MASQUERADER

Ram vs Shyam

Anoop Kohli
23 February 2010, 07:15 PM IST

Hotklix	Digg
Google Bookmarks	StumbleUpon
Reddit	Newsvine
Live Bookmarks	Technorati
Yahoo Bookmarks	Blogmarks
Del.icio.us	ApnaCircle

When Shyam Saran, India’s special envoy on climate change, put in his papers over his differences with environment minister Jairam Ramesh, it was the 40th time that a top civil servant had quit in protest. You may check this number, or replace it with a more accurate one, but this one has been derived from a constant - "the rational tolerance ratio" (TRTR) - between the politician and the bureaucrat in this country. This leads to around three such in each government. Considering the number of governments, and adjusting for the coalitions, minority, weekly and a few monthly governments, and denoting different attributes, where resignations became promotions, or resignations were camouflaged as "transfers", you can’t get a better figure. But if you have one, I’ll accept it.

The Constitution as well as the judiciary has little in terms of power definition, or precedence to make a general statement, as to which - the "bureaucrat" or the "politician" - takes precedence over the other. It is worse when something like "national interest", which, quite humanly put, is your "personal interest in the national interest" is the lever to get the upper hand. But that is also the true and standard vocabulary for a resignation at that level.

Factually, it is always the bureaucrat who has stepped out of a ministry. That does not make the politician superior. The reasons are two. The bureaucrat shows that he exercises his power of rejection more often, and that only another of his own breed can replace him. Politicians too get dropped or are set aside as governors. That could be a cheeky job done by his secretary, if he is closer within the power circles. Governments are known to keep a particular minister in check by posting an adverse or tough secretary. It is here that a truly honorable battle of two mature minds, bred in the two different constituencies of governance, takes place. Bureaucrats are strong on experience, have been virtual rulers sometime or the other, know their paperwork. Politicians survive on raw common sense, massive vote banks, and their adherence to their own power and business lobbies. It is mostly an even match keenly contested at every serve, ace, and volley. The spectators love it, and keen rivals like it too.

Bureaucrats often fall prey to their "jack and master of all trades" approach. Sometimes they atone later for their past sins on TRTR towards technocrats. The massive egos that are gathered in circumstances of little trial and much less answerability sometime leave them too burdened before a dancing and skipping politician in the ring. They basically miss out on the footwork. The match is always a split verdict, but they fail to recognize the judges, having held that post many times before.

It is not a game of winning or losing. It is the game. Politics finally is the ultimate and dirtiest trick of life, and someone has to play it. Quoting rules, ethics and morals is irrelevant. Addressing the issues, circumstances and gauging the interests, national or global is the essence. You often deal with more than one set of cards. A shrewd bureaucrat in order to get his message across neither ‘reports’ to the minister, nor flatters him. He contrives a circumstance that can be ignored only at the peril of political survival. No one is holier than the other. It’s a battle of wits, and one has to survive to be able to enforce. We have expectations from upright bureaucrats, as we have from politicians.

It would be speculative to denote any particular attribute as the actual cause of the spat. They do report of issues regarding the "per capita" rate of emission. My friend Nair tells me that Indian religion/mythology has a parallel for all circumstances. The great Emperor Mahabali was invincible, but was vulnerable to the extent that he could never refuse charity. In universal interest, Lord Vishnu as "Vaman" avatar asked for land he could cover in three steps. The first step covered the earth, the second the heavens, and when there was no more left to put foot on, the Emperor had to offer his head for the Lord to step on. The Emperor perished, but was blessed, and Kerala celebrates its major festival "Onam" on that account.

With nature ravaging towards devastation, I only hope that the "per capita", as stated, does not have a similar connotation for the people of this country.

12 Comments | Comments are closed. Rated

Tax and debt

Pack 'age' in a package

Subscribe to comments on this Post Comments:

Sort by: Oldest | Newest | Recommended (12) | Most Discussed

santosh thakur says: Bookmark this discussion

February 26,2010 at 10:54 AM IST

Yes, this is the fate of indian bureaucracy and popularly uttered " Aam Aadmi" vs Politics.
Wheras Politics in democracy means to the general public it never happens either at the root level or at top level. I agree with the views expressed by the author. Obviusly such politics shuld b e condemed in every walk of life and govenance.

(Reply to santosh thakur)- Anoop Kohli says:

March 07,2010 at 09:57 PM IST

All comments make me think, and thanks for this. Mr Singru, quite maturely knows and mentions the state of affairs. As a citizen, who has been given the facility to blog, I have learnt to express facts and analyze them. I feel I have no right to judge or pronounce judgements on rather responsible politicians and administrators. Finally the message is better given by a non-confrontational approach. Readers have every right to pronounce their views, as a freedom of speech. My proffession somehow witholds me from the 'good' 'bad' classifications. A disease is a fact, and one knows how to diagnose and treat, and I know despite all campaigns, people shall choose lifestyles thay are addicted to. We have to accept that without aspersions. On a more general note, the process of enquiry and fact analysis goes smoother if you do not put too many red flags on the way. With such true and independent comments, I always feel that I should not bias anyone by my writings. The more suggestions and views, the better

Anoop Kohli

Sughosh Bansal says:

February 25,2010 at 12:14 PM IST

Mr. Anoop: What is the theme of your article? (1) Is to discect why did Sharan resign or whether the resignation of Sharan was justified or between a politician and a bureacrat who has to suffer? (2) or do you want to make comment on the attribute of "per capita"? Let us not mix up issues just to fill in the blanks but come out with some cogent storey on the burning current issue.

