‘Governance’ is considered to be
anybody’s task and often understood as requiring little less than honest
intentions and formal education. Even the most informed voter often casts his
vote in favour of a presumably less corrupt candidate. Having an incorruptible
image is often considered sufficient to be in the business. If it were true,
one would not be hard put to identify leaders in India’s sixty year long
political history with demonstrably effective governance record.
Unfortunately, politics is a
discipline by itself and governance is rocket science. In India’s inherently complex and
evolving socio-political dynamics, this is increasingly true. Honesty is both
necessary and desirable but by no means sufficient. Political brilliance has no
substitute. Incompetence, on the other hand has no virtue. The importance of it is required to be stressed as unfortunately politics is confused with romanticizing poverty and glamorizing false pride.
Political brilliance is by its
very nature less evident and difficult to trace. If history is any judge, we
also know that it is rare. It is characterised by leadership quality, decision
making ability, political will and the acumen in governance. Disdaining qualities
or rendering them irrelevant will prove suicidal. What we have also witnessed
very often is that a political discourse which ignores political brilliance generates
sub-standard governments.
Lack of political acumen is
capable of creating epic blunders. Nehru’s vision of Kashmir which lacked foresight
and national interest led to an almost irreversible problem. Rajiv Gandhi’s
addiction to irrational, anti-national and sectarian sentiments churning out
one disaster after another is not unknown either, while political brilliance of
Sardar post independence and Indira Gandhi during the Bangladesh War led to
unification of India and consolidation of national security, respectively.
It is hard to imagine why a
leader should be judged on extraneous grounds except for governing abilities.
Demonstrable and relevant merit
is indispensable for any employment. Being young may not be enough, being a
dynast is totally irrelevant. Any departure from the norm will render the
institution deficient. Politics is no different.
The simple answer the question of who should be in the business is that it has to be the one who knows how to do the business.
