Hurling accusations at each other and indulging in an unending blame game, with no holds barred, is usually associated with the politicians whose representatives battle it out every day at prime-time TV debates and on Twitter and other social networks.’
What kind of image do we wish to project abroad: Digital India or Bulldozer India?
Regrettably, this disease seems to have infected the retired civil servants too. After hanging up their official gloves, the civil servants return to the status of ordinary citizens of India. So, one can’t find any fault with their strong urge to give vent, in public, to their views and opinions which they held back for decades bound of the Civil Service Conduct Rules. And as ordinary but supposedly well-informed citizens of this nation, they too have the sovereign right to applaud and support government policies and decisions or express their concerns and reservations and point out what they thought had gone wrong with certain government decisions and policies. This is quite a normal phenomenon in democracies.
So, why should this generate any controversy? If some retired civil servants feel that the PM was going great guns; he was serving vital interests of the country, raising her international stature high and doing India proud; they have every right to say so loudly, it’s their prerogative. Why should it rattle anyone?
By the same yard stick, if some civil servants think that things were not honky and dory as claimed and many issues of larger public interest remained unattended and government indulged in blitzkrieg of publicity and strident rhetoric rather than concrete results, they too have a right to express their views, take a stand and be counted? Why should their patriotism be questioned on account of their criticism of the government of the day? Are we so insecure?
Healthy criticism is a must for the health of the democracy. But can unsubstantiated, sweeping, unbalanced criticism considered constructive? Acts of violence, irrespective of who organized or initiated them, must be condemned and real perpetrators brought to justice soonest possible. Arrests of common citizens on flimsy grounds like making critical remarks about the CM; drawing a cartoon or making fun as a stand-up comedian are unacceptable in a democracy. Similarly, drawing attention to cow lynching, mob lynching and excesses of the security force or the police isn’t a crime. On the contrary; it’s the duty of every conscientious citizen to flag such incidents in public interest. Telling citizens what to eat and what to wear runs counters the spirit of democracy.
But how sensible it is to blame the PM for all this? Notwithstanding certain negative developments that might be taking place in different parts of the country, does it make any sense to call the PM a Hitler and accuse him of pursuing a fascist agenda? His critics shouldn’t lose balance and propriety, their absence often erodes the genuineness and credibility of the criticism which might be well-intentioned.
Yes, as the head of the government for over 1.3 billion people, when such things happen, the PM can’t escape a moral responsibility. And many believe, a prompt, strong and unequivocal condemnation of such developments by the PM and an appeal for peace and harmony will go a long way in bringing the situation under control.
Recently, I was aghast to see some civil servants hurling serious accusations at their fellow servicemen/women; some of them 10-15 years senior and having held much higher posts, on national TV. They sounded in agreement to the suggestion that the civil servants critical of the government might be acting at the behest of some foreign power. What a preposterous and ridiculous suggestion!
Whatever might be their other failings and shortcomings; one will have to concede that the civil services have kept this country united and, barring some bad apples, have served the government of the day with utmost loyalty and offered to their political masters the best possible advice. If this wasn’t true there won’t have been civil servants who have served as the cabinet secretary, principal secretary to the PM, the home secretary and foreign secretary under four-five Prime Ministers of different political parties.
To suggest, even remotely, that those who once served as the cabinet secretary or foreign secretary or secretary in different ministries and director general of police in big states might be acting on behalf of foreign powers is absurd! It’s as credible as Imran Khan’s accusation that the US wanted to bring down his government.
A senior member of the Union cabinet who is in-charge of three key ministries was a member of the IFS for 40 years and has served 11 Prime Ministers. None has ever questioned his honesty, integrity, competence and professionalism. Why should it be different for other retired civil servants?
Perhaps inspired by vigilantes of various kinds and having got a booster of patriotism from 24×7 talk of patriotism on most TV channels, some retired civil servants have imagined themselves as the protectors of the current dispensation. In their irrepressible zeal, they pounce on anyone who dares to find fault with the present government, especially the PM.
But do the BJP and the PM need such civil servant defenders? In spite of the devastating second wave of coronavirus, distressing sight of thousands of half-clad and half-fed migrants walking bare feet hundreds of KM to their villages during the lockdown, the bloody incursion by the China in Galwan Valley, loss of millions of jobs and skyrocketing price of petrol diesel and the gas and shortages of many products thanks to the ongoing Ukrainian crises, PM Modi remains the most popular national leader of India.
In the Covid-hit world, his global stature has risen higher; he is sought out by world leaders. His recent visit to Germany, France & Denmark & the visits of world leaders to India in the last two months validates that point. His party enjoys unassailable majority in Lok Sabha and has government in 17 states.
In Sambit Patra, Nalin Kohli, Sudhanshu Trivedi, Gaurav Bhatia, the BJP has some of the most combative, well-informed and articulate spokespersons to defend the government. So, what motivates some retired civil servant to attack the members of their own clan like vigilantes? Is it the lure of a few minutes of arc light at prime-time on national TV?
We can dismiss all the foreign criticism. But can anything be concealed from today’s all pervasive social network? On his latest European visit, like in the past, Narendra Modi has been making tireless efforts to project India’s image as a country on the move, her aspirational people embracing and mastering new technologies and becoming major players. For the last three days, he has been talking about start-ups, green energy, solar energy, Unicorns, connecting all the villages with broadband internet connections and having done away with over 2500 obsolete rules and regulations and inviting his audience to visit India to witness it’s unbelievable transformation.
Alas, loose cannons of some organizations indulge in the most provocative and combustible utterances as happened at the Dharma Sansads; they made open exhortations to rape Muslim women and incited ordinary people by alleging that Muslims will attack, kidnap and rape Hindu women. While Modi is busy in explaining how green energy will help us meet our climate change commitments, back home, many are fighting street/legal battles about Hanuman Chalisa and loudspeakers.
What kinds of image do we wish to project abroad: Digital India or Bulldozer India?
Surendra Kumar is a former Indian ambassador.