Pratap says:

February 25,2010 at 11:26 AM IST

Dr. Kohli may not be remembering me but I know him as my wife was once under his treatment.
I read his blogs and the more I read them, I appreciate his multifaceted talent all the more.

S,.M.Singru says:

February 24,2010 at 01:23 PM IST

Anoop, you have brought out one type of the situation between the politician and the bureaucrat very nicely. But currently, what is worrisome is the prevalence of collusion between the two at the expense of the exchequer and the common man. More and more examples are surfacing when they cynically followed the Sanskrit dictum sahanvavatu sahanau bhunaktu ( meaning may we both grow, shine and be strengthened, may we both be protected together.) A friend of mine, who is a former senior respected bureaucrat says that no major corruption can take place without the politician and the bureaucrat joining hands. Therefore, in a general sense, we all should prefer a higher TRTR rather than a low one for each government,are you with me?

Ashok Gupta says:

February 24,2010 at 12:46 PM IST

Most of the Ministers( or Even Earlier Rulers)want to keep their personal secretries who take care of the Minister's 'Whims and Fancies'rather than those who are more capable but do not take care of personal whims.
'Right or wrong' this is what the nature is.

This Governement is no different. On the contrary this Government will like to have Senior Judges/ Election Commisionars besides IAS's, who prefer to toe their line ( thought process) even over looking the constitution.Because this is incapable Government.
NO SURPRISES!
Moreover these Bade Babus( IAS officers) have a feeling ," THEY ARE LORDS AND KNOW EVERYTHING" Whether it is Medicine/ Engineering/Science/ Sports / History/ Geography/ Botany/ Management and what not. In my opinion,These Bade Babus are more a co-ordinators rather than decision makers. Because if these are decision makers they must own resposibility of the decision they make and should be accountable for the wrong decisions as well. But unfortunately this is missing.
Rest Later.

guna sekhar says:

February 24,2010 at 08:12 AM IST

just one comment, could you replace the word mythology to purana.

myth denotes hindu religion as something untrue. is that so??? pls change this ....

Jitendra Desai says:

February 23,2010 at 10:45 PM IST

40 is a small figure, considering that we, the people payroll more than 1 crores of them in the states and at center.Mr Shyam Saran and 39 others are exceptions to the rule, that the bureaucrats chose to crawl when asked to bend before their masters.Politicians atleast have to go and face people every five years or less.Babus have a tenure of 35 years with retirement benefits, again paid for by the people.Pensions to retiring bureucrats are now Rs 30,000 crores per year?
With experience of more than 60 years of freedom, we can say that we have been let down more by our Babus than our Netas.Which neta does not want roads,bridges, water, power, schools, teachers,health care, transport for his constituents? since AD 2000, we have had no problems with funds;they remain unutilized in many cases.Yet, we wait for those basics.Who is responsible for this sloth and incompetence? Out of every rupee that we pay, 70 paise go for the upkeep of this behemoth.Time, we had more resignations and even more dismissals.

Anupam says:

February 23,2010 at 09:54 PM IST

I wonder how and when did Shyam Saran become a climate change expert. So, the way a post comes, same way it goes.

Sachin says:

February 23,2010 at 09:38 PM IST

A post which needs further discussion. Great premise but the bigger question is what you actually did hint in your post - who is more powerful? I actually would prefer another version of this. Who should be more powerful. In my version of democratic politics, it should be always the politician and before the sceptic hack me down, let me explain. It has everything to do with accountability and there should always be just one throat to grab and that should be the politicians. In our democracy the rough idea is that we elect a party at the center and hope that that party puts in the right people/politicians to drive the nation towards what the people's mandate has been. It is always a rough direction and given democracy is a majority based decision making not all of us will be happy with where the govt is taking us. But we have the ability to replace the govt if most of us disagree with the outcome. So while the bureacrat may be right and not agree with the politician, it is the bureaucrat who has to go. The accountability is set for the politician who should be the one who gets penalized if the nation does not agree and the politician should have the ability to choose or remove the bureaucrat. While the bureaucrat runs the nation they do not and should not be the ones making the decisions. The buck should stop with the politician. It is similar to a corporate world, where the buck stops witht the CEO. And let not the politician ever be allowed to make an excuse that the bureaucracy was not working for it is the politician who has the power.

Rajeev,Ujjain says:

February 23,2010 at 09:36 PM IST

Anoop,

The current system only allows for supremacy of Legislature over Judiciary(in policies) and Executive.

As such, Shyam Saran being shunted out at the instance of Jairam Ramesh might be an article of discussion but cant be more significant/important than a routine procedure.Personal I believe that Jairam is on the right track.

The discussion on this to me seems as useless and univited as the one on a SRK movie that took prime time on TV recently.

Sharda Bhargav - The Confiscated Soul says:

February 23,2010 at 09:23 PM IST

Your talk of national interest may not interest the bureaucrats. They have their own inclinations. One out of hundreds might have resigned because of non fulfilment of desires of getting higher status. They are not doing anything good for the country. Corruption, poverty, illiteracy, over population are not the concern. We can do without them.