I DIA

UNDER
, talBehariVajpayee
THE B P ERA

Dr. c.P. Thakur

. Devendra P. Sharma
 INDIA
UNDER
Atal Behari Vajpayee
 INDIA
UNDER
Atal Behari Vajpayee
THE BJP ERA

Dr. C.P. Thakur

--.-~-

;;:rr- ~.',
Devendra P. Sharma
,,_-

- '
---_
.'
..
. ..
__ --;:_-
"",
,
"","'..-T<::;-,;
• _,
~'
I
I
,,~ - I' ..,.....', ~, ' .. " •

...,. 1· (.~:,._
·,J I'.
'.; - ' ,~ " ,~(b ii \
, I, " "
(II: • I ,

~ 'IT ., r • ~
, ~ - ~ "" 1 1:) ')"'\ I '\- I 4

g ~t ~: 5Lt S 3 t~,:~: 3"l-~· 9 (

~f>: (5 -t I . 'l.l)O~

BUBSPD
UBS Publishers' Distributors Ltd.
New Delhi. Bangalore. Chennoi
Calcutta. Patna. Konpur
 UBS Publishers' Distributors Ltd.
5 Ansari Road, New Delhi .. 1 10 002
Phones: 3273601,3266646. Cable: ALLBCX)KS. Fax: 3276593, 3274261
e-mail: [email protected] • Internet: www.ubspd.com
10 First Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Bangalore-560 009
Phones: 2263901, 2263902, 225390.1.Cable: AlI,;B(X)KS. Fax: 2263904
6, Sivaganp Road. N..apmbakkam, Chennai-600 034
Phones: 8276355. 8270189 .Cable~ tJBSIPUB. Fax: 827R920
8/1-B, Chowringhee Lane, Calcutta-700 016
Phones: 2441821, 2442910, 2i4~473 .• Cable: UBSIPUBS. Fax: 2450027
e-mail: ubspdcalfJcnl.vsnl.net.in
5 A, Rajendra Nagar, Patna-ROO 016
P~(mes: 672856, 673973, 656170.Cal1le: UBSPUB. Fax: 656]69
SO, Noronha Road, Cantonment, Kanpur-208 004
Phones: 369124,362665, 357488. Fax: ,1 r; 122
Dismbutars for Western India
MIl Preface Books
Shivali Apartments. PIO( No.1. S. No.2 5/4, Chantamant &X:lt.·ty.
Karve Nagar, Pune 411052 P. Phone: _3016203
O\IeT.5ea.~ Contact
475 North Circular Road, Neasden. London NW2 7QG
Telc: 081·450-8667. Fax: 0181·452·6612 Ann: UBS

© Dr. c.P. TIlaicur and [levendra P. Sharma

First Published 1999

Dr. c.P. Thakur and Oevendra P. Sharma assert the moral right
fo he identified as the authors of thilt woric.

All ri~rhts reserved. No pan of chis publication may be reproduced or

transmitted m any form or by any mean~, electronic or mechanical, includin~
photocopying, recording or any informatlon storaac or retrieval system, without
prior permission in writine from the publisher.

COtlCT Desi~ : UBS Art Studio

Prinudat Ra;kamal Electric Prell, lklhi

 Preface

At present, Shri Atal Behari Vajpayee has attained the

status of a towering, but gentle, colossus in the political
arena, where he has been active for several decades,
growing in stature day by day. Over the years, despite
being caught up in the hurly .. burly of politics, he has
conle to symbolise the remarkable qualities of a warm
and caring human being, such as courtesy, compassion,
dignity, tolerance and, above all, magnanimity.
We have heen privileged to have known, and
interacted with, this wonderful person for many years.
We have been extremely fortunate to have enjoyed -
in all aesthetic splendour - the friendliness and
affection of Shri Vajpayee on several occasions, each
of which we will cherish as momentous and inspiring.
When Shri Vajpayee was sworn in as the prime
minister of India on 19 March 1998, virtually the entire
country was joyous and jubilant. There were
spontaneous celebrations all around. Even Shri
Vajpayee's trenchant critics welcomed his appointment
 PREFACE

to the prime ministerial post. The climb to the peak

was not easy by any standards: it was arduous; it was
difficult, but it was eventful.
. We, in this volume, seek to trace the path traversed
by Shri Vajpayee over the years, and in the process, we
have also recounted various important events which
shaped his life and character. We also seek to highlight
how he interacted with a vast cross,section of people,
some of whom influenced him immensely. The
Vajpayee saga and the Bharatiya Jajata Party (BJP)/
Bharatiya Jana Sangh saga are so very interwined that
they can hardly be separated. Therefore, the BJP (as a
political party) also occupies centre .. stage in this book
along with the protagonist. The vicissitudes of this
party are outlined in fairly graphic detail, right from its
inception (as the Bharatiya Jana Sangh in the early
19505) to the present day. The essential underpinnings
of the book are BJP,oriented and try to present the
ideology and principles of this party and how they have
kept pace with the times without losing their original
substance.
We have striven to highlight the achievements of
the BJP,led coalition Government at the Centre,
despite the tremendous odds stacked against it (both
internal and external). The nuclear tests conducted by
India in May 1998 find a pride of place because they
ensured that India gained respect and admiration
among the comity of nations, despite sanctions being
imposed by the industrially advanced countries,
spearheaded by the USA.
PREFACE

We have also tried to put the role of the Vajpayee

Government in historical perspective by describing the
important events and developments that took place
during its tenure. The denouement attempts to capture
the drama and the excitement that marked the fall of
the Vajpayee Government (on 17 April 1999) by the
narrowest possible margin as well as the uncertainty
that resulted thereafte~ forcing the country to face yet
another mid .. term election.

May 1999 Dr. C.P. Thakur

Devendra P. Sharma
 Contents

PREFACE V

1. THE ORIGIN OF TIlE BJP 1

2. THE RISE OF THE BJP 20

3. THE CLIMB TO THE SUMMIT 35

4. AT TIlE SUMMIT 63

5. GWALIOR TO NEW DELHI: A SHORT DISTANCE

BUT A loNG JOURNEY 75

6. THE INHERITED LEGACY 86

7. THE FOREIGN POLICY DIMENSION 115

8. INDIA'S NUCLEAR TESTS AND THEIR AITERMATH 131

9. REACTIONS OF EMINENT INDIANS TO POKHRAN..II 145

ix
,
x CoNTENTS

10. VIEWS OF EMINENT FOREIGNERS ON POKHRAN..II 170

11. AN EVENTFUL JOURNEY (I)

(MAY 1998 TO NOVEMBER 1998) 185

12. AN EVENTFUL JOURNEY (II)

(DECEMBER 1998 TO MARCH 1999) 273

13. RUMBLINGS OF DISCONTENT 328

14. THE FALL OF THE V AJPAYEE GOVERNMENT

AND BEYOND 346

INDEX 369
 1
The Origin of the BJP

Dust thou art to dust retumest

Wast not spoken of the soul
H. w. Long{ellow

The preceding lines reflect an ancient Hindu belief

that the soul is immortal. Men come and men go but
some great men leave their footprints on the sands of
time. Their impression becomes deeper as time passes.
One such great Indian, born on I April 1889, was
Dr. Keshavrao BaHram Hedgewar. He founded the
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, commonly known as the
RSS. It is the most powerful organisation of those
helieving in Hindutva, and the number of its activists
today is more than the number of the workers of many
1
2 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARl VAJPAYEE

other Indian organisations put together. It was the RSS

leadership that, in 1951, conceived the idea of
founding the Bharatiya Jana Sangh which later on
rnerged into the Janata Party in 1977 and finally broke
away from it in 1980 to form the Bharatiya Jan~lta Party
or the BJP. Atal Behari Vajpayee, who assumed charge
as the prime nlinister of India on 19 March 1998, had
joined the RSS as a school student in Cjwalior, a town
ahout 270 km froln Delhi.
Dr. HeJgewar was horn In Nagpur In a relatively poor
Brahlnin Lunily. His ancestors had shifted froln Andhra
PraJesh to N agpuf (then in (~en tral ProVInces). FfOJl1
his chilJhooJ itself, he pfoveJ hill1self to he a talented
person with the greatest p()~sihle grit. Those wen: the
days of the British Raj in India. Queen Victoria's 60th
hirthday was heing celehrated in InlIian schools, a~ pef
the order of the British authl.)rlties. Sweets were
Jistrihuted (lmon~ thl' students. The chtld Keshav took
the packet of sweets a~iJe and thre,"' it unto a gllttl'r;
this action showed how opposed he was to the Raj. Ht'
was destined to he a revolutiunary, who would hl' jailed
on In3ny occaSl0n~.
After cOlnpleting hb school education, he 1l10veJ
to Calcutta for further studies and joined the National
Medical College. While he was a stuJent of IneJicine, he
became a member of a revolutionary group headed by
Pulin Behari Das. After completing his nlcJical education
he returned to Nagpur. He joined the Indian National
Congress and was jailed twice. As a young man Keshavrao
drew his inspirat ion fronl Swalui Vi vekananda and
Loknlanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak.
THE BjPERA 3

In a Congress gathering in Calcutta, a speaker had

used improper language while talking about Tilak.
Hedgewar went up the podium and slapped him. It is
here that we see the main difference between the
philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, i.e., non,violence
under all circumstances, and that of Dr. Hedgewar. It
was hccause of this dominating aspect of Gandhism that
another firehrand leader, Subhash Chandra Bose,
advocated a different line for the freedom fighters.
Later on, during the 1942 Quit India Movement,
another famous leader, Jayaprakash Narayan, took a
line of ~lCtion which was not strictly in accordance with
the (Jandhian way.
Be that as it may, Dr. Hedgcwar was witness to many
incidents In which Hindus were at the receiving end. The
disunity anJ Jissensions among the Hindus pained
Dr. Hedgcwar very much. Along with a few friends he
decided to inaugurate the new organisation, the RSS,
on Vijay Dashmi or Dus~ehra festival day, in 1925. This
significant event happened in Nagpur and it was to
change the course of InlHan history. Even the name RSS
was given to the organisation a little later. It heralded
the active resurgence of Hindu society. The first
thoughts regarding Hindu resurgence as such were
expressed by Swanli VivckananJa who Jied at a young
age in the first. half of the first decade of the twentieth
century.
In a couple of years the hard,core strength of the
RSS rose Jramatically. Many young men, who became
very famous later on, joined the organisation. For
instance: Professor Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar was a
4 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAjPAYEE

lecturer in Varanasi; Bala Saheb Deoras was a teacher

in Nagpur; and Rajendra Singh at Allahabad
University. They all plunged into the burgeoning stream
of Hindu resurgence.
Dr. Hedgewar always strived to ensure that top
public men were associated with the movement for
Hindu awakening. His close and intimate relationship
with eminent leaders like Baba Rao Savarkar (the
elder brother of the renowned freedom fighter
V.D. Savarkar), Bhai Parman and , B.S. Munje, Madan
Mohan Malaviya and others not only helped
substantially in expanding the RSS network but also in
rousing the common Hindus as well.
Dr. Hedgewarl s speeches were generally fiery in nature.
Listening to his defiant statement in court in defence of
one of his public speeches (for which he was hauled up
for sedition), the judge remarked, 'your defence is more
seditious than your speech' and awarded him one year's
rigorous imprisonment. That was in 1921. The 1930
movement again saw him courting imprisonment. He
offered satyagraha; some of his colleagues in the RSS
also joined him.
Or. Hedgewar believed that the task of strengthening
the Hindu people, who formed the mainstay of the
national edifice, should receive foremost priority, both for
fighting the British and for bringing round the Muslims
into the nationalist current. Dr. Hedgewar had decided to
concentrate exclusively on consolidating the organised
national strength of the Hindu people for achieving
freedom. It was this far ..sighted approach of keeping the
flame of the freedom struggle burning even while
THE BJP ERA 5

strengthening the nation's backbone that marked the

unique feature of the evolution of the RSS right from
the time of its inception.
In 1940 Dr. Hedgewar passed away at Nagpur. He
was succeeded by the then general secretary of the RSS,
Professor Golwalkar, commonly known as Shri Guruji.
Repeatedly he warned Congressmen against their
appeasement of separatists. They did not heed his
warning. The country had to pay the price. The
luotherland was cut into pieces. Pakistan was born.
Millions of people got uprooted from their hearths and
homes. Trains full of dead bodies steamed into the
Indian territory, inflaming the passions of Hindus.
Blood was spilled in huge quantities on both sides of
the horder. Millions of women turned widows; innocent
children hecame orphans. Food and shelter posed the
greatest and the most urgent problems for the millions
of displaced Hindus and Sikhs who had to come to
India fronl Pakistan.
l)ur independence turned into half mourning. Loui~
Mountbatten was the g(}vernor~general at that tilne.
Jayaprakash Narayan had serious reservations regarding
accepting partition. Shri Guruji spoke against it.
Mahatma Gandhi was also against partitioning the
motherland hut somehow he reluained silent. The
Jetails about the partition of India have been narrated
hy Abut Kalam Azad in his hook India Wins Freedom.
The unfortunate assassination of Mahatma Gandhi
occurred on 30 January 1948. (Nathuram Godse
gunnt!d him down during a prayer tneeting.) Godse was
helieved to be an RSS supporter. There was large .. scale
6 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

rioting at various places. Prime Minister Jawaharlal

Nehru took advantage of the situation and banned the
RSS, declaring it illegal. Thousands of innocent people
belonging to the RSS were put behind bars by the
government.
Some eminent non .. Congress individuals pointed
out to the government the unfairness of keeping large
number of patriotic people behind bars for a long
period without even a show of a trial. Nehru, who used
to vent his spleen on the evils of dictatorship, did not
bat an eyelid when saintly men like Shri Guruji were
clamped in prison. Moreover, he also called them
'Fascists'. Incidentally, it was his daughter (Indira
Gandhi) who imposed Enlergency in June 1975 and
behaved much worse than any Fascist in the Italy of
Benito Mussolini.
Due to the intervention of eminent non .. Congress
individuals, Vallabhbhai Patel, the home minister in
Nehru's first cabinet, eventually saw reason. He agreed
to lift the ban on the RSS and release thousands of
imprisoned youth. Nehru had no choice but to accede
to Patel's wishes.
RSS leaders as well as the rank and file started
feeling strongly that they had no choice hut to build
up a political organisation to function as a strong
opposition to the Nehru Government. In this context,
Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, who was a minister in
Nehru's first cabinet, arid had later resigned, was
approached by RSS leaders to head the new political
organisation. Thus, in 1951, the new political party
named as the Bharatiya Jana Sangh came into being, Its
first convention was held in the heart of New Delhi
THE BJP ERA 7

Mauli Chandra Sharma, a volatile orator, was

brought in as the first general secretary. Atal Behari
Vajpayee, then a young man of 25, was for some time
the personal secretary of Dr. Mukherjee. Earlier,
Vajpayee had been the full~fledged editor of the RSS
journal published from Lucknow. He had been groomed
well hy Bhau Saheb Deoras. Bhau Saheh was then the
chief provincial organiser of the RSS in Uttar Pradesh.
He was a brilliant person. For years together he
remained as a powerful sentinel of the RSS. Another
person held in deep esteem hy Vajpayee was Deen
Dayal Upadhyaya, who was a great thinker. He was very
Inuch a silent person, spending his afternoons in
lihraries. ()ne of the authors of this book (DPS) had
Inet him for the first time in a New Delhi lihrary.
HUlnility was his halln1ark. He was later on murdered
in a running train near Mughal Sarai in early 1968. His
body was brought to New Delhi. Indira Gandhi caIne
to Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road where the body lay before
being cremated. Vajpayee told Indira Gandhi that the
circumstances of his death should be inquired into. Her
commen-ts were negative. No wonder that some BJP
leaders even now strongly feel that saIne powerful
politicians were hehind the lTIurder of Upadhyaya who
was gem of a man.
At this stage, it would be desirable to have a
glimpse of the RSS ideals which formed the moorings
of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh which later on assumed the
name of the Bharatiya Janata Party. The fundamental
meeting point of the RSS - called the shakha - that
Dr. Hedgewar evolved, therefore, was designed to
B INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

remove differences arising due to various factors and

create an intense national consciousness.
The training camps, called the sangh shiksha vargas,
are held for its members at various levels wherein
healthy samskars and oneness are further strengthened
so as to eliminate all kinds of sectarian, linguistic, caste
or other differences. The third and final stage of
training for those who would have undergone the first
and second stages in their respective regions affords an
effective medium for steeling the intensity of national
outlook.
Dr. Hedgewar never tired of warning that the mere
quitting of the British would not make much of a
difference in getting rid of all our troubles. A powerful,
organised resurgent Hindu society alone could furnish a
firn1 guarantee for our continued national freedom and
integrity.
Let us now put events in proper perspective. In the
early 1920s there was a wave of Hindu,Muslim riots
throughout the country. Dr. Hedgewar viewed communal
rioting as a symptom of the weakness and divisions within
the Hindu community. He argued that independence
could be easily achieved if the divided Hindu community
were strengthened and united. He had once been a
member of the Congress Party, but noticed that it was
appeasing the Muslims beyond a desirable degree.
Ultimately, this appeasement policy led to the partition
of the motherland in August 1947 when the British
left. Earlier, in 1916; the Congress and the Muslims
came together politically at the national level. Some
eminent persons opposed the proposed 'separate
THE BJP ERA 9

electorates'. Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya was one

of them. Some others opined that Mahatma Gandhi's
efforts to strengthen Hindu,Muslim relations by lining
up the Congress organisation behind the Muslims'
protest against the dismemberment of the Turkish
empire, known as the Khilafat Movement, would foster
Muslim separatism. When Gandhiji launched his first
major Non . . Cooperation Movement in India in 1920,
one of the issues was the British unwillingness to satisfy
Muslims on the Turkish issue. The Mahatma called for
a complete boycott of government institutions, while
simultaneously including the doctrine of non . . violent
resistance, satyagraha, as an integral part of the
movement. Among those who opposed the Mahatma's
line of argument were Bal Gangadhar Tilak and some
other Congressmen from Maharashtra and Bengal.
Nevertheless, many Hindu leaders supported the
Inovement and welcomeJ going to jail, out of the great
faith they reposed in the Mahatma's leadership. Sopn
the Khilafat Movement spilled over to every nook and
corner of the country and assumed the fonn of a Inass
Non-Cooperation Movement.
Dr. Hedgewar also plunged fully into the Non-
Cooperation Movement. Now to know more about
Dr. Hedgewar's mind let us focus on one of his speeches.
In his address to the Maharashtra Hindu Yuvak
Parishad, he declared:

There are some who take pride in proclainling their

sacrifice for the sake of the nation. Such an
expression only betrays their feelings of being
10 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

something distinct from the nation. Just as a person

never says that he has made a sacrifice for the sake
of his son, so also any service offered to our broader
national falnily does not amount to sacrifice. It is
just a sacred duty to be performed by us. Later on
Shri Guruj i, in his guidance to the workers engaged
in the service of the neglected sections of society,
wrote: "Strenuous work springing from the heart
and manifesting itself in the day,to,Jay behaviour,
work on spiritual, moral and social plane is called
for. Let us work in the right spirit of Dharma making
no distinction in doing service to whoever he nlay
.be, a Christian or a Musliln. Misfortunes make no
such distinction and afflict all alike."

Referring to Hindu culture Dr. Hedgewar had

observed: 'The Hindu culture is the life breath of
Hindusthan. It is therefore clear, that if the Hindu is to
be protected we should first nourish the Hindu culture.
If the Hindu culture perishes, if the Hindu society
ceases to exist, it will hardly be appropriate to refer to
the luere geographical entity that remains as
Hindusthan. Mere geographical lumps do not make a
nation. The Sangh will cooperate with the Congress in
the efforts to secure freedom so long as these efforts do
not come in the way of preserving our national culture.'
Based upon these firm guidelines, the RSS men, called
the Swayamsevaks, have been trying to manifest the
pristine genius in diverse fields of national endeavour.
It would be relevant at this stage to dwell upon
Dr. Hedgewar's life and career.
THE BJP ERA 11

Though Dr. Hedgewar's father was a person of

humble means, he managed to give a good education
to his son who was a bright student from the very
heginning. The young student was keenly interested in
history and politics, particularly in the life history of
Chhatrapati, Shivaji Maharaj. An author has noted that
the young Keshav always thought of emulating Shivaji.
(_)n one occasion in 1896, he and a group of young
children unsuccessfully attempted to replace the Union
Jack flying over the British fort with Shivaji's standard,
the Bhagwa. He was a fervent reader of Kesri, a weekly
founded hy Tilak. He was very much influenced by
B.S. Munje, a doctor who had returned to Nagpur after
rendering his services in the Boer War (South Africa).
Dr. Hedgewar enthusiastically accepted Munje's
Inilitant nationalism and was expelled from several
schools because of his participation in anti-British
activities. According to some reliable sources, it was
Dr. Munje who sent Hedgewar to Calcutta in 1910 to
study medicine at the National Medical College
hecause he wanted him to establish contacts with the
revolutionaries in Bengal. Hedgewar was 21 years of age
at that time.
(_)n his return to N agpur, Hedgewar declined to get
married. His decision was a disappointlnent to his parents;
he declined to practise medicine as well. The RSS was
founded many years after he returned to Nagpur. What
did he do as a young man during those days? The Nagpur
District Gazetteer reported that he was the 'brain behind
the revolutionary movement in Nagpur'. This
publication also mentioned that he developed contacts
12 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

with revolutionary groups in other towns of India, and

thus indirectly established links with England's enemies.
After Germany's defeat in the First World War
revolutionary activities in India diminished. Actually,
it was the first phase of such activities on a regular
basis. There had been some isolated cases earlier. The
seconJ organised activity of the revolutionaries came
ahollt 10 years later when Chandrashekhar Azad in UP
and Bhagat Singh and Rajguru in Punjab tried to
awaken the dormant nationalism among the Indian
Inasses through their own sacrifices. In the first phase
of the revolutionary activity Dr. Hedgewar also could
not gather luore than a dozen young men for leading a
life of armed revolutionary struggle. It was probably
Dr. B.S. Munje who was the most eminent Congressman
in Nagpur at that time. Mahatma Gandhi had not
assulued the overall leadership of the Congress then.
Nagpur was the capital city of the then Central
Provinces under British rule. There was a Rashtriya
MandaI, an affiliate of the Congress in that area. It
maintained a separate identity to some extent, as the
local leadership differed on certain matters with the top
leaders. Tilak was one of the prominent leaders of the
Congress and Hedgewar was brought into the former's
inner circle. The Congress session held in 1920 was, in
fact, fully managed by Hedgewar.
During the early 1920s, Hedgewar became very much
involved in Congress activities. Tilak died in August 1920
and his supporters were unable to fully agree with the
Mahatlna's programme. But Dr. Hedgewar was inclined
to remain as a part of the non,violent movement, which
THE BJP ERA 13

was quiet successful. Dr. Hedgewar delivered some

lectures and was sentenced to one year's imprisonment.
He undertook his tenn as a disciplined soldier, but his
inner self was yearning to give a new shape to the
decadent Hindu society.
The RSS work was limited to areas around Nagpur
up to the year 1930. It was only in mid~ 1931 that Bhai
Parmanand, an Arya Samaj leader, sent an invitation
to Dr. Hedgewar to attend the young men's Hindu
association session at Karachi. It was there that
Dr. Hedgewar started organising the RSS in Sind and
later on in Punjab. Prabhakar Balwant Dani, who later
on he came general secretary of the RSS, frequently
toured the northern states. Bhau Saheh Deoras, the
younger hrother of Bala Saheh [)eoras, the third
SaTsangh chalak of the RSS, did pioneering work in UP.
It would be proper not to forget that the organising
capacity and the leadership provided hy Shri Guruj i,
M.S. (Jolwalkar, made a deep impact on the events that
took place in India after independence. It would be
worth Inentioning that in Delhi, the first RSS organiser
was Vasantrao Oak. Although very old now, he is quite
active. Ashok Singhal was the third provincial
organiser of the RSS at Delhi. He later became the
general secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.
Let us now focus on the life of M.S. Golwalkar and
how he helped shape events.
Shri Guruji's father was the headmaster of a high
school and he young Madhav was a very obedient son.
I-Ie was extreluely intelligent. He went to Varanasi for
higher education and did his M.Sc. in botany frotn the
14 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Banaras Hindu University. He was appointed a lecturer

in the university where he came in contact with the
RSS. Dr. Hedgewar visited Varanasi in 1931 and it was
thftH.~ that he happened to Ineet M.S. Golwalkar for the
first time. The parents of Shri Guruj i wanted him to
return to Nagpur and settle there. There, he was given
some duties in the organisation by Dr. Hedgewar. At the
sanlC tilne, Shri Guruji completed his law examinations
at Nagpur. He had a strong attraction for spiritualism
and, leaving Nagpur for some time, he went to Calcutta
where he came in contact with Swami Akhandananda,
a colleague of Swami Vivekananda. Akhandananda was
a scholarly sanyasi who had written a book ahout his
trip to the Himalayas. This book leaves a great
i1l1pression on the reader's mind. It is possible that Shri
Guruji read this book. Even otherwise, a great
intellectual and a saffron-robed sanyasi like Swami
Akhandananda was bound to draw great veneration
froln a scholar like M.S. Golwalkar. Golwalkar came
to Nagpur after spending some time with Swami
Akhandananda. He plunged himself intensely into RSS
work. It was in the luiddle of 1939 that he was selected
general secretary of the Sangh.
Meanwhile, towards the end of 1939, Dr. HeJgewar
st;.utcd developing a strange kind of fever. He never
thought of getting himself admitted to hospital, probably
hecause of his desire to keep himself in touch daily with
the functioning of the organisation that he founded in
1925.
Dr. Hedgewar eventually died on 21 June 1940. It
was at the house of Babasaheb Ghatate who was in
THE BJP ERA 15

charge of the Sangh activities in the city of Nagpur that

he breathed his last. Thousands of people from all over
India reached Nagpur. After 13 days of mourning, the
top leaders of the RSS met. The RSS rank and file had
gathered in thousands. Acting as a spokesman of other
senior leaders present there, the Nagpur leader
announced that Dr. Hedgewar had named Shri Guruji,
M.S. CJolwalkar, as his successor.
Shri CJuruji was comparatively junior to many other
leaders of the Sangh. Surely, it was his razor,sharp
intelligence that Iuade him everyone's choice. He
hecalue Sarsangh chalak at an early age. During his
period the RSS ranks swelled to one million. His
speeches (in Hindi) were candid and scholarly and
Blade a powerful impact.
The Second World War was on. The Japanese were
to soon knock at the eastern gate of India. Naturally,
(Jllrllji's thoughts were topical on this issue. Suhhash
(~handra Bose was known to him. I t was at Varanasi
that Shri Guruji had first listened to a speech of Bose
and was very much impressed. It was during his days at
Varanasi that Golwalkar had first met Dr. Shyama
Prasad Mukherjee. Shy am a Prasad's father, Sir Ashutosh
Mukherjee, was the vice,chancellor of Calcutta
University for a long time. Shyama Prasad was a
thunderous orator. Though not a Congresslnan, he was
invited by Jawaharlal Nehru to be a Ininister in the first
cahinet formed at the tinle of India gaining its
inJependence.
Some Hindu organisations, excluding the RSS, took
a stand that Hindus should join the British Army and
16 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

support the war effort. The Congress had passed the

'Quit India resolution at the AleC session on 8 August
1942. Mahatma Gandhi had delivered his famous 'do
or die' speech in that session which was held in a small
park near Opera House theatre building in Mumbai.
The Mahatma was arrested on 8 August itself and was
taken to Pune. Jawaharlal Nehru was arrested early in
the morning of 9 August from the residence of his
younger sister, Krishna Hathee Singh. Maulana Ahul
Kalam Azad was the president of the Indian National
Congress during those fateful days preceding the quit,
India resolution. Acharya J.B. Kriplani, a very senior
disciple of the Mahatma, was the general secretary of
the Congress. The arrested leaders were taken to an
unknown destination. Shri Guruji was very much upset
that the Congress had not consulted some of the non,
Congress leaders as to how the British were to be fought.
He convened a meeting of all RSS leaders. He asserted
that the RSS was not to officially take a plunge into
the freedom struggle, yet the Swyan1sewaks were to
support the Congress in its fight against the British Raj.
Meanwhile, mciny Congress activists evaded arrest
and went underground. Eminent among them were
Jayaprakash Narayan and Aruna Asaf Ali. Hans Raj
Gupta was then the Sangh chalak of Delhi and Punjab.
It was he who provided shelter to Jayaprakash Narayan
and Aruna Asaf Ali for many weeks.
As mentioned earlier, the Mahatma was assassinated
in Delhi in the evening of 30 January 1948 by
Nathuram Godse who had arrived from Pune a few days
earlier. At the time of the Mahatma's killing, Godse was
THE BJP ERA 17

the editor of a newspaper in Pune. The government

suspected that the RSS might have had some hand in
the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. On 3 February
1948, Shri Guruji was arrested and the RSS was banned
the next day.
On 24 September 1948, Shri Guruji wrote a letter
to Prime Minister Nehru to the effect that no evidence
existed against the RSS and it was highly improper not
to lift the ban on its functioning. He also wrote to
Sardar Patel, the home minister in Nehru's cabinet.
Sardar Patel's reply to Shri Guruji proposed that the
RSS cadres carryon their patriotic endeavour only by
joining the Congress and not by keeping separate and
by opposing it.
Correspondence between Shri Guruj i and the home
minister was going on. The restrictions regarding travel
were removed so that Shri Guruji could reach Delhi for
talks. At the end of discussions Shri Guruj i was again
arrested and sent hack to Nagpur. Saine persons in the
RSS wanted that the Sangh should undertake political
work openly. Shri Guruji differed on this count for
quite some time. But he was determined to protest
against the unlawful detention of several RSS leaders.
He issued instructions to Prabhakar Balwant Dani, the
general secretary, to ensure that RSS remained active.
This move, in fact, meant starting an agitation to
protest against the ban. The general secretary was
popularly known as Bhaiyaj i Dani. He arrived at New
Delhi railway station from Nagpur in a train that
reached in the morning. The police was present there
in huge numbers to arrest a single unarmed citizen.
18 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARt V AjPAYEE

There were some onlookers when Bhaiyaj i Dani was

arrested by the police and whisked away in a car. He
raised his right hand to signify that the satyagraha
lllo'vement to get the ban lifted had started froIn that
motnent. Nearly 60,000 members of the RSS offered
satyagraha. Many more were ready to court arrest, but
Shri Guruji's instructions to them were not to
overcrowd the jails but to work outside and force the
government to lift the unjustified ban. Ultimately, some
mediators took up the matter with the home 111inister
and the ban on the RSS was lifted after some
negotiations. Some Congressmen also advised Nehru
and Patel that if the ban were not lifted the RSS
tnovetnent might go underground fully and engage itself
in revolutionary work which would go against the
interest of the Congress. After his release, Shri Guruji
took counsel from a large number of e1l1inent persons
whether or not a political party to challenge the
Congress at the hustings should be formed. In any case,
the cultural activities of the RSS were to continue as
before. The opinion crystallised that a new political
party was very necessary to keep a check on Congress
despotism.
As Shri Guruj i was not to head the contemplated
political party, some eminent person, equally well,
known, was to be offered the presidentship of the new
party. The overall choice fell on Dr. Shyama Prasad
Mukherjee.
The fiery orator, Mauli Chandra Sharma, who hailed
from Jhajjar, a town near Delhi, was to be the first
general secretary of the new party. Some eminent
THE BJP ERA 19

workers of the RSS were to be inducted into the new

political party to manage its affairs. The formal
inauguration of the new party, Bharatiya ] ana Sangh,
took place in 1951 in Delhi. This party gave sleepless
nights to Congressmen who were always apprehensive
that they ITIay some day lose power to it.
How the Jana Sangh metamorphosed into the
present' day BJP is a saga by itself, which will be
narrated in the subsequent chapters.
 2
The Rise of the BJP

Jayaprakash Narayan was one of the greatest Indians of

all tilnes. He never sought any ministerial office. In the
early 1970s, he was disgusted with Indira Gandhi's rule
as he thought that she was breaking every democratic
institution in the country. The thought of a peaceful
revolution took possession of him.
In 1973, the Opposition parties launched an
agitation against the Congress Government in Gujarat.
Even the sons and daughters of Congressmen came out
on the streets denouncing the government for its
various acts of omission and commission. They drew
their inspiration from Jayaprakash Narayan just as the
student community in the whole of India drew
inspiration from him when he went underground in
1942. For the benefit of the younger generation, we
would like to point out that the entire secret police of
the Central and Provincial Governments in 1942 tried

20
THE BJP ERA 21

to catch him. A big reward was announced for his arrest

by the British, but, for a long time, he could not be
arrested.
Around the same period, i.e., in 1973, discontent
was simmering against the Congress rule in Bihar. A
wind of protest was blowing through the state.
Jayaprakash Narayan turned the wind into a whirlwind.
Almost the entire Bihar population was on the streets
asking for the removal of the Bihar chief minister
Abdul Ghafur. (To go into the reasons would be to
deviate somewhat). Prime Minister Indira Gandhi
refused to ask Ghafur to step down. Representing the
overwhelming sentiment of Bihar, JP came to Delhi to
inform Indira Gandhi personally that the people of
Bihar did not want Ghafur as chief minister for even a
lninute lnore. JP's lneeting with Indira Gandhi lasted
for less than five minutes. He asked for Ghafur's
removal and when she said 'no', he came out from her
residence at once. JP was determined to make the entire
India rise against her. He possessed charisma and a solid
moral background to succeed in his mission of throwing
Indira Gandhi out of power. Indira Gandhi wanted to
arrest him that very day; she consulted a couple of
persons close to her. One of them replied: 'Please do
not do so. Otherwise, your governn1ent will fall like
nine pins in less than a fortnight.' She accepted that
advice.
Jayaprakash Narayan returned to Patna. One day he
was leading a mammoth procession. The Central
Reserve Police Force (CRPF) suddenly lathicharged
the peaceful citizens. A lathi was about to strike
22 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VA)PAYEE

Jayaprakash Narayan's head but for Nanaji Deshmukh's

timely intervention; the latter took the blow on his
forearm, which got fractured. (Nanaji was an eminent
Bharatiya Jana Sangh leader and, of course, a product
of the RSS.) Wherever Jayaprakash went, he drew lakhs
of persons. He proved himself to be a bigger crowd-
puller than any other individual in Indian history in the
twentieth century. He praised the RSS. When
Jayaprakash Narayan came to Delhi in early June 1975,
he held a meeting at the residence of a Member of
Parliament. Nearly 70 MPs (mostly Congressmen)
attended this meeting, including Chandra Shekhar (who
later became PM in 1990). When the report reached
Indira Gandhi, she got unnerved. She consulted a few
of her advisors and a lawyer (a Congressman) quite
close to her politically. They advised her to impose a
state of Emergency on the country. Incidentally, a noted
civil servant, the last of the ICS officers, disagreed with
her approach, for Constitutional reasons, of course.
Another disturbing development which instigated
Indira Gandhi to go in for Etuergency was the
Allahabad high court's verdict (early June 1975) which
held that her election to the Lok Sabha was not valid.
On 25 June 1975, she declared the imposition of
Emergency to bring the 'law and order' situation under
control. Within an hour of this announcement,
Jayaprakash Narayan was arrested in Delhi. Many other
leaders, including Chandra Shekhar, were arrested that
very night. Later on, even persons who wrote a letter
to her advising her not to resort to undemocratic
measures were also arrested. One of them was Bhimsen
THE BJP ERA 23

