Home :: Sunday Sentiments

Sunday Sentiments

  • The sad choice before us

    Posted On September 6, 1999

    By Karan Thapar

    Well, two days of voting are over although, of course, there are three more to go. In a sense we are trapped right in the middle of the electoral process. Hapless victims of loud talking parties and their obstreperously performing politicians. At the moment we are quite literally all they care about. But soon, far too soon, once the votes are in and counted, they will forget about us. At least, till next time round.

    So, today, let me reverse the focus. Let me concentrate on them. Not all of them, not even a chosen few but just two. Sonia Gandhi and Atal Behari Vajpayee. In fact, the order in which you write their names hardly matters. It could just as easily be A.B.V. first and S.G. second. For the point I wish to make is that in one critical, but so far unrecognised, respect they are not really different. No, that is not clear enough : they are indistinguishable. No, let’s be truly frank : they are exactly the same.

    Neither Sonia nor Vajpayee has given interviews. I’m not talking about addressing rallies or answering questions at press conferences. They aren’t the same thing. At a rally the politician sets the agenda. At a press conference there are far too many reporters with their own individual concerns to focus attention on any one issue leave aside closely question in a well-structured way. Only a proper sit-down interview can do that. And in terms of getting to know a politician’s views and, more importantly, to see how they stand-up under pressure there is no alternative to an interview.

    Now think of Bill Clinton or Tony Blair. They thrive on interviews and at election time they rarely decline an invitation to give one. Why? Because they know that senior politicians who want to run a country owe it to their voters that they are ready and willing to be questioned. Not just that, to be cross-questioned. But they also recognise something else. A politician reveals his capacity to fight, his

    commitment to beliefs, his conviction to carry through change by the way he performs in an interview. That is how the audience judges him and that is when he seeks to impress them.

    Possibly that’s why S.G. and A.B.V. – or A.B.V. and S.G. – avoid interviews. May be they do not want to be judged, perhaps they do not know how to stand-up to close scrutiny, arguably they do not wish the voter to really get to know them. I suppose this is also why when they do give interviews – which is, on average, once a year if not less – it is to friends. ‘Hostile journalists’ – the apostrophes are deliberate – are never permitted within their vicinity.

    I think this is wrong. In fact its shameful. Actually its deplorable. May be I’ll never get an interview from either of them after writing this but if that is the case so be it. My point, however, remains unchanged. There’s something very strange about a democrat who cannot, no who will not, face questioning. And there’s something lacking in a democracy where this is accepted and condoned.

    I’m using strong language not just because the point deserves emphasis but because I want you to sit up and recognise a farce that is being perpetrated on all of us. Worse still, it’s a farce we are ourselves permitting.

    Can you imagine the people of France, Britain, America, Germany – or for that matter any other self-respecting democracy – voting for Chirac, Blair, Clinton or Schroeder without wanting to see them interviewed, repeatedly, toughly and often aggressively? Can you imagine Chirac, Blair, Clinton or Schroeder refusing to give interviews? Or only choosing to be interviewed by friends?

    That is why – at the end of the day – our politicians fall short, far, far short, of the great democrats we see on BBC and CNN. That is also why, despite Monica Lewinsky, the Americans still respect Clinton.

    Mr. Mahajan may or may not have been making a flippant point but there was a sad truth lurking in his remarks which even he might not have appreciated. If Sonia or Vajpayee had to stand against Clinton or Blair I think I know who the Indian people would vote for. And can anyone blame them for the choice they would make?

    Our politicians and theirs

    Let me stick with the same subject but try and make the point the other way round.

    Way back in the early ‘80s, when Mrs. Thatcher was prime minister of Britain and facing serious problems, I happened to be part of a crew that interviewed her at No.10. We, the team, were licking our lips in anticipation of a prime minister in retreat. After all inflation was at 27 per cent, the Conservative Party was deeply divided by Mrs. Thatcher’s monetarism and the trade unions were restive and threatening action. Things could not have been much worse. In fact, what was perplexing was why Mrs. T was willing to be interviewed in such circumstances.

    The interview over, one of the sparks, an outspoken, ginger-haired, freckled twenty-two year old with a broad Geordie accent, popped the question on everyone’s mind.

    “Prime Minister” he said, after ensuring he had a full glass of Mrs. T’s beer in his hands, “how do you decide when you will and when you won’t agree to an interview?”

    “Ah” the Iron-lady replied. She liked being taken by surprise because then she could show what stuff she was really made of. “Its when things are going wrong that a politician should give interviews. Because that’s when you need to come out fighting, to show you have the answers, to prove you are on the ball.”

    “And when things are going right?” the spark butted in.

    “That’s when I would shut up” Mrs. T responded. “When things are going right you can only put your foot in your mouth if you start to open it.”

    Sadly, our politicians, do the opposite. If they give interviews they do it to crow not to prove they are up to the job. So they agree to be interviewed when all is well and end up in trouble. But when they are truly in trouble and need to show they have the answers they choose to stay strangely silent.

    The one man who is different

    And now if I am honest – and to hell with the implications of what I am about to write – there’s one politician who respects, in fact encourages, tough interviewing. He deserves to be recognised. His name is Lal Krishna Advani. I always look forward to my ding-dongs with him. I think he does too!


Share this Video:

Description
  
There are no comments on this sunday sentiments yet.

Characters remaining (3000)


Will be displayedWill not be displayed


Will be displayed

Please answer this simple math question.

9 + 4