Reports coming out of New Delhi regarding moves to reconcile the differences between the Prime Minister and the former Home Minister are so contradictory and confusing that it is impossible to say whether these will eventually “succeed” or not. But some points are and, indeed, have for long been, reasonably clear. It is, for instance, evident that there can be no genuine reconciliation between Mr. Morarji Desai and Mr. Charan Singh even if the latter is brought back into the Cabinet under some formula, that the proposed patch-up will in no way help promote even the minimum necessary measure of unity in the Janata party and that instead it will reduce whatever coherence the government can now be said to possess because it must adversely affect the authority of the Prime Minister and therefore his capacity to lead his heterogeneous team. In plain terms the Janata leadership – if such an entity exists – has been faced with the task of making a choice between Mr. Desai and Mr. Charan Singh, that is, a choice between backing the former so that he can function effectively as head of the government and taking steps for his replacement by the latter at a fairly early date. This it has not been willing to do and it has been encouraged in this approach by Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan and Acharya Kripalani who regard themselves as architects of the Janata party and its electoral victory in March 1977 and therefore its guardians,. The result is there for anyone to see – no Home Minister for over six months, intensification of factional infighting in the Janata, uncertainty whether Mr Charan Singh and his supporters will stay in the party or revive the BLD, speculation over the possibility of the former Home Minister making common cause with Mrs. Gandhi and her party to bring down the government which cannot but spread confusion, if not demoralisation, among civil servants, and a steady decline in the credibility of the government. Indeed, the Janata leadership has made such a spectacle of itself that no one should be surprised if the impression has spread that it is just not capable of running the affairs
of the country.
It is to Mr. Desai’s credit that despite the “mediatory” efforts of some of his own ministers, sarcastic comments attributed, rightly or wrongly, to Acharya Kripalani and journeys to Patna by all manner of individuals, he has managed to maintain to an extent the dignity of the office of Prime Minister by avoiding succumbing to pressures. But he has not shown the firmness and leadership expected of him. He has talked of the prerogatives of the Prime Minister – he has publicly insisted that it is his right to choose and change his Cabinet colleagues. But he has not exercised these prerogatives. Instead he has kept the Home portfolio to himself for more than six months as one “mediatory” move has followed another in an endless succession and he has held up a long overdue Cabinet reshuffle on the same count. In other words, he has kept on non-performing and outright incompetent ministers, some of them with doubtful reputations in respect of their personal integrity, because he has “agreed” to wait for a possible deal with Mr. Charan Singh on the terms of the latter’s return to the Cabinet. It is possible to argue in his behalf that he has had no other option in view of the character of the ruling party and that he has strengthened his position by adopting a conciliatory but firm stance on the question of the terms on which the former Home Minister can return to the government. There is some merit in both these propositions. But leadership belongs to those who seize it, as Mrs. Gandhi has demonstrated again and again. As such he would have been in a much stronger position today if, soon after Mr. Charan Singh’s resignation on June 29, he had appointed a full-fledged Home Minister – Mr. Jagjivan Ram would have eminently filled the role in view of his administrative experience and record and the prominence the attacks on the Harijans have attracted – and dropped ministers who should never have been appointed in the first place. In theory it can be said that this would have isolated him in the Cabinet and the party and exposed him to the charge of following Mrs. Gandhi’s style of functioning. In reality the situation could well have been dramatically different. He has thrown away several opportunities to reshuffle the Cabinet. He should not continue to dither any longer unless, of course, he is convinced that the odds are against him or that a deal with Mr. Charan Singh is round the corner. In the first case, he should step down and let the party choose another leader and, in the second, he should press for an early decision by the former BLD group.
The Times of India, 18 January 1979