Sachar, a former chief minister of Punjab. Even freedom

fighters were arrested. One of the exceptions she made
was in the case of the octogenarian Acharya J.B.
Kriplani who was living in a flat in South Delhi.
Top BJS (Bharatiya Jana Sangh) leaders including
AtaI Behari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani were
jailed without any loss of time. In Punjab too, the
arrests took place in large numbers. An eminent Akali
leader, S.S. Barnala, graphically narrates (in a book)
that he was at Shimla at that time, along with one of
his sons, when the Emergency was declared. He received
a telephone call from a journalist informing him of the
event. He rushed hack to the plains by the first
available bus. After some days a Ineeting of the
Shiromani Akali Dal took place and the mernbe·rs
decided to resist the Enlergency. Akalis were arrested
in large numbers. Every day some of them offered
satyagraha at various places in Punjab. The number of
Akali workers arrested came next only to the BJS
workers. Nearly one lakh persons were arrested
throughout the country. A vigil was kept on a large
number of officers. There was hardly any city or town
where BJS workers were not arrested. Many of theIn
were tortured by way of being put in sinall cells. Barnala
fell ill. Later on, he was shifted to another jail where
he recouped. Tens of thousands of workers of the
Opposition belonging to many parties suffered merely
for defending the democratic values enshrined in the
Constitution of India.
A couple of days after the imposition of the
Emergency, the Hindi service of British Broadcasting
24 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Corporation observed: 'It is now to be seen how long

she will keep India in her dictatorial clutches.' There
was the silence of the graveyard all over the country.
The" Indian Express owned by Ramnath Goenka, left its
editorial space blank. Censorship had been imposed
and nobody could speak or ·write against the mighty
architect of the Emergency, Indira Gandhi. But many
intellectuals had not even the slightest doubt that this
sinister regime could not go on for long. She surpassed
the British in suppressing freedom of expression and
restricting the activities of millions of people.
Jayaprakash Narayan fell ill during his detention. Atal
Behari Vajpayee developed back pain. On medical
advice, he was shifted to the All India Institute of
Medical Sciences from his New Delhi residence at
Ferozeshah Road.
Charan Singh (a powerful leader representing
farmers) was also behind bars. Karpuri Thakur, the
socialist leader from Bihar, went underground, dividing
his time between Nepal and his home state. Another
notable incident about the BJ S leader, N anaj i
Deshmukh, is worth recounting. Indira Gandhi spoke
in Parliament ahout the arrests, and referring to Nanaji
she noted: 'The gentleman is still at large.' Her
phraseology ind icates that she was terribl y
apprehensive of Nanaji. Nanaji Deshmukh remained
underground dividing his time between Delhi and a
couple of other places. At Delhi, he was staying at the
residence of a friend of his in a locality known as
Defence Colony. One day when he alighted from a
vehicle about 50 yards from his residence, he was
 25

spotted by a plainclothes policeman. Within an hour

he was arrested.
Meanwhile, the total number of workers of the BJ P
arrested exceeded 60,000; this feature accorded
immense popularity to the party. The people silently
endured the 'Hitlerian' rule of Indira Gandhi. It brought
silent disdain and contempt for her. The BJS grew in
stature throughout the Hindi belt and also in some
southern states. In Karnataka too a large number of BJ S
cadres were arrested. The whole of Punjab was turned
into a jail and pro .. government spies and informers were
moving all around.
Much has been. written about the Emergency over
the years. However, it is worth re~emphasising that huge
numbers of Opposition cadres were arrested (and some
were even liquidated), fundamental rights were
suspended and freedom of expression was throttled.
Indira Gandhi rode roughshod over delTIocratic
institutions and all voices of dissent were ruthlessly
silenced. But there was light at the end of the tunnel.
In January 1977, Jagijivan Ram, then a minister in
Indira Gandhi's cabinet, in the briefest meeting he ever
had with her, asked her to lift the Emergency. Jagjivan
Ram had sixth sense. He could feel the pulse of the
nation better than most Congress members of those
days. She assured him that she would lift the
Emergency. There was no formal declaration that day
or the next, but elections to Lok Sabha were soon
announced (March 1977). Within a matter of few days,
many Opposition parties sank their individual
differences for some time and merged themselves
26 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

together to form the Janata Party under the leadership

of Jayaprakash Narayan. Meanwhile, most of the
people arrested during the Emergency were released
hefore the Janata Party was formally launched. After
that historic event, the election campaign was set in
motion by Atal Behari Vajpayee and other leaders.
Jagjivan Ram and Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna resigned
from the Congress, a party which they had nourished
with their sweat and blood. They formed the Congress
for Democracy (CFD) as a subsidiary of the Janata
Party. These two veterans also joined the election
campaign. Jagjivan Ram spoke at many rallies;
Bahuguna spared no words to condemn Indira Gandhi
anJ her sinister deeds during the Emergency. Lakhs of
people listened to the Janata Party leaders wherever
rallies were organised. India was undergoing a
tremendl)us change. The ] anata Party emerged
victorious in the general elections. Democracy in India
got a fresh lease of life. By common consent, Morarji
Desai became the prime minister at the ripe old age of
80. Atal Behari Vajpayee bacame external affairs
minister in the cabinet of Desai. L.K. Advani was made
information and broadcasting minister. Chandra
Shekhar was elected as the president of the Janata
Party. Raj Narayan, who defeated Indira Gandhi
convincingly from the Rae Bareilly constituency, was
inducted as a minister in Desai's cabinet. In course of
time, Raj Narayan raised the issue of dual membership.
He insisted that all those B]S members holding office
in the government and the party should relinquish their
membership of the RSS. He was close to Charan Singh,
THE BJP ERA 27

whose party, the Lok Dal, which merged into the Janata
Party had as many Members of Parliament as the BJS
(more than 90).
When Morarj i Desai was due to take over reins as
the prime minister, the militant trade union leader,
George Fernandes, was being tried in the sessions court
of Delhi in the case instituted against him (known as
the Baroda dynamite case) by Indira Gandhi's
Governluent. After becoming PM, the decision that
Desai took was to withdraw proceedings against
Fernandes and appoint him Union minister of industry.
Fernandes rushed to Rashtrapati Bhavan to participate
in the swearing.-in ceremony.
Morarj i Desai's Government was soon beset with
problelns and a serious rift developed between him and
his deputy PM, Charan Singh (over the aforementioned
duallnelnhership issue), in mid . . 1979. Charan Singh was
aspiring to become PM (with outside support from
Indira Gandhi). A na.-confidence motion was moved
against the Morarj i Desai Government in July 1979 and
it collapsed. Even his cabinet colleagues deserted hitn.
Even before voting on the no . . confidence motion
could take pLace, Desai tendered his resignation frotn
the prime rninistership to President Neelam Sanjeeva
Reddy. President Reddy first asked Y.B. Chavan (the
home minister in Indira Gandhi's cabinet) whether he
could form a government. Chavan declined and
suggested the name of Charan Singh for the post of
prime minister, who assumed office in July 1979 with
the backing of Indira Gandhi, despite sonle 'bad blood'
between them. Earlier, Charan Singh (as home minister)
28 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

had issued the orders for the arrest of Indira Gandhi.

She was being taken in a police car to Haryana. On the
waYl she asked the driver to halt for a minute as she
wanted some fresh air. She sat on a culvert by the side
of the main highway. She refused to be taken to
Haryana. The police authorities contacted the home
minister (Charan Singh), and she 'was brought back to
Delhi. That was the turning point in her favour. When
she was produced in a court on Parliament Street, New
Delhi, the prosecution was unable to produce any
papers. (This outcome was decided at the highest level
in the government, probably between Prime Minister
Desai and Home Minister Charan Singh.) The trial
officer, consequently, ordered her immediate release.
Her supporters, who had gathered in droves, raised
slogans to boost her morale. When Char an Singh
eventually becmne prime minister, the Janata Party had
!-luffered a setback. Charan Singh never faced the
Parliament Juring his brief tenure as prime minister.
His prime Ininistership witnessed the decline of the
Janata Party. Ultimately, the Janata Party broke up into
many pieces. The Jana Sangh group took stock of the
situation and decided to emerge in a new form as the
Bharatiya Janata Party.
Charan Singh's term of office as PM did not last
long; his stint ended when Indira Gandhi withdrew
support to his government.
Consequently, general elections were held to the
Lok Sabha in January 1980. They proved a boon for
Indira Gandhi, who regained power and took over as
PM. During her 'second innings', she committed many
THE BJP ERA 29

~rievous blunders. The economy slumped and prices

hegan to soar. Communal riots hroke out in some parts
of UP. Terrorism was widespread in Punjab and a few
other northern states. Innocent people there were, being
slaughtered almost on a daily basis. When the situation
took on alarming proportions, Indira Gandhi resorted
to drastic measures. In June 1984, she ordered an Army
assault on the holiest of the Sikh shrines, namely, the
Akal Takht within the Golden Temple at Amritsar. The
purpose was to flush out the militants taking shelter
there. This move deeply hurt the sentiments of the
Sikhs as well as religious,minded Hindus. The
consequences were very unfortunate. On 31 October
1984, Indira Gandhi was assassinated hy two of her Sikh
hodyguards.
Indira Gandhi's assassination was followed by large,
scale looting of Sikh shops and houses and widespread
killing of Sikhs, especially in the capital New Delhi, by
frenzied mobs incited by some politicians. ()n
1 November 1984, a hunch of rioters wanted to burn
down a fleet of taxis (belonging to Sikhs) near the
Press Club, New Delhi. Atal Behari Vajpayee happened
to he nearby. Despite suffering from high fever, he
reached the spot at once and telephoned another BJP
stalwart, Krishan Lal Sharma, to join him immediately
and the latter did so. The comhined persuasive efforts
of both Vajpayee and Sharma could prevent the crowd
from setting fire to the taxis.
(In the political front, Indira Gandhi's son, Raj iv
Gandhi, was sworn in as her Sllccessor (as PM)
forthwith by President Zail Singh. (According to some
30 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARl V AJPAYEE

reports, Zail Singh was a bit reluctant, but had really

no choice after the Congress Working Comlnittee had
deCided upon Rajiv Gandhi as PM.)
Indira (Jandhi's assassination in ()ctoher 1984
accorded a new lease of life to the Congress in that the
party won a [nassive Inandate in the general elections
held soon afterwards. Such an overwhelming result
could be attributed to the sYlupathy wave. Rajiv
Gandhi was sworn in as the prime ministe-r. The
individual [nost instrumental in elevating him to the
prime 111inistership was the veteran Congressman
Kanllapathi Tripathi. His view prevailed upon the
varioLls Congress leaders that it was in the best interests
of the party to have Rajiv Gandhi as prilne minister.
Raj LV Gandhi had earlier (i.e., immediately after his
111other's assassination) occupied the prime 111inister's
office under inauspicious circumstances; anti,Sikh riots
had broken out in Delhi and in other parts of the
country. Many Sikhs also lost their lives and property
as a result uf large .. scale arson and killings. The Army
had to be called In to restore law and order. But the
hitterness and the suspicion were rather deep .. rooted
and continued to fester.
The initial months of Rajiv CJandhi's tenure as PM
was luarkeJ by goodwill and euphoria. But after that,
several serious problems began to crop up. The law and
order situation in some north,eastern states began to
cause concern. Next, in late 1987, Rajiv Gandhi
decided to send an Indian Peace,Keeping Force (IPKF)
to Sri Lanka to help the government there in fighting
the terrorist outfit LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil
THE BlP ERA 31

Eelam}. Once, during a VISit to Sri Lanka, while

inspecting a guard of honour, one of the Sri Lankan
soldiers tried to hit Rajiv Gandhi on the back of his
head, but was unsuccessful. Rajiv narrowly escaped
heing seriously injured. (Raj iv Gandhi was eventually
assassinated hy a huolan bomb at Sriperumbudur in
Tmnil Nadu on 21 May 1991; the hand of the LITE was
;lpparent in this killing, which was probably ordered by
the LITE chief V. Prabhakaran.)
(jther major setbacks faced by Rajiv Gandhi were
In Punjah and Oarjeeling. In Punjab, Rajiv signed an
accord with the Akali Oal leader Sant H.S. Longowal.
Unfortunately, the Sant was assassinated (on 20 August
1985) shortly after the accord was signed. The accord
could not he fully ilnpielnented.
The most serious blow to the Rajiv Gandhi
Ci overn 11le 11 twas dea I t by the Bofors scandal (a
howitzer deal in which SOlue top' level leaders were
alleged to have pocketed huge kickbacks), which
eventually led to the Congress Party losing the
November 1989 general elections.
It was the fortner Congressman V.P. Singh (who
resigned as a Ininister froIn Raj iv Gandhi's cabinet) who
hecalne the prime Ininister in Deceluber 1989. (Singh
haJ switched over to the Janata Dae and headed a
coalition governlnent supported hy the BJP as well as
the cOlnmunists.)
Advani took over as president of the BJP in
September 1989. The B]P, spearheaded by Advani, felt
that this was the opportune time to push forward the
cause of the Ram temple at Ayodhya.
 32 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Advani was born in Sind, now a part of Pakistan.

