At the Simla Institute which trains hundreds of bright young men and women who have passed the All India Civil Service Examinations, the focus, I am told, used to be on foreign affairs. The brightest and the best who had cleared the Indian Foreign Service examinations were the ‘cream’, and just needed some finishing touches before taking up their assignments abroad. The trend, however, is changing. Today, the same bright youngsters are opting not for foreign postings, but for the more important and less glamorous Indian Administrative Services (IAS), where they are more directly involved in running the country at the behest of their political masters.
The IAS (formerly ICS or Indian Civil Service) prepared these young men and women in more arduous duties like feeding India’s millions, preparing the infrastructure for the iron frame of the country (industry, education, defence, transport, aviation), taking care that the expenditure on these did not exceed the annual income. This is an enormous task made more difficult by constant interference by politicians. Yet, such is the challenge that it attracted not only the IFS personnel, but also crack teams holding degrees in higher management and engineering.
When a political party gets elected and forms the government, the focus is generally on key portfolios like Home, Finance, Defence and External Affairs. The State Chief Ministers tend to keep some of these major portfolios for themselves. The Prime Minister of a vast nation like India would also like to do the same, but often is unable to do so because he finds out quickly that being Prime Minister is more than one man’s job. His political advisers help him to choose the right candidates for the jobs. The ministers chosen thus may not be the best, but essentially they have strong political roots, can raise funds, and maintain discipline in their regions.
The Nehru-Gandhi golden era of foreign policy
Foreign affairs is an acquired taste. It offers lesser opportunities to acquire political clout within the party or the chance to build a strong political base. It suits a political leader whose interests are wide and varied. Jawaharlal Nehru, though the PM, was the best choice as the External Affairs Minister because he was a man of the world, who understood and could interpret happenings in many parts of the world, and how they related to India. A couple of junior ministers to do the routine work in the ministry were enough. Nehru himself formulated major policies, reacted to international developments, and guided a team of brilliant bureaucrats like N.R. Pillai, G.S. Bajpai and R.K. Nehru. He had the guts to appoint his friend, V.K. Krishna Menon, and stand by him when he was pilloried by the right wing media, and its powerful political supporters.
Even as the Prime Minister, Nehru was extraordinarily active as his own External Affairs minister. He founded the Third World thinking, got it the respect it deserved and his concept of ‘Panchsheel’ was ahead of its time. Nehru was a leader who had a vision of the world but the other politicians like Morarji Desai could never understand him.
To them, communism was an evil ideology and America alone could save India from the clutches of the Russian Bear. No Asian leader contributed so much to international understanding as Nehru and the respect he received from the rest of the world was fully deserved. The people who rule India today will never understand how forward thinking he was, and it was fortunate that India had a citizen of the world to guide our foreign policy during its early years.
It was another strong leader, this time Indira Gandhi, who focused world attention on India by taking on Pakistan and creating Bangladesh, even while offending the US and its Indian chamchas (sycophants). We often talk of Indian pride but no one exhibited it as well as Mrs Gandhi who saw through the double talk of Nixon and his Machiavellian Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger. Unable to make Indira toe the US line, ‘Tricky Dick’ and Henry abused Mrs Gandhi in the vilest terms in their memoirs. Strange to say, Dr Kissinger was a hero to the strong industrial lobby in India, which kept inviting him and contributing liberally to the various ‘causes’ he supported.
The Nehru-Gandhi era was the one which kept Indian foreign policy flying. Since then, our position as a world power has waned (despite the so-called economic clout which we had supposedly acquired), and our foreign policy has remained a mute spectator. Prime Ministers came and went, hardly showing any interest in creating an impression on the world scene. The present one acts as though he was the Prime Minister of Gujarat.
The United States world view
Weak or strong, the United States contributes strongly to the world by way of its own foreign policy and how it affects others. Men like John Kennedy were widely read in foreign affairs, fought World War II, wrote major books, and at least prepared themselves to rule their country. Kennedy formulated his own foreign policy, collected a powerful ‘think-tank’ from universities, industry and the media. Look at the galaxy of stars who worked for him – Prof J K Galbraith, Adlai Stevenson, Robert McNamara (Head of Ford Motors), Harvard historian Arthur Schlesinger and so on.
Kennedy followed world affairs closely, though often he reached conclusions which were wrong. It was a pity he could not get along with Nehru who by that time was old and ill. Both India and the US were more concerned with economic issues. Somehow, the noble art of diplomacy declined. The USSR had also contributed much through Andrei Gromyko (who ended up as President of USSR), Anatoly Dobrynin, the long-serving envoy to the US, V M Molotov, Andrei Vyshinsky and others. It was the golden age of debate. Wrong decisions were taken, injustice was done, but diplomacy was developed\ to a great art. Read the books published during this era and you will understand what I say.
But India which once perched at the top of the United Nations as a strong member, crumbled. Each succeeding Prime Minister was ready to work as a mere satrap and was devoid of a world view. Our foreign policy was hijacked by several vested interests. Strong decisions needed to be taken on India-Sri Lanka relations, but the issue was allowed to be clouded by the petty regional issues of the Dravidian parties. Mamata Banerjee tells the Centre on how to deal with Bangladesh problems. State governments in Punjab and Tamil Nadu deify murderers who killed Indian Prime Ministers. In this political and intelligence vacuum, foreign policy has no role to play.
[/column][column size=”4/5″]
V. Gangadhar
The writer is a well-known satirist.[/column]