. Kalam's statesmanship, vision and sense of his own legacy remain undiminished.