After partition he came over to India, and settled to
work at Jaipur. His first assignment was that of a school
teacher. Then he became a pracharak (wholetime
worker) of the RSS at Kota, Rajasthan. Kota hecame a
stronghold of the Jana Sangh and, later, the Bharatiya
J anata Party. Mohan Lal Sukhad ia, the Congress
stalwart, was the chief minister of Rajasthan at that
time. Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, a former police
sub inspector, had given up his job to work for the BJP;
he was the chief exponent of this party in Rajasthan.
He was a marvellous orator and his attacks on the
Congress were always straightforward and sober. During
his public speeches, he did not indulge in any humour.
The details of various cases of corruption, against his
rivals, were on his fingertips A'dvani developed great
regard for Shekhawat during those days and made it a
point to he present at the tneetings addressed hy the
latter in Kota.
Advani then shifted to Delhi. For some titne he
worked as as assistant editor of the Organiser (weekly).
I t was during those days that his work was very much
appreciated by Bala Saheb Deoras. Advani contested
a seat for the Delhi State Assembly. He was later
elected as speaker of the Assembly. His popularity was
also on the increase. Luckily for him, he was backed for
the presidentship of the BJP by powerful persons who
could make all the difference. Thus, he came on the
centre,stage of national politics in the late 1980s and
his importance has grown from then on.

~~~?;-;~, ~~w~7il
I _. _
THE BJP ERA 33

In August 1990, in the wake of the massive ground,

swell for the construction of a Ram mandir (temple) at
Ayodhya (the birthplace of Lord Ram), Advani
decided to undertake a Rath Yatra (chariot journey)
from Dwarka (a holy town on the Gujarat coast) to
Ayodhya via several states of India, including those
ruled by the Congress. This Rath Yatra drew wide
applause as Advani's 'chariot' (a Toyota car decked up
as a chariot) rolled through one major city after
another. The atmosphere was filled with full,throated
cries of 'J ai Shri Ram'. The stupendous response to
Advani's Rath Yatra made V.P. Singh feel that he and
his government were in the doldrums. He decided to
halt the Rath Yatra before it could reach its destination.
Evidently, on V.P. Singh's instructions, the Rath Yatra
was stopped at a place called Samastipur in Bihar by
Laluo Prasad Yadav, the chief minister of that state.
Advani was taken by helicopter to Masangora
guesthouse, where he was put under detention. Later,
in his speech, Laloo Yadav boasted that he had put
Advani in the helicopter like 'a sack of potatoes'. Such
was the intemperate language used by no less a dignitary
than a chief minister!
Incidentally, in a similar vein, it is worth noting that
in late 1998, Rabri Devi, the wife of Laloo Yadav (who
succeeded him as the chief minister of Bihar), hurled
abuses at the Central leaders, including the prime
minister (Atal Behari Vajpayee) and the home minister
(none other than L.K. Advani)!
34 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARI VAJPAYEE

The BJP 'juggernaut', in the later half of 1990, strode

ahead forcefully and was able to make deep inroads
into what were once considered Congress strongholds.
The V.P. Singh Government came tumbling down in
November 1990 after the BJP withdrew its support to
it. In December 1990, another candidate who had been
waiting in the wings to become prime minister, namely,
Chandra Shekhar (an MP from Bhalia in Uttar
Pradesh), managed to fulfil his drealn with due support
froln the Congress led by Rajiv Gandhi. However, his
tenure was short,lived. The Congress withdrew support
to Chandra Shekhar in April 1991 on rather. flimsy
grounds and, as a result, general elections to the Lok
Sabha became inevitable and were held in May 1991.
(It was in the middle of these elections that Rajiv
Gandhi was assassinated, i.e., on 21 May 1991.)
The results of the general elections were announced.
The B]P, despite its vastly ilnproved performance, was
not able to muster enough support to form a govern(ne~t
at the Centre. It was again the turn of the Congress to
occupy the New Delhi gaddi (throne). P.Y. Narasimha
Rao became the prime minister in June 1991 and his
government lasted its entire term of five years.
 3
The Climb to the Summit

Although the Narasimha Rao Government managed to

survive for five years and did account for some major
achievements on the economic front, its tenure was
marred by a series of 'scams', notably the 'stock market
scam' (1993). Other factors such as a deteriorating law
and order situation, in,fighting among Congressmen
and the growing distance between the people and the
leaders led to intense disillusionment among the
masses. Consequently, in the May 1996 general
elections, the Congress was rejected by the people.
The BJP emerged as the single largest party, securing
165 seats in the Lok Sabha. The overall result reflected
a 'fractured' verdict. The BJP staked its claim to form
the government at the Centre. Consequently, the
president of India invited Atal Behari Vajpayee on
16 May 1996 to take over the 'reins of power'. Vajpayee
accepted the offer. Unfortunately, his government

35
36 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

lasted only 13 days due to lack of support from other

parties. Vajpayee graciously stepped down.
Next, it was the turn of a motley collection of 14
political parties to come together under the umbrella
of the 'United Front'. These parties projected a
relatively unknown politician, H.D. Deve Gowda (a
Janata Dalleader from Karnataka) as their leader. Thus,
on 1 June 1996, Deve Gowda was sworn in as the prime
minister. As the Congress offered to support the Gowda
Government from outside, it managed to secure the
majority required to rule.
Deve Gowda did not last even for one year. In April
1997, the Congress, under the leadership of Sitaram
Kesri, decided to pull the rug from under Deve Gowda's
feet, again for some untenable reasons. Gowda lost the
vote of confidence in the Lok Sabha. He was replaced
by another Janata Dal leader, namely, I.K. Gujral, on
21 April 1997. (Gujral was the minister for external
affairs in V.P. Singh's Government, at the height of the
Gulf crisis, when Iraq had invaded Kuwait.)
The Gujral Government was supported by the very
same Congress and also by the communists. In fact, the
CPI (Communist Party of India) was represented by two
Union ministers (Indraj it Gupta and Chaturanan
Mishra). The CP_I,M (Marxists) also lent outside
support to the Gujral Government.
Uncertainty plagued the Central Government. Once
again, the Congress (with Sitaram Kesri as its president)
withdrew support to the Gujral Government. The bone
of contention was that the Central Government should
drop those ministers belonging to the DMK (Dravida
THE BJP ERA 37

Munnetra Kazhagam, a regional party of Tamil Nadu)

which was alleged to be symapthetic to the LITE (i.e.,
the group alleged to be involved in Rajiv Gandhi's
assassination). The PM refused to do so. Consequently,
Gujral was compelled to quit office. The president, left
with no choice, dissolved the Lok Sabha (eleventh) on
4 December 1997.
Again, general elections loomed large on the
horizon. In the run,up to the elections, there were large'
scale realignments of political forces.
In West Bengal, the indomitable Matnata Banerjee
severed her links with the Congress and formed her
own party known as the Trinamul (grassroot) Congress.
She contested the elections from the Calcutta (south)
constituency and emerged victorious. Other Trinamul
Congress candidates also contested from various
constituencies in West Bengal.
Meanwhile, other momentous scenes were witnessed
on the political landscape. In the first week of
Decelnber 1997, the Election Commission of India
recognised the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) (led by
Kanshi Ram) as a national party. The event was
celebrated by Kanshi Ram and his supporters by hosting
a tea party to which many prominent leaders of the
United Front (UF) were invited. The BSP supremo
declared that he was willing to join hands with any
party which would help in defeating the BJP in Uttar
Pradesh (the state with the largest population and
considered crucial in deciding any party's fate). Kanshi
Ram's offer was probably meant to entice the Samajwadi
Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav (a politi'cal
38 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

heavyweight and a former chief minister of UP who was

also the defence minister in the Gujral Government)
into reaching an agreement on the sharing of seats.
In South India too, several significant changes took
place. G.K. Moopanar (the leader of the Tamil Manila
Congress, TMC), once an ally of the DMK, lnaintained
his distance from that party. (Incidentally, Moopanar
was a long, time Congressman hut broke away from his
parent party to form the TMC.)
On another political front, Harkishan Singh Surjeet
(CPI,M) and the UF convenor Chandrahahu Naidu
(belonging to the Telugu DesalTI party and. the chief
minister of Andhra Pradesh) tried to prevail upon
Moopanar to bring about a ra/Jprochemenr between the
TMC and the DMK. Surjeet and Naidu stood out as
hardliners who were dead set against any alignment with
the Congress. On the other hand, l.K. Gujral and
Mulayam Singh did possess a soft spot for the Congress.
(As a sidelight, it may be mentioned that Moopanar's
name was considered for prime ministership after the
fall of Deve Gowda's Government. His prospective
chances were, however, gunned Jown by the
,communists, who felt that Moonapar had emotional
links with the Congress.) Moopanar proclaimed that
the UF's presence in several states, particularly in the
north and the west, was not formidable enough. He also
declared that if the UF was keen to defeat the B] P,
which was growing progressively stronger, then it had
to join hands with other parties, including the Congress.
In Moopanar.'s opinion, any other approach by the UF
would not be able to counter the BjP's game plan to
THE BJP ERA 39

capture power at the Centre. Finally, he held that those

who wanted to vanquish the BJP on their own were not
pragmatic in their assessment of the political realities.
For his part Laloo Prasad Yadav (who had by then
I

snapped links with the Janata Oal to form his own party,
the Rashtritya Janata Dal) asserted, unalubiguously,
that he would cooperate with the Congress as an ally.
In the last month of 1997, the country was looking
forward to general elections in order that the twelfth
Lok Sabha could be constituted. A core committee
meeting of the UF was held in the evening of
8 Decemher. While emerging from this meeting, Deve
Gowda was heard descrihing Mulayam Singh Yadav as
the 'general' who would lead the 'UF troops' in the
Hindi heartland. However, the crucial question
remained: could Mulayam Singh draw sufficient crowds
and impress the voters? Could he n1atch Vajpayee's
silver, tongued oratory, marked by wisdom, wit and
profundity? A leading newspaper commented on the
political situation (in its editorial of 10 December 1997
under the heading 'A Myopic Front'): 'Gifted with
neither foresight nor hindsight, the United Front and
the Congress are doing their utmost to block a pre~
election alliance, which can he beneficial to both. Now
that the Lok Sabha has been Jissolved, the United
Front has no need of the Congress. The same may he
said to apply to the Congress vis,a,tJis the United Front.'
The UF stand was logical inasmuch as that most of
its constituent partners were strong in some states and
the Congress was their main rival there. The two
exceptions were UP and Tamil Nadu. Bihar was a
40 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

unique case where the Congress was to find an ally in

Laloo Prasad Yadav's Rashtriya Janata Dal in facing the
challenge of the BJP~Samata combine. Mulayam Singh
Yadav's Samajwadi Party was bidding to capture Uttar
Pradesh from the BJP with the Bahujan Samaj Party
emerging as an enemy's enemy rather than a friend. The
other UF constituents, namely, the two left parties, the
Telugu Oesam, the Janata Oal and the Assam Gana
Parishad, faced the Congress or the BJP as their main
rivals in their respective areas of power and influence.
In short, the continued existence of the United
Front as such had little significance hecause the
regional parties were to try their fortunes at the hustings
on the basis of their own identities, in their own spheres
of influence.
The Congress was desperately in need of crutches
and it could not find a strong ally in Uttar Pradesh. A
different picture emerged in Maharashtra. The most
pathetic plight was reserved for the Janata Dal. Reduced
to a rump in Bihar, faced with a very stiff challenge in
Karnataka and a split in Orissa, this party was moving
inexorably towards extinction. The J anata Dal's loss
was surely to be the gain of the BJP rather than that of
the Congress as the Janata Dal had always thrived on
floating anti,Congress votes.
The overall picture three months before the polls
for the twelfth Lok Sabha was quite confusing indeed.
After taking the mOlnentous decision not to have any
truck with the Congress, the United Front reduced itself
to the same state as the National Front was after the
dissolution of the ninth Lok Sabha in 1991. A creation
THE BJP ERA 41

of the hung Lok Sabha of 1996, the UF could have

dissolved itself with the House to save itself from
ignominy. The fact that it did not do so could only mean
a possible slump for the regional parties in the 'electoral
market'.
Cou ld the UF not foresee such a pass i bit i ty?
Obviously not. All its constituents were in the grip of
'BJP phobia'. The UF was bent on paying any price to
prevent Atal Behari Vajpayee froin occupying the
prime ministerial saddle. The Congress perhaps thought
that the dissolution of the UF was a sort of suicide. They
probably preferred a delayed and not an immediate
suicide, hoping that SOine unforeseen development
Inight save them fronl political disaster. Their bravado
increased all the more. The leftists had a hig stake in
the polls. They very well knew their limitations. They
were hoping against hope. They could not have acted
utherwise. They were the lnost vocal and the most keen
for the dissolution of the eleventh Lok Sahha.
The Samajwadi Party of MulayaITI Singh YaJav was
certainly not prepared to sing the UF tune vis~a,vis the
Congress. Its members probably thought of a possible
maintaining of balance between the UF and the
Congress at the time of government formation. The
saIne was the game of the BSP with the difference that
this party could bargain with any of the three major
groups. The BSP leaders publicly confessed that they
were 'opportunists'. The standards of political
hehaviour of SOlne groups was, of course, appalling.
They were not worried about their credibility. The
public at large appeared to be anguished over the
42 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

behaviour of many Congress leaders. Also, there was a

sense of revulsion. Whatever may have happen~d in UP
when a chunk of their MLAs (Members of Legislative
Asselnb ly) joined the BJ P, it was not considered
detestable just as many in Gujarat did not consider the
events of 1995 undesirable when S.S. Vaghela took
more than 40 BJP MLAs to Khajuraho (in Madhya
Pradesh) and revolted against the BJP Government in
Gujarat.
In the middle of Decemher 1997, the Janata Oal in
Orissa split. The leader of the breakaway group, Navin
Patnaik, son of the late Biju Patnaik, sought recognition
for his group from the speaker of the Orissa Assell1bly.
The Congress was dealt a massive blow on
1 7 December 1997, when J. J ayalalitha, the leader of
the AIADMK (All,lndia Anna Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam) announced that her party would enter into
an electoral alliance with the BJP in Tamil Nadu. She
had firmly rejected overtures by the Congress, which
she felt, had come too late anyway. (Jayalalitha wielded
considerable clout, despite being out of office - she
was earlier the chief minister of Tamil Nadu.) In the
aftermath of this serious setback, one of the Congress
stalwarts, Pranab Mukherjee, expressed the view that
every party had the right to ally with any other party.
Another Congressman from Tamil Nadu, Mani Shankar
Aiyar (known for his acerbic writings against the BJP),
expressed unhappiness.
In Andhra Pradesh, a former chief minister, Bhaskar
Rao, virtually threw a bombshell by announcing his
THE BJP ERA 43

resignation from the Congress. He decided to keep his

options open and remarked that he may join the BJP.
The Congress, however, found an unexpected ally
in Laloo Prasad Yadav, who was still willing to mend
fences with the Janata Oal (from which he had broken
away), provided his arch,rivals SharaJ Yadav (JD
president) and Ram Vilas Paswan (fonner Union railway
minister during the Deve CJowda and Gujral
(jovernments) were kept out. He was, of course,
demanding the ilnpossible.
At this stage, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) (once
an ally of the BJP in UP) found itself hetween the
proverbial 'devil and the deep sea'. This situation
resulted hecause one of the prolninent BSP leaders,
Mayawati (a former chief Ininister of UP), had forcefully
pronounced that her party would ally with neither the
C:ongress nor MUlaYC1111 Singh Yadav's Samajwadi Party.
The thinking in BSP circles was that in a quadrangular
contest (ao)()ng the C~ongress, the B]P, the BSP and the
Samajwadi Party) in most areas of UP in the 1998 Lok
Sahha polls, the ESP [night retain the second position;
it was a foregone conclusion that the BJP would he
numero uno. C)n the other hand, the BSP felt if it were
to become a part of an anti,BJP alliance of diverse
groups, it may not be able to secure a place in the sun.
To chalk out its strategy for the forthconling polls,
the BJ P held its plenary session at Bhubaneshwar (the
capital of Orissa) froln 19 to 21 December 1997. The
BJ P leadership was confident of securing a majority in
the elections. An understanding on seat sharing
hetween the BJP and the Biju Janata Oal (led by Navin
44 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHAR I VAJPAYEE

Patnaik) was finalised as far as Orissa was concerned.

The alliance with ]ayalalitha's AIADMK was celnented
firmly. Addressing the plenary session, Atal Behari
Vajpayee underscored the fact that the B]P had been
able to break into new geographical areas and remove
previous rnental barriers due to the onrush of popular
support for it. Vajpayee went on to add sagaciously:
'Political parties should playa level game during the
polls. We have been playing the ganle according to the
rules for the last 40 years. We have ohserved certain
110rnlS. If we have to play with those who indulge in foul
play, what do you expect of us?' In response to a
question as to whether the B]P was moving away from
democratic norms by projecting him (Vajpayee) as the
prime ministerial candidate, he rernarked: 'That is the
party's dec.ision.'
Towards the end of Decemher 1997, the southern
state of Karnataka witnessed a politically significant
Jevel0plnent. In Bangalore, the renowned Ralnakrishna
Hegde (a Ininister in Morarji Desai's cabinet and a
former chief minister of Karnataka) advocated the
fornlation of three broad fronts constituting the BJP, the
Congress and the leftists, respectively. Hegde, too, had
severed links with the Janata Dal and formed his own
party known as Lok Shakti. He, however, emphatically
stated that his party would not merge with any other
party; i.e., it would maintain its individual identity.
Probably, Hedge wanted to strike some sort of bargain
with the BJP, n party which he had promised to support.
Hegde's approach was subtle and courteous in glaring
contrast to the BSP supremo Kanshi Ram's outbursts.
THE BJP ERA 45

At that point of time, Kanshi RaIn was considered a

leader of some consequence because his party had
developed a substantial base among the Scheduled
Castes in northern and central India. The loss of the
huge chunk of Scheduled Caste votes would have an
adverse impact on the prospects of the Congress and
the Samajwadi Party. For its part, the B]P was confident
of bagging the votes of the upper and middle classes,
Inainly in the northern and central states (including
Bihar) .
As the dates for the polls drew nearer, more
dranlatic events began to characterise the political
scenario with a cascading effect.
l)n 21 Decclnher 1997, the TaInii Nadu Congress
forn1ally split. Its former president, Vazhapadi K.
Ramarnurthy, affirmed that he would float a new party
which would ally with the AIADMK, which, in turn, had
decided to ally with the BJP. Another prominent
C:ongress leader, R. KUluaraluangaiam, decided to switch
over to the B] P. These tnoves represented a severe
hlow for the Congress.
In West Bengal, as already Inentioned, Man1ata
Banerjee had formed her own party, the Trinamul
c.:ongress. Two well,known Congress leaders, Ajit Panja
(a former Union minister in Narasinlha Rao's cabinet)
and Krishna Bose (a relative of the famous Subhash
Chandra Bose) joined the Trinamul Congress, thus
further weakening the Congress presence in West
Bengal. Malnata also decided to support the BJ P.
Mamuta did lneet Sonia Gandhi (who had replaced
Sitaram Kesri as Congress president), but nothing came
out of it.
46 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

The scenario in the northern state of Punjab was

favourable as far as the BJ P was concerned. The ruling
party in the state, the Akali Dal, was eager to join hands
with the BJP. In fact, the canlaraderie was so robust that
the Akali Dal offered the Gurdaspur seat to Atal Behari
Vajpayee to contest frotn.
The birthday (25 December) of Vajpayee proved to
be very lucky for the BJP. On this day, its ranks were
fortified as a result of the admission of a formidable
array of former armed forces luminaries including two
lieutenant~generals, six major~generals and eight
brigadiers, one of whom was a close confidant of a
former prime tninister (V.P. Singh), and one air marshal
(Dushyant Singh).
A senior Congress leader fflJITI Madhya Pradesh,
Dilip Singh Bhuria (who had won six Lok SahhCl
elections from the Jhabua constituency) came over to
the BJP. Another noted MP (Rajya Sabha), Som Pal
(once quite close to Laloo Prasad Yadav) decided to
join the BJ P. He announced his decision at a press
conference in the presence of the BJP president. Som
Pal was pitted against former Union minister Ajit Singh
(the son of former PM Charan Singh) from the Bagpat
constituency (UP) in the ensuing Lok Sabha polls.
Atal Behari Vajpayee's birthday celebrations proved
to be memorable. On this occasion, Vajpayee tllaJe a
mental note of every caller very carefully. A huge
gathering of ticket~seekers was also there, just to
register their presence. One of the authors (DPS) was
also present. Since' he had not brought along a garland,
he requested a young sanyasi standing nearby to give
THE BJP ERA 47

him one. Upon noticing DPS, Vajpayee began walking

towards him but, meanwhile, a group of ladies (who had
been waiting for a long time) rushed forward to garland
Vajpayee. The event was marked by genuine warmth,
aff~ction and happiness all around.
The same evening, Vajpayee's hectic schedule took
him to Mumbai, where he addressed a huge gathering.
Next, he had to go to South India to address election
rallies.
Vajpayee stood like a colossus in the Indian political
field in the last week of 1997. What the year 1998
would bring him and the country was a nl00t question
then, but his followers were quite exuberant as if they
had alreaJy won the elections in a grand way. They
thought that the Congress would collapse like a house
of cards in northern and western India and that a
partial dent in the citadels of other parties in the sOLlth
and the east would certainly occur and that the BJP
would ronlp home with success. In Maharashtra,
although the BJP had entered into an alliance with the
Shiv Sena (led by the vociferous but uncompromising
Bal Thackeray), an elctnent of uncertainty continued
to linger on (at the end of December 1997). This
uncertainty was due to the understanding reached
between the seasoned Congress leader Sharad Pawar (a
fonner defence lninister and a former chief minister of
Maharashtra) and sotne splinter factions of the
Republican Party, each of which had a substantial
following among the socially deprived sections of
society. It was this somewhat nehulous state of affairs
48 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHAR) V AJPAYEE

which compelled Vajpayee to rush to MUlnhai (on the

evening on his hirthday).
Such was the political Inosaic in variolls parts of the
country as the people stood on the threshold of general
elections.
Vajpayee kicked off the election campaign from
Karnataka by querying as to why the Congress withdrew
support to both the Deve Gowda and Gujral
Governments? He delnanded that the people punish
hoth the C:ongress and the UF for playing with the
interests of the country and for hringing the nation to
the hrink of disaster. He expressed the view that the
happenings over the past 18 months had lowered the
prestige and the image of Ind ia in the eyes of the
international community. After addressing meetings in
Gulbarga and Bidar, he went to Huhli and then to
Mangalore as part of his whirlwind election campaign.
The veteran Karnataka BJP leader, Yediyurappa,
predicted that the UF would disintegrate and the
Congress would receive a severe druhbing at the
husting:,.
Other prominent BJP leaders entered the electoral
fray. The BJP president, L.K. Advani (on 28 Decemher
1997) categorically stated that his party was against
treating the minorities as mere 'vote banks'. He
affirmed that they would be given 'equal status'. He also
clarified that the building of the Ram temple at
Ayodhya could form a plank of the BJP's election
campaign. In a press conference, Advani reiterated his
party's demand for the imposition of president's rule in
Gujarat to ensure free and fair polls. He asserted that
THE BJP ERA 49

(:Jovernor K.S. Singh's decision to allow the chief

minister, Dilip Parikh, to head a caretaker government
had no legitilnacy. Advani also indicated that the BJP's
election rnanifesto would highlight crucial issues such
as a uniform civil code, a stable government,
abrogation of Article 370 (which prohibits non,
Kashmiris from owning land or property and from
setting up commercial/industrial establishments in
J&K) and halting of illegal migration from across the
horder in the north-eastern states.
Advani held the opinion that the main contenders
for the Parliamentary 'throne' would be the BJP and the
C:ongress, hoth of which, he felt, would Jonlinate the
national scene. The UF, in his view, would not playa
111ajor role. He retnarked that the caretaker PM, l.K.
(Jujral, was not sure to which faction of the Janata Oal
he he longed.
Ridiculing the CPI{M) general secretary, Harkishan
Singh Surjeet's remark that the (~ongress was intact
despite the recent developments, Advani observed that
it was in a pathetic shape cOlnpared to the position
during the last elections. He claimed that it would be
an easy walkover for the BJP in the conling elections.
He hoped for a comfortable, if not nverwheltning,
InajQrity as the Congress was disintegrating rapidly and
this s ta te of affa irs had dashed a 11 hopes of the
emergence of a viable twa--party system in the country.
The BJP president noted: 'Recent desertions from the
Congress party led to disappearance of the Congress as
a force and this was not a healthy trend in democra(;y.'
He returned from Ahmedabad to Delhi in the morning
50 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

of Sunday, 28 December 1997. Meanwhile, Atal Behari

Vajpayee expressed himself in favour of setting up a
'Constitution Commission' to review the efficacy of the
Indian Constitution in grappling with the problems of
the nation over the past 45 years. He also expressed
grave concern at the steady fall in the n10ral standards
in public life.
'The younger generation that is to man the nation
in the immediate future is losing faith in the system,'
Vajpayee warned while seeking help from the
enlightened public in rekindling faith in the democratic
institutions and also in evoking hope among the
populace for a better future. 'The present climate of
despondency and helplessness has to end,' he asserted.
The BJP leader indicated that a review of the
Constitution was imperative in the light of the
prevailing political instability both at the Centre and
in some states and also because of frequent elections
and the misuse of the constitutional provisions for
narrow political and personal gains.
Vajpayee, who appeared in a rather contemplative
mood, spelt out the party's agenda for the coming
elections by promising greater decentralisation of both
economic and political power. He emphasised that
vigilance against threats to national security could not
be lowered. He spoke about unity in diversity and
stressed that India has always been secular. He reiterated
his party's dictum sarva dharma sambhav (respect to all
religions) and appeasement of none. 'I have seen a wave
of change sweeping the country,' Vajpayee ohserved
while referring to the spontaneous response of the
THE BJP ERA 51

people and their massive turnout at his meetings in

various parts of the country. He added that the BJP
would have to coopt large chunks of the population
who have thus far heen denied a share in the
111anagen1cnt of the country's power structure.
A significant development, with far,reaching
repercussions for all parties, was the parties, was the
decision of Sonia Gandhi to campaign for the Congress
Party, which was con~iderably debilitated by the exodus
of many top .. notch luminaries. Sonia Gandhi thus
ended her seven,year self,imposeJ exile from active
politics and, in one fell swoop, quashed all speculation
ahoLlt her future plans. She was to take over as
C:ongress party president, upon the urging of the
inc un) ben t pres iden t, Si taram Kesri, Juring the
C:alcutta session. The rank and file of the Congress
party felt rejuvenated and turned euphoric.
()n 24 January 1998, the Congress released its
election Iuanifesto. The party apologised to the Indian
people for its inahility to protect the Bahri Masjid at
AyoJhya (which was destroyed on 6 December 1992)
when P.V. Narasituha Rao (a Congreso1an) was the
prilue 1l1inister. For his part, Rao, who was in the
political wilderness in early 1998, hroke his silence on
the subject to declare that he alone could not he held
responsible for the events of December 1992.
As the election campaign tempo picked up, the
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (which had played a prominent
role in the BJP's ascent up the political ladder) struck
a somewhat discordant note. The VHP's general
secretary, Ashok Singhal, a staunch H indutva
52 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

exponent, reportedly asked Muslilns to 'withdraw from

disputed sites at Kashi and Mathura or be ready to face
the Ayodhya,like "humiliation" once again.' It needs
to he clarified here that Ayodhya, Mathura and Kashi
or Varanasi - all three located in UP - represent
'disputed sites' in that pro .. Hindu organisations helieve
that at these sites once existing temples were destroyed
and mosques (masjids) were built. As a result, the Babri
Masjid was razed to the ground by some militant Hindu
groups (on 6 Decenlher 1992). The VHP had also
threatened to demolisth the masjids at Mathura
(helieved to have been built atop the birthplace of
Lord Krishna) and also at \laranasi (helieved to have
been built after destroying the Kashi, Vishwanath
temple).
Accord ing to sOlne press reports, Singhal
announced at a press conference in Lucknow (on
29 December 1997) that the Hindus would not tolerate
any injustice or attack on their religion hy SOIne
Inissionaries and Inemhers of religious groups who were
trying to convert HinJus forcibly. Mounting a scathing
attack on Mulayam Singh Yadav, Singhal accused him
of being responsible for the 'Islamisation' of India. He
also charged Yadav of dividing Hindus on 'caste lines'
and warned that he (Yadav) would not be allowed to
be successful in his efforts.
Many sober and sincere BJ P supporters did not
particularly relish the outburst~ of the VHP leader.
Also, many observers felt that a national reconciliation
was not possible by ignoring Mulayam Singh Yadav.
THE BJP ERA 53

Atal Behari Vajpayee's categorical statement to the

effect that Mathura and Kashi were not on the BJP's
agenda did not cut much ice as far as Mulayam Singh
Yadav was concerned. He retaliated by pronouncing
that the BJP could not he relied upon to maintain a
consistent stand as the party had 'seven tongues'. He
lambasted the BJP for building up 'an atmosphere of
falsehood' .
The battle for supremacy in Uttar Pradesh began in
right earnest on 29 December 1997, with the Congress
under Sonia Gandhi jumping into the electoral fray.
Even if she could sway .3 to 4 per cent of the voters to
cast their votes for the (~ongress, the contest in UP
would turn into a triangular one, the other two parties
being the BJP and Mulayam Singh Yadav's Samajwadi
Party.
For his part, Atal Behari Vajpayee undertook a
whistle,stop election tour which would take him to
Karnataka and Maharashtra. His schedule was tight and
his progratnme hectic. He criss,crosseJ the area in a
helicopter, addressing rallies and moving on quickly
from one venue to another. Vajpayee was accorded a
rousing reception wherever he went. ()n his return to
Delhi, he held a press conference. Here, he assured the
minorities, with all sincerity, that they would not be
harassed if the BJP came to power. He also asked them
to give up any apprehensions in this regard.
During the course of the same week, the Shiv Sena
supremo, Bal Thackeray, proclaimed that a 'national
luonuluent' should be built at the disputed site at
Ayodhya and separate plots should be allocated for the
54 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

construction of the Ram temple and also a mosque.

Even this logical and practical suggestion (if Bal
Thackeray was resented by those 'secularists' who
wanted Hindu~Muslim differences to persist.
Vajpayee Inaintained his momentu1l1 unwaveringly
on the election trail. Travelling in a small hired jet, he
managed to address several rallies at different places
in a single day. At end of his hectic campaign schedule,
he had covered an impressive number of constituencies
(more than 120).
On 24 January 1997, in the morning, Vajpayee
spoke forcefully at a rally at Gorakhpur (UP). Droves
of people lined the roads just to get a glimpse of the
star orator; ultimately, all that they could see was a
dazzling cavalcade of white Ambassador cars (with dark
window screens) whizzing past them froln the helipad
to the rally site. By 4.30 p.rn. Vajpayee had reached his
next venue - a park in Allahabad (also in UP). The
crowds had been waiting there from 1 p.m. itself, spilling
over to the roads adjoining the park. But their wait was
worthwhile. Vajpayee proved why he was an orator par
excellence. By 8.30 p.m., Vajpayee had hopped over to
Varanasi, where he regaled an enthusiastic audience,
which included a large number of youth, at the Kashi
Vidyapeeth grounds. H is speeches were studded wi th
gems of sagacity, satire, philosophy and, above all,
common sense.
Dwelling upon the entry of Sonia Gandhi into the
electoral arena, he remarked: .'India does not .wait for
any man or woman. It awaits a government which will
last five years and give the country a stable polity and
THE BlP ERA 55

a clean rule. Whatever Sonia Gandhi says apart from

the emotional part, it does not make any political
appeal. Why should we be scared? Our initial hesitation
was because we are gentlemen and we did not want to
attack the lady. But now that she is fully involved there
will be a full fight. As I have made it quite clear, there
is no question of vengeance or vendetta. Criminal cases
will, of course, be pursued to the bitter end. Nobody
will be spared.' He went on to add: 'We also have huge
rallies. Look, our work starts after the rally. Their work
ends with the rally.' Referring to his allies he said:
'We ... are seeking cooperation of our allies before the
elections. There will be a joint catnpaign. It will not
he sharing of power but sharing of views also. A new
programme will be formulated for the new combination.
The BJP programme will not be adopted as the
programme of the government. It will have to be
amended.' Speaking about some criminals entering
politics the leader said: 'We are not adopting the same
methods as other parties. Pendency of a criminal case
is no bar under law, conviction is. You, press people,
will have something to say. What are we supposed to
do? When we behaved, we kept losing and you press
people called us "bekar" (useless). You have to accept
that we are in the business of politics to win elections,
and carry out our agenda.' Talking about principles, he
conceded: 'Some dilution is there; that cannot be
avoided in politics. As I said earlier, if all players play
foul, a single player, howsoever good he might be
cannot do anything on his own.'
56 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

Vajapyee reinforced what L.K. Advani had

luentioned earlier with regard to Muslims: 'The
Muslims are not alienated. They came to our rallies.
TI1ey listened to us .... Now they are getting disillusioned
with other political parties; they think they are being
treated as vote hanks. They like the B]P, because it is
a frank party. By now n10st of their apprehensions have
been allayed after seeing the [BJ P] state governlnents
in operation.' He pooh,poohed the notion that the BJP
had 'engineered' trouble or instability at any time in
any non,BJP ruled state: 'That [charge] is ridiculous. By
that logic, give us the Centre and everything will be
all right .... We are committed to "Raj Dharma",'
Regarding the three 'd isputed sites', he candidly
expressed his views: 'We will not allow Ayodhya to be
repeated anywhere. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the
RSS have views of their own. The Bharatiya Janata
Party too has its own views. Mathura and Kashi are not
on our agenda.' Then caIne the critical question: 'Why
do people feel that if there is a BJP government the RSS
will control it from hehind the scenes?' Vajpayee's
response was characteristically straightforward: 'The
advice they give will come openly and it is for us to
accept the advice or not.'
With reference to another contentious issue, i.e.,
reservation of seats for women in Parliament, he
predicated: 'Increased representation for women can
work only if there is a Constitutional Amendment to
which all parties have to agree. It cannot work in
isolation in one party; the "winnability'~ criteria have
to be taken into consideration. I admit we had only
THE BJP ERA 57

7 per cent allotment for women in the last Parliament.

This time it is more.' With respect to economic policy,
he clarified that the BJP was the first to raise its voice
against the licence .. permit .. quota raj, and would
continue to oppose it. He also pointed out that the BJP
wanted the 'fruits of liberalisation' to .reach the
common people. He advocated that investment must
be made in those sectors which directly or indirectly
promote employment.
The BJP 'big guns' then began firing their salvos
against their arch .. rival - the Congress. On 7 February
1998, the BJP challenged Sonia Gandhi to a debate on
any national issue. The BJP general secretary, Venkaiah
Naidu, spoke disparagingly of Sonia Gandhi, making a
statement to the effect that she was noncommittal on
important national issues and priorities and was
carrying out a 'hit .. and .. run' campaign against the BJP.
Vajpayee clearly indicated that if the BJP won, it would
bring to hook 'the corruput among Congress leaders'.
The BJ P was assisted in its tirade against the
Congress by the redoubtable Shiv Sena chief Bal
Thackeray, who was, true to form, vehement in his
attack. Lashing out at Sonia Gandhi at a huge rally at
Ramtek (near Nagpur, Maharashtra), he thundered
(after imitating in a mocking manner Sitaram Kesri's
wobbly gait and Sonia Gandhi's accented diction):
'That woman will sell the country. Her husband [the late
Rajiv Gandhi] and she have already looted Rs. 60 .. 65
crore [allegation in respect of the Bofors howitzer deal).
Sonia Gandhi is nothing but the creation of the media.
58 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR) V AJPAYEE

It is my pledge to you: I will never allow her to become

. .. ,
pnme minister....
The Congress, evidently, was not going to take such
assaults lying down. Its top leaders, though decimated
in numher, let off a series of volleys, hasically aimed at
the Sangh Parivar, which was helieved to 'control' the
BJP. The Congress sought to paint a picture of the BJP
as a 'communalist and Fascist' party whose prime
driving force was generated by the- overpowering desire
to foist Hindutva on the country. In a bid to woo the
Muslim voters, the Congress publicly tendered an
apology for its inahility to protect the Bahri Masj id
froln destruction (on 6 Decemher 1992): As a rejoinder,
a former Congressman, Aslam Sher Khan (a former
national hockey team captain), who had come over to
the BJ P, descrihed the Congress' nlove as 'decei tful
cheap tactics'. Sonia Gandhi's apology (at Chandigarh
on 24 January 1998) did not seem to carry much
conviction. Many people wanted the Congress to
apologise for the Emergency (imposed in June 1975)
and for the economic mess created hy successive
Congress regimes. Despite vigorous and somewhat
strenuous efforts hy the Congress to influence the
electorate, the reality was gradually dawning on the
leaders of this party that they could not hope to win a
majority; in fact, they were facing a rout!
Regarding the United Front, the antics of its
members proved to be an antithesis of its name! Its
constituents were in a state of inconceivable disarray.
Laloo Prasad Yadav had broken away from the parent
Janata Dal to form his own party, the Rashtriya' Janata
THE BJP ERA 59

Dal (RJD). Laloo Prasad's former 'comrades .. in .. arms',

Sharad Yadav and Ram Vi las Paswan, were baying for
his blood! [Laloo Prasad, who was one of the accused
in the Bihar 'fodder scam' (which made continuous
news headlines for months on end) shrewdly made his
wife, Rabri Devi, the chief minister of Bihar. He hilnself
was put under arrest and spent some time in jail before
heing granted bail.]
Another piquant situation arose regarding the
constituency from which the caretaker PM, LK. Gujral,
would contest the election. The Akali Dal, an ally of
the BJP, offered Gujral the Jalandhar (in Punjab) seat.
This offer created the expected furore in the UF circles.
Many visihly agitated LJF heavyweights wanted to
know how Gujral could accept such an offer. To them,
it was like 'supping with the Devil'! Mulayam Singh
YaJav, the defence n1inister in (JujraI's cabinet, flatly
refused to campaign for his leader in case the latter
accepted the Akali Oal's offer. In fact, Mulayam Singh
condemned Gujral for even considering the Akali's
proposal. Atal Behari Vajpayee tellingly cOInmented on
these developments: 'The enemies of India are rolling
their sleeves on the horders, hut our Defence Minister
is not worried ahout the threat to Indian territory but
ahout Lok Sabha seats. Mulayan1 Singh's attack on
(Jujral has made India a laughing,stock in the eyes of
the internauonal community.'
To round off this chapter, let us briefly analyse the
political situation across the country as the various
parties were 'girding their loins' in preparation for the
forthcoming electoral battle.
60 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHAR! V AjPAYEE

In Punjab (13 seats), the BJP .. Akali Dal combine

was set to emerge victorious. The Congress had badly
stulnhled here and was virtually out of the race.
In Haryana (10 seats), the BJP had a tie .. up with
Bansi Lal (a former (~ongressman and a Union minister
Juring Indira Gandhi's tenure as PM) and with am
Prakash Chautala (the son of the former chief minister
of the state, Devi Lal, who became the deputy prime
rninister during V.P. Singh's stint as PM).
In Himachal Pradesh (four seats), the BJP's chief ally
was Sukh Ram (the communications minister during
Narasimha Rao's premiership, who was entangled in the
weh of an unsavoury financial scandal).
In jarnn1u and Kashmir {six seats} the BJP sought
the support of the National Conference headed by
Dr. Farooq Abdullah. The Congress presence was there,
hut fleetingly.
In Delhi {seven seats}, the BJP expected to
'steamroll' its way through. The Congress did enter the
fray, hut its chances were slim.
In Uttar Pradesh {85 seats, the highest of all states},
th~ BJP was enmeshed in an essentially triangular
contest, the other two Inain contenders being the
Salnajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party. The
Congress, despite several attempts, could not make
Inuch of an impact.
In Rajasthan (25 seats), the tussle between the BJP
and the Congress was likely to be keen. The 'anti,
incumbency factor' (a popular buzzword during election
time) was stated to playa prominent role (in the favour
of the Congress).
THE BJP ERA 61

In Madhya Pradesh (40 seats), again, the arch~

rivals - the BJP and the Congress - were the main
cotnnatants, with the other parties hardly making their
presence felt.
In Bihar (54 seats), the BJP·Samata Party nexus was
pitted against the other parties, ~uch as the C:ongress,
the RJD and JD.
In West Bengal (42 seats), the BJP~Trinamul
C:ongress duo entered the arena. Lined up against this
duo were the CPI,M (West Bengal was one of its major
hailiwicks), the CPI, and the Congress apart from a few
regional parties.
In the cluster of the north-eastern states (including
Sikkitn) (total 25 seats), the BJP, the C:ongres and
several regional parties were arrayed against each
other.
In lJrissa (21 seats) the BJ P had linkeJ up with the
Biju Janata Oal (led hy Navin Patnaik). The nlain
opponent here was the Congress, which did have a
stront.! hase.
In (]ujarar (26 seats), again, it was to 111ainly he the
'clash of the titans', ncuuely, the BJP and the Congress,
although a few other parties were in the fray.
In Maharashtra (48 seats), the proll1inent warriors
were (rool an assortnlent of parties stich the BJP~Shi\'
Sena combine, the (~ongress, and the Repuhlican Party
of India. The comhatants were almost evenly matched.
In Karnataka (28 seats), the BJP~Lok Shakti
(Ramakrishna Hedge's newly formed party) hond had
to withstand the onslaught from other political forces,
mainly the Janata Oal anJ the C:ongress.
62 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

.In Tamil Nadu (39 seats), the BJP,AIADMK

alliance had to take on the Congress apart from several
regional parties (such as the DMK and the Tamil
Manila Congress).
In Andhra Pradesh (42 seats), the dominant party
was the Telugu Desam, with the BJP, the Congress, the
CPI and a smattering of other regional parties in the
runnIng.
In Kerala (20 seats), the left parties, especially the
CPI-M, were the potent force. The Congress's stock was
fairly good but the BJP stood marginalised.
In the other constituencies, such as Chandigarh,
Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Goa, Lakshadweep, Daman
and Diu, and Pondicherry, the contestants included the
main national parties {such as the BJ P and the
(~ongress) as also a clutch of regional parties.
The Election Commission of India formally
announced that the polls for constituting the twelfth
Lok Sabha would be spread over the follOWing dates:
16, 22 and 28 February 1998 and 7 March 1998.
 4
At the Summit

The people of India, hy and large, responded with

somewhat subdued enthusiasm (reflected by the none'
too-encouraging voter turnout) to yet another mid,
term election, which was completed as per schedule.
Inevitahly, the polls were marred hy occasional spurts
of violence and sporadic inciJents of ballot hox
snatching and intilnidation. However, considering the
malnmoth size of the electorate and the huge
geographical area (dotted with plains, deserts and
mountains), the entire process was largely peaceful,
barring the odd aberration.
The day 14 March 1998 witnessed some dramatic
developments, which were bound to have far-reaching
consequences. First of all, the Congress Working
Committee (eWC) officially appointed Sonia Gandhi
as Congress president in place of the octogenarian
Sitaranl Kesri. Second, the AIADMK leader,

63
64 INOlA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I VAJPAYEE

]. Jayalalitha, decided to send a letter to President K.R.

Narayanan, confirming, her party's (and alliance
partners') support to the Vajpayee Government, in case
he was called to form one at the Centre.
As the election results started pouring in, the vast
multitudes waited with the proverbial 'hated hreath'
for the final outcome. Millions of people sat glued to
their TV or radio sets lapping up the news with great
relish. The BJP and allies bagged 264 seats, eight short
of the requisite 272 seats, i.e., the half,way mark.
The world moved into 14 March 1998, the date
which had a special significance. The president had till
then not invited Atal Behari Vajpayee to form the
government. On that day, two other political 'giants't
Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laioo Prasad Yadav called
upon President Narayanan at Rashtrapati Bhavan,
apparently with the intention of persuading him not to
summon Vajpayee to form the government because the
BJP and its alliance partners lacked the numbers.
On the same evening, informal contacts between the
Congress and UF leaders were established. Many
Congress leaders did not consider it a prudent step to
collaborate with Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo
Prasad Yadav.
The next day, a news item reported that Sonia
Gandhi preferred the Congress to he in the Opposition,
at least for some time. On the same day, BJP leaders met
to review the political situation. Later on, a meeting
of the BJP and its alliance paJ;tners was held. According
to BJP general secretary, Venkaiah Naidu, the purpose
of the meeting was to make 'all efforts to sort out minor
differences' .
THE BJP ERA 65

Eventually, on 15 March 1998 (which shall be

remembered as a red .. letter day) the president, after
holding a fairly the long meeting with Atal Behari
Vajpayee, handed over the letter" appointing him
(Vajpayee) as the next prime minister of India. The
swearing .. in ceremony was scheduled for 19 March
1998. Incidentally, this date (as later confirmed by
leading astrologers) was the most auspicious one for the
oath .. taking ceremony.
President Narayanan explained his reason for
appointing Vajpayee as prime minister. In his view,
although the BJP and its partners had notched up only
264 seats (as against the required 272), since the Telugu
Desam leader, Chandrababu Naidu (the chief minister
of Andhra Pradesh) had con veyed to him (the
president) that his party would remain neutral during
the vote of confidence, the president was obliged to
invite Vajpayee to occupy the prime minister's post.
The president asked Vajpayee to prove his majority
within 10 days.
Ernerging from Rashtrapati Bhavan after his meeting
with the president, a heaming Vajpayee (the prinle
minister.. Jesignate) conveyed the momentous news to
the hordes of IneJiapersons asseolbled there. Vajpayee,
on the prenlise of sincere goodwill and nlutual trust,
sought the cooperation and assistance of one and all
in the interests of stability ~d competent governance
so that his government could concentrate on tackling
the plethora of challenges that faced the country and
its teeming millions. The BJP and its allies were jubilant
and went on a celebration spree.
66 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AJPAYEE

Between 15 March and 19 March 1998 (when the

swearing~in ceremony was to take place), certain
dissenting voices created a din. The AIADMK chief,
Jayalalitha, after initially promising support to the BJP
Government, began dilly~dallying and going in for a
'song and dance' routine. Eventually, Vajpayee had to
send his enlissary, the distinguished Jaswant Singh, to
Chennai, to persuade her to end the suspense and throw
in her lot with the BJP and its other allies. Jaswant
Singh's nlission proved successful. Jayalalitha acceded
to his re4uest and also expressed her general agreement
with the national agenda (drawn up hy the BJP and its
allies).
Then came the crucial day. (_)n 19 March 1998, at
9.30 a.m., Atal Behari Vajpayee was sworn in as the
prime nlinister of India hy President Narayanan. ()n the
same day, 21 Union lninisters and 21 ministers of state
were also sworn in. The cahinet ministers included a
galaxy of distinguished individuals slIch as L.K. Advani,
Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, George Fernandes, N itlsh
Kumar, Surjeet Singh Barnala, Ramakrishna Hegde and
Ananth Kumar. The supporters of the BJP and its allies
celebrated the momentous events in virtually every
nook and corner of the country.
The reputed BBC, known for its balanced reporting,
in one of Urdu language service hulletins, hroadcast
the views of a well~known Indian journalist, regarding
the post-election scene in New Delhi. This journalist
painted a picture to the effect that some sort a struggl~
was going on for the coveted finance portfolio.
Undoubtedly, all kinds of pressures were being exerted
THE BJP ERA 67

on Prime Minister Vajpayee. Ultimately, the post went

to Yashwant Sinha, a former memher of the Indian
Administrative Service (lAS). (This was the second
time that Sinha bagged this office; the first time, he was
the finance rninister during the prime ministership of
C:handra Shekhar, during the height of the Gulf crisi~
end the ensuing Gulf war, in early 1991.) The AIADMK
chief, J ayalalitha, got what she wanted. Two of her
loyalists were appointed ministers: M. Thambidurai was
handed over charge of the Ministry of Law and Justice,
while R.K. Kumar was placed in change of the Revenue
Wing in the ~1 in istry of France. Both these
appointments were interpreted hy some 'perceptive'
journalists as very ilnportant for Jayalalitha's 'hidden
agenda'. I n other words, the occupants of these plum
posts would 'soft~pedal' the corruption cases in which
Jayalalitha was involved.
InJraj it Gupta of the Communist Party of India
(C:Pl), a former home minister and a senior
Parliamentarian, was appointed pro tern speaker of the
Lok Sahha. The elected 01elnhers (to the Lok Sahha)
were duly sworn in on 22 and 23 March .
•
The new government's thinking on a range of
itnportant issues is reflected hy certa in statelnents made
hy SOlnc of the enlinent Ininisters (on 20 March 1998):

• Yashwant Sinha (finance minister): 'Multinationals

have nothing to fear.'
• L.K. Advani (home minister): 'Cynicism over the
security situation in the country needs to be
d ispe lied. '
68 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

• George Fernandes (defence minister): 'India will

not he shy of inducting nuclear weapons or
tepeating tests of the Agni missile.' (The Agni
launch stands out as one of India's significant
achievements in the field of ballistic missiles.)
• Ramakrishna Hegde (commence minister): 'The
highest priority [will be given] for accelerating
exports growth.'
• Sushma Swaraj (information and broadcasting
minister): 'We will look into the working of Prasar
Bharati without any preconceived notions or
prejudice.' (Prasar Bharati is an autonomous body,
set up by the Government of India, pertaining to the
functioning of Indian TV and radio.)
• R. Kumaramangalam (power minister): 'If an
Indian and a foreign firm are on equal footing, we
will naturally prefer the Indian firm.'
• Ananth Kumar (civil aviation minister): 'I am like
a batsman on a new pitch. Wait and see how we will
play the game. Punctuality and safety will be given
top priority in both the airlines [Le., Air India and
Indian Airlines].'
• Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi (human resources
development minister): 'We will make all our
efforts to provide free education to girls up to
college level, including professional courses.'

The foregoing statements revealed that the new

ministers were brimming with new ideas and concepts.
Meanwhile, the crucial vote of confidence had to
be won in the Lok Sabha by the Vajpayee Government.
THE BJP ERA 69

An air of suspense hung over the country. On 23 March

1998, in a remarkable coup, the BJP and its allies
managed to secure crucial support from Chandrababu
Naidu's Telugu Desam Party. The National Conference,
led by Dr. Farooq Abdullah, also opted to support the
BJ P and its allies. The widely held belief was that
Naidu's decision to plump for the BJP was based on a
quid pro quo that the Telugu Desam candidate, G.M.C.
Balayogi, would he fielded as the candidate for the
speaker of the Lok Sabha. Earlier, the consensus among
all parties was that P.A. Sangma (Congress) would be
the candidate for the speaker's post. But, at the last
Ininute, Sangma was pipped at the post by Balayogi.
The denouement was nothing short of dramatic! Up to
the morning of 24 March 1998, it was Sangma all the
way. But, suddenly, the tables were turned on him. The
BJP and its allies decided to summon Balayogi (who was
in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh) post~haste to file his
nomination. Balayogi airdashed to Delhi (on 24 March)
and somehow tnanaged to reach his destination in the
nick of tilne, i.e., before the deadline expired. At 4.12
p.ln. (on 24 March) Balayogi was elected speaker of the
twelfth Lok Sahha.
The Inanner in which the new speaker had heen
elected created all sorts of apprehensions among the
()pposition parties. Allegations were hurled against the
government, thick and fast. One noted columnist's
alarmist views are reflected in his writing: 'History
reaches us that the econon1ic and political
uncertainties have often created powerful cultural
hacklashes. The econ01l1ic and political collapse of the
70 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

Weimar Republic [1929,33] created national socialism

[i.e., Nazism] in Germany. This ideology virtually
deprived millions of Germans [mainly Jews] of their
national identity on the basis of race. I do not think
that this can happen in India, but it is wise to be
forewarned of the dangers ahead.' Such subtle, but,
nefarious attempts at sowing seeds of suspicion in the
minds of the intellectually vulnerable sections of
society need to nipped in the bud. In this context, it
needs to be emphasised that for four decades or more,
Atal Behari Vajpayee has established himself as an
unshakeable pillar of democracy. He understands and
respects public opinion and the people's hopes and
aspirations. The public at large adores him and showers
hinl with affection. He is greatly venerated by all
sections of society, irrespective of religion or caste.
Vajpayee embodies the finer points of Indian tradition.
His humanistic approach, his courtesy, his sensitivity
and his compassion are assets par excellence in forging
a bright future for a resurgent India. In fact, Vajpayee's
elevation to the lofty post of prime minister is itself a
guarantee that democracy in India is perfectly safe in
his hands.
Then came the D,day, i.e., 27 March 1998. On this
day, the prime minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, moved
a one,line motion (in the Lok Sabha) seeking the
confidence of the House. His tone was sincere and
fortright. This appeal was the starting point for a
momentous debate in which reputed orators - ranged
on opposite sides of the 'political fence' - pitted their
skills against each other. The debate - marked by
THE BJP ERA 71

acrimony, satire, wit, and, above ali, lively verhal

exchanges - formed the basis on which the votes
would be eventually cast. Millions of people diligently
kept track of the proceedings either on TV or radio.
The vociferous Mamata Banerjee stood out as one
of the most effective speakers. She did not pull any
punches while launching her assault on the Communist
Party of India (Marxists), the ruling party in her state
of West Bengal. She highlighted the double standards
of the leftist governnlent in her inimitably belligerent
lnanner.
A couple of eloquent speeches characterised the
counterattack from the ()pposition henches.
The dehate spilled over to 28 ~1arch 1998. Sushlna
Swaraj, the minister for information and broadcasting,
focussed upon the national agenda drawn up by the BJP
anJ its alliance partners. She took up the agenda, point
hy point, and asked the (jpposition nlemhers as to what
ohjections they haJ to progralnlnes ailned at puhlic
welfare?
Another speaker, P.A. Sangnl<l (Congress) (who was
replaced by Balayogi as the speaker rather
unceremoniously) dahbled in unnecessary controversy.
His relnarks appeared unsavoury and in bad taste. All
that he succeeded in doing was tarnishing his own
image. A gaggle of other BJP,baiters and critics of the
Vajpayee (iovernment merely parroted the usual run,
of-the-miLl accusations.
Another knowledgeable and convicing speaker,
Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi of the BJP, delivered his verbal
punches with skill and dexterity; the Opposition was
72 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

duly flummoxed. Dr. Joshi quoted from a book by Sir

Syed Ahlned (the founder of the Aligarh Muslim
University), in which the author had defined a 'Hindu'.
According to Sir Syed, a 'Hindu' is a resident of
'Hindustan' (i.e., India) irrespective of religion or race.
This adept move on Dr. Joshi's part took the wind
completely out of the sails of the so~called 'secularists'.
Next, Yerran Naidu of the Telugu Desam stood up
to speak. His speech was the crucial pivot on which
the entire voting process would revolve. Everyone
waited - anxiously and apprehensively - for Naidu
to unravel his party's strategy. He read out - clearly
and unambiguously - the resolution pnssed by his party
at Hyderabad earlier that day (and transmitted to hiln
hy the electronic wizardry of the fax). This resolution
mounted a devastating blitzkrieg on the Congress and
its policies. Many Opposition leaders were completely
aghast as the full import of Naidu's words sunk in. It
dawned on them that the BJP and its allies were on the
hrink of achieving their desired objective with the vital
support of the Telugu Desam MPs (11 in all). The
combined onslaught of the Congress, the leftists and
some other parties crumbled rapidly after Naidu's
forceful declaration of intent. History was making its
presence felt in the Lok Scibha that Jay.
For his part, Vajpayee maintained a calm and
composed posture despite the furore and the turbulence
caused by the raging debate. His visage reflected serene
stOICIsm. He may have felt some anxiety about the
outcome of the debate, but he did not reveal his
THE BJP ERA 73

feelings. This anxiety would have definitely been

dispelled after hearing Naidu's speech.
It may be mentioned in parentheses that no other
leader after Jawaharlal Nehru has been endowed with
as much charisma and mass appeal as Atal Behari
Vajpayee. After all the speakers, one after the other, put
forth their views and ended their peroration, Vajpayee
rose to address the Lok Sabha. His speech was infused
with his characteristic wisdom, satire, profundity and,
above ali, practical common sense. Being a poet at
heart, he interspersed his oration with poetry. A few
Opposition members sat with their hands on their
foreheads; the PM's highly impressive oration may have
rattled them.
On that memorable day (28 March 1998) a fresh
realignment of political forces took place in the
country.
After the PM had wound up his speech, the speaker
called for a voice vote, but no clear~cut outcome
emerged due to the din and the chaos in the House. He
then ordered formal voting by each member. As the
process of voting proceeded, the suspense and the
tension became palpable. A dejected Congress leader,
Inorose and shattered, murmured: 'He [Vajpayee] will
survive.' Another Opposition member walked up to
hiln and whispered: 'He may ilnpose emergency; let us
go to the president.' Such far~fetched and unrealistic
thinking only reflected a distorted mindset. As
mentioned earlier, Vajpayee reposed full faith in
democracy and all its concomitant features. (Vajpayee,
later on, accorded total freedom to certain state
74 INOlA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

governments despite the fact that the judiciary has

imposed some strictures on these governments.)
After the counting had been finalised, the speaker,
G.M.C. Balayogi, stood up to declare the results. Atal
Behari Vajpayee was confirmed as the prime minister
of India by a clear margin. He had reached the summit,
ultimately.
 5
Gwalior to New Delhi: A Short
Distance But a Long Journey

Atal Behari Vajpayee's ascent to the sunlmit began at

the bottom - he did not inherit the prime ministerial
office through any family legacy. He had to struggle at
every step during the climb to the top. He had to put
in tremendous efforts to achieve his goals. All through
his political journey, he has remained upright,
courageolls, determined, serene, self~assured and, above
nIL Inagnanimolls.
Let us trace the career graph of this remarkable
individual whose life can serve as an ideal role model
for today's youngsters, most of whom have heen brought
up on a 'staple diet of TV and more TV!
Atal Behari Vajpayee was born in the early n10rning
on 25 December 1926 at Gwalior. He spent a relatively
carefree childhood in Bateshwar (Agra district), his
ancestral village on the hanks of the river YalTIUna,
75
76 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V A)PAYEE

where his grandfather (Shyam Lal Vajpayee) lived.

Shyanl Lal was a scholarly karha,vachak (scripture
reciter) pandit. Atal Behari's father, Pandit Krishna
Behari Vajpayee, took up the job of a teacher in
Gwalior and settled there.
As a young lad Vajpayee loved nature a great deal,
and had a deep respect for the environment. He
enjoyed the rustle of the fresh morning air; he admired
the plants and the trees around him; and he relished
bathing in the river Yamuna flowing nearby (obviously,
during his boyhood, the river would not have heen a
victim of excessive and indiscriminate pollution as it
is today, when, its waters appear thick with layers of
sludge! ).
His father, in due course, became a headmaster and
then the district inspector of schools. Vajpayee's
mother, Soma Devi (who hailed from Etawa, now in
UP) was a lady with an excellent disposition. She must
have passed on some of her remarkable characteristics
to her son (Atal) and to her other offspring (three other
sons and three daughters).
Atal Behari Vajpayee did his schooling in
Gwalior. As a student, he was very eager and
enthusiastic for acquiring knowledge. His teachers were
greatly impressed by him. He then joined the
Victoria Collegiate School. The noted Hindi poet,
Dr. Shivrnangal Singh, was one of the teachers who
influenced the young Vajpayee considerably.
I t was in 1940 that, at the suggestion of his close
friends (Narayan Prasad Bhargava and B.L.
Khanwalkar), that Vajpayee decided to enrol in the
THE BJP ERA 77

RSS and began attending the shakha (gathering or

assembly) regularly. As time rolled by, his popularity
started growing rapidly and he hegan winning the
"-
admiration of all those who came in contact with him.
The residential area of Gwalior where the Vajpayee
falnily lived was known as 'Shinde ki Chhavani'.
Although Atal's father earned only a tneagre income,
and despite the fact that the falnily was large, every
child was given a good education. The economic
conditions were such that the family lived quite
frugally, but without any complaint or grouse.
(Eventually, all of Atal's brothers and sisters got
married; he decided to remain a bachelor and has
maintained his resolve steadfastly.)
Atal passed his luatriculation and intermediate
exarninations from the Victoria Collegiate School,
Gwalior, wlth the proverbial flying colours. His next
destination was Victoria College (now renamed as Rani
Laxmi Bai College), also in C)walior, from where he
graduated, again with distinction. When he was
pursu ing his gradu.n, the principal of Victoria
(~ollege chose him as~e candidate for participating in
a national .. level debate· to be held at Allahabad (now
in UP). lJnfortunately, the train in which he was
travelling got delayed. As soon as it pulled into
Allahabad station, Atal rushed to the debate venue,
without even stopping to work his hands and face.
When he reached the venue, the judges were on the
verge of declaring the results. Atal climbed on to the
dais and explained to them the reason for his late ..
coming and requested them to give him a chance to put
78 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

forth his views. The judges were considerate enough to

let him speak. His diction, his style, his poise and, above
all, ~is trenchant arguments made a tremendous impact
on the judges as well as the audience. Needless to add,
he hagged the first prize. This incident gave an early
inkling of the shape of things to eome as far as oratory
was concerned.
After finishing his graduation (subjects: English,
Hindi and Sanskrit), Vajpayee was keen to take up
political science as his suhject for post,graduate
studies. He also wanted to study law. His desires were
fulfilled very soon, hut he had to take admission in
Kanpur colleges, which were affil ia.teJ to Agra
University. (Agra University rules permitted students
to pursue a post, graduate course and law
simultaneously; however, there was a stipulation that
they could appear only in one final exanlination in one
particular year.) One very interesting Jevelopn1ent
took place at this stage. AtaI's father, who had retired
fnHTI service when he (Atal) moved over to Kanpur,
also joined the law classes a l . with his son! Both
father and son stayed at the D~ College hostel.
The political science classes were taken by three
Jistinguished men, namely, M.M. Verma, M.M. Pandey
and K.K. Pradhan, whose guidance proved invaluable
for Atai. Pandey was an extremely conscientious
teacher; he conducted classes at home, free of charge.
Atal notched up a first class in his MA examination,
securing the second position in the university.
InCidentally, the first position was claimed by AtaI's
classmate, Trilok Nath Srivastav.
THE SJP ERA 79

Meanwhile, during the course of his law studies, Atal

Behari Vajpayee had one Gulab Chandra as his
classmate. Both of them usea to attend the early
morning RSS shakha regularly. SOlnetimes, Atal used to
find it very difficult to get up in the wee hours of the
morning (to attend the shakha) because he used to
study late into the night. It was Chandra who used to
prod hinl awake! In due course, additional
responsihilities descended on Vajpayee's shoulders. He
was asked to look after the students' wing of the RSS
in Kanpur as he was considered mentally sharp and also
physically robust. He became totally committed to the
responsibilities that devolved upon him in the RSS.
In Kanpur, he revived his relationship with flowing
rivers; this tin1t~, with the holy Ganga, in which he took
a dip regularly to freshen him and shake off any feelings
of lethargy. .
During this period, Vajpayee never gave up his
passion for writing poetry, despite numerous other
COlnlllitments and ohligations. He used to regularly
recite his poenlS at kavi sam111elans (gatherings of poets).
Vajpayee ardently desired to acquire a Ph.D .. from
a reputed university. He, therefore, shifted his hase to
Lucknllw, although he continued studying law, being
enrolled in a Kanpur college.
India was then on the threshold of independence
(August 19~ 7). In UP, Bhau Rao Deoras was the chief
provincial organiser of the RSS. Deoras felt that a
monthly journal would prove useful in disseminating
the views of the RSS far and wide. He, consequently,
entrusted the job of bringing Qut a journal to the
80 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

illustrious Deen Dayal Upadhyaya, a softspoken scholar

and an organiser par excellence.
Upadhyaya was a highly knowledgeable gem of a
man, and was also very humble. Vajpayee's close
contact with Upadhyaya helped him not only gain a lot
of wisdom and experience but also rise lneteorically on
the BJP firmament. This period was highly fruitful for
Vajpayee, who was then in his early 20s. His hard work,
mental agility, respect for all elders and transparent
goodwill impressed everyone who came in his contact.
His wit is a God .. gifted boon. In short, he had every fine
quality that takes a man up and up.
As time went by, Vajpayee plunged himself full,time
in RSS activities at Lucknow, so much so that he totally
abandoned his Ph.D. pursuits. (Nevertheless, later on,
he did receive an honorary doctorate.)
Vajpayee's first assignment saw him donning the
mantle of a co,editor of the RSS jdurnal Rashtra
Dharma (the other co-editor was R.L. Agnihotri). The
print run of the first issue was 3000 copies. The journal
carried a soul"stirring poem penned by Vajpayee. The
journal made a tremendous impact; the print run
increased with each issue. Rashtra Dharma soon
attained the status of a top Hindi monthly. Vajpayee
achieved fame as a poet and as an editor. He was just
22 when his name became known to virtually every
educated person in the Hindi heartland, especially UP.
The success of Rashtra Dharma encouraged Deen
Dayal Upadhyaya to launch a weekly. Thus was
Panchjan'Ya born. (Panchjanya is the name given to Lord
Krishna's shankh or conch.) Panchjanya proved to be an

r~~::' ti ..~ I
THE BJP ERA 81

ideal name, because it sounded the clarion call of duty,

week after week. Naturally, Vajpayee was appointed as
its first editor. It is worth mentioning that, at present,
Panchjanya is one of the most widely sold weeklies in
the country.
In the initial stages (after the launch of Panchjanya),
Vajpayee used to literally 'burn the midnight oil'. He
hardly slept for three hours at night and, that too, on
the floor of the office room, with a brick substituting
for a pillow! He accepted such discomforts cheerfully;
he never complained, nor did he seek any 'luxury item'.
Such was the stoicism of the intrepid crusader for a
noble cause.
With the passage of time, Vajpayee's stature
continued to grow day hy day. He decided to enter the
field of nitty,gritty politics at a time when Jawaharlal
Nehru was at the helm of affairs. He contested and won
the Lok Sabha elections (1957) froIn Balrampur (UP)
as a Bharatiya Jana Sangh candidate.
In one of Vajpayee's earliest speeches in the Lok
Sabha (15 May 1957, with respect to the motion of
thanks to the president of India), he exhibited not only
his oratorical skills but also his far,sightedness and
statesmanship. Dwelling on the crucial subject of
Jammu and Kashmir (which even today stands out as a
highly explosive issue), he cautioned the Nehru
Government that its policy on J&K could only lead to
further complications. He referred to the tragic and
mysterious circumstances under which Dr. Shyama
Prasad Mukherjee- (Vajpayee's mentor and founder of
the Bharatiya Jana Sanghl had died in Kashmir and
82 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARI V AJPAYEE

sought a full~fledged investigation into this unresolved

matter. He stressed that India must speak to Pakistan
in a language that the latter could understand. He
repeatedly warned against the dangers of America
providing large~scale military 'aid' to Pakistan. The
words of this young and dynamic leader proved
prophetic. (Pakistan deployed the American arms to
wage wars against India, in 1965 and in 1971.)
On 30 May 1957, during a discussion on the general
budget, Vajpayee tellingly pointed out: 'Mr. Speaker,
Sir, there is no enthusiasm anlong the people regarding
the plan. One reason for this is that the plan is being
effected on party lines. It is not a national plan. My
basic objection is that the plan is capital-intensive. It
should be labour:-intensive.' In this context, he was
echoing the thoughts of his senior party man Deen
Dayal Upadhyaya.
Another important issue that was tormenting
Vajpayee was the practice of giving dowry during
marriages by the bride's side. Invariably, the
bridegroom's parents or relatives demanded exorbitant
sums, which the hride's parents or relatives were usually
unable to pay. As a r~sult, many brides were harassed
endlessly and some of them committed suicide or were
killed by their in-laws (so that the man could marry
again and procure more dowry). Vaj payee spoke
eloquently and forcefully on this highly sensitive topic.
He suggested, with all sincerity, that the law should be
amended immediately to restrict the dowry amount to
Rs. 2000. His suggestion was, however, rejected by the
Nehru Government.
THE BJP ERA 83

In the 1962 elections to the Lok Sabha, Vajpayee

contested, again from Balrampur (as a Jana Sangh
candidate). As Nehru himself campaigned for the rival
(~ongress c(\ndidate in this constituency, Vajpayee lost
the elections by a narrow margin. On the whole, the
Jana Sangh managed to bag 14 seats in the Lok Sabha.
Vajpayee was later elected to the Rajya Sabha (in
1962 itself). At that time, the towering intellectual,
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, was the Rajya Sabha chairman.
On 22 March 1964, Vajpayee's powerful oration
reverberated along the corridors of Parliament House.
He vociferollsly denollnced the government's policy of
continuing the use of Article .3 70 {of the Constitution},
which accorded a special status to Jammu lind Kashmir.
{According to this Article, no outsider can buy any
property or set up any industry or commercial
estahlishment in J&K.} This denouncement did not
exactly find favour with Nehru and his cabinet
colleagues. They chose to disregard Vajpayee's
statelnents. This lapse rroved costly as subsequent
events were to show (details given later).
l)n 27 May 1964, Jawaharlal Nehru passed away at
New Delhi. Nehru was a democrat in the real sense of
the term; Vajpayee was one of his admirers, despite
heing on the 'other side of the political fence'. In his
condolence speech in the Rajya Sabha, Vajpayee paid
glowing tributes to Nehru. This speech, delivered in
chaste Hindi, had all the hallmarks of erudition; it
flowed like poetry. Very few speakers could match
Vajpayee's magnificent oration.
84 INDIA UNDER ATAI,. BEHARI V A)PAYEE

In the late 1.960s, as Vajpayee's fortunes began to

rise, so did his party's (i.e., the Jana Sangh's). The cadres
of the lana Sangh were active in virtually every nook
and corner of northern and central India. In the
southern states of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, the
Jana Sangh had made a distinct mark for itself. In
Maharashtra, although the party had a definite
presence, it could not possibly match the formidable
strength of the Congress, either in resources or in
monetary reserves, but the Jana Sangh leaders bided
their time.
After Nehru's death, Lal Bahadur Shastri succeeded
him as prime minister. His rather short tenure will be
remembered for his courageous initiative in countering
the Pakistani aggression in August-September 1965.
Sha'stri died, rather suddenly, at Tashkent (Uzbekistan)
in January 1966 after signing a peace agreement with
Ayub Khan (of Pakistan) which was brought about with
the assistance of the Soviet Union.
After Shastri's passing away from the scene, it was
Indira Gandhi who took over as prime minister in early
1966. The country went to the polls in 1967, before
Indira Gandhi could really consolidate her position.
Although the Congress' popularity slumped during the
elections, the party managed to form the government
at the Centre. The Jana Sangh now became a force to
reckon wi tho
India and Pakistan went to war once again,
beginning 3 December 1971. This time India's objective
was to help liberate East Pakistan from the clutches of
West Pakistan. The West Pakistanis were accused of
THE BJP ERA 85

committing genocide, i.e., large,scale killings of

Bengalis, apart from torture and rape of their women.
Millions of refugees poured into India in order to
escape being slaughtered. India provided them all
possible help. Eventually, India was forced to exercise
the military option to defeat the West Pakistanis, who
surrendered at Dhaka on 16 Decemher 1971. A new
nation, Bangladesh, came into existence. There were
celehrations of victory all arounJ. Indira Gandhi rode
the crest of a popularity wave.
In the next general election, the Congress romped
home, triumphant and confident. But then, hubris
probably engulfed that party. The distance between the
rulers and the ruled became unbridgeahle. The masses
were suffering a lot, burdened by galloping prices and
shortages of essential cOlnlnoJities. As Inentioned in
Chapter 2, in early 1974, the Opposition parties came
together under the leadership of the pre,eminent
Jayaprakash Narayan, demanding that Indira Gandhi
step down. She responded in a draconian manner by
imposing Emergency on 25 June 1975. (For the events
which followed and for tracing the career graph of
Vajpayee, the reader is referred to Chapters 2 and 3.)
 6
The Inherited Legacy

After the BJP and its allies had taken over the reins of
power in March 1998, they had to confront a
formidable range of problems - both domestically and
internationally - inherited from the previous regimes.
The most serious problem was inevitably that of
widespread poverty. Despite numerous grandiose plans
drawn up by various preceding governments, poverty
alleviation remained a distant dream. One wonders
where all the money allocated, under so t;nany schemes
for the poverty .. stricken, really went. Destitution
continued to persist, with millions living below the
'poverty line'.
The next major problem staring the nation in the
face was large .. scale illiteracy, one of the main obstacles
preventing poverty alleviation. The important, in fact,
crucial, role of literacy in the development of the
country can be assessed by the fact that the 1998 Nobel
Prize for economics was bagged by Professor Amartya
86
Atal Bch(~ri Vajpayee being felicitated by Sikandar Bakht (right) and
Gopinath Munde (the deputy chief minister of Maharashtra). Partially
seen is L.K. Advani (with arm upraised)
Vajpayee being felicitated by Kalyan Singh (the UP chief minister)

Vajpayee greeting the President of France, Jacques Chirac

 J Vajpayee flashing a triumphant 'V for victory' sign. Also seen are
Vajpayee being felicitated by Kalyan Singh (the UP chief minister)
Ram Jethrnalani and Venkaiah Naidu among others (March 1998)

Vajpayee attending the All India Muslim Women's Conference

Vajpayee greeting the President of France, Jacques Chirac
(4 Oerober 1(98) [
Vajpayee flashing a triumphant 'V for victory' sign. Also seen are
Ram Jethrnalani and Venkaiah Naidu among others (March 1998)

Vajpayee attending the All India Muslim Women's Conference

(4 October 1998)
Vajpayee and BJP President Kushabhau Thakre enjoying a joke
(Jaipur, August 1998)

ajpayee addressing mediapersons aboard an aircra

 ajpayee in conversation with the Nepali Prime Minister G.P. Koirala
(1998)

Vajpayee attending a book release function (1998)

ajpayee greeting the ' prime minister of Mauritius (1998)

Vajpayee unveiling a a plaque during his tour of South Africa (1998)

THE BJP ERA 87

Sen for his pioneering work in welfare economics. The

crux of Professor Sen's contention is that literacy is a
sine qua non for all .. round progress. It is, indeed,
mortifying for us to note that every third illiterate
person in this world is in India (according to the
UNICEF report entitled 'State of the World Children,
1999'). India also achieved the dubious distinction of
having the maximum number of school dropouts.
The ideal budget allocation of 6.1 per cent of the
GNP for education has never been done in India after
independence; the present allocation is just 3.1 per
cent.
The earlier mentioned UNICEF report has also
highlighted the relationship between schooling and
child mortality rates; i.e., the higher the level of
education, the lesser the chances of mortality. Another
alarming statistic is that nearly 50 million children in
I nd ia do not attend school. Moreover, the variation in
the number of children going to school, state .. wise, is
fairly wide. For instance, while nine out of ten children
in Kerala attend school, the figure drops to five (out
of ten) in Bihar.
Dr. Shiv Kumar, a renowned development
economist, has expressed serious concern over the fact
that the illiteracy figure in India (in 1991) had touched
the 7S-crore mark. To reverse this trend, Dr. Kumar has
projected that in the Ninth Five .. Year Plan the amount
needed would be around Rs.40,OOO crore, a whopping
sum, indeed!
Among the illiterates, the worst sufferers are the
girls due to the deeply ingrained discrimination pattern
against them in Indian society.
88 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

The all, important question now arises: how is India

going to achieve the goal of educating all children,
especially the girls? Evidently, the gigantic task would
have to be tackled on a war footing. All possible
resources would have to be mobilised forthwith. Apart
from the material inputs, such as setting up an
extensive education,oriented infrastructure across the
length and breadth of the country, the human inputs
would also have to be garnered on a massive dimension.
Large numbers of schools would have to be opened and
teachers suitably recruited. In this context, the valuable
services of retired persons, who are still active, can be
utilised productively.
One should bear in mind that quantity per se is not
the only criterion; due attention should be paid to
quality also.
In this regard, a recent survey revealed a rather
peculiar trend, i.e., the best educational institutions,
especially colleges, were concentrated in Delhi. In the
past, the pattern was different; schools and colleges of
eminence were found in Calcutta, Madras (now
Chennai), Bombay (now Mumbai) and Patna.
Therefore, nowadays, students tend to rush to Delhi to
get admission in the 'centres of academic excellence'.
This somewhat disturbing trend needs to be reversed.
Good quality education should be provided all over the
country, whatever be the subject (e.g., science,
technology, medicine, engineering, genetics, arts,
humanities or vocational studies). To achieve this goal,
apart from material and human resources, the necessary
THE BJP ERA 89

motivation and dedication have to be engendered so

that the profession of teaching can once again attain a
lofty and noble status.
The next important area of focus pertains to primary
health care. Here again, it is worth emphasising that the
1998 Nobel Laureate, Professor Amartya Sen, has
identified health care as a crucial means of social
development.
Despite a vast array of lofty schemes drawn up right
from independence and despite the allocations made
under eight five . . year plans, health care leaves much to
be desired. Although substantial development has
taken place in this field, much more needs to be done.
During the First Five .. Year Plan (1952 .. 57) efforts
were made to build up primary, secondary and tertiary
health care centres and to link them through a proper
referral system. The private sector and voluntary
organisations also stepped in to offer their help. These
efforts were supplemented during the course of the
successive five .. year plans. These efforts did yield
positive results in that the death rate declined steeply
from 25.1 per cent in 1951 to 9.8 per cent in 1985.
Also, life expectancy rates went up dramatically from
32 years in 1947 to 61.1 years in the 1991 .. 96 period.
The figure for female life expectancy was pegged at 61.7
years.
Over the years the health care network has covered
almost the entire country, but several serious lacunae
still exist, which the Vajpayee Government plans to fill
up.
90 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

During the Ninth Five .. Year Plan (the current one)

the ministry concerned has envisaged a range of
measures to fill up the critical gaps with respect to
infrastructure, manpower, equipment, diagnostic and
prognostic drugs, and the overall efficiency of the
health care system. The remarkable fact is that most
primary health care centres lack diagnostic and
treatment facilities, consequently leading to
inadequate functioning.
In the view of one of the authors (Dr. C.P. Thakur),
each primary health centre must be manned at least hy
four doctors. The first doctor should focus on treating
communicable diseases. The second doctor should
concentrate on combating chronic diseases. The third
should devote his attention to promoting a healthy and
positive lifestyle among the people at large apart from
propagating the importance and relevance of family
planning. The fourth doctor should supervise the
overall functioning of the centre and also estahlish
links with other systems of medicine (which prove
useful in health care). He should also keep in constant
contact with referral and teaching hospitals.
Due emphasis should be given to prevention of
diseases, especially infectious ones such as malaria,
dengue, kala azar, tuberculosis and leprosy, focussing on
eliminating the new strains of viruses and hacteria.
AIDS (the deadliest disease today) prevention also
needs top priority. For this purpose, an education
campaign needs to be launched on a mammoth scale,
using state .. of.·the .. art audio .. visual equipment.
THE BJP ERA 91

Keeping in view the vast size and the huge

population of India, there should be at least one
teaching .. cum .. training centre in each state which can
Inatch the standard of the prestigious All India
Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi,
which is equipped with ultramodern gadgets and a
hattery of specialists in all disciplines.
Primary health care centres should actively playa
prominent role in population control. Given the
present trend, the population of India could shoot up
to touch the one billion mark very soon! This trend has
to her eve r sed, i m m e d i ate 1y and e ff e c t i vel y. Th e
'productive segment' should be targeted, either through
incen ti ves, or if necessary, through the use of subtle
coercion. No couple should be allowed to have more
than two children, irrespective of their religion or caste.
If such stringent n1easures are not taken forthwith, the
population explosion would spell doom for our country.
One would be startled, if not stunned, to know that
in India only 1 per cent of the total Central
Governluent expenditure had been allotted for health
during 1990.. 97, whereas the USA ano Switzerland had
prudently set aside 20 per cent for this purpose.
As already mentioned, AIDS is going to stand out
as the scourge of the future. Since there is no cure as
yet for this fast .. spreading disease, the only remedy is
prevention. Statistics have revealed certain disturbing
facts: the sero .. positive (Le., showing a high level of
antibodies) rate has gone up (in India) from 25 per
1000 in 1986 to 80 per 1000 in 1997. At this rate,
92 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

India will probably very soon account for 25 per cent

of the total AIDS' victims the world over.
To combat the AIDS menace, a stupendous mass
awareness campaign needs to be launched without any
loss of time or dilly,dallying, especially in the rural
areas. A constrained and conscious effort should be
n1aJe to educate people about AIDS and how to
prevent it because the costs of treatment would prove
prohibitive, even for the affluent! Here, the media has
a crucial part to play.
Another disease, which is spreading rapidly, is
hepatitis (i.e., inflammation of the liver), even among
children. Although anti,hepatitis vaccines are
available, they are very expensive and beyond the reach
of the poor masses. India should, consequently, acquire
the technology (and equipment) to produce these
vaccines on a large scale.
Geriatric problems are going to pose a major hurdle.
Given the rise in life expectancy patterns, the number
of elderly persons has gone up considerably in recent
years. Therefore, adequate provisions have to be made
for the welfare and upkeep of the older people, so that
they do not feel neglected or rejected by society.
While sufficient budgetary ~llocations are very
important, what is more important is the political will
to implement various health care programmes.
A vital ingredient of any health care programme is
nutrition, especially for children. Millions of children
are unable to get an adequately nutritious diet. In fact,
the situation in some places has turned so grave that
starvation deaths have been reported; for instance,
THE BJP ERA 93

froIn Kalahandi in Orissa and Bundelkhand in Madhya

Pradesh. All these, pressing problems have to be tackled
urgently.
Although rivers abound in India, the provision of
safe drinking water is woefully short of expectations,
especially in desert areas of western Rajasthan. Here,
women have to trudge for 10-12 km for getting a potful
of water, every drop of which is very precious. Many
regions in Bihar, UP, ()rissa and Gujarat suffer from
serious water scarcity. The possihle way out of the water
shortage could he the pHwision of adequate number of
tuheweLls. In this respect, the states of Punjah and Tamil
Nadu have proved exemplary, forging way ahead of
other states. Anyway, irrespective of the source, all
types of water need to he purified, i.e., made potahle.
()therwise, drinking of polluted water can lead to
dehilitating diseases such as hepatitis, dysentery,
cholera and diarrhoea. These diseases have enough
'fertile ground' to flourish, thanks to 'open-air toilets'
especially in jamracked urhan shllns.
SlUl11S have proliferated in virtually all towns and
cities. Here, the poorest of the poor somehow n1anage
to survive, despite heing hogged down in the n10rass of
poverty, hunger and iIl~health. With huge clusters of
human beings living and carrying out their 'daily
ahlutions' in extremely close proxin1ity, cleanliness and
hygiene are the first casualties. In their wake follow the
series of diseases (mentioned earlier) apart from that
overriding and corrosive phenon1enon known as
/)ollution .. (_)verf1owing drains, stagnant pools of murky
water, Inounds of garbage and roadside defecation are
94 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

the dominant characteristics of a present .. day 'shanty

town'.
Apart from the preceding sources of pollution,
industrial effluents have dominated the scene in a big
way. -Such effluents have made their obnoxious
presence felt in seas, rivers and other bodies of water
which happen to be (unfortunately) located in the
vicinity of factories or other manufacturing units. Such
Inodern,day 'wonders' have not lagged behind in
discharging immeasurably large volumes of toxic fumes
into the atmosphere with alarming regularity. Added to
these fumes are the exhaust futnes which emanate from
Inillions of automobiles. It is, indeed, a miracle that the
inhabitants of towns and cities can breathe at all
without collapsing!
Here again, the Ministry of Environment must
strictly enforce pollution control laws before towns and
cities are converted into lethal gas chambers.
The root cause of all shortages facing India can be
traced to a demographer's nightmare called 'population
explosion'. Given the present spiralling growth rate,
India's population could cross a memorable landmark
by 2000: one billion! Certain surveys have shown that
India's population will exceed China's by the year 2020,
unless the present rate of multiplication is reduced
drastically. To state the obvious: excessive population
growth means that the benefits of scientific,
technological, economic and agricultural growth still
reach lesser and lesser number of people, thereby
qualitatively reducing the standards of life, especially
of the poor and the destitute. Such unchecked growth
THE BJP ERA 95

adversely affects the individual, the family, the society

and, by logical extension, the entire nation.
During the Emergency era (june 1975 to March
1977), when Indira Gandhi was the prime minister, a
massive population control programme was set in
motion. The main tnrust of this programme, apparently
a brainchild of Indira Gandhi's younger son, Sanjay
Gandhi, was. nasbandi (male sterilisation) on a nation,
wide basis. Although the intentions were worthwhile,
the means were nothing short of barbaric. Vast droves
of Inales were virtually herded into sterilisation camps
(especially in North India) and were forcibly subjected
to vasectomy. (Such compulsive measures backfired
and Indira Gandhi lost the 1977 general elections.) The
momentum of the programme thus fizzled out. After
that, no government has taken effective measures to
curtail the population rise.
The galloping rate of population growth can be
attributeJ to various factors; heading the list are
poverty, illiteracy, ignorance and the overwhelming
cOlnpulsion to sire a male child, although a couple may
have several daughters. (The reasoning behind the
desire for a male child is based on Hindu tradition. In
other worJs, only a male can keep the lineage intact and
only a son's lighting of a father's funeral pyre ensures
muksha or salvation, for the latter.)
As mentioned earlier, illiteracy and ignorance
directly contribute to a marked spurt in population.
Consequently, the population rise has attained
maximum levels among the poorer strata of society,
whose members indulge in sex rather frequently as the
96 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

only means of enjoyment. Most of them are blissfully

ignorant of contraception methods, or else, view them
with suspicion and even hostility.
Fortunately, there is a ray of hope on the horizon.
Among the educated classes, the population growth
rate has declined noticeably, especially in the urban
areas. This reaction of the population has readily and
en thus ias ticall y adopted the la tes t con tracept lve
devices (such as condoms, copper, T and diaphragm,
apart from the use of spermicides).
While the educated Hindus have taken to family
planning methods voluntarily, the Muslims have been
reluctant to do so, claiming that their religion forbids
them from going in for 'artificial' methods of birth
control. Thus, there is no check on the number of
children produced by the followers of Islam in India.
It needs to be pointed out, in this context, that in other
Islamic countries, the Muslims have adopted family
planning procedures, especially the affluent classes.
Encouraged by these developments, some well,to,do
and educated Indian Muslims too have taken to family
planning techniques.
One positive way of motivating people (of all
religions and castes) is to announce very attractive
incentives (monetary or otherwise) if they keep a
check of the population. A mass mobilisation campaign
would have to be launched nation,wide.
Another stumbling block confronting the BJP,led
government has been in the form of escalating prices.
Although the Finance Ministry, in concert with other
related ministries, has tried to put in place several
THE BJP ERA 97

measures for controlling prices, especially of essential

commodities, they have not been very successful.
Let us digress a bit here. In fact, during the
Assembly elections in Delhi, Rajasthan and Madhya
Pradesh in November,December 1998, the humble
onion, a vital ingredient in Indian cuisine, was the
cynosure of all eyes! This crucial vegetable played
havoc with the BJP's fortunes in the elections. The
price of onion soared to dizzy heights, virtually placing
it he yond the reach of the poor masses for whom this
vegetable was almost indispensable. Taking advantage
of this situation (created by unseasonal and peculiar
wea ther patterns) the Congress romped home
victorious in the three aforementioned states.
(lther factors which led to the downfall of the BJP
state government in Delhi were the mustard oil {an
essential item in North India for various purposes,
including cooking} adulteration scandal, which resulted
in many deaths in Delhi, besides the steep price hike
in edible oils and the disturbing deterioration in the law
and order situation along with the alarn1ing upward
curve in the crime bYfaph. The BJP state government and
the Central Government did make endeavours to
control the situation but in vain. Thus, the people's ire
turned against the BJP during the Assembly polls.
Yet another serious malaise, akin to cancer, afflicting
a part of the Indian body politic is the form of a nexus
between politicians and criminals (or vice versa). Over
the years, some unscrupulous politicians have
cultivated the underworld 'Mafia dons' with disastrous
repercussions. The Mafia 'umbrella' covers an
98 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

assortment of criminals including professional

murderers, gangsters (known in local parlance as
goondas or dadas), anti,social characters, narcotic
dealers and other lumpen elements (e.g., piInps,
forgets) of the underworld. The situation has taken such
a turn for the worse that one is left wondering whether
the politicians are controlling the criminals or vice
versa.
In the 1970s, the renowned Justice Krishna Iyer (a
Supreme Court judge) delivered a historic verdict,
which set a new trend in judicial dispensation.
Justice Iyer's humanitarian preference for 'hail'
instead of 'jail' for accused criminals emboldened them
to enhance their activities instead of curtailing them.
Perhaps the judge's magnanimity was misplaced.
Over the past few years, the commercial capital of
India, Mumbai, has 'benefited' a great deal from Justice
Iyer's decision. Violent acts of murder, blatant extortion
and daylight robberies have become the order of the
day, with the wings of the police considerably clipped
by the politicians. The starting point was probably the
series of bomb hlasts which rocked the metropolis in
March 1993., leading to extensive loss of life and
property, apart from the fear psychosis that gripped the
city. The Congress Party was then in power, in
Maharashtra. Some of the accused for the bomb hlasts
fled the country and took refuge in a 'safe' sanctuary.
One of them was reported to be visiting Pakistan quite.
often.
The Mafia 'octopus' has spread its tentacles far and
wide to enmesh the real estate business (a lucrative
THE BJP ERA 99

proposition), the flesh trade (including the 'export' of

young boys and girls to the Middle East, where they are
sexually exploited), smuggling contraband and
narcotics, the liquor trade, universities and colleges and
even the" cinema, wherein movies are 'financed' by
underworld kingpins for 'reciprocal favours'.
Another favourite field of criminals qua politicians
(or vice versa) is the election arena. Here, in many
areas, money power and muscle power form a menacing
symhiosis. Ultimately, the stronger the symbiosis, the
higher a candidate's chances of winning.
Keeping in view such an ominous scenario, urgent
and effective 'surgery' - ruthless if need be - is
required to get rid of this malignant cancer before it
spreads over the entire political spectrum. All elected
representatives of the people - whether at the Centre
or in the states - should realise their crucial
responsibilities and do their best to sever the politician,
criminal bond. They should maintain strict vigilance to
check the growth of this scourge. Upright and eminent
individuals should COIne together and form a powerful
shield against criminalisation of politics. They should
weed out the criminal elements from society and
ostracise them from politics once for all. But such a
gigantic effort would require immense courage and
tremendous will power.
Tackling the criminal"'politician nexus is one thing;
dealing with terrorists is a different ball game altogether.
Terrorists come in many forms, but all of them are
fiercely, in fact, frantically motivated by a specific cause
or a specific individual. They do not see themselves as
100 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

'criminals' but as 'crusaders' for a belief or a mission,

however warped it may be.
Terrorism usually stems from a deterioration in the
socio .. economic values of a particular society or system.
Therefore, terrorism cannot be wiped out without
tackling the socio .. economic problems confronting a
particular state or community. Let us focus on specific
examples.
First, let us take up the case of Naxalism. The term
owes its origin to a small town called Naxalbari (near
Siligur.i en route from Calcutta to Darjeeling) in West
Bengal. The raison d'etre of the Naxalite movement was
(and is) to protect the suffering peasants and labourers
from exploitation by contractors and landowners
(zamindars). This movement picked up tempo, thanks
to the inspiring motivation provided by Kanu Sanyal,
who was a close friend of Charu Mazumdar, a leader
belonging to the Communist Party of India (Marxists)
[CPI(M)]. The Naxalite movement soon took on the
dimensions of an insurrection. Many opponents were
assassinated. The Naxals spread from West Bengal to
Bihar and then to Andhra Pradesh. One of the most
prominent Naxal leaders was Vinod Mishra. His 'case
study' makes interesting reading. Mishra's father was a
government employee, who had participated in the
general railway strike in 1968, when Indira Gandhi was
the prime minister. He along with many other striking
employees were dragged out of their houses and
mercilessly beaten by a gang of thugs in order to cow
them into submission. They, however, refused to yield.
The young Mishra watched helplessly as his father was
THE BJP ERA 101

being roughed up. He then took a vow to rebel against

the established order of society. As a first step, he joined
the Naxalite movement. He rose up the ranks and
hecame a leader to reckon with in the state of Bihar.
The top leftist leaders adopted the line that a new
social order could be brought about only by aligning
themselves with the lower castes and the toiling
landless people. This new alignment led to further caste
tensions in Bihar, which, in turn, resulted in group
massacres, mainly of upper castes by lower castes, aided
by Naxalites. The upper castes could not possibly take
such attacks lying down. They carne together to form
an anny . . like outfit known as Ranbir Sena. In 1998, the
Ranbir Sen a went on the rampage and slaughtered
111any lower caste members, mostly poor and famished
and totally innocent villagers in a district called
Jehanabad (Bihar). The Naxalites retaliated. Attacks
and counterClttacks became common. Humanity in
general was stunned and the people of Bihar in
particular were deeply anguished, hut helpless.
Moving on to Andhra Pradesh, the Naxalites took
root there in the shape of the People's War Group
(PWG). Andhra Pradesh has a chequered history of
anneJ rebellion and the PWG was one of the 'links in
the chain'. In the 19905, the PWG militants targeted
affluent landlords and also police patrols, many of
which were blown to smithreens by Naxal bombs.
Almost all the north,eastern states of India have
also been gravely affected by the impact of terrorism.
Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur and Arunachal
102 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

Pradesh have witnessed terrorist activities at some

point of time.
In Assam, right from the 1980s, the clashes between
the ULFA (United Liberation Front of Assam) and the
government forces had taken a heavy toll of life as well
as property. (The ULFA wanted the foreigners, mainly
refugees from Bangladesh, to be deported from Assam.)
Rajiv Gandhi signed the Assam Accord in August
1985, restoring some degree of peace. Later, in the
1990s the Bodo militants (demanding a separate state
of Bodoland) have carried out a series of attacks on
their rival tribes, often butchering large numbers of
them. Reprisals have been inevitable, thereby causing
corrosive tension and uncertainty in the state.
In Tripura, an outfit known as the Tripura National
Volunteers (TNV) fomented insurgency in the state
from 1978 onwards, spurred on by a terrorist named
B.K. Hrangkhawl. In 1980, local tribals and non,tribals
(mostly outsiders) were engulfed in a serious conflict
which resulted in more than 500 deaths. The state went
through turbulent times in the 1980s. Eventually, an
accord was signed with TNV (on 12 August 1988, when
Rajiv Gandhi was the prime minister) which brought
about some peace and stability.
In Mizoram, in the 1960s, there were attempts made
to secede from the Indian Union, which were instigated
by a militant group known as the Mizo National Front
(MNF). In fact, the state witnessed an armed uprising
in 1966. Sporadic bouts of violence erupted in the
1970s and early 1980s. Eventually, on 30 June 1986 a
'memorandum of settlement' was signed between the
THE BJP ERA 103

MNF and the Government of India. Mizoram has since

then prospered and forged ahead in many fields.
Underground movements were prevalent in other"
north .. eastern states such as Nagaland and Manipur, but
the militants have gradually given up arms and have
come into the mainstream.
The prime reason for the spread of unrest and
insurgency in the north .. eastern states can be attributed
to their geographical isolation vis ..£l.. vis the rest of India
besides cultural, linguistic, economical and ideological
differences and want of enough development projects
during the decades .. long Congress rule at the Centre.
Terrorism's vice .. like grip was felt most severely in
the states of Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir. In Punjab,
virtually throughout the 1980s and the early 1990s,
terrorists held sway, killing people regularly and
enforcing their diktats ruthlessly. The police and the
armed forces, despite vari'ous efforts, could not
eliminate this scourge. In June 1984, Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to flush out
militants holed up in the holiest of the Sikh shrines (the
Golden Temple at Amritsar). The Army set in motion
'Operation Bluestar', which led to far .. reaching
repercussions for the state and for the nation. The
entire anti .. terrorist operation in Punjab was handled
very wrongly by Indira Gandhi.
The entire Sikh community was outraged at the
desecration of their hallowed sanctum sanctorum (the
Akal Takht). Indira Gandhi paid dearly for her
decision to send the Army into the Golden Temple. On
31 October 1984, she was assassinated by two of her
104 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

Sikh bodyguards. As a retaliatory measure, hundreds of

Sikhs were brutally massacred or maimed, and property
and shops belonging to Sikhs were looted or burnt, in
many towns and cities, especially in Delhi.
Incensed by these riots, terrorism took on an
on1inous fonn. The extrelnists began killing people at
random. Bomb blasts were frequent. The new prime
minister, Rajiv Gandhi, tried to quell the terrorist tide,
hut was not entirely successful. I t was only in 1992,
after elections for the State Assembly were held that
normalcy was restored.
While terrorism has been brought under control in
most parts of the country, its spectre still looms large
in Jammu and Kashmir.
Let us try to identify the root causes of the present
Kashmir irnbroglio.
When India attained freedom (on 15 August 1947),
under the Indian Independence Act of 1947, passed by
the British Parliament, the rulers of India's princely
states (560 in all) were allowed to accede to the newly
formed Dominions of either India or Pakistan. The
relevant significant phrase runs as follows: (Theoretically
free to link their future with whichever Dominion [1 ndia or
Pakistan], they may care.' Consequently, the Maharaja
of Jammu and Kashmir, Hari Singh, entered into what
as known as a (standstill agreement' with Pakistan and
started negotiations with India for entering into a
similar agreement. The maharaja urged Pakistan to
continue the pre'partition arrangements with regard
to civil supplies, posts and telegraphs and communi,
cations. Pakistan responded rather belligerently. It cut
THE BJP ERA 105

off J&K's 'transport channels with the rest of the country

and, in October 1947, started sending tribal invaders
to occupy J&K, beginning with the capital Sri nagar.
(The details of the events that took place are beyond
the scope of this book.) Anyway, the crux of the matter
is that under mounting pressure due to the Pakistani
attack, the harassed maharaja decided to join India and
signed a historic document known as the 'Instrument
of Accession'. This accession of J&K to India was
hacked by a prominent leader of the state, Sheikh
Abdullah, and his party (National Conference) and also
hy none other than Lord Louis Mountbatten. As soon
as the Instrument of Accession was signed, India
airlifted troops from Delhi and elsewhere to Srinagar.
They just managed to reach the city in the nick of time
to save it from falling into the clutches of the Pakistani
invaders. Meanwhile, in a letter to Maharaja Hari
Singh, Mountbatten introduced a proviso that still
haunts India. Mounthatten stated that as soon as law
and order were restored in Kashmir and the state was
cleared of the aggressors, the complex issue of
accession should be settled by a reference to the people
(i.e., a plebiscite). This view was reiterated by the Indian
prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, in his correspondence
with his Pakistani counterpart. On 25 November 1947,
Nehru declared that if the Pakistan Government was
sincere, it could halt the depredations of the infiltrators
and accelerate the return of peace and normalcy to
J&K; only after that would the people there decide on
whether or not to ratify the accession to India. In other
words, Nehru was willing to accept the people's verdict
106 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AJPAYEE

only when they were under no compulsions or duress

engendered by the Pakistani invaders. Pakistan chose
to ignore these appeals by Nehru, and the invasion
continued ahetted by regular Pakistani Army soldiers.
When the Government of India realised that
Pakist-an was intent upon creating a war, like situation
in J&K, it lodged a complaint at the United Nations
(under Article 35 of the UN Charter) against 'Pakistani
aggression' on 1 January 1948" India pointed out that
the invaJer~, who were citizens of Pakistan, were
permitted to cross the frontiers and attack J&K. They
USt~J military equipluent, transportation and supplies
obtained from Pakistan. Moreover, India pointed out
unalubiguously that Pakistani officers were training,
guiding and helping the aggre~sors.
The UN Security Council for its part 'requested' the
Ciovernrnent of Pakistan to prevent its personnel -
lTIilitary and civil - from participating in, or assisting,
the invasion of J&K and to deny access (to the
aggressors) to its territories and uther facilities and
equipment including military bases and weaponry.
Pakistan 'counterattacked' at the Security Council.
It vehemently denied India's charges. In fact, Pakistan
lodged a countercomplaint against India, listing 10
charges, only one of which related to J&K. Pakistan
clailned that India had obtained the accession of
Jamnlu and Kashtuir through 'fraud and violence'. The
Pakistanis also accused the Indian forces and other
Indian nationals of massacring large numbers of
Muslims in J&K. Pakistan laid down certain demands
before the Security Council, i.e., the SC should ensure
THE BJP ERA 107

the following: (1) the cessation of fighting in J &K;

(2) the withdrawal of all outsiders from J&K,
irrespective of their origin (India or Pakistan); (3) the
return of, and compensation for, Muslims who had heen
compelled to live in J&K; and (4) the establishment of
an impartial, independent and representative
administration in J&K.
(_In 17 January 1948, the Security Council called
upon the Governments of both India and Pakistan to
iln~rove the situ3tion in J&K, but the latter did not
coo1piy. In fact, Pakistan exacerbated the situation by
sending in regular forces to J&K. The Pakistani foreign
Ininister, Sir Mohammad Zqfarullah, admitted to the
UN Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) that
his country had provided transport to the raiders in
1947 and, more candidly, that two brigades of the
Pakistani Army had been engaged in operations in J&K.
The Security Council mernhers took Pakistan's action
as a violation of the SC~'s ceasefire resolution. The main
provisions of this resolution stipulated that: (1)
hostilities should be stopped immediately; (2) Pakistani
forces and tribesmen should be withdrawn from ]&K;
(3) pending a final solution, the territory evacuated hy
the Pakistani forces would be administered by the local
authorities under the surveillance of the UNCIP; (4)
on the withdrawal of the Pakistani forces and
tribesmen, the bulk of the Indian forces should be
withdrawan from ]&K in stages; (5) the Indian
Government should maintain the minimum strength of
its forces as necessary to assist local authorities in
maintaining law and order; and (6) a plebiscite to
108 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

ascertain the will of the /)eople of J&K should be held

when it was found by the UNCIP that the ceasefire and
truce agreements had been fulfilled. There were several
other clauses but one relating to a plebiscite had very
serious implications for the future.
The preceding UN resolution actuaUy recognised
the sovereignty of the J&K Government over the entire
territory of the state. Also, it did. not question the
validity of the accession of J&K to India and held the
presence of Pakistani forces there as 'unwarranted'.
For its part, Pakistan failed to implement the UN
resolution. On the other hand, it tightened its hold over
the portion of J&K under its occupation, which it called
'Azad (free) Kashmir'. (Even today, 'Azad Kashlnir' is
in Pakistan's hands.) In the early 1960s, Pakistan
'handed over' to China (hoth countries then heing
'hostile' towards India) a huge chunk of territory in
J&K (which came to he known as Aksai Chin).
(Incidentally, Chinese forces attacked India in late
1962 and occupied a vast amount of territory in J&K
as well as in what is now Arunachal Pradesh.)
Time rolled hy, but the antagonism between India
and Pakistan persisted. In 1965, India and Pakistan
went to war, the 'bone of contention' again being J&K.
India repulsed the Pakistani assault effectively under
the courageous leadership of Prime Minister Lal
Bahadur Shastri (who had succeeded Nehru after his
death on 27 May 1964). In fact, Indian forces had
reached the outskirts of Lahore after driving back the
Pakistanis.
THE BJP ERA 109

In a bid to end the conflict, the USSR offered to

mediate. This offer was accepted by both India and
Pakistan. In January 1966, the Pakistani President Ayub
Khan and the Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri
signed the momentous Tashkent Agreement, which led
to the 'cessation of hostilities'. Tragically, after signing
this agreement, Shastri passeu away in Tashkent.
Yet another Indo,Pak conflict took place in
Deccluher 1971, when Indira Gandhi was the PM, but
this time around, ] &K was not the bone of contention.
India's main objective was to liberate what was then
known as 'East Pakistan' from the domination of the
West Pakistani soliders. The latter were accused of an
array of crimes against the Bengali population (of East
Pakistan) including genocide, torture and rape. India
achieved its objective, and Pakistan forces surrendered
at Dhaka on 16 Decemher 1971. Subsequently, a new
nation, called B;:ingladesh, was horn.
()ver the 1970s and 1980s, J&K reluaied relatively
peaceful, harring sporadic incidents of violence.
Disaffection and militancy were slowly creeping in
muong the people. Then came 1989, when the state was
virtually engulfed in a blaze of terrorism. That blaze has
still not heen fully extinguished even today. A detailed
analysis of the events in J&K would he beyond the
scope of this book; only the highlights have been
provided.
In December 1989, V.P. Singh had hecolne prime
minister, after defeating the Congress led hy Rajiv
(Jandlii in the general elections. Singh appointed a well~
known leader from J&K, Mufti Mohammad Sayeed, a~
110 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

the Union home minister. On 8 December, Rubaiyah,

the daughter of the home minister, was kidnapped by
the JKLF (Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front). The
kindnappers demanded the immediate release of five
militants in exchange for freeing Rubaiyah. The tense
dran1a dragged on for a few days, with the luedia,
especially Doordarshan (India's national TV channel),
turning on the spotlight at full wattage! The JKLF
activities received a tremendous boost. Unfortunately,
the Central Government yielded to the JKLF's demands.
The released militants were taken around in a
procession through Srinagar. They eventually crossed
the line of control and slipped into Pakistan. This abject
surrender on the part of t,he Centre opened the
'floodgates of militancy'. The JKLF leaders, who wanted
an independent Kashmir, believed that azaadi
(freedolu) was about to be achieved. However, their
hopes were belied. In January 1990 the Centre decided
to send J agmohan (who later became a minister in
Vajpayee's cabinet), who was an able and reliable
administrator, as governor of J&K. The chief minister,
Dr. Farooq Abdullah, resigned and president's rule was
imposed on J&K. On 9 January 1990, several
contingents of paramilitary forces, particularly the
CRPF (Central Reserve Police Force), carried out a
search at night in certain localities of Srinagar to flush
out militants. The CRPF personnel were fired at. They
retaliated by killing almost 50 citizens, and many more
were injured. The strong action continued and frequent
curfews became the norm.
THE BJP ERA 111

With the passage of time, fundamentalist Islamic

organisations, backed by Pakistan's lSI (Inter,Services
Intelligence), began evolving a fear campaign directed
against the Kashmiri Pandits. Many Pandits were
mercilessly killed or maimed. Large droves of them
began fleeing from the state. (In fact, many of them are
in a state of 'diaspora', scattered across various parts
of the country, including Delhi.)
Terrorism was on the rise from then ownards, with
militants going on killing sprees indiscriminately. The
Indian Army was called in to assist the local police and
other paramilitary outfits. Despite the Army's strong
presence, the militants carried out their attacks,
steathily but steadily. They also burnt down thousands
of structures, including educational institutions.
V.P. Singh was replaced by Chandra Shekhar as PM
in December 1990. But the latter's tenure was not to
last long. He was replaced by Narasimha Rao as PM
after the May 1991 elections. In J&K, General Krishna
Rao was appointed as governor. Despite the general's
valiant efforts to curtail terrorism, the scourge refused
to go away. Militant activities continued. Several
incidents - both small,scale and large,scale - took
place in J&K in the 1990s. Elections to the State
Assembly were held in 1996 and, as expected.
Dr. Farooq Abdullah took over as chief minister again.
Since then, a degree of normalcy has returned to the
state, but lnassacres and killings have not yet fully
stopped. The militants have shifted their focus towards
Jammu and its neighbourhood from the Valley proper.
In 1999, occasional incidents of violence and killing
112 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

have hit the headlines. Pakistan still rakes up the 1948

UN resolution which entails a plebiscite.
The BJP and its allies also inherited various other
problems such as growing unemployment, cOlnmunal
tensions, infrastructural deficiencies, and, ahove all, the
fallout of a series of financial scmns, all of which had
seriously undermined people's faith in the econon1ic
system.
The word 'scam' (of US origin) came into vogue in
India, thanks to a 'pioneer' going by the name of
Harshad Mehta (also known as the 'big hull' amongst
the stock market aficionados). He was the mastermind
hehind what canle to he widely known as the securities
scarn, which shot into the limelight in MUInhai in 1992,
in the euphoria generated by the 'liheralisation'
policies of the Narasilnha Rao Government. Mehta and
his illustrious associates employed their rnanipulative
skills to optimum effect. They siphoned off huge sums
from various banks and financial institutions hy roping
in the 'insiders' and enticing thein with lucrative
proposals. Mehta and his 'rnerry gang' amassed vast
piles of 'moolah' by adopting unscrupulous tactICS.
They capriciously floLlted the plethora of rules and
regulations put in place by 'reputed' institutions such
as the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Ministry of
Finance, the Department of Banking, the Income Tax
Department and, most significantly, the 'watchdog'
SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India). As a
result of the flamboyant activities of Mehta et al., a
large number of individuals and corporate organi,
sations lost heavily. Interestingly, the scam was exposeJ
THE BJP ERA 113

not by any government vigilance agency, but by a

newspaper, The Times of India. After that expose, the
law enforcers moved in and a slew of arrests resulted.
However, the missing money still remains missing.
(Litigation dragged on, and it was only in March 1999
that some of the guilty stock brokers and bank officials
were convicted.)
The securities scam not only resulted in crippling
losses to many individuals and husiness ventures hut
also, more disquietingly, shook the foundations of the
financial system. After that, a wide range of measures
were devised to prevent any recurrence of such
shenanigans.
The 1992 securities scam was followed by many
others, some of which involved a galaxy of luminaries.
The Bihar fodder scam (to the tune of some Rs. 900
crore) stands out as exemplary. (The matter remains sub
judice.) This scarrl and its aftermath were the 'cynosure
of the meJia' in 1998. Two former chief ministers
(apart from other noteworthy ministers and officials)
of the state are the prime accused, namely,
Dr. Jagannath Misra and Laloo Prasad Yadav. The details
of the shady deals struck during the scam are too
voluminous to be given in this hook. Suffice it to say
that the law of the land has lived up to its lofty
reputation by not sparing the 'high and mighty',
irrespective of however loftily perched they may have
been in the political hierarchy and whatever power
they may have wielded. But the mystery remains: where
did the money go?
114 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Yet another fairly sensational event was the urea

scam (1996,97), in which Prabhakar Raa (the son of
former Prime Minister N arasimha Rao) has been
involved, apart from a flock of officials and other
assorted individuals. The amount involved was around
Rs. 127 crore, which had been withdrawn from the State
Bank of India, for the purchase of a consignment of urea
froln a Turkish COlnpany. The money disappeared and
not a single granule of urea reached India!
The disturbing or even alanning revelation of all
these SCCllns reflects the extent to which the cancer of
corruption has pern1eateJ the econolnic systeln. All the
laws, checks and balances, rules and regulations,
guidelines and other legal preventive measures could
not prevent the· foregoing scams. This state of affairs
clearly indicates that hoth the system and the people
in charge of the system needed 'overhauling' and
ilnmediately at that!
Thus, one may conclude that the 'legacy' inherited
by the BJP and its allies was not a particularly ennobling
or edifying one, but then such is destiny!
 7
The Foreign Policy Dimension

Before dwelling upon the relations of India vij-a,tds

other countries when the BJ P and its allies took over
the reins of power in March 1998, it would be necessary
to trace the origin and growth of India's foreign policy
frOIn the tiine when I ndia attained independence
(1'5 August 1947).
The credit for shaping India's foreign policy, right
from 1947 to 1964, goes to Prime Minister Jawaharlal
Nehru, who also doubled as the foreign minister. Nehru
was deeply influenced by the tenets and precepts of
socialism, and, thus, his leanings were towards the
Soviet Union. He had visited the USSR in the 1920s
and had also participated in the Conference of Socialist
Parties in Brussels held in 1927.
Nehru and his distinguished contemporaries (i.e.,
freedom fighters) were strongly opposed to
explOitative forms of governance such as imperialism

115
116 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

and colonialism. They were also vehemently against

social discrimination, especially apartheid. All those
factors played a crucial role in providing the
underpinnings to Nehru's thought processes, which
eventually fashioned India's foreign policy.
At the time of independence, India was certainly not
a world power by any standard. Nevertheless, Nehru's
tall stature, as an internationally renowned statesman,
ensured that India was greatly respected for its idealism,
lTIoral stand and ethical conduct hy the international
community at large (barring a few exceptions).
The Western countries, mainly the USA, tried to
entice Nehru to join their fold (they were pitted
against the Soviet Union) in their efforts to get rid of
communism. Nehru rejected their overtures. He did not
want India to align itself with any bloc or ideological
grouping. In fact, he proposed that India remain Inon,
aligned'. Thus originated the concept of 'non,
alignment' in Nehru's mind. Other reputed leaders such
as Josef Broz Tito of Yugoslavia and Abdul Galnel
Nasser of Egypt were greatly inspired by Nehru's ideas
and thoughts. Also, both these leaders had close
personal equations with Nehru. As a result of their
combined efforts was born the 'Non .. aligned Movement'
(NAM) in the 1950s. NAM was basically a coming
together of a group of developing countries to counter
the dominance of the West through strategic alliances
such as NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation).
The main drawback of India's foreign policy during
the Nehru era (1947 .. 64) is reflected by the fact that
there was no institutionalised framework. Nehru was a
THE BJP ERA 117

one .. man institution in himself, who tackled prohlems

on the international front on the basis ()f his charisma,
statesmanship and reputation.
In the first few years after independence, such a
lack of institutional support created some ohstacles
for India, especially with regard to the
'internationalisation' of the Kashmir tangle. Nehru
sincerely believed that taking the Kashmir issue (in
January 1948) to the UN would 'expose' Pakistan as the
aggressor and put that country in the dock. But his
belief was a misplaced one. The UN was dominated by
power politics, with the Western countries calling the
shots. The USA and the UK backed Pakistan, which
turned the tahles on India, so to say (see Chapter 6 for
details). The upshot is that the Kashmir 'wound' has still
not healed; in fact, it has festered over the years.
Another instance of Nehru's misplaced bonhomie
pertains to relations with China. In the 1950s, a
generous amount of euphoria was generated by the
slogan Hindi .. Chini Bhai .. Bhai as a result of Nehru's
attetnpts to establish friendly relations with the Chinese
leaders, Mao T'ie .. tung and Chou En .. lai, who were hard-
core comITIunists.
The cmnaraJerie he tween New Delhi and Beijing
(then known as Peking) was somewhat reduced as a
result of a conference, popularly known as the Bandung
C:onference, held in 1956. China did not particularly
appreciate India's 'moral ground' and 'didactic
approach' vis .. a. vis other developing nations of the
region. l1ther minor pinpricks were also apparent in
Sino .. lndian relations. ()ccasional border skirmishes
lIB INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

between Indian and Chinese troops took place.

Eventually, in Octoher 1962, China launched a full,
fledged military attack on Ind ia and managed to
occupy huge chunks of Indian territory in Ladakh (in
the west) and in Arunachal Pradesh (in the east), which
was then called North,East Frontier Agency (NEFA).
The country, in general, and Nehru, in particular, were
stunned. Nehru never recovered from the proverbial
'stab in the back'. His health began to deteriorate and
he passed away on 27 May 1964.
Evidently, India could not assess correctly the
Chinese intentions, although New Delhi had acquired
information (admittedly delayed) that the Chinese
were building a road in the Aksai Chin territory (which
Pakistan had 'handed over' to China). Since the end
of 1962, a ,perpetual state of mistrust and suspicion has
existed hetween the two Asian giants.
Othet contentious issues which marked the Nehru
era included the Suez Canal crisis (1956,57), the
Soviet invasion of Hungary (1956) and the Bay of Pigs
stand,off between the USA and the USSR in 1962.
The Suez crisis was sparked off when British forces
hlockaded the canal, thereby throttling the trade routes
in and out of Egypt. The point to he noted is that India
condemned this act in strong words. When the Soviet
Union invaded Hungary in 1956, India did not voice
its protest strongly against this act of aggression. Even
if it did, the tones were muted. The nub of the
argument is that India adopted different standards
while responding to events on the international scene.
Again, during the Bays of Pigs affair, when Soviet
THE BJP ERA 119

warships (with nuclear weapons) were almost in US

waters (i.e., near Cuba), India's stand was equivocal.
All the preceding examples clearly underlined the
need for evolving a coherent and sustainable foreign
policy in an institutional framework.
After Nehru's departure, his successor as PM, Lal
Bahadur Shastri, initiated certain measures towards
consolidating India's foreign policy, but his tenure was
too short to achieve the desired objectives. Shastri
passed away in January 1966 and Indira Gandhi, who
happened to be Nehru's daughter, took over as PM. Her
approach towards foreign policy matters was markedly
different from her father's. She inducted several
eminent individuals into the foreign policy 'think tank',
including the reputed D.P. Ohar. However, during her
first tenure as PM (1966,77), she created a bit of an
aInbivalence as far as foreign policy-making procedures
were concerned. She set up a post called 'chairman of
the Policy Planning Conlmittee' which was almost on
par with the minister of external affairs. Consequently,
the foreign secretary (belonging to Indian Foreign
Service) became accountable to two 'masters', leading
to some degree of ambiguity in foreign policy
formulations.
After the 1969 Congress Party split, Indira Gandhi,
who had emerged victorious by trouncing her party
rivals, introduced a distinctive change in foreign
policy-making procedures. She issued a directive to the
effect that the Indian Foreign Service (lFS) (as well as
other civil services) should have a cOlnmitment to the
ideologies and policies of the ruling party. This
120 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A} PAYEE

directive marked a qualitative revamping in foreign

policy Inethodology, thus setting in Illotion a new and
disquieting trend, i.e., politicisation of the Foreign
()ffice. During Indira Gandhi's first regime (1966 .. 77),
InJia's foreign policy tended to tilt towards the USSR.
In fact, the zenith of Indo,Soviet relationship was
reached in 1971 when New Delhi and Moscow signed
a historic 'Treaty of Friendship'. Consequently, the
USSR stood solidly behind India during the 1971 Indo,
Pak conflict (to liberate Bangladesh). (This trend
continued even after Indira (iandhi was dislodged frotn
office in March 1977.) Her successors, namely, Morarj i
Desai and Charan Singh, over the years 1977,79, did
not reverse the trend, although they were ideologically
poles apart from Indira Gandhi. In fact, during their
terms of office, the trend became more pronounced.
Indira Gandhi reclaimed her position as prime
Inin ister after the January 1980 general elections.
During her 'second innings' as PM (1980,84), ·the IFS
appeared to he shedding its professional approach,
which certainly did not augur well for the country's
foreign policy challenges. Suhjective decisions were
taken at the top levels, which impinged adversely on
India's image in the international community, especially
with respect to New Delhi's muted reaction tu the
Soviet takeover of Afghanistan in 1979 . . 80 and its
aftermath.
Another incident which had negative implications
for India pertains to New Delhi's attempts to mediate
in the eight .. year Iran . . lraq war, which began in 1980.
The Indian foreign minister, apparently after heing
THE BJP ERA 121

persuaded by his Cuban counterpart, attempted to use

the offices of the NAM to achieve a reconciliation
hetween the embattled countries. Such attempts were
rehuffed by hoth Tehran and Baghdad.
()ne hright spot was evident as far as foreign policy
issues were concerned during Morarj i Desai's prilue
1l1inistership (1977,79). Desai appointed none other
than Atal Behari Vajpayee as the foreign minister.
During his relatively short tenure, Vajpayee'~
achievements were nothing short of phenornenal. He
succeeded in ilnproving relations considerably with
two hostile neighbours, nan1ely, China and Pakistan.
(He visited China in early 1979 and established a good
ra/)/)()rt with the C:hinese leadership.) He also managed
to strike a vital halance in India 's relation~ with the two
superpowers, the USA and the LJSSR, arart from
keeping India's foreign policy orientations on an even
keel.
After Indira Gandhi's tragic assassination (on
31 Octoher 1984), her elder son, Rajiv Gandhi, took
over her mantle as PM. During his tenn in office, the
foreign policy outlook and orientations were relatively
stahle, except for occasional aherrations. Ra.iiv
(JanJhi's tenure lasted froll1 the end of 1984 to the end
of 1989, when V.P. Singh occupied the prime Ininisterial
berth. Singh's days in office were marked hy a
distinctive all,round slump in India's foreign relations.
Even the distinguished l.K. Gujral (v.r. Singh's minister
for external affairs) could not prevent India's iinage
froln heing tarnished.
122 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARI V AJPAYEE

India's foreign policy moorings were rudely shaken

during Gujral's tenure (as minister for external affairs)
mainly as a result of India's stand during the Gulf crisis
of 1990-91. Gujral managed to get himself
photographed, caught in a hug by Iraqi President
Saddam Hussein, who was considered an aggressor hy
the international community. India's response to Iraq's
invasion and occupation of Kuwait was somewhat
ambiguous. (Even some friendly countries began to
look askance at India.)
V.P. Singh was succeeded by Chandra Shekhar as PM
in December 1990. In January 1991, India's foreign
policy was characterised by a reversal of its earlier
stand, when New Delhi decided to grant refuelling
facilities to US aircraft participating in the Gulf War.
Chandra Shekhar did not last long as PM. He was
replaced by N arasimha Rao in June 1991 (after the
Congress Party won the general elections; during the
course of elections, the former PM Rajiv Gandhi was
assassinated on 21 May 1991). Rao tried to undo the
damage (vis-d--vis foreign relations) caused during the
V.P. Singh and Chandra Shekhar regimes.
Momentous and epoch .. making events marked Rao's
five .. year term in office. The main ones were as follows:
The gigantic and seemingly impregnable Soviet Union
disintegrated and many former Soviet satellites largely
discarded their communist ideology (mainly the east
European countries such as Poland, Bulgaria and
Romania). The Cold War came to an end and new
alignments were the order of the day on the
international scene, which was in a state of flux. The
THE BJP ERA 123

unification of Germany was a major international

happening.
The minister of external affairs during Rao's period
in office had to deal with a world in transit. New
political, economical and cultural links had to be
forged with newly formed countries, which emerged
after the break,up of the USSR, while existing
relationships with the neighbours as well as distant
countries had to be reinforced, especially with the
USA.
After the collapse of the USSR, the USA emerged
as the most powerful nation in the world. The success
of India's diplomacy lay in winning over Washington.
1t is indeed a paradox that both the USA and Ind ia,
after casting off the yoke of British rule (of course, at
different points of time in history), and emerging as
liheral democracies, do not share a completely cordial
and close relationship. To put it differently, India did
not (and does not) occupy any place in the heart of the
US administration. Despite several efforts hy the MEA,
Juring Ran's time, to improve Indo,US relationships,
they maintained a downward trend. The low point was
prohably reached when Robin Raphael (the first
assistant secretary of state) declared in September 1993
that the Instrument of Accession (signed by the
maharaja of J&K, Hari Singh, in October 1947) was not,
in her opinion, politically or legally valid. Predictably,
an uproar liesulted in India, especially in the diplomatic
echelons. The tnedia played up Raphael's statement to
the extent possible, thereby stirring up a hornet's nest.
To set matters right, tremendous diplomatic efforts had
124 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

to be undertaken, but the bitterness continued to linger

on.
Kashluir formed the key area of the MEA's policy,
rnakers. They had to project the reality in J&K to the
international cOlnrnunity, fairly and squarely, without
Jeopardising the nation's security in any way.
Pakistan continued to wage a 'proxy war' in J&K,
persistently goaded on by the Inter,Services
Intelligence (IS!), from 1991 onwards. Large hatches
of Kashluiri youth were provided training as we 11 as
weapons by Pakistan to foment insurgency in J&K.
C:asualties - both civilian and tuilitary - maintained
an alarming upward trend. It was only in 1996 that
election:, were held to the J&K State Assembly, when
Dr. Farooq Ahdullah took over as chief 111inister after
lung years of Central rule. (See also Chapter 6.)
Another major episode during Rao's stint as PM was
the demolition of the disputed Babri structure at
Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, on 6 December 1992 by some
vigorous Hindu activists. As a result of this demolition,
large,scale riots erupted in various parts of India. This
event also had international ramifications. Most of the
Muslinl countries were deeply upset; Pakistan voiced
its protest stridently. Here again, imn1ediate 'damage
control tueasures' had to be undertaken by the MEA.
The 111inistry officials tried to minimise the harm to
India's credentials as a truly secular country, but,
nevertheless, the country's reputation on this count
suffered somewhat.
An analysis of India's relations with major countries
during Rao's prime ministership (1991 .. 96) would be
THE BJP ERA 125

useful at this stage. (Indo, Pak relations have already

heen discussed.)
Relations with China struck a positive chord as
hoth New Delhi and Beij ing were keen to end the
atlnosphere of suspicion anJ distrust which
unJerpinned Indo,China relationships right from 1962
onwards. The (~hinese premier (Li Peng) visited India
in 1991. This visit helpeJ clear many obstacles
preventing the nonnalisatioo of Sino,lnJian ties.
As already Inentioned, Indo-US ties were not too
cordial, especially after Rohin Raphael's statement
l}uestioning the valiJity of Kashmir's accession to
I nd ia. The relations, fortunately, did not deteriorate
ci ther. A ,!..!ood deal of headway was n1ade in matters
rclatlo,!..! to trade and industry. especially conlputer
software.
Relations with Russia witnessed a \eesaw effect'.
When the Soviet Union collapseJ in 1991, Russia
enlerged as the higgest nation. President Boris Yeltsin,
ilTIlnediately after coming to power, sought to establish
good relations with India, mainly to prove his
creJentials among the comity of nations. He wanted to
visit India forthwith, hut New Delhi's reaction was far
f rOln encouraging. Meanwhile, other nations
estahlished links with Russia and offered to support it
hoth lnaterially and financially. New Delhi, therefore,
could not expect the san1C kind of wannth and
friendship fronl Moscow as in the Soviet era. Relations
hetween the two countries suffered a setback over the
cryogenics episode. The fonner Sov iet Un ion had
entered into an agreelnent with India to supply
126 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHAR} V AJPAYEE

cryogenic material for India's space programme.

However, after the break,up of the USSR, the onus of
the responsibility for fulfilling the agreement fell upon
Russia. The new leaders, spearheaded by Yeltsin, were
not particularly keen on delivering the goods, for
reasons best known to them. (It was widely speculated
that the USA had exerted tremendous pressure on
Russia to refrain from providing India the cryogenic
rnaterial.) Anyway whatever be the reality, the crux of
the Blatter was that India had to seek out other sources
for procuring the requisite space technology. Moreover,
trade as well as cultural relations between India and
Russia lost the momentum built up during the Soviet
period. Fresh efforts wou ld have to he made to
rejuvenate relations between India and Russia as well
as other former Soviet states such as Ukraine, Georgia
Kazakhastan, Uzbekistan, Annenia and Turkmenistan.
India and Japan, which could trace their links way
back in tinle (more than 2000 years), forged many new
collaborations in the 1990s, especially with regard to
the automobile industry and electronics. Several joint
ventures were set up, which have continued to flourish
over the past years, despite the recession that has hit
many countries the world over. It is worth noting that
Japan accounts for 7.5 per cent of India's total trade.
Japan has emerged as a major economic power in the
1990s, with its GNP (gross national product) being an
impressive 15 per cent of the world's GNP! In fact, Japan
contributes the largest amount to the official
development assistance (ODA) worldwide.
THE BJP ERA 127

To digress a bit: Japa.n has risen like the proverbial

phoenix from the ashes after the end of the Second
World War (in 1945), despite two of its cities
(Hiroshima and Nagasaki) being reduced to rubble by
atomic bombs (dropped by the USA), not to mention
the colossal loss of lives and the harmful effects of
radiation which afflicted millions of people.
India's relations with the UK remained stable during
1991 .. 96. Trade continued as usual, with the focus being
on British (or NRI) direct investment in various
projects in India. Also, India's links, mostly commercial,
with the EU (European Union) countries have
expanded after India went in for large .. scale
liheralisation of economic policies. (These countries
together have a population of around 375 million and
are scientifically and technologically advanced.) Some
of the EU nations have gone in for direct investment
in Indian ventures.
India's relations with its immediate neighbours such
as Nepal, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and 'Bangladesh were
rnarked hy ups and downs from 1991 to 1996, but there
were no serious sethacks in any sphere.
Apart from the Non .. aligned Movement (NAM),
which was the 'hrainchild' of Jawaharlal Nehru, a few
other groupings came into being such as SAARC
(South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation)
and ASEAN (Association of South .. East Asian
Nations).
The ASEAN came into being in the 1960s. At
that time, India rejected ASEAN'S overtures to become
a luember due to certain differences of perception
128 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

vis .. ii .. vis the international scenario of that period. In

the early 1990s, ASEAN members surged ahead
economically and technologically, making rapid all ..
round progress. At this stage, India wanted to join this
forum, but its requests were turned down by the ASEAN
members. (I t is a different matter altogether that
ASEAN members' economies were severely hit by
recession in 1997 .. 98.) But now India has been made a
full dialogue partner (FOP) of ASEAN and India wants
to become a member of this association.
The first SAARC summit was held at Dhaka in
1985. The prime objective of setting up this forum was
to provide a unique opportunity to the leaders of the
countries of this region (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and the Maldives) to come
together on one platform in order to identify, discuss
and resolve economic problems through multilateral
discussions. The underpinning of SAARC also
emphasised that regional cooperation should he based
on the principle of sovereign equality, territorial
integrity, political independence and non .. interference
in the internal affairs of member.. nations.
SAARC has contributed a good deal to activities
such as cultural exchanges, media programme
exchanges, child illiteracy reduction, poverty
eradication programmes and empowerment of women.
Also, certain institutions have been set up, such as the
Agricultural Centre (1988) and the Meteorological
Centre (1995), both in Dhaka, Tuberculosis Centre
(Kathmandu, 1992) and SAARC Documentation
Centre (New Delhi, 1994).
THE BJP ERA 129

At the Male summit in November 1990, a regional

arrangement known as SAPTA (South Asian
Preferential Trading Arrangement) was put in place,
thus setting the stage for the flow of free trade among
SAARC members.
The Non,alignment Movement (NAM) was
somewhat adversely affected in the 1990s, in the wake
of dramatic events such as the break,up of the Soviet
Union, the end of the Cold War and the world
becoming unipolar. The last mentioned development
hit the NAM hard in that the lJS,dominated glohal
scenario left very little scope for developing countries
to assert thelllseives either collectively or individually.
Although NA1v1 is longer the powerful forum it once
was, India still relnains one of the most respected
Inelnbers.
Finally, let us look at India's position in the UNO
and how its relations with the world hody has
developed over the year~.
The UN can be considered to be a kind of 'world
rarlian1ent', which would he endowed with the
legitimacy, the authority and the power to tackle all
issues pertaining to, or stemming from, international
relations. The UN also performs other functions
through its various 'offshoots' such as WHO, UNICEF
and UNESCO.
Ever since its inception in 1945, the UN has
sponsored several peace,keeping operations in
different war,torn areas of the world such as Congo,
Korea, Afghanistan and Bosnia. India has made
130 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

valuable contributions (by sending troops) to these

operations.
The UN has also undertaken a wide range of
hUlnanitarian aid operations, mostly in drought,stricken
countries such as Ethiopia and Somalia.
Despite the noble intentions underpinning the very
raison d'etre of the UN, unfortunately, at present this
world body has come to be dominated by a handful of
powerful nations, led by the USA. Such a situation has
develuped due to collapse of the balancing force to the
US in the fornl of the USSR. The US and its allies now
seek to pressurise other nations to toe their line by
trying to impose discriminatory regimes such as the
CTBT (comprehensive test ban treaty) and the nuclear
NPT (non,proliferation treaty). India has resisted such
pressures from the Western bloc and has stuck
steadfastly to its stand that double standards with
regard to nuclear weapons cannot be condoned.
Given the security threats to India's unity from two
of its proximate neighbours and faced with a
discriminatory international regime, New Delhi had to
assert itself dramatically in order to make an impact.
I t was against such a background that the new
BJP,led Government had to revamp India's foreign
policy.
 8
India's Nuclear Tests and
Their Aftermath

()n 11 May 1998 (Buddha Purnima day) India

successfully demonstrated its nuclear potential hy
testing two underground nuclear devices at a remote
place called Pokhran located in the Rajasthan desert.
The historic announcement was made by Prime
Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee on the same day. The
country, by and large, spontaneously applauded this
mega event. There was jubilation in the BJP camp. The
B) P's allies were euphoric. Even the Opposition
leaders, barring a few exceptions, congratulated the
scientists, technicians and engineers for their
spectacular achievement; they, however, refrained from
paying any compliments to Vajpayee.
Two days later, Le., on 13 May 1998, India again
successfully tested three more nuclear devices at the
same site. In all, five tests were conducted, which
131
132 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

cOlnprised small and Inedium capacity bombs and

included the hydrogen hOluh.
Adluittedly, India had exploded its first nuclear
device way hack in May 1974 at the salue site
(Pokhran) when Indira Gandhi was the prime n1inister.
Vajpayee was among the first to extol this decision of
Indira Gandhi. She wanted to conduct some lnore
tests, but apparently due to pressure exerted hy some
foreign powers, she had to ahandon her pInns. After
that, a stream of prime ministers came and went hut it
required the courage, the will power, the stature and,
ahove all, the vision of Atal Behari Vajpayee to go in
for further nuclear tests and to consolidate India's
position in the international cOlumunity as well as to
accord it respectahility.
The distinguished team of scientists (who were the
brains behind the nuclear tests) consisted of luminaries
such as Dr. A.P.]. Abdul Kalam and Dr. R.
Chidan1haram. They had put in years of relentless toil,
Inotivated by the zeal to accolnplish something, hoth
spectacular as well as useful.
The alnazing fact regarding the first lot of nuclear
detonations (on 11 May 1998) was that they were
conducted in complete secrecy. Despite their array of
satellites orbiting the earth, the US and its allies could
not 'discover' India's proposed detonations beforehand.
They were duly taken aback. They expressed their
consternation and also decided to impose certain
sanctions on India. True to form, Washington
announced a series of sanctions, hoth economic and
n1ilitary. Japan followed suit, but its sanctions were
THE BJP ERA 133

chiefly trade,related ones. Other nations such as the

UK and Germany also decided to impose sanctions.
Apart frotTI imposing sanctions, the USA also
insisted that India should sign the CTBT
unconditionally and ilnmediately. New Delhi strongly
felt that the CTBT was highly discriminatory. The
Vajpayee (Joverntuent refused to oblige. The stance
adopted hy New Delhi paid off. Within a few days, the
LJS mellowed down appreciably. The prime reason for
~uch a change of heart can he attributed to the fact that
the ~clnctions would harnl the lJS more than India (as
A111erican business woulJ he severely curtailed). This
reality was driven home by a series of write,ups in the
A 111 e ric a n r res s . I n fa c t , the CEO s 0 fee r t a i n
rnultinationals cautioned the US Government to the
effect that sanctions could prove counterproductive. A
group of US Senators too voiced their apprehensions
to the C~linton administration vis,a,vis sanctions.
Ov1eanwhile, US President Bill Clinton was on the verge
of Inaking a trip to China, essentially to ensure that the
U5 did not lose the manl1110th Chine~e Inarket. The
tact that (:hina had exploded a \vhole lot of nuclear
devices (rotTI the late 1960s onward~ did not seem to
unduly worry Washington.)
C)n. 14 May 1998, Vajpayee decided to go in for
plain talking. He assured the Opposition leaders that
the government would take them into confidence with
regard to the socio,economic and political
repercllssions of the nuclear tests.
Despite the divergence of perception between the
BJ p' and its allies on the one hand and the Opposition
134 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

on the other, all political parties displayed a unity of

purpose while tackling the situation arising out of the
s,anctions imposed by certain Western countries as well
as by Japan. The Congress adopted a reassuring stance
to the effect that India was a big nation and co~ld stand
up to any sanctions, although initially it had
questioned the timing of, and motives behind, the
nuclear tests. The Janata Dal and the left parties
condemned the sanctions but, simultaneously, did not
lag behind in castigating the BJP for attempting to gain
political mileage from the nuclear tests.
Justifying India's decision to conduct nuclear tests
the defence minister, George Fernandes, in the third
week of May 1998, cautioned that the Chinese were
carrying out some activities in an island near Andaman
and N icobar Islands, which could prove hostile in
nature. He pointed out that the Chinese could be
planning to build a base close to Indian territory.
Fernandes' statements set the 'cat among the pigeons'.
The Chinese reacted sharply and refuted all charges
levelled against them. The left parties in India also
lambasted Fernandes. Some communist leaders wanted
Fernandes' scalp, i.e., they wanted him to he sacked
forthwith. But the prime minister withstood all the
barbs of ~riticism and asserted that Fernandes would
continue in his post, although he (Vajpayee) did not
necessarily share the views expressed by the defence
minister. Vajpayee's statement acted as a buffer between
the defence minister and his critics. Fortunately, the
controversy soon blew over.
THE BJP ERA 135

Meanwhile, Pakistan too 'jumped on to the nuclear

hand wagon' . From 28 to 31 May 1998, Pakistan
conducted a series of underground nuclear tests at a
place called Chagai in Baluchistan. These tests were
almost identical to those carried out by India. The
Pakistani leaders proclaimed that their nuclear
programme was 'India,specific' in its orientation. They
even specified the potential ranges of their tnissiles.
The entire country was in the grip of jingoism. In fact,
the Pakistani prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, and the
foreign minister, Gauhar Ayub Khan, trumpeted
Pakistan's capability to strike at any place in India.
Despite such provocative utterances by senior
Pakistani leaders, Vajpayee strove for maintaining
peace and harmony between the two countries. In order
to minimise the fallout of India's nuclear tests, Prime
Minister Vajpayee wrote to various heads of
governn1ent clarifying New Delhi's stand. Vajrayee
clearly outlined the threat perceptions faced by India
and pointed out that India had to undertake certain
self,protective measures urgently. He also categorically
declared that India's nuclear programme did not pose
any danger to any country, even if it were 'inin1ical'
towanls India.
In the wake of both India and Pakistan having 'gone
nuclear', Prime Minister Vajpayee wrote to his Pakistani
counterpart, Nawaz Sharif, reiterating InJia's
cOlnmitment to fostering a peaceful and friendly
relationship and developing stable and strong
cooperation between India 'and Pakistan. In this letter
the Indian prime minister also conveyed the tuessage
136 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

to Nawa: Shanf that their 111eeting at C:olombo (during

the forthc()lning SAAR(-: SlllTIlTIit) would enable them
to h(lld hilateral discussions on all issues of mutual
Interest and also to decide on ways and nleans of
proceeding further with the process of dialogue between
the two cOLIn tries a t various leve Is (e .g., min isterial
level, foreign secretary level). For his part Sharif ruled
out any further nuclear tests for the 'tinle heing' and
l'xl'res~ed willingne~~ to hold talks with India. He,
however. pOlI1teJly Lleclared that '~olving the Kashnlir
dispute hcrween India and Pakistan was the key to
(1 vert I n g a n II c Iear a r 111 s r ace 1nth e I n d ian
Sllhc()nfIIlcnt',

l)n the international front, the reactions to hoth

1nd ia and rakisuln turning nLlclear were along the
expect~d lines. I-ligh-Ievel representatives of the USA,
the lJK, France, Russia and C:hina Iner at (~eneva in
JLine 1998. All of them urged hoth India and Pakistan
to hold talks urgently to resolve bilateral disputes. They
also Jesired that hoth countries should sign the C~TBT.
This 'Cieneva initiative' of the five permanent Inclnhers
uf the UN Security C:ouncil was considered hy theln as
'the heginning of international mediation' on the
Kashmir issue. Japan too offered to mediate between
India and Pakistan (on the Kashmir dispute). New
Delh i firmly, but politely, turned down both efforts at
1l1eJiation. Pakistan, of course, was only too eager to
accept third~party intervention, which would helr
btunahad in internationalising the Kashlnir issue.
Pakistan's jingoistic excesses in the wake of its
successfully conducting nuclear tests proved to be a
THE BJP ERA 137

valid cause for alarm in India. A news item (datelined

New York, 2 July 1998) carried a highly disturhing
report. According to this report, Pakistan had deployed
nuclear weapons on its horder with 1ndia and had
decided on pre,en1ptive nuclear strikes against Indian
tnilitary facilities, including nuclear installations,
following 'information' that New Delhi was likely to
attack Pakistan's nuclear weapons laboratory located
at Kahuta. This 'revelation' was made hy a Pakistani
scientist, Iftikar Chaudhary Khan, who had defected
{rorn Pakistan and was seeking asylum in the USA. Khan
also disclosed that the decision to launch a pre,emptive
strike (against India) was taken at a rneeting held on
2') April 199R and chaired hy General Jehangir Karatnat
(Pakistan's chief of staff). This meeting was attended
hy several top' level dignitaries, including the foreign
Ininister, (jauhar Ayub Khan. According to Iftikar
Khan, who claimed to have heen a participant in the
aforetnentioned meeting, the upshot was that Pakistan's
prilnary target ought to he New Delhi. Khan and four
other scientists protested against this decision and
threatened to go publ ic. Consequently, the plan for
attack was ahorted. Khan also stated that he and hi~
Luuily received death threats froln various intelligence
agencies (which later detained his wife). The four (lther
scientist colleagues of Khan also defected from Pakistan
and were believed to be living in London. To play down
Khan's revelations, the Pakistani Government duhbed
him as an 'accountant' (and not a scientist). In other
words, Pakistan tried to erode Khan's credibility to the
extent possible.
138 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

In spite of such potential threats to India's security,

Vajpayee and his ministers maintained their equanimity
and refused to turn alarmist or belligerent. Vajpayee
categorically announced a moratorium on further
nuclear tests, which he was willing to convert into a de
Jure ohligation, if Pakistan reciprocated.
Vajpayee also wanted that both India and Pakistan
should jointly ask the world's nuclear powers to halt
further testing and to eliminate all nuclear weapons in
their arsenal within a specific time frame. He also
sagaciously observed that the time had come for all
nuclear weapons countries to adopt a 'no,first-use'
approach. He candidly admitted that there were
problems as far as relations with Pakistan were
concerneJ. He, however, clarified that India had always
kept the 'door of friendship' open, but Pakistan was not
willing to enter! In his characteristic form, Vajpayee
remarked: 'We cannot change our neighbours but we
can change our friends. We can reduce the number of
our opponents but a neighbour is a neighbour.' He re,
emphasised the point that any third-party mediation
between India and Pakistan was not necessary and that
disputes between the two countries could be resolved
bilaterally.
Referring to the all, important suhject of sanctions,
he pointed out that the countries which had imposed
them were wondering as to who had been harmed
more - their own people or the people of India? The
US business corporates were likely to be deprived of
large segments of the Indian market as a result of the
sanctions. In fact, other Western countries would fill
THE BJP ERA 139

the vacuum created by the withdrawal of certain US

firms from the Indian market.
Meanwhile, to lucidly project India's reasons for
conducting nuclear tests (Pokhran, II) on the
international front, the choice fell on the eloquent
Jaswant Singh (deputy chairman, Planning
C:ommission) and the knowledgeable Brajesh Mishra (a
member of the Prime Minister's ()ffice). Jaswant Singh
initially held parleys abroad in June 1998 and later in
Jlily.
(In 13 July 1998, the US assistant secretary of state
for South Asian affairs, Karl Inderfurth, formally
requested a waiver authority from the US Congress for
all sanctions imposed on India and Pakistan (while
testifying hefore the Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee). Inderfurth also listed certain
stipulations to he fulfilled by both India and Pakistan
hefore sanctions could he lifted. These stipulations
were as follows:

1. Both India and Pakistan should not conduct any

lTIOre nuclear tests.
2. Both countries should sign and ratify the CTBT
without any preconditions.
3. Both countries should refrain from deploying
nuclear weapons or missile systetTIs.
4. Both countries should stop producing fissile
Inaterial immediately.
5. Both countries should ftHn1alise policies not to
export weapons of mass destruction as well as
missile technology and related equipment/gadgets.
140 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A] PAYEE

6. Both countries should resume direct dialogue in

order to address the root causes of bilateral tension
or dispute, including Kashmir.

lnderfurth hastened to clarify that the preceding

stipulations were not demands. He adopted a
conciliatory tone: 'We fully recognise that New Delhi
and Islamabad will have to assess them [i.e., stipulations]
in the light of their own national security
arrangements.' He pointed out that he was seeking
waiver authority because the administration would
need greater flexihility in order to (1) tailor its
overall approach to the nuclearisation of India and
Pakistan, (2) influence forthcol11ing events and
(3) respond to new developtnents effectively. He
expressly declared vis,il.,vis the Kashmir imbroglio
(involving both India and Pakistan): 'International
attention, and not international mediation, is the
correct approach.'
In a significant policy shift, the US affirmed that it
\vas no longer opposed to India and Pakistan huilding
and testing their ballistic missiles hut was definitely
against their deploYlnent. He wanted both India and
Pakistan to exercise restraint and refrain from
deploying such missiles.
Meanwhile, the Indian viewpoint regarding its
security perceptions found support from US Senator
Sal11 Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, and the
chairman of the Foreign Affairs Suhcommittee on Ncar
Eastern and South Asian Affairs. On 13 July 1998, he
ren1arkeJ that India definitely had security concerns,
THE BJP ERA 141

with particular reference to Chinese activities. Senator

Brownback, who had recently.visited India and Pakistan
along with Senator Chuck Rohb (a Democrat from
Virginia) corroborated India's stand that China was
supplying nuclear technology and matenal for missiles
to Pakistan. He also referred to the growing
ra/>/Jr()chement hetween Washington and Beijing despite
the latter beIng a virtual dictatorship and violator of
human rights. At the saine tlIne, he pointed out that
sanctions were being put in place agaInst India, ~hich
was a vibrant dernocracy.
Beijing vehemently denied the charges levelled
against it. ()n 14 July 1998, the lead article in thc
official C::hina Dail-v calleJ for cunvcning a lneetlng of
five countries (India, Pak istan, the lJS,A, Russia and
(~hina itself) fur resolvIng the Kashmir dispute.
(:hina's view, hy and large, conforIneJ to thar of the
US President Bill (-::lil1tol1, who wanted Beijing tu play
an active role in settling the llifferences between India
and Pakistan over Kashlnir. This view was sOlnev.:hat at
variance with that of Karl Inderfurth (Inentioned earlier
in this chapter). In other words, the lJS was sending out
contradictory signals.
Apart fron1 wanting India and Pakistan to resolve
the Kaslunir tangle, the US Senate expressed Its desire
to lift sanctions against hoth countries. Evidently, this
'generous offer of reprieve' \vas not altogether altruistic.
The US seemed to have realised that unilateral
sanctions rarely fulfilled their intended objectives.
India and Pakistan could seek out other sources to
offset the adverse impact of US,imposed sanctions.
142 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

Other countries could step in and capture the vast

nlarkets in India and Pakistan. Moreover, the US
wanted to bailout its old 'ally' Pakistan whose economy
•
was tottering and desperately needed to he reinforced
and steadied by the IMF (International Monetary
Fund) loan of $ 226 million. Another compelling reason
for Washington to lift sanctions, especially against
Pakistan, was that the powerful agricultural lohhy in
the US needed to be placated because large,scale
exports of foodgrains to Pakistan would have heen
drastically curbed.
Regarding the impact of sanctions on India, they
would mainly affect the import' and export,oriented
husinesses. The millions living in the rural areas would
not he so severely hit. The IMF officials decided, on
humanitarian grounds, not to cut its quota of aid to
India hecause such a step would inflict tremend()u~
misery on the poorest of the poor, they thought.
Let us now move on to discuss how Indo,Pak
re lations developed in the post,nuc lear period (i.e.,
after May 1998). In this context, the SAARC Sllmluit
(held in the Sri Lankan capital Colombo towards the
end of July 1998) assumed great significance. Various
heads of government, including the Indian PM Atal
Behari Vajpayee and the Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif,
were to come together on a common platform. Nawaz
Sharif, characteristically, sought to raise the Kashmir
issue at the opening session itself, although SAARC was
not a forum for bringing up bilateral disputes. The other
countries rebuffed the Pakistani PM's efforts,
eluphasising that SAARC's raison d' etre was regional
cooperation and not confrontation.
THE BJP ERA 143

During the course of the Colombo SAARC summit,

the prime ministers of India and Pakistan met on the
sidelines (on 29 July). Their meeting lasted for about
an hour. Vajpayee summed up the highlights as follows:

I reiterated our commitment to developing peaceful

and friendly ties with Pakistan. I urged that we
shou III work together to develop trust and
confidence and avail of many opportunities for
mutually beneficial cooperation in the econolnic,
social and other fields so that we can improve the
ltv(.·s of rour] peoples. I further underlined the need
to work together to address our differences in a
rational and realistic manner. The atmosphere of the
talks was cordial and constructive ....
India has consistently underlined its comluitment to
a direct, composite Llialogue with Pakistan.... The
dialogue 1l1ust address the totality of the
relationship and not he pursued in a narrow,
sego1enteJ fashion which would defeat its very
purpose, which is to build a wiJe,ranging and
enduring relationship. A direct hIlateral interaction
which seeks to generate confidence and foster
cooperation for functional areas and enhanced
people,to,people contacts would also help create a
positive climate, in which difficult issues under
discussion could be purposefully addressed. It is
recognised by the international comnlunity that all
outstanding issues between India and Pakistan,
including Jammu and Kashmir, should be settled
bilaterally in a I)eaceful manner. [Authors' italics.]
144 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl VAJPAYEE

The modalities which we have suggested would help

ensure that the process moves forward ... in a
constructive and sustained manner, while, at the
same time, provides a meaningful opportunity for
discussions on confidence,hu ild ing measures,
cooperation and dealing with outstanding issues ....
During Iny talks with Prilne Minister Nawaz Sharif,
I also elnphasised that instigation and support of
terroriSlTI were incompatible with our common
desire for friendly and peaceful relations and that
these activities Inust cease immediately.

The Indian PM went on to explain how the ASEAN

melnhers were apprised of India's viewpoints after
Pokhran,lI as well as of the logic and the reasons hehind
the nuclear tests. Vajpayee also dwelt upon the fact that
Indian officials had held constructive discussions with
the foreign Ininisters of Russia, China, Australia and
New Zealand, apart from the lJS secretary of state and
the ministers of state of Japan and the UK, to elucidate
India's stand vis-a-vis the nuclear tests, realistically and
cogently.
In conclusion, one may state that India emerged a~
a power to reckon with in the comity of nations after
conducting the nuclear tests. The sanctions ilnposed did
lead to a slump in the economy and a fall in hoth
industrial production and exports but the overall
resilience of the Indian people helped thenl overCOIne
such temporary sethacks. One may claim without any
false sense of modesty that the nuclear tests have
helped India make the quantum leap into the twenty,
first century.
 9
Reactions of Eminent Indians
to Pokhran . . II

I t was on 26 AU~USl 1998 that the authors of this

book called on Kushabhau Thakre, the BJ P
president, to elicit his views on the Pokhran,Il tests.
Thakre has been a whole-timer of the BJ P. Madhya
Pradesh was his field of acti1.Jity. He is one of those
few persons who never sought publicity. He prot-'ed
himself to be an outstandin~ organiser. As he is one
of the seniormost leaden of the BIP he was a natural
choice for the IJresidenrship when L. K. Ad\lani
comJ)leted his extended tenn. He is a person who
believes in very simple living and dedicated thinking.

Q: Sir, you are the president of the BJP, and the BJP,
led coalition government tested nuclear devices at
Pokhran recently. Do you think that it was proper for
India to explode nuclear bombs?
145
146 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

KT: It was not only proper but very timely as well.

Our neighbours, China and Pakistan, were equipped
with nuclear bombs and China tested them much
earlier. They had armed themselves fully with the
nuclear bombs and also missiles of various ranges. All
our experiences of the past made us think ahollt it and
it was decided boldly to test nuclear bomhs. It was very
necessary for India to go in for the tests to nlodernise
our armed forces and to bring our arsenals up to date.
Our armed forces wanted it. ()ur scientists had also
thought that we should go in for nuclear tests. For some
political reasons, the previous governments dithered
and did not order the test of nuclear devices, perhaps
out of the fear of the unknown.
Q: Sir, do you think that explosion of nuclear
devices by India inculcated or caused SOlTIe fear in the
minds of our neighbours, particularly Pakistan, and is
it because of that fear that they exploded their bomhs
after a week of the test explosions hy India?
KT: Some foreign powers wanted India to relnain
weak so that we remain dependent on them. They were
clandestinely helping Pakistan to develop nuclear
devices. They were also dissuading us regarding our
efforts to build up our missiles programnle. It was
obvious that they were putting various pressures on us
to achieve their ohjectives.
On the sanctions I must say that we should accept
them. We are ready for them. They may prove to be a
blessing in disguise. One must remember that India
should stand on its feet. We should not forget that
THE BJP ERA 147

India's development expenditure is based on our

domestic resources. Twenty,six per cent of the total
(lOP is spent on development work. It is merely 2 per
cent of our GDP that we get as aid from abroad which
includes aid from all agencies - World Bank, IMF, etc.
India, therefore, cannot fall to the dictates of other
countries merely for this pittance of an aid. Another
thing which is absolutely clear is that [it is] not only
we [whol need them. They also need us very much. They
cannot i~nore a vast market like India. If economic
sanctions are really carried out fully, indirectly it would
be a noon for India.
Q: Most of the nuclear powers in the world first
weaponised themselves and then they used their
nuclear capabilities for peaceful purposes. But in India
first we lIsed atomic energy for peaceful purposes and
then thought of weaponising. What you have to
C01l1nlent on it, Sir?
KT: It was not only necessary, but (also] very
essential. We should have done it 111uch earlier. There
was dCll1and for it froIT1 arn1eJ forces. Our security
considerations are paral110unt. The pleasure and the
displeasure of anyone else, i.e., any other country, is
indeed secondary. They will ultimately reconcile
fthetl1selvesl to what we have done. When France
exploded its nuclear bomh, there were disagreen1ents
and protests but ultimately it was accepted. The same
thing happened when China exploded nuclear hOlnhs,
one after another. There were big protests (in the
Western press) and also from SOll1e diplolnats around
148 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

the glohe, but ultilnately it was accepted. The same

thing is going to happen in the case of India. Please
note that all these rrotests and angers are temporary
and in course of tilne they will fully reconcile
[themselves] ....

We next met l.K. Gujral on 28 AURUst 1998. C;ujral

was a lninister in the government of Indira Gandhi
during Emergency days. He was later India's
ambassador to the USSR. After the fall of the Deve
Gowda Government in April 1997, the choice for the
post of prime minister fell on Gujral. This was mainly
because of the 'blessings' of the leftists and of Lal()()
Prasad Yadav, the then chief rninistcr of Bihar and als()
the /Jresident of ] anata Dal which was the d()rninllting
partner in the lJnitcd Front. CJujral was the J>rimc
minister uf India from 21 A{Jril 1997 to 18 March
199B. Presentl)', Gujral is a member of the Lok Sabha,
elected from Punjab.

Q: Mr. Gujral, you had a very long experience in

politics and diplomacy. Can you dwell on the evolution
of the nuclear policy of India?
IKG: Nuclear policy in India has evolved over the
years and it has been consistent. The Departlnent of
Nuclear Atomic Energy has been given prilne
importance, and, therefore, it has always been kept
under the charge of the prime minister. After the
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki hy the Allied
forces during the Second World War, the peaceful use
of atomic energy has hecome very attractive. Most of
THE BJP ERA 149

the countries tuned up their laboratories for the use of

atomic energy for peaceful means. India was also one
among them, and, therefore, India kept the nuclear
option open. InitiaLLy, laboratories were established in
Trombay [a locality in Mumbai}. Now, India is also one
of the countries to produce power from atomic energy.
But [as] there were changes in the strategic environment
of the country, it hecmue itnrerative for India to go in
for production of the .Hom homb. In the meantime, one
of our neighhours, China, hecame a nuclear power
state. Later on, it became apparent that China is
helping Pakistan for Inaking the atoln homb and other
atomic warheads for using the same in war. Therefore,
it has hecotne very necessary for InJ ia to go for it.
Initially, no country was willing to cooperate with India
for giving technology or otherwise in this venture.
Therefore, \vhatever development has taken place in
this field has heen done hy the Indian scientists and
engineers 100 per cent, and the credit goes to our
scientists and engineers for developing a totally
indigenolls technology in the field of nuclear science.
In spite of the Symington and Pressler Amendments, the
USA directly or indirectly helped Pakistan in acquiring
technology for the development of nuclear technology.
The (Jeorge Bush administration kept in the dark the
IUSl (-:ongress and the Senate about all these
JevelopInents, and, therefore, from one side they helped
Pakistan for development of this technolo~1)' and, on the
other side, they also applied sanctions under the
Pressler Amendtnent. During lndo~ Pak conflicts of
1971, one cannot be sure whether the 7th Fleet of the
150 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAjPAYEE

US Navy was equipped with atomic nuclear warheads.

Then Diego Garcia [an island in the Indian Ocean] has
been developed as a base for monitoring nuclear
warfare activities by the USA. Since China became a
nuclear power state and Pakistan acquired nuclear
capabilities, India has no option but to go [in] for
weapon development. The credit goes to Rajiv Gandhi
that he decided first that India should go [in] for the
production of nuclear weapons. Rajiv Ciandhi had
definite information that China started helping
Pakistan for acquiring nuclear weapons or might have
given the finished homhs. The subsequent prime
luinisters and subsequent governlnents have kept up
this policy and helped the department in all possible
ways. I t is the continuity of the pol icy which has
resulted in the explosion of Pokhran, II.
India is a very old country traditionally as well as
culturally, which goes even beyond 5000 years. But
fortunately or unfortunately India has become a nation,
state only 50 years ago. It has to develop a foreign
policy which should have continuity.and reciprocity.
The continuity is very in1portant. The governments
might COine and go but the continuity of the policy is
important. This applies to nuclear policy as well.
Certainly, it requires modifications, alterations and
upgradation according to the changing times. In the
meantime, it is very essential for any country to go [in]
for economic development to remove hunger and
illiteracy. Then only th~ development in nuclear
technology will be helpful for the nation. The strength
of the nation lies not only in the development of
THE BJP ERA 151

nuclear weapons but in the development of a nation as

a whole. It has to develop its industry, agriculture and
economy in all aspects. The economic growth should
not he less than 8~ 10 per cent for removing poverty and
illiteracy. Take the example of North Korea. Everyone
knows that it is a nuclear power but its economy is very
weak. 1t had to horrow foodgrains from other countries.
The fortner USSR had a large stockpile of nuclear
weapons, l.1Ut in spite of this, that country got
disintegrated. The development in nuclear weapons
alone could not save it from disintegration. We have
to keep all these factors in our mind.
India is a country which has unity in diversity. If we
want to plan for any development of this country, we
have to keep this in our Inind and we have to take all
sections of the society along with [liS]. There should be
;1 unity on all Inajor issues <11nong different sections of

the ~(.)ciety, not only the political parties. Therefore, in

this Inajor issue also the present government should
take the path of consensus. They should take all
political parties into confidence. 1, as a prime Ininister,
always consulted Atalji on major issues.

Q: Do you think the rilning of the explosion was

appropria te?
IKG: I had a meeting with Bill Clinton in
Septelnber 1997 when I was the prilne tninister. On the
issue of atc.HU bomb when Clinton asked Ole not to go
[in] for the nuclear weapon proliferation, I had put a
question to Clinton: 'Mr. Clinton, I am not sure ahout
the strength of your nuclear warheads at Diego Garcia.
152 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

China has acquired nuclear weapons and warheads and

has enough economic and military strength. China is
helping Pakistan. Pakistan has developed nuclear
warheads. Pakistan~trained terrorists are active in
Jammu and Kashmir and creating a day~to~day problem.
Had you been the prime minister of India what would
you have done?' Clinton kept quiet for some tilne, then
looked intently towards me and said: 'I understand your
difficulties. '
Q: What are your views on Indn .. lJS talks, P()~t ..
Pokhran- I I?
IKG: I personally feel that after four rounds of talks
between Jaswant Singh [then the Indian PM's ernissary
who later became the minister for external affairs} and
Strobe Talbott, deputy secretary of state in the Clinton
administration, the country should know ahout the
outcolne and there should he a consensus on this lssue
of national importance by all political parties, if they
want our cooperation. Silnilar should he the attitude
on signing the CTBT. If signing the CTBT in any way
jeopardises our national security, then we should not
sign it. Therefore, on this issue also there should be
consensus.

J.N. Dixit is a former foreign secretary of India. He

has also been India's ambassador to many countries.
He is at l)resent a poli tical columnis t, university
professor and consultant to the Government of India
on national security and foreign policy. He 'has
authored several books.
THE BJPERA 153

Q: Do you think that economic sanctions are going

to he very harmful to India?
JND: They [the countries imposing sanctions] will
try to hinder the international financial assistance and
private invesuTIents, and assistance from World Bank,
Asian Bank, IMF, etc. They will try to stop transfer of
sophisticated technology. According to the calculations
done during the last four months, the total value of the
sanctions will come to three billion dollars per year.
C:oITIpared to our total economy, this is not a big
alTIOllnt. The sanctions lTIay last for five years, ten years,
hut this is not going to affect the assistance [and aid]
that are already committed and are in the foreign
private sector getting involved in our econon1y. India
today is the most attractive market in the world
hecause there is a South,East Asian lTIeltdown. China
has reached a saturation point and Russia is in
shambles.
Q: In what way, Sir, has China reached a saturation
point?
JND: ()nly South,East China is big, developed and
the rest of the country is perhaps not getting enough
resources for developo1ent. There lS a big
unenlploYlTIent in China; they have estimated a figure
of 245 million of unemployed persons by end of year
A.D. 2000. There is a food scarcity also in China. India
has a large middle class and has trained manpower. India
is in a hetter position because we have a proper system;
the liheralisation has taken place. Returns to
investments are there; law and order situation has not
154 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

hindered the economy so much; some advancement is

there. There is a certain orientation in India's economy
which is positive. We have a rule of law as compared
to China. There are institutionalised hanks. These are
the things which are familiar to the West. When I
visited European countries [and] I asked persons
whether they would like to continue their investtnents
in India, SOlTIe of the high,ups in tnultinationals replied
that they were investing in certain countries with no
guarantees of any kind from anywhere. There is no
reason why the private foreign investnlents in India
would stop. ()nly 2 per cent of the total econotny was
in the form of aid while 98 per cent was frotTI ollr own
resources; so it is not an unsurmountahle difficulty. We
have approxilnately 86,90 per cent self,reliance in
infrastructural and other facilities and also our own
tratned 111anpower. We have nearly 500 ll1illion people
engaged In productive work ana there IS no question
of ollr progress getting slow in the absence of foreign
aid. 1 iun sure India cannot he cowed down politically
as well.
Q: Do you think, Sir, that India did the right thing
in going in for nuclear tests at Pokhran in May 1998?
JND: Yes, we did the right thing. Even previously
Pakistan was in no position to tnatch us in any way, hut
the tests gave a new confidence to the people of India.
If you have a look at India's history, then you will
see that right frotn the days of Alexander's invasion
Inore than 2000 years ago, right up to the thirJ hattIe
Df Panipat in 1761, we were defeated because the
invaders had superior arms. Thus, from the point of
 ..
THE BJP ERA 155

view of the national security, it was quite proper to have

tested the nuclear devices which we had built over the
years. Vajpayee deserved the congratulations fnHTI
everyone in India. People were happy, of course. India
has entered into a new era. We have reasons to he
optimistic ahout India's future ....
It Inay he pointed out here that in his recent
speeches the prilne minister hin1self has said Inore than
unce that if the restrictions on the inflow of technology
trolH developed countries are rernoved India nlay think
ot si~ning the CTBT; but the prilne minister has also
added that India will not Jo any sllch thing under
pressure. Here is a prilne minister who has been telling
the We~tern countries, particularly the United States,
that I nd ia shall not he pressurised. I t has become
possihle only after the nuclear tests. Vajpayee has
certainly heconlc a sytnhol of nationalism and India's
honour.
Even if we do not sign the C:TBT, the negative
reactions \vill fade away. In political terms, no harnl
could corne to India even in the case of not signing the
C~TRT. Technically, on SIgning it, there will be a ban on
S0111C kinds of tests. But even the (~TBT itself does not

ban laboratory tests and it lays no tilnetable for

elilnination of nuclear weapons.
Q: Please clarify whether Clinton's pressure on
President Yeltsin not to advance any technological aid
to I ndia reflected SOlne kind of lack of Inaturity.
JND: Denials hy anybody could never stop India
frOIl1 advancing further. Soon after nur Independence
156 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AJPAYEE

America did not agree to provide us the technology for

the manufacture of finer steel. But Russians and
Ciennans caine forward to help. Russia and France
supplied us aircraft, and then we started luanufacturing
ourselves. We could not be harnled.
Ho\\' can we forget when George Fernandes closed
down IBM and Coca Cola (in 1977), India had a
quantum jUIUP in quality of our soft drinks. There was
a demand for our soft drinks in some other countries.
Even after signing a memorandum of understanding
(MoU), the United States of Alnerica declined to sell
us a supercomputer but we developed ollr own 'Param'
(supercolnputer) in 1993. The USA stopped Russia
fro111 supplying us the tnachinery needed for the booster
engines of ollr contelnplated satellite. India had
declared at that time that they would soon develop
their own engine for the satellite very soon. We, in fact,
did it. Even then the United States of America did not
learn a lesson anJ kept on denying technology,
continued arm twisting of India. But after Vajpayee
becolning the prime nlinister of this country, AlTICrica
has probably realised that they would never sllcceed in
pushing India into subluission to theln.
Such arm,twisting and overbearing attitude of the
United States did not succeed in Cuba, Iraq or Libya.
India being a large country will never bend to American
pressure. Supposing they took such an attitude in China
and tell them something regarding human rights and
threatened to withdraw, China would certainly reply:
Plca.se withdraw.
THE BJP ERA 157

In fact, President Clinton could not tell China

ahout absence of human rights when he visited China,
at least, there was no effect. President Clinton has no
sense of national purpose, or even of national self.
International relations depend not only on power
but [also on] reason and persuasion. Unilateral demands
of even the powerful can never succeed at any future
point of tilne. I stand for good relations with the lJS
but not on illogical premises.
Q. Could the announcement have been done
differently?
JND: The prime mlnlster addressed a press
conference at 4 p.m. on 11 May 1998. Supposing
Vajpayeeji had gathered all the previous prilue
mini~ters at his residence and said: 'Dekheye Sahib,
homb /Jho()t gaya hcin hum sub milkar hi )'eh goshana
karcngay' [the bOOlb has been exploded; we will make
this annoucen1ent together]. Supposing all the former
prilne Ininisters were there on his right and left at the
tilne of announcement, the entire world would have
seen it on television; the prinle ministers (present and
previoLls ones) standing together. But somehow this did
not happen; perhaps nobody around hiln spoke to hiln
of irs necessity. What a luessage (to the world it would
have heen)! To have nuclear tests was, in fact, a
1110l11entolls decision. I atn sure Atalji could not have
said 'NC), if sOlnebody around could have suggested to
take other leaders also along with hiln at the time of
announcement. I am very sure Vajpayee does not
consider it an achievement of the BJ P alone. He
158 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEl-IARI V AJPAYEE

considers it a national achievement. There is no doubt

about it.

K.L. Sharma is a Member of Parliament from the outer

Delhi constituency and is also vice,president of the BJ P.
One ()f the authors (DPS) held an interview with him
on 20 October 1998.

Q: What are the special achieveillents of the BJ P

(]overnITIent and what are the drawhacks that shall
have to be ren10ved?

KLS: The BJP Government took over on 19 March

1998 and they have completed just seven months. This
government has been under attack from day one frotTI
all the Opposition parties including the Congress. They
were not happy and they thought that they would be
able to pull the government down very shortly. This
governlTIent had to begin its functioning under strange
CirCUITIstances. Whether Vajpayee will be ahle to carry
all the allies with him? Whether Vajpayee will seek a
vote of confidence and win? Whether he will he able
to evolve a process of consensus? Whether he would
be able to face the arm,twisting attempts of the entire
Opposition and provide a stahle government? Now,
after seven months, it can be said with confidence that
this government has survived the initial hurdles and the
atInosphere of confidence is now huilding [up] day hy
day. This governluent will complete its full term. The
achievements of the government have been on all
fronts: the internal political front, the economic front
THE BJP ERA 159

and also the international front. This government has

taken hold initiatives while presenting the railway
hudget and the general hudget. This government has
surpriseJ everyone hy evolving a consensus on the
outstanding dispute of the Kaveri waters [mainly
hetween Karnataka and Tamil Nadu]. The prime
111inister's speech on 15 August [India's Independence
Dayl spelling out some decisions relating to the
elupowennent of women and this government's decision
to involve experts in industrial and trade sectors by
fornling two advisory councils to assist the prime
111lnister are SOllle of the achievements within the ~hort
span of seven Inonths. Econoluic sanctions were
ilnposed on India and the country had to face sOlne
natural cahllnities. Bold and quick responses to the
situation in a planned way are some of the glimpses of
this governnlent's functioning.
Now let us take the nuclear tests in Pokhran in May
last. This enhanced the honour and respect of India.
Indian scientists did a wonderful work hy hreaking the
IlHHlopoly of the international nuclear cluh in one
single excellent ~tr()ke.
What is the hue and cry against this action; against
nuclear tests? The international community,
particularly the USA, has realised that it will have to
soon accept the reality that India is now a nuclear
power. The initial reactions in other countries will soon
give way to support for India's action.
In this short span Vajpayee has visited tnany
countries in the world. But a breakthrough in the
deadlock which was persisting between India and
160 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Pakistan has not been possible. Talks were held

between the two prime ministers {of India and
Pakistan} in Cololnbo where the SAARC conference
was held recently Duly 1998]. Now, consider his latest
visit to the US. He was the first prin1e luinister of InJia
to speak in Hindi at the UN General Assen1hly. He was
straightforward and forthright. He was given a standing
ovation and was much adtuired. So far, the world never
listened to the voice of India. Now we are powerful
enough. The world is now hound to listen if India
speaks in a voice which is not that of a beggar. There
is a general atlnosphere of support in the US. Many
senior people in the US desired that the US must
reconsider its decision of imposing sanctions hecause
it is lnore harmful to the interests of the US than to the
econOlUY of India. The US Congress has recently voted
in favour of a waiver of sanctions for one year. No
previous coalition till now had as much unanimity on
the leadership, and that too he fore the general election.
No coalition had ever accepted a national agenda on
which there had heen nq dispute. It is a basic unifying
factor that this alliance is having full faith in the
leadership of ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE. No cOluplaint
has ever been made that the prilne minister has ever
gone out of the national agenda. C)ur government, and
especially the prime minister, are working in very tough
circumstances. He is carrying all the allies with him,
facing the Opposition machinations. We are going
ahead with healthy programmes. It [the government]
will not succumb under any pressure whatsoever,
internal or external, while taking important decisions,
THE BJP ERA 161

particularly on the Issue of national security and

defence ....

The following interview was held between Chetan

Chauhan, former test cricketer and later MP, and one
of the authors (DPS) towards the end of September
1998:

Q: What was the reaction of the people in your

constituency (Alnroha) when India tested nuclear
devices on 11 May and 13 May 1998?
CC: Cienerally, people were happy as the people
living in the villages in my constituency worship the
Goddess Durga [who symbolises power and resilience].
India secured strength and power and all are very proud
that we hecame one of the top six countries in the world
by testing our powerful weapons. Only some politicians
criticised this explosion. I go from time to time to
villages and towns. I exchanged views; nobody
questioned why Vajpayeej i decided to order testing of
nuclear devices. There was not the slightest protest
froln the people in my constituency wherever I went and
talked to people.
Q: What are the reactions from the circle of
sportsmen, particularly cricket lovers? Any criticism?
CC: Nohody told me anything against the
explosions. Most of the people are very proud of
Vajpayee. It is the non . . BJP people and that too a very
small segment from where some little noise was heard.
162 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

When the National Front was in power, they were keen

to do it; now they do not want to give the credit to BJP.
We do not want the full credit. Our scientists and
technicians worked hard for the last 25 years; it is the
nest. experiment Juring the last 50 years of freeJon1. I
thought it is very necessary in the sense that sometimes
we have to show our strength. Explosion of the nuclear
dev ices has given confidence to the people of our
country.
Before these explosions at Pokhran we used to
consider Pakistan a strong country. We do not have any
such cOlnplex now. People now realise we are strong.
We can fa c e any c hall eng e f r (.) In any qua r t e r
whatsoever.
Q: Do you think that there is some difference in the
Kashmir situation?
cc: There is definite improvement. The Kashlnir
situation is ilnproving slowly hut steadily. Ir is hecause
we are better placed now. KashIl1ir is an integral part
of the country. People living in Kashmir arc part of
India. We Inust protect then1 fully. The present
governInent is doing everything possihle. Security
forces, such as ITBP [Indo, Tibetan Border Police] and
BSF [Border Security Force] or J&K Police, have all
been deployed in all the terrorist, infested areas. Earlier,
terrorists could reach even high,altitude peaks. Now
our forces are in full command. All facilities have heen
provided by the government, like helicopters, for the
forces to reach the highest peaks and flush out the
terrorists anJ deal with them strongly. The Central
THE BJP ERA 163

Government is gIving full cooperation to the state

government of J&K, in terms of security and in terms
of econolTIic aid. Elections ITIay take place in Jammu
and Kashmir for gram panchayats, municipalities, zila
parishads, etc., so that the confidence of the people
there returns to normal. The confidence has started
huilding up now.
According to reports, nearly 75,000 tourists have
visited Srinagar and other hill stations in Jammu and
KashlTIir, after a gap of eight or ten years. I am sure it
will improve further. The foreign terrorists and their
activities in JalTInlU and Kashmir are heing curhed and
they are heing dealt with sternly. Earlier, the average
cit i;: e n 0 f Ja 111 In 11 <l n d Kash 111 i r was p s yc hoi 0 g i c a II y
under the int1uence of the terrori~ts and was also in fear.
hut, slowly. that fear is going away and the population
is slowly turning against the terrorists; they have started
cooperating with the security forces as the people of
JCllTIlllU and Kashmir have now realised that peace must
be there and only that can bring prosperity and
development. The local people are now fed up with the
terrorists and 1 am sure in the next two years Kashmir
will he a very Inllch peaceful state and it will reach its
earl jer glory.

Q: l)ur defence Illlnister ICieorge Fernandes] had

spoken about (:hina a few nl0nths hack and their
installing SOlTIe machinery, etc., in one of the islands
near Andaman and N icohar and he drew the attention
of the country to the possible danger. This act was very
much criticised hy SOlne leaders. Vajpayee said that he
d iJ not necessarily share the perception of George
164 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Fernandes. What are your comments regarding India,

China relations?
cc: In 1961,62, I was in the university. The then
prime minister of India Uawaharlal Nehru] tried for
peace with the Chinese. In fact, we were taken by
surprise when the Chinese attacked us. We had signed
the Panchsheel Agreelnent, based on the five principles
of peace. Suhsequently, they [Chinese] entered India
and claimed the areas up to Arunachal Pradesh.
Negotiations took place even then. (Jur present defence
minister is careful. All is not cOlnpletely normal
between India and China. The Chinese have got their
activities along the border and also around the Bay of
Bengal. We have to be very careful and alert. Chinese
have heen helping Pakistan; they have heen supplying
highly techn ica I eq 1I ipmen t, espec iail y nliss iles. So,
China is indirectly helping the country which is hostile
to us. After all, the defence minister is directly
concerned about it and he must have had the reports
from the defence experts and Defence Intelligence. But,
at the same time, the present government is trying its
best to keep the negotiations and talks going on with
China to improve the relations. We are trying to have
economic relations with China and it will he mutually
beneficial for both the countries.

It was on 20 October 1998 that the two authors of thi.Ii

book met Indrajit G ulna, M P, representing the
Communist Party of India (CPI) and one of the
seniormost members of the Lok Sabha, at New Delhi.
The first question put to him was about his views
THE BJP ERA 165

reRarding the testing of nuclear devices by India in May

1998.

In his view, this testing was an important

development in the history of independent India.That
the government decided to make India a nuclear
weapons state was very significant. According to him,
it was a reversal of India's policy pursued so far. He
pointed out that India had earlier talked about
elinlinating nuclear weapons from the world. Certainly,
there was no 4uestion of using them, he added. The
next sentence was half in English and half in Hindi:
'Traditional policy and outlook ko ulta kar diya, bigad
diya' (the traditional policy and outlook have been
reversed, made worse),
The communist leader then had a dig at Defence
Minister George Fernandes. He remarked that in a
statelnent some weeks back George talked of 'increased
threat, additional threat', He added that the defence
rninister had lneant that the threat was from China. lAb
kahte hei mcra who mariab nahi' (now he says that h~ did
not 1l1ean it that way).
We put a direct question to him: 'Is there no threat
frotn C:hina you nlcan?' He replied: 'Ho ya na ho' (may
or may not be), there was no need for tests.' He thought
that there was no increased threat. He was of the
opinion that it was a political decision to go in for the
tests. The present government thought. according to
the COlunlunlst leader, that previolls governments had
no courage and no strength. He was of the opinion that
the tests had not happened overnight and preparations
were heing done earlier as well.
166 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

According to his view: 'They [the B) Pleaders]

thought that they would get good support in the
counrty.' (Jne positive outcome of the tests was, in his
view, that India could demonstrate to the whol~ world
its capability in this regard. Two weeks later, Pakistan
also tested its nuclear devices. Then he raised a
question himself and answered it as well. The question
was whether chances of war between I ndia and Pakistan
had now increased or decreased? 'Objectively, I feel
that chances of war between India and Pakistan had
lessened,' opined the communist leader.
He further ohserved: 'As far as conventional
weapons were concerned, India was rnuch stronger than
Pakistan, and Pakistan was no match for India. Purely
as a scientific achievement, they have done a good
thing.' And the Americans did not know about the tests
beforehand. 'It is a big thing,' said the CPI leader.
Previously they (Pakistan) were shouting for help:
help from America, China, etc. Indrajit Gupta thus
implied that India was much stronger and there was no
need for conducting any test.
Then a question was put to him about whether or
not India should sign the CTBT. He thought that the
hitch abollt the signing of the CTBT had arisen because
Alnericans were not prepared to part with the latest
technology; they were bargaining for it. When the
question was again pointedly asked whether or not
India should sign the treaty, the CPI leader said, inter
alia: 'I have a strong view that it should not be signed.'
Then he talked of the celebration that took place
after the homb was successfully tested. The BJP and
THE BJP ERA 167

related cadres wanted to 'mobilise big support for the

government'. Then he talked about the implications of
the cost of developing the nuclear programme further.
Then he queried us in Hindi: 'Kharcha kaun dega?'
(Who will bear the cost?) 'It has not done any good,'
he declared; at the same time he added that 'we cannot
he ignored hy the rest of the world now'. Thus, what
the veteran communist of our country said was
contradiction in terms in the same breath.
He added if India went on 'fighting hard for
elimination of nuclear weapons, our voice will be
heard' .
Then the senior communist leader posed a question:
'What was the necessity of rVajpayee] writing to
C:linton, it was leaked out to the press. I do not knov,:
who leaked it. It was an apologetic letter.'
Then another question was put to hiln: Had any
other prilne n1inister before shown enough guts by
speaking so boldly on the soil of the United States? He
replied, 'you are right in saying this, but it was not
consistent with the letter'. The CPI leader felt that the
relations with China should be improved. 'Generally
speaking, both India and China agreed that relations
are improving', he asserted.
Finally, he drew our attention to the fact that,
previously, neighbouring countries in South,East Asia
lIsed to be guided by India regarding foreign policy,
Suddenly, apprehensions and douhts in their minds had
come up, he said.
Though we differed with him on much of what h~
said, the meeting was certainly an enjoyable one as we
168 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

met someone who was patriotic indeed but had a

different perception.

Alok Mehta is a senior journalist and currently he is

an executive editor of a leading Hindi daily,
Hindustan. He accompanied Awl Behari Vajpayee as
one of the members of his entourage to the USA. We
wanted to record his views on the Vajpayee Government
and the nuclear explosions conducted hy India. We
met him on 15 October 1998.

Q: Mr. Mehta, what is your impression about the

feelings of the people fOU met in America about the
recent decision of the Vajpayee Government to
explode the nuclear bombs?

AM: I have Inet different categories of people there.

The Indians'working in America were happy. They were
feeling that outsiders or even a common American now
have started seeing with respect the achievements of
the Indian scientists. The non,resident Indians were
also happy. They described this nuclear experiment as
a great achievement for Indian scientists and also they
have developed more respect for the Vajpayee
Government.
I have met people from other countries. They have
als,o developed a positive feeling for India and they
give us more respect now. The common Americans were
also not unhappy. The problem was only at the
administrative level. Under their own laws they have
THE BJP ERA 169

imposed sanctions, but from their talks it appeared that

they would waive the sanctions in the near future.
Q: What is your opinion about the functioning of
this government?
AM: Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee is a good man. His
political life has been clean. What is needed at present
is good governance. If he chooses a good team, this
government should deliver the goods. The common
man has a lot of problems. His problems should be
addressed properly. Corruption is rampant at all levels
and this needs to be reduced if not eradicated. But I
see that in future he will be able to give a clean and
stable government to the country.
Mehta added that Vajpayee was successful in
convincing the UNO that India exploded the bombs
in the interest of the country. India was thus accorded
a better respect than before. Mehta was of the opinion
that India should expand its relations with countries
which showed sympathy after the explosions such as
France. After atomic explosions it was believed by
many people in India that we might be rejected by the
world bodies but this did not happen. Vajpayee, with
tact and oratory, established the supremacy of India in
world bodies.
There was a difference between the atomic bombs
of Pakistan and India. Pakistan threatens that they will
use the bomb against an enemy country, while India is
deve loping the bomb as a part of an atolnic energy
programme which is required for the development of
the country. India should concentrate on development
of industry and quality control so that our products can
compete in export markets.
 10
Views of Eminent Foreigners
on Pokhran .. II

Both the authors held a question-ana-answer session

with the ja/Jancse ambassador to India (Hirabayashi
Hiroshi) on 22 SclJtember 1998. The relevant
extracts are now reproduced.
Q: There has been a relationship hetween India and
Japan for thousands of years. The basic approach to the
problem of nuclear proliferation is the same for both
the countries, i.e., hoth- want the elimination of nuclear
weapons. We want to know your reactions on the recent
nuclear tests by India.
HH: We know something about India. You know
India better as it is your country. But some of us know
India better than any Indian. We also know what India
is all about. India provided a lot of solace and goodwill,
after Second World War, to Japan. When India
170
THE BJP ERA 171

introduced a market .. oriented economy, Japan was the

first country to extend an emergency package of foreign
currency assistance. India and Japan are friendly
countries. The two countries are democratic countries;
hoth of us are trying for a permanent seat in the
Security Council.
()ur country has strong sentirnental anti~nllclear
feelings after Hiroshima and Nagasaki episodes. We
took certain decisions. We do not call (them) sanctions;
we dislike this word [as] it prohibits certain assistance
to other countries. We do not want that our people's
n10ney should he spent for the proliferation of nuclear
war. Your country has pledged for no first use of nuclear
weapons [and] expressed willingness for unilateral
Inoratorium on further testing and also to sign CTBT
and not to transfer the nuclear technology to other
c () u n try. The sea r ewe IcOin e s i g n s. () u r fin a n cia I
comn1itInents made earlier are going strong hut now no
assistance is granted. SOlne of the projects are running
in Bihar.
To SOlne extent we share your security concern.
Nevertheless, India nlakes nuclear homb. Pakistan
tnakes nuclear homb and nohody knows which country
starts nuclear war. This will lead to chain reaction. The
countries should sort out the difference through
dialogue. So far I know that dialogue has not started.
With Japan also India should start the dialogue. Your
prilne minister is going to address the UNO; our prinle
minister will also be there. The dialogue with our prime
minister could be started there. But he has same
pressing engagements at home and he will return to
172 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

Japan; our finance minister is there. He can meet your

prinle minister there (in New York) and dialogue should
be started between the two countries.
(For some reason this suggestion of the Japanese
amhassador could not be conveyed to the proper
authorities in the MEA (Ministry of External Affairs)
in time. Meanwhile, the prime minister left New York
for Europe.)
Q: What about CTBT?
HH: We want that your country should sign the
CTBT and your country should not go for nuclear
weaponisation. As J aswant Singh is starting a dialogue
with Strobe Talbot, a dialogue with Japan should also
start. I believe that Vajpayee will be able to convince
the Opposition parties and sign the CTBT.
There are many fields in which we can work
together. We must have more of cultural exchange,
technological cooperation, more traJe and conlmerce
between the two countries. We can participate in
poverty alleviation programmes. We can cooperate in
eradication of infectious Jiseases and improvement in
international environment. Expertise of the two
countries can be utilised for eradication of poverty.
Q: Pokhran,1 and Pokhran,II - hoth the tests -
were conducted on Buddha Purnima day. Therefore, we
think the intention of India is not to use nuclear
weapons for mass destruction; but the strategic
environment might have forced the Indian leadership
to go in for a nuclear test. What do you feel about it?
THE BJP ERA 173

HH: I do not subscribe to this view. We disagree

with the tests done on any day. Lord Buddha was a man
of peace and I think that it (nuclear test) should not
have heen conducted on that day (Buddha Purnima).
Q: Supposing Japan had nuclear weapons even half
of that with the US in 1945, could it not have deterred
the Americans from dropping atomic bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
HH: I do not agree to this logic. When nuclear
explosions took place in India and Pakistan, the people
of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were very much worried.
They felt that all efforts should he utilised in checking
the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The people of
these two places have becon1e very much sentimental
ahou t these tests.
Q: Some people say that after the Second World
War, the presence of nudear weapons has prevented the
occurrence of another world war?
HH: C:ertainly, it has rreventeJ the world war but
it has nut prevented the slnaller conflicts like the
conflict between the USA and Vietnam, between the
Koreans, Alnerica-Iraq conflict [Gulf War], etc.
Q: The US has a big stockpile of nuclear weapons.
What moral right has it to tell other countries to stop
making nuclear bombs? Don't you think there should
he a time frame for elimination of all nuclear weapons
in the world for betterment of mankind?
HH: Russia and the US are going to start START
II 1. They should work for reduction in nuclear arsen~l
174 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A}PAYEE

within a time frame. We are also persuading China to

reduce nuclear arsenal. All countries should unite and
strive for a nuclear,free world. But we disagree that
some countries take the umbrage at this and go in for
nuclear proliferation. This will lead to horizontal
prolif~ration of nuclear weapons which we do not like.
We should persuade other countries like Iran and Iraq
not to go nuclear and also combine for elimination of
nuclear weapons in the world.
Q: Do you not think that [since] the Chinese are
having a lot of nuclear weapons, there might be a
thinking going on in Japanese intellectuals to go
nuclear?
HH: It is unthinkable for Japan to go nuclear. We
are working for a better relationship between Japan and
China. We are working together on so many
international fora, and Chinese are also adjusting more
and lTIOre to delTIocratic methods. Their economy is fast
becoming a market, oriented economy. A China
working with democratic countries is better than a
China remaining isolated. India should also try to
improve relations with China. That will help in
betterment of atmosphere in this region.

On 24 September 1998, one of the authors

(Dr. C.P. Thakur) met Mangala Moonesinghe, the
Sri Lankan high commissioner to India and interviewed
him. The high commissioner is a lawyer by profession;
he is not a career diplomat as such. He has been a
THE BJP ERA 175

Member of the Sri Lankan Parliament for about 20

years. His grand .. uncle (Dharmapal) was an associate
of Swami Vivekananda; both of them addressed the
Conference of Religions in Chicago (USA) in 1893.
Q: What is your reaction to India's nuclear tests at
Pokhran on 11 May and 13 May 1998?
MM: We were the first to say that we were glad that
one of us did it. Our minister was the first to say that
we were not concerned, we welcomed it. We were not
unnecessarily perturbed. India detonated the bomb for
the first time in 1974. While other nations developed
the bomh and tested [it] we were very patient. After all
your own national security was threatened and we were
actually proud that one of the South Asian nations did
it and has the capacity. Secondly, we feel that the
Alnerican b0l11h is the ul11hrella for certain American
counrries, for example, South America. China's homb
is an Ulnhrella for us; that is how I personally feel ahout
it. I think we were very secure and I am sure that
though we developed it, we are not going to use it.
Actually it has been a big deterrent. The development
of the nuclear b0l11h has kept war away; it has been a
deterrent in keeping the third world war away.
Q: ()ne prohlelH is that the bomb is very expensive
and lTInney is needed for eCOn01TIY, development, etc.
What do you feel about it?
MM: India is a big country and the biggest market
and has lot of resources, minerals and everything. I
think India has not 'harvested' its resources well and it
176 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

can afford it (nuclear development). Therefore India

must develop its science and technology. Sri Lanka has
spent a lot of money on its people (on social services).
N inety .. three per cent of people in Sri Lanka are
literate. Our life expectancy has improved: [it is now]
72 years. We have spent a lot on education and health.
The growth in population was previously 45 per 1000.
We have controlled it. We may be able to bring it
down to zero level in the next 15 years. Our infant
mortality has come down; now it is 11 per 1000. Our
production is up by 5.5 per cent and per capita income
now is 875 US dollars per year.
An important point which Sri Lanka's h'igh
commissioner explained was that all terrorists have
links; they do not function in an isolated way. He talked
about the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) as
well and underlined the fact that, in spite of armed
conflicts, negotiations have been taking place off and
on in Sri Lanka. He pointed out that the trouble is
mainly because of only one man (Y. Prabhakaran, the
LTTE chief), whereas there exists a' good deal of social
contact between the Sinhalese and the Tamils of Sri
Lanka. One of their rniniste~s is a Tamil and, recently,
a mayor was also a Tamil. The wife of the present Sri
Lankan high cqmmissioner is also a Tamil. He said that
this man (Y. Prabhakaran) got two heads of state killed,
namely, Rajiv Gandhi and Sri Lanka's President
Ranasinghe Premadasa. The question was the reaction
of the common man and that of Sri Lanka's press to
these nuclear tests conducted by India. The high
commissioner thought that the common man in Sri
THE BJP ERA 177

Lanka felt that the bomb was, after all, not going to be
dropped there. India was not going to harm its own
people. What the common man wants is good housing,
good education, secure employment, etc.

On 4 September 1998, one of the authors (Dr. C.P.

Thakur) held an interview with a senior officer of the
American embassy (at New Delhi) who wanted to
remaln anonymous.

Q: What is the impression of the American

Government regarding recent nuclear tests conducted
hy India?
A: Well, we feel that the Government of India has
made a very conse4uential decision to test those
weapons. We think it was a mistake. By testing those
weapons for making this part of the world more secure
and particularly making India [nore secure, testing of
the weapons has made India and South, East Asia rather
less secure than hefore. We have told the Government
of India that the USA and much of the outside world
who were friendly with India were shocked and
disappointed.
Q: India's security environment has deteriorated in
recent times. There is a base of the USA in Diego
CJarcia. There might be some nuclear installations.
China is a nuclear weapon state. Pakistan has acquired
nuclear weapons. The hostility between the Sri Lankan
Army and the LITE is continuing and the LITE has
178 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

been blamed for its involvement in the murder of Rajiv

Gandhi. Certainly, the security environment of India
is not so good. What are your views?
A: I think for years India has maintained a position
of ambiguity so far as nuclear weapons are concerned.
We feel that the position of ambiguity provided enough
deterrent ·to protect the country's vital interests. We
also firmly believe that nuclear weapons are very
expensive and their deterrent value, once they are
deployed, is not so great. Then let us take up the issue
of security environment. The Government of China ha~
informed us that they are willing to improve their
relationship with India by reviewing the talks on the
border dispute with a renewed comn1itlnent to sorting
it out. They have also reduced support to Pakistan in
recent years. The Government of China has taken other
steps to improve relationships with India. In their part
security environment is improving. The relationship
with Pakistan is not so good at the moment. But it is
not worse than what has been during the last couple of
years. We feel that the LTTE is not going to pose a
nuclear threat to India. We talk of the issue which
formed the basis for taking a decision to test those
weapons. The relationship with the neighbouring
countries was not so bad to take this decision. But we
also respect India's right as a sovereign nation to make
an independent decision. All we can do is that we can
gi ve our opinion about the impact the tests created
internationally. We feel that the impact internationally
was not favourable.
THE BJP ERA 179

Q: Indian scientists felt that it was imperative for

India to go for those tests to verify their methods and
designs. They also felt that these tests should have been
done much earlier. Other countries like the USA, China
and France did it before using the computer for
simulation experiments. What do you think?
A: Well, India exploded nuclear devices in 1974
and called them peaceful nuclear devices .. In those days
the Indian scientists had no idea that their designs
would work. They must have misportrayed to the
political leadership of the country that what has
happened in 1974 was a great success, but there was
speculation that it was not so. On the assumption that
it was a success, I do not know [how] India increased
its security by this additional test .... We are also testing
nuclear designs on computer. India could have done
that. There was no need to go for these tests. We have
also heard ahout the feelings of the Indian scientists ....
Q: After the nuclear tests, Indian Prime Minister
Atal Behari Va.ipayee has [nade sufficient statements
like offering a' no,first,use pact with Pakistan and other
neighhouring countries, no n10re tests, etc. India
helieves in a nuclear,free world. What do you feel?
A: Well, I am pleased that he has made a statement
like this that there will he no more tests and India will
adhere to a moratorium on testing. India has offered no
first use of nuclear weapon with Pakistan and other
neighhouring countries; that is a positive development.
But one again has to go hack. The basic questions are:
'has nuclear explosion made India a safer nation? or
will it make South,East Asia a safe place to live in? or
is the reverse true?' We helive that the reverse is true.
180 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

However, nuclear weapons make a more dangerous

neighbourhood to live in than before. India and
Pakistan have fought three wars and they have
continuing tension including continuous exchange -of
artillery fire regularly, almost daily in Kashmir. India has
fought one war with China in the last 25 years also.
This makes us worry. If nations in this part of the world
start developing nuclear weapons that raise the cost of
war to an astronomical level, then we wonder whether
one country decides to launch nuclear weapons against
another country in South, East Asia, it might be a
matter of 90 seconds or two minutes to decide whether
the nuclear attack is coming against that country or it
is another balloon. I t has heen said that Juring the
Cold War the USA and the USSR had thousands of
nuclear warheads but there were something like over
2000 false alarms. OUf leaders have little longer time
to react - it is about 5 to 7 minutes. During the Cold
War nuclear technology was very much advanced and
the delivery system was equally advanced but still it was
a very short time for leaders to make ~p their mind that
whether they should retaliate or not. This sort of
situation requires a very advanced command and
control system. One has to have a very advanced
electronic system to give advance warning that nuclear
attack is coming. It could be detected much earlier and
methods to prevent it could be applied. Also, it
requires that the possibility of an accident by launching
a nuclear warhead is reduced to a minimum, but all
these cost a lot of money. It puts huge responsibility
on the part of the political leadership as well as on
THE BJP ERA 181

military leadership. India and Pakistan do not have so

much money and expertise.
Q: Some of the American experts have expressed
[the view] that India was not far too wrong in going for
the tests?
A: We believe in democracy. We have 200 million
Americans who might disagree with the decision of the
government.
Q: There was news today that the Senate might not
ratify the CTBT and that the two~thirds majority
required to ratify the CTBT may not be available. The
Senate also wants to divert the money to some other
directions like scientific development in the field of
prevention of nuclear attack.
A: Yes, I have also seen that news. The Senate
aprrov~s the expenditure in advance to monitor the
activities of the CTBT. I do not want to he speculative
on it. There might not be adequate majority in the
Senate but the president and his administration believe
that they might manage two~thirds majority in the
Senate to ratify. He and his administration will make
great efforts to see that it is ratified. I do n(o)t know what
will happen in future.
Q: Do you think that in the future there will be total
annihilation of nuclear weapons and an absolutely
nuclear~free world?

A: Yes, I will hope for our children's sake. We

helieve that the world will be without nuclear weapons.
182 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

At the end of the Cold War, the USA and the USSR
each had more than 20,000 nuclear warheads. They have
substantially reduced that, even more than one .. fourth,
and if START.. II I is signed, it will be less than 2000 each.
It is the intention of our government to reduce it
further. We do not, however, agree with the
Government of India's suggestion that there should be
some deadline fixed as it is unrealistic for elimination
of nuclear weapons totally. This is going to take a long
time.

The authors interviewed Bhekh B. Thapa, the Nepali

ambassador to India, on 27 August 199B. The relevant
excerpts are now reproduced.

Q: Sir, your country is very friendly to lnd ia and your

country is just [across the] border of India. What was
the reaction of the people of Nepal and the government
about the nuclear explosion at Pokhran by Ind ia?
BBT: India and Nepal were very closely related
[for a] long long period,' even [from the] Veda period.
There is a mention about this relation in Ramayana and
in other scriptures also. There are hardly any well ..
defined boundaries between these two countries.
Culturally also both the countries are alike and, in that
perspective, both the countries have to maintain their
friendly relationship. We have maintained a consistent
policy so far as this question is concerned and we want
a world which is totally devoid of nuclear weapons and
we also maintained that there should he peaceful
THE BJP ERA 183

coexistence between the neighbouring countries. Here

again, after all Nepal is an independent country. There
are many political parties and everybody has got the
freedom to express his own views. Some of the leaders
have expressed views in favour of this explosion and
some leaders have expressed views against it also. Here
[lies] the importance of official version and the role of
ambassadors. We, the ambassadors, have to put forward
the official views. The official views of the Government
of Nepal are as follows: (press release of the
Government of Nepal, datelined Kathmandu, 12 May
1998 ):

Nepal, as a party to the Nuclear Non,Proliferation

Treaty and signatory of the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty, views with concern nuclear test by any
country.
Nepal hopes that the recent nuclear tests hy India
will not unleash a nuclear arms race in the region.
Nepal would like to urge all to exercise maximum
restraint and refrain from nuclear test in order to
create an atmosphere of trust and confidence
essential for global nuclear disarmament.

Actually these are the weapons of annihilation and our

country never started proliferation of nuclear weapons;
so initial reaction might be somewhat mixed. But the
later stateluents by Indian leaders on this issue were
quite clear that they have done it just to safeguard
security and they are not going to use these weapons
first against any nation and this has satisfied us. The
184 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

subsequent announcement has also given a lot of

assurance to neighbours.
Q: China is a neighbour of Nepal. China has got
nuclear weapons. Keeping in view this whole scenario
shouldn't have India gone for it [nuclear test]?
BBT: As an ambassador we should not express any
views regarding the relationship between China and
India, especially on this issue. We held the same view
on nuclear issue whichever country develops it. No
matter who does it, our views are the same. We are a
signatory to the Global Convention. As a matter of
commitment for total annihilation of nuclear weapons,
it is our commitment to the world and it will remain
so. As the new government under the Bharatiya Janata
Party has come to power, it is their lookout to see that
friendly relationships with neighbours are maintained
and we want peace with our neighbours.
 11
An Eventful Journey (I)
(May 1998 to November 1998)

May 1998 was a momentous month for the BJ P

Government. The long cherished desire of nuclear
scientists was fullfilled. Indian scientists worked hard
to perfect the technology of making nuclear bombs. But
they were not allowed to experiment. Therefore they
were not sure about the success or failure of their
technology. On 11 May, India conducted three
underground nuclear test in the Pokhran range in
Rajasthan. The tests that were conducted included a
low-yield device, a fission device of approximately the
same strength as was exploded in 1974, and a
thermonuclear device, which is a fusion bomb
commonly called the hydrogen bomb with a tTIuch
bigger yield. All these tests were conducted
simultaneously at 3.45 p.m. on 11 May. India alsb
testfired the Trishul missile, a short.-range triple missile,
185
186 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARI V A) PAYEE

having a capability of being used as a surface,to,surface

and surface,to,air missile at the interior test range
(lTR) at Chandipur (Orissa). The missile, with a 50 km
range, has an added use for the Navy.
On 13 May India conducted two more nuclear tests
at Pokhran. The two tests conducted at 12.21 p.m. were
for generating 'additional data for improved co~puter
simulation of designs and for attaining the capability
to carry out subcritical experiments'.
The preceding tests done hy India evoked divergent
reactions at home and abroad. Pakistan also exploded
a nuclear bomb. The United States of America and its
allies imposed economic sanctions. Indian scientists
were extremely happy by this decision of the
government. People, by and large, were happy and
proud of this achievement of the country. But
Opposition parties were not happy. Addressing the
general body of the Congress Parliamentary Party
(CPP), the party president, Sonia Gandhi, criticised the
Government's decision to conduct the nuclear tests
without 'critical reasons' and warned that sanctions
imposed by the US and Japan would adversely affect
the country's poor people.
On 15 May in an interview to India Today, Prime
Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee declared that India was
now a nuclear weapons state. He asserted that these
would not be weapons of aggression. In a joint
statement the Department of Energy (DAE) and the
Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO)
declared the India had acquired state,of,the,art nuclear
weapons capability after testing a 45 kiloton yield
THE BJP ERA 187

hydrogen bomb at Pokhran. The five devices were

placed in separate holes, but the depths at which they
were placed were not disclosed. The thermonuclear
(4.5 kiloton), fission (15 kiloton) and the low .. yield
(0.2 kiloton) devices were detonated simultaneously on
11 May and two more subkiloton devices (0.5 and
0.3 kt) were simultaneously triggered off on 13 May.
The testing of nuclear weapons evoked sanctions by the
United States. US President Bill Clinton inlposed
economic sanctions on India on 13 May. The US
decided to cut off all bilateral economic aid and loans
by American hanks to companies in India. The US
decided to oppose, under its laws, loans from
international financial institutions to India, which
receives about $ 3 billion from the World Bank,
including $ 1 billion as concessional credit. The United
States set three definite conditions for India: the
signing of the discriminatory CTBT without any
conditions; avoiding weaponisation; and avoiding
deployment of a ballistic missile.
The UN Security Council, on 14 May, strongly
deplored the nuclear tests by India and asked it to sign
the nuclear non .. proliferation treaty (NPT) and the
CTBT without any conditions.
Japan suspended 3.5 billion yen (26 million dollars)
annual grant .. in .. aid. It also refused to host the World
Bank .. sponsored Aid .. India Meet scheduled for June
1998.
Germany also announced cancellation of official
talks on development aid and froze fresh assistance
worth OM 300 million. Denmark froze aid at the
188 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

current 190 million crowns (28 million dollars) per

year instead of boosting it as planned at 300 million
crowns by 2002 and also cancelled high, level trade
visits.
India rejected the EU's (European Union's) demand
adopted in Brussels calling on New Delhi to cease its
weaponisation programme and sign the CTBT
unconditionally. The G,8 asked India not to make
nuclear weapons also asked it to sign the CTBT and the
NPT. It, however, refrained from imposing collective
sanctions against New Delhi.
New Zealand and Australia recalled their envoys.
In contrast Russia ruled out sanctions but criticised
India's nuclear tests.
At the same time, in an interview, the secretary in
the Prime Minister's Office set out certain conditions
fc· signing the CTBT. He said that India would sign the
erBT as and when it would be recognised as a nuclear
weapons state.
Earlier on 1 May, while addressing a press
conference in Mumbai, Prime Minister Vajpayee
showed his keenness to maintain cordial relations with
Pakistan and, even after the nuclear tests, the PM
suggested holding of talks on all complicated issues
with Pakistan. But he wanted that the initiative should
come from Pakistan.
The prime minister defended his nuclear policy
strongly in the Lok Sabha both after India's nuclear
tests as well as after Pakistan's nuclear tests at Chagai
in Baluchistan. Pakistan declared a state of emergency
after the tests, but in India everything continued In a
normal manner as before.
THE BJP ERA 189

Again, speaking in the Lok Sabha, Vajpayee

affirmed that he was ready for total nuclear
disarmament but not for a discriminatory disarmament,
which divided the world into nuclear haves and have ..
nots. He also underlined the potential of nuclear
technology in the economic development of a
developing nation.
If May 1998 was a momentous month for the BJP ..
led Government on the defence front, June was
important on the financial front due to the general
budget to be presented. Everybody expected a hard
hudget because of the financial sanctions imposed by
America and its friends after the atomic explosions
done by India. But the budget presented on 1 June was
much better than expected.
Yashwant Sinha, Union finance minister, presented
the Union budget. The salient features of the budget
are as follows: (1) No change in rates of personal or
corporate tax; personal income tax exemption limit
raised to Rs. 50,000; standard deducation increased to
Rs. 25,000 for income up to Rs. 1 lakh. (2) Tax .. free
reimbursement of medical expenses raised to
Rs. 15,000; levy of gift tax discontinued; gifts to come
under income tax; petrol cess of Re. 1 per litre imposed
to fund national highway expansion. (3) Customs duty
on newsprint reduced' to 5 per cent; cigarettes to cost
more but matchboxes to be cheaper. (4) Fiscal deficit
placed at 5.6 per cent of the GOP with special thrust
on agriculture. (5) Rural development plan allocation
for agriculture to be raised by 58 per cent; Rs. 3000
crore for the rural infrastructure development fund.
190 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

(6) The gl~vernment promised to announce a national

agriculture policy paper soon; inflow of foreign direct
investment to be doubled within two years; 90 days'
time~bound clearance of high~value foreign investment
prop<?sals; limit for NRI secondary market investment
in Indian companies increased from 1 to 5 per cent and
liluit on aggregate NRI investment raised frolTI 5 to 10
per cent; persons of Indian origin holding foreign
passports to get special cards granting them visa~free
regin1e and other privileges. (7) Insurance sector to he
thrown open to private Indian companies; FERA to be
repealed and replaced with a new Foreign Exchange
Management Act (FEMA). (8) Indian Airlines to be
restructured and government holding to he reduced to
49 per cent over three years. (9) Disinvestment of up
to 74 per cent in non~strategic public sector.
(10) Budget allocation for education increased hy
50 per cent and allocation for atolnic energy increased
hy 68 per cent and for space hy 62 per cent.
This hudget was hailed by the business cOlumunity
and the COlTIlTIOn man as a growth,oriented one.
Later in June 1998, Atal Behari Vajpayee, in
response to a letter written by Congress President Sonia
Gandhi, categorically stated that his government would
not allow any organisation to violate the sanctity of the
judicial process vis,ir,vis the Ayodhya issue. He
ohserved: If the Supreme Court paves the way for the
I

construction of the Ram Mand ir at Ayodhya, the

verdict will be given effect to accordingly. If, on the
other hand, the apex court gives a contrary ruling my
government will perform its Constitutional duty of
THE BJP ERA 191

ensuring that nothing acts against the verdict.' This

assurance by the prime ministe~ might have assuaged
the feelings of the minority cOffitTIunity as well as
indicated the mindset of the BJ P Government on this
issue. This statement of the prime minister indicated
that the BJ P was not going to follow the policy of
appeasement of the minority community but it was
going to follow a just and judicious policy. The BJP has
all respect for the sentiments of the minority
conllnunity as repeatedly asserted hy Vajpayee. He also
simultaneously showed respect for the Supreme Court.
In J Line 1998, the two Yadava leaders, MLilayam
Singh and Laloo Prasad, launched a new front, called
the Rashtriya· Loktantrik Morcha (RLM), to fight the
BJP.
Bihar was again in the news for murders and
countermurders. On 2 June nine MCC (Maoist
Communist C--:entre) activists were killed in an
encounter with the police. Also, Brij Bihari Prasad. an
MLA and a former n1inister, was alleged to he involved
in the killing of L)evendra Dubey, another MLA from
C30vind CJanj who was shot dead in a hospital campus
in Penna. Douhts were raised regarding the hand of
higher~ups of the Rashtriya ] anata Dal in this affair. The
governor of Bihar, on 15 June, described the law and
order situation in the state as 'grave'. On 14 June
another veteran cpr (M) leader and party MLA, Ajit
Sarkar, was gunned down in Purnea.
While these political turn10ils were rocking the
country, on 10 June, a servere cyclone hit Gujarat and
killed over 400 persons. Prin1e Minister Atal Behari
192 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Vajpayee released an amount of Rs 1.23 crore from the

National Relief Fund for the cyclone,hit victims.
In the proxy war going on in Kashmir, 25 persons
were killed in Doda district of Jammu. Indian troops
also ,killed mercenaries and militants in Kashmir.
On 4 June a special court ordered the attachment
of Jayalalitha's assets worth Rs. 11.59 crore; she has
been accused of amassing wealth to the tune of Rs. 63
crore in the case filed by the Directorate of Vigilance
and Anti,corruption.
On 16 June India got a reprieve in its nuclear
controversy gene'rated after Pokhran,II explosion as
Bangladesh, one of the India's neighbours, endorsed
New Delhi's stand on CTBT and NPT. The visiting
prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, said that
provisions from CTBT and NPT were unequal and
discriminatory. She appreciated India's Inoratorium on
nuclear tests and ruled out third .. party mediation
Kashmir.
On 7 and 8 June Prime Minister Atal Behari
Vajpayee informed the Parliament that the UN
Security Countil resolution to stop India's nuclear
programme was unacceptable. He reiterated that India
will take decisions in this regard on the basis of 'our
assessments and national security requirement in a
reasonable and responsible manner'.
During the month of June 1998, India's political and
diplomatic activities revolved round defending the
nuclear explosions. Vajpayee and his team justified the
explosion in the national interest and never felt
demoralised before the international community. India
THE BJP ERA 193

felt that the approach to nuclear disarmament was not

based on justice and equality; rather, it divided the
world into nuclear haves and have .. nots. This arbitrary
approach in which five nuclear powers states had all
the rights to have nuclear weapons was not acceptable
to India and it was not in tune with the security
environment of the country.
July 1998 was not a historic month for the Vajpayee
Government like May and June. But July brought in a
good monsoon which helped the nation withstand the
aftereffects of economic sanctions. But Vajpayee got
the first ultimatum from Jayalalitha to notify the draft
schenle for the implementation of the Kaveri Water
Dispute Tribunal's interim award before 21 July, failing
which he olight have to face 'disastrous consequences'.
The Suprerne Court, on 19 July, gave three weeks' time
to the government to implement the interim award
given by the aforelnentioned trihllnal under the Inter,
State Water Disputes Act. The court further ordered
that it was the last chance for the government to
fonnulate the scheme for implementation of the award.
(On 9 April 1997 the Centre had assured the apex court
that a schenle would be worked out to implement the
award. The schenle seeks to ilnplen1ent the Justice
Chittatosh Mukherjee's Cauvery Water Dispute
Trihunal's interim award given in 1990.)
The WOlnen's Reservation Bill dominated the scene
inside the Lok Sabha.The governlnent, on 2 July,
decided to defer the introduction of this Bill that
sought to reserve 33 per cent seats for women in the
Lok Sabha and state Legislative Assemblies till a
194 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

consensus was evolved on the isslle at an all,party

lTIeeting. The RLM was demanding that the quota of
reservation for women be reduced frolTI 33 per cent to
15 per cent and also wanted reservations for minorities
and. Other Backward Classes.
In th.e Lok Sabha, on 13 July, there was bedlam
created by RJD MPs, and the Bill was not introduced
again; the speaker convened an all,party meeting for
achieving consensus.
The fate of the Bill for creating three smaller
states - Uttaranchal, Vananchal anJ C:hhattisgarh -
was left dangling. A committee of seven ministers was
constituted to finalise the modalities towards the
formation of the three new states.
On 7 July, the Prime Minister announced in the Lok
Sabha that reservations for Scheduled Castes/
Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (OBCs)
would continue and there was no question of the
government withdrawing them. The ()pposition raised
the issue in Parliament on the statement given hy the
Union minister, Ram Jethmalani, on 8 J LIly while
attending a some private party, when he suggested
review of the legislation.
On 10 July, the prime minister categorically
announced in the Lok Sabha, while replying to a debate
on the working of the External Affairs Ministry, that
India would not sign the CTBT unconditionally, nor
would it succumb to any pressure to stall its nuclear
weaponisation and missiles programlnes.
As a part of hectic lobbying for softening the
attitude of the USA on sanctions, the talks he tween
THE BJP ERA 195

J aswant Singh and Strobe Talbott were held in a

meeting at an undisclosed venue in Frankfurt.
In the meantime, the Clinton administration asked
the US Congress for powers to waive sanctions. While
testifying before the Senate' Foreign Relations
Subcommittee on 14 July, assistant secretary of state
for South Asian Affairs, Karl Inderfurth, requested
waiver authority from Congress for all sanctions
currently applied against India and Pakistan~ He listed
certain stipulations for India and Pakistan: conduct no
further tests, sign and ratify the CTBT without
conditions, refrain from deploying nuclear weapons or
missile systems, withhold missile material production,
formalise policies not to export weapons of mass
destruction and missile techniques or equipment and
resume direct dialogue to address the root cause of
hilateral tension between India and Pakistan including
Kashmir. President Clinton also got the Senate's nod to
ease sanctions. The Senate voted unanimously to give
Clinton the authority to waive sanctions for up to one
year, especially the non,military sanctions imposed on
India and Pakistan in the wake of their nuclear tests.
The Senate, on 10 July, voted 98 to 0 to exempt
agriculture exports and credits from the sanctions
imposed on India and Pakistan after their nuclear tests.
The waiver included both food products and fertilisers.
On 20 July, though the third round of talks between
Jaswant Singh and Strobe Talbott was considered
'constructive' by both the parties, the US admini,
stration asked seven Indian scientists to leave that
country on 23 July, and similar orders were to be issued
196 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

against 75 more Indian scientists working in the USA

under different programmes as punitive action against
scientists for India's achievements in the nuclear and
missile fields. This attitude clearly showed that the
USA did not like India to emerge as a powerful state.
The US suspended all scientific cooperation with India
on 24 July. The US energy secretary, Fedrico Pena,
ordered suspension of all Department of Energy and
National Laboratories~financed interactions with India
and Pakistan except for humanitarian assistance. The US
Energy Department had directed suspension of all
activities, including visits of Indian and Pakistani
nationals from nuclear institutes and related hodies as
also suspension of all high,level visits from the US to
India and Pakistan.
As a part of 'softening' of the attitude of the USA,
the World Bank (through the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development) approved a $ 130
million package for a diversified agricultural support
project in Uttar Pradesh. The World Bank assured that
it would give $ 300 million through the IDA for the
integrated child development services (ICDS) scheme
for five years.
On 1 July, a Pakistani nuclear scientist, Dr Iftikar
Khan Chaudhary, who defected to the United States,
had claimed that Iran and China were involved in
Pakistan's effort to develop nuclear arsenal and Saudi
Arabia helped to fund it.
On 30 July, Pakistan agreed to resume talks on a
treaty banning fissile material for nuclear weapons and
other devices. On that day, a Russian daily,
THE BJP ERA 197

Rommarsant, quoting Russian Defence Ministry sources,

reported that India had acquired the capabili ty of
controlled, thermonuclear yield, permitting it to
produce universal warheads for its tactical as well as
strategic missiles. The report added that India was
capable of making the hydrogen bomb. Thus, in the
month of July, the nuclear issue dominated the political
talks between India and other countries. Unfortunately,
this issue did not get adquate publicity in India.
In the first week of Septelnher 1998, ahout 300
C:ongress delegates met at Panchmarhi in Madhya
Pradesh. In its cool climate their brains also worked
well. C:ongress President Sonia Gandhi gave a new line:
well, reasoned and cogent. On the first day of the
meeting she pointed out that the Congress should not
look for allies and should try to stand on its own legs
as that alone would benefit it in the long run. In fact,
the feeling of most of the participants of the
Panchlnarhi camp was that the so,called protagonist of
social justice had hijacked the plank of the Congress.
I t was the springboard of social justice from which they
have always jumped into the turbulent waters of
electioneering and swam through successfully quite
often. That they should snatch back that springboard
and smash the casteist forces politically in Uttar
Pradesh and Bihar was the undercurrent of feeling in
the camp. It is clear to any student of Indian politics
that unless the Congress regains its past glory in Uttar
Pradesh and Bihar, it will never he able to provide a
stahle government at the Centre. This implication was
clear to many a person who spoke at the Panchmari
convention.
198 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

Chandrajeet Yadav, a former Union minister and a

'Young Turk' of yesteryear, did not relish any direct or
indirect reference to the casteist forces. There were a
couple of politicians in the Congress camp who had
dreamt, at times, of becoming the prime minister with
the help of these very castiest forces which were hit,
to some extent, by the dramatic entry of Sonia Gandhi.
The veteran leader from Madhya Pradesh, Arjun Singh,
was reported to have spoken satirically. At
Panchmarhi, Congressmen discussed this matter
informally, and some persons from Other Backward
Classes appeared somewhat critical, but it seems they
did not have the courage to speak out openly against
the Congress president. But, apparently, the informal
talk amongst themselves reached the ears of Sonia
Gandhi. It also appeared that it had some effect on her.
She probably felt that it could cause a schism in the
Congress Party. If, at any time, such a schism among
leaders became a reality, only 50 Members of
Parliament would be enough. to split the Congress.
Only three or four leaders had to make up their mind
to quit the party. If that happened at any time in the
near future, Sonia Gandhi would certainly have lost her
chance to become prime minister for all time to come,
but, in all probability, such a development may not
come about.
I t was in the last week of August 1998 that Prime
Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee went on a tour of four
countries. On the last leg of the tour, he attended the
Non . . Alignment Group's Conference at Durban, South
Africa. On 2 September 1998 India expressed shock
THE BJP ERA 199

at NAM chairman and South African President Nelson

MandeLa's reference to ]aInn1u and Kashmir in his
inaugural speech at the 12th NAM summit at Durhan.
Mandela hrought up the Kashmir issue while referring
to areas of conflict all over the world. 'All of us remain
concerned that the issue of ]arnmu and Kashmir should
he solved through peaceful negotiations and should be
willing to lend all the strength we have to the
resolution of this matter,' he ohserved.
The Kashmir issue has never heen fortnally
mentioned in any inaugural speech at a NAM summIt,
1110re so hy a person whom India considers a 'friend'.
Although there had heen no formal reaction by New
Delhi, senior diplomats accompanying the Indian prime
Inin is ter expressed surprise over Mande la himsc If
hroaching the subject. India was concerned that South
Africa, as chairn1an of NAM for the next three years,
coulJ use its position to influence other metnners.
Indian diplotnats tnade it clear that our position on
Kashmir was well known. We did not want any thin),
party interference. Islatnahad and New Delhi were
capahle of settling their differences on a numher of
issues without NAM or any other group or country
assisting them, they emhpasised. Mandela's reference
to Kashmir was prohably part of South Africa's efforts
to ensure that NAM, like the Southern African
Developlnent Community (SADC), could playa role
in the 'resolution of conflicts hetween lnelnher,states'.
Vajpayee Inet'the SOllth African deputy president,
Mheky, on 1 Septemher 1998. He later told Indian
newspersons that Mheky had assured him that SOllth
200 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Africa wanted both India and Pakistan to resolve

bilateral disputes without any third~party mediation.
India was facing another problem at NAM. Till
then, ~ember~states had not arrived at a consensus on
draft paragraphs relating to disarmament. New Delhi
was pushing for members to accept the Cartagene
resolution on nuclear disarmament, which spoke of
global elimination of nuclear arms, and did not bring
in regional proliferation or any specific mention of the
Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests.
Late in the evening of 2 September, Mandela tried
to explain that what he observed at the NAM summit
earlier was in general terms but this explanation was
no consolation to anyone in India. Mandela's deputy
in the South African Government apologised for what
had been said by the country's chief spokesman, but the
damage had already been done.
Another shock was in store for India. UN Secretary~
General Kofi Annan, in a report on the eve of the 53rd
UN General Assembly session, clubbed the Kashmir
issue with events such as the deadlocked peace process
in Cyprus, the turmoil in Afghanistan and the
stalemate in the Middle East peace process, and listed
it as one of the causes of concern worldwide. RevieWing
the UN's work last year, the secretary~general also spoke
about 'increased tension' between India and Pakistan
following their nuclear tests and opposed their demand
for recognition as nuclear powers.
Annan described the nuclear tests by India and
Pakistan as a 'highly disturbing development' and asked
the two nations to take certain measures urgently: such
THE BJP ERA 201

as refrain from any further testing, adhere immediately

to the global test ban treaty and freeze their nuclear
programmes and the development of missiles capable
of delivering them.
Pointing out that the world was in the 'critical
moment' of efforts to reduce the danger posed by
nuclear weapons, he stated, without naming any
country, that any increase in the number of nuclear
weapons states would have serious implications for
peace and security globally.
Annan also remarked th'at the nuclear tests by India
and Pakistan heightened tensions between them and
were a sombre reminder to the world that non,
proliferation could not be taken for granted. 'The
success of previous years, the indefinite extension of
the NPT, the signing of the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty have been called into question this year by the
decision of the two non,signatories, India and Pakistan,
to conduct nuclear tests,' he opined.
He went on to add: 'It is, therefore, of utmost
importance that the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty,
together with the objective agreed to at the 1995
review and extension conference of the parties to the
treaty of non .. proliferation of nuclear weapons, become
universally accepted.'
On 7 September 1998, Prime Minister Vajpayee's
special envoy, ] aswant Singh, held an unannounced
Ineeting with US deputy secretary of state, Strobe
Talbott, amidst reports that Washington was trying to
get New Delhi to commit itself to the CTBT to pave
the way for President Bill Clinton's proposed visit to
India in October 1998.
202 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

Jaswant Singh and Talbott had earlier held four

round of talks on nuclear anus proliferation and India's
security concerns after New Delhi's May nuclear tests.
'The US and other major Western powers are trying to
persuade India and Pakistan to move closer to the
international proliferation mainstream,' The Wa.."hington
Post reported, quoting an unnamed State Department
official.
No doubt, India had been facing severe criticism,
hut, in the light of the huge nuclear arsenals of China
and with reports of Pakistan possessing nuclear
weapuns, India had no choice but to ann itself with
these weapons. Some of the big powers in the world
have always desired that India should renlain in a
dcrlloralised state. But one thing is certain: the earlier
fear of a large number of Indians has now disappeared
after Vajpayee's decision to conduct nuclear tests. India
certainly cou Id not be counted a weak nation any
more. Diploluatically, India appeared to be on the
defensive but that was only to be accepted. ()ne does
not give up the fulfilment of one's urgent needs siluply
because SOlne others do not like it.
(In 9 Septetuber 1998 there were reports in
international dailies that the Government of India was
luoving closer, bit by bit, to signing the CTBT but fears
of adverse political fallout were preventing the
Vajpayee Government from putting its signature on the
treaty.
'We believe that adhering to the CTBT will not
jeopardise our security concern', a senior official in the
Prilue Minister's Office affirmed on 8 Septemher 1998.
THE BJP ERA 203

After the May 1998 tests India could have, in some

indirect way, told certain foreign governments that it
was not averse to signing the CTBT. At the beginning
of the second week of September, 1998, the BJ P,
according to certain reports, was planning to talk to all
political parties during that n10nth itself to get their
views and prepare the ground for eventually putting
India!s seal on the CTBT. There was, however, anxiety
that the Congress and other Opposition parties could
use this opportunity to pull down the Vajpayee
Governlnent. Politics heing what it was in India.
parties were likely to use the 'consensus on the CTBT'
nlove agatnst the BJP (}OVernITIent. The (~ongress party
was divided on the issue. l)ne group favoured the C:TBT,
whereas another section was vehen1ently opposed to
sign ing it. The governluent's Jeslre was to shift track
anJ convince those opposed to the treaty that India's
interest would not he harmed hy signing it. TI1e Pokhran
tests in May 1998 ensured that the country was capable
of defending itself from a nuclear attack, and signing
the C:TBT could not stop Indian scientists fronl going
ahead with computer sin1ltlations.
The BJP was not hothered clbollt the C:TBT. The
party wanted the tests. Accurding to press reports there
was no pressure frOITI within the party not to sign the
treaty. Defence Minister George Fernandes had already
fired the first salvo. 'The CTBT is not a hone of
contention,' he told the British Broadcasting
Corporation's Hindi Service on 8 September 1998. He
added that India would have no prohlem signing the
CTBT if it was recognised as a nuclear state. However,
204 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

it remains to be seen whether this quid pro quo would

work. It was widely suspected that the government
itself had changed track on the issue. In fact, some_
sharp intellectuals had conjectured it many weeks
earlier when the second meeting between Strobe
Talbott and Jaswant Singh took place. 'We are a
nuclear power whether the rest of the world is willing
to acknowledge it or not,' a government official
asserted. There was enough pressure on the
government, both at home and abroad, on the nuclear
question. Signing on the dotted line without something
substantial in exchange could be projected by its
opponents 'as a sellout'. There was a fear that without
getting something in return from the USA and the
other nuclear powers, it might be difficult to 'sell' the
CTBT to the Indian people. The nuclear five had not
shown any inclination to give in on this issue.
The highlights or headline,making news in August
1998 - notably the Monica Levinsky sex scandal, the
bombing of the US mission in East Africa, the Cruise ..
missile attacks in Afghanistan and Sudan - all ensured
that Indo,US negotiations on nuclear non,
proliferation were relegated to the back burner. The
talks between Talbott and Jaswant Singh in July 1998
received little attention in the media in the West.
The US deputy national security advisor, Steinberg,
was asked by American reporters accompanying
Clinton to Northern Ireland if a presidential visit to
South Africa was in the offing in November 1998.
Steinberg, however, deflected the question and replied
that Clinton was actively interested in the progress of
THE BJP ERA 205

the talks that the US was conducting with both India

and Pakistan.
The Washington Post, meanwhile, reported (by
quoting an unnamed State Department official) that
'the US aim is to get India to commit [itself] to the test
ban treatly soon'. It, however, stressed that Clinton's
visit to the subcontinent could be scuppered by the
prev ious month's Cru ise miss i Ie barrage on
Afghan istan' s terrorist strongholds because some
Pakistanis were killed. This report exposed Pakistan's
apparent complicity in terrorism. Given the security
situations in an unstable, impoverished Pakistan, there
appeared a question mark regarding President Clinton's
visit to the subcontinent in 1998.
The Washington Post report tended to take the view
that the Nawaz Sharif Government was 'not notified in
advance' about the imminent missiles strike on
Afghanistan when the prevalent view amongst many
South Asian observers was that they were tipped off in
advance. The Post also maintained that the Talbott,
Singh negotiations became complicated by the
exposure of Pakistan's presence in Afghanistan terrorist
camps and that Pak,sponsored terrorists were planning
raids in Kashmir. The paper also quoted another
unidentified State Department official as saying: 'We
have been taking some very tough measures [with
regard] to Pakistan on this subject.' The source of
optimism for any substantial progress in the Indo,US
talks, according to this news account, seemed to be
based on Jaswant Singh's recent article in the journal
Foreign Affairs.
~06 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

There was an inlportant news itelu published in

SOllle Indian national dailies on 7 September 1998.
According to the press reports, the prime minister's
principal secretary, Brajesh Mishra, told a private
television network on 6 September that progress had
been made on talks between India and the US on the
issue of non,proliferation and disarmament but denied
the suggestion that New Delhi was very close to signing
the CTBT. He clarified that the modalities for the
resumption of the stalled foreign secretary level talks
he tween India and Pakistan would be finalised after
Vajpayee's scheduled meeting with Nawaz Sharif in
New York on 23 September 1998.
The suave and dignified Jaswant Singh (who hails
{rOIn a princely family in western Rajasthan and who
had served in the armed forces as a very senior officer)
created a worldwide inlpression of heing the ablest
diplomat India has known during the past two to three
decades, next only to the highly intelligent and great
statesman, Atal Behari Vajpayee, who was the
external affairs lninister in Morarji Desai's (JOVernInent
(1977,79).
Jaswant Singh had several round of talks with
Talbott from June 1998 to mid,September 1998.
Meanwhile, K. R. Narayanan, the president of India,
went on a tour of a few Western countries in the second
week of September 1998. On the last day of his tour
of Germany, he had an occasion to speak about Indian
affairs to leading journalists. Earlier, he had made some
points clear to Chancellor Helmut Kohl, Foreign
Minister Klaus Kinkel and others. The subject was, of
THE BJP ERA 207

course, 'concern about nuclear explosions, etc., and

their impact on the situation in South Asia'. If German
press reports were anything to go by, the hosts did not
lllince words in asking India to adhere to international
non .. proliferation regimes and desist from
weaponisation. But that was only expected. What was
significant was the manner in which Narayanan
defended India's nuclear tests and the government's
policies with regard to both domestic and foreign
policies.
The Vajpayee Government could not have found a
hetter person to put forward its case to a country which
is crucial to India's interest in Europe, not to mention
the country which is the second largest trading partner
and donor. In what [nay he considered a tnemorable
presiJential statenlent, Narayanan's extelnporc expose
of the strategic rationale and compulsions behind
India's May nuclear tests, anJ, more significantly, the
secular credentials of the BJP-Ied Government, was the
high point of the visit.
Although the presidential visit was planned much
before the nuclear tests and even hefore the installation
of the Vajpayee ()overnment, it has turned out to he a
useful coincidence for the government which has
helped it rehahilitate the country's in1age that had
taken a beating in the summer of 1998.
Addressing the cream of German intelligentsia at
the German Society for Foreign Affairs in Bonn,
Narayanan belied his soft gentlemanly demeanour and
ripped apart the Western nations' nuclear hyprocrisy.
208 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

In a convincing comparison of the five

acknowledged nuclear powers' self.. proclaimed right to
weapons of mass destruction and the denial of even a
minimum deterrence capability to others, with the
nineteenth century international legal doctrine of
'different rights', Narayanan left the audience nursing
a grudging admiration for him. Even the two American
diplomats in the audience confessed that 'he was good'.
Directly addressing one of the major concerns of the
Germans, President Narayanan unanlbiguously declared
that there was no longer a possibility of war between
India and Pakistan, thanks to the minimum nuclear
deterrence that both the countries had acquired. He
further elaborated this point at the prestigious
Humboldt University in Berlin where he interacted with
a very distinguished gathering of German intellectuals.
The president of India impressed his audience that the
same deterrence that saved Europe from acti ve
hostilities during the Cold War would also work in a
nuclear South Asia. He said that a peaceful resolution
of the outstanding issue of conflict between New Delhi
and Islamabad had been made inevitable and
compulsory.
The genius of Narayanan's address, however, lay in
the fact that he was able to logically and convincingly
resolve the contradiction of a nuclear India's resolve
to work for a weapon .. free world. Generously drawing
from the views of his mentor and hero, Jawaharlal
Nehru, the original and most ardent protagonist of
universal disarmament, Narayanan explained how
India had come to realise the futility of idealism
THE BJP ERA 209

without power to back it up. Narayanan also impressed

his guests about how Nehru's prediction of the
inevitable emergence of a bloc~free non~aligned world
had come into being, possibly alluding to the presence
of the Americans as 'observers' at the recently held
summit of the Non .. aligned Movement in Durban.
Narayanan also volunteered to allay the seemingly
widespread German apprehensions with regard to the
'Hindu' government in New Delhi and, much to the
surprise of even some of the Indians in the audience,
declared that the BJP was as secular as any other party
in the country. He blamed any unsavoury
developments in the country on the fringe groups of
society.
Reiterating Nehru's reasoning, Narayanan also
rejected Pakistan's claims on Kashmir strictly on the
basis of India's secular credentials, something that
seelned to go down well with an audience that was wary
of Islamic fundamentalism.
The president's performance all through the three ..
day Gennan visit, the diplomats pointed out, had also
the advantage of over four decades of public life as well
as diplomatic and academic experience to tackle what
was obviously a difficult task in difficult times in a
difficult place.
Thus, India was waging. a struggle in the Western
world to put across its viewpoint. At home, Prime
Minister Vajpayee was in his own way fighting not only
fissiparous tendencies but also actively divisive
struggles - direct or indirect - launched by sonle
forces against the very unity and integrity of India.
210 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Though the image of the Vajpayee Government

marginally suffered because of rising inflation and an
increasing cost of living, the prin1e n1inister enjoyed a
lot of sYll1pathy and goodwill as millions of people were
thoroughly convinced that a lot of problems faced by
India had their roots outside the country's borders. It
is most unfortunate for India that politics stood
divided on caste lines, especially in northern India and
the casteist forces dominated some segments of society.
But India has always possessed an inner strength and
collective aCUluen to understand all these phenonlena.
But how unfortunate that India does not act in unison
on many occaSlons.
(Jne particular incident which took place in Iran had
repercussions for India as well. It was on 15 September
1998 that dead hodies of Iranian diplomats killed by
the Taliban in Afghanistan reached Tehran. Ayatollah
Khamenei, the supreme Leader there, made an emotional
statement expressing deep agony about the killing of
diploluats; all of them were probably Shias. In India
too the private conversations of S0t11e Muslims
exhibited their leanings against Iran. They felt that the
Shias of Iran would he taught a lesson. In India the
Sunni Muslims outnumbered the Shias. In Lucknow
there used to be clashes between Shias and Sunnis every
year on the occasion of Moharram. It is only during
the regime of Kalyan Singh, the BJ P chief minister of
Uttar Pradesh, that the clashes between the Shias and
Sunnis stopped.
Re 1igi~)n, regrettably, has become a tool in
politicians' hands in our country. Unfortunately, most
THE BJP ERA 211

of the policies of almost all parties have become vote~

oriented. There is a feeling among the intellectuals in
the country that if the presidential system is ushered
into India and the president given overriding powers
in all executive decisions, ITIuch of the evils,
particularly electoral evils, will cOlne to an end. This
cannot he possihle without a change in the
C:onstitution, which is possible only if both the
Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress agree on this
lssue.
Prime Minister Vajpayee declared on 16 September
1998 that India was negotiating with key nations the
issue of the CTBT, especially regarding transfer of high
technology t6 create conditions for signing it. Vajpayee
asserted that India could not sign the CTBT in its
present discrirninatory fonn. He was speaking to press
reporters at Chcnnai where he had gone to address a
puhlic meeting arranged hy Vaiko, a leader of a
political group which was part of the DMK (Dravida
Munnetra Kazhagam) some years earlier. With a sharp
acun1en, rather a sort of intuition, Vajpayee said that
he knew that the treaty was not going to be amended.
He hoped that certain arrangements might be made to
create conditions for Indi? to sign the CTBT.
Probahly the talks between Jaswant Singh and
Talbott had proceeded on certain specific lines and the
thread was supposed to be picked up by the prime
minister himself on his visit to New York in the last
week of Septeluber 1998. He made it clear that the
Indian approach to the CTBT was not to be influenced
by Pakistan's actions. India stood determined to take
212 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

an independent line in the interest of its security and

honour.
A significant development occurred in Islamabad,
the capital of Pakistan, on 16 September 1998, which
marked a sudden turnaround. Nawaz Sharif dropped his
plan to bring in a draft resolution in the Pakistani
Parliament for signing the CTBT.
Due to immense pressure from the Opposition, the
new foreign minister of Pakistan, Sartaj Aziz, observed
that his country's Parliament had given enough
guidelines to the government to take a final decision
on the issue of CTBT. 'We assure that we will take a
final decision on the signing of the CTBT keeping in
mind our best national interest', Aziz concluded,
winding up the discussion in the joint session of
Parliament over CTBT.
As a way out of the protracted stalemate, India and
Pakistan agreed on a time schedule of dialogue on
certain specific outstanding issues already identified by
them. This was the suhstance of the agreement on the
modalities for talks reached by the foreign secretaries
of India and Pakistan at Durban during the NAM
summit earlier in September 1998.
This news, published widely throughout Asia on
19 September 1998, created an impression that the way
the talks were taking place at various levels between
India and Pakistan was, in fact, a very slow process that
suited the ruling parties in both the countries. The
ba ttIes and negotiations had been going on between
India and Pakistan for the last 50 years and it appeared
that they would go on for another few years. Both the
THE BJP ERA 213

countries had become nuclear powers. The deterrence

factor was such that no one could afford an atomic war.
Realising this reality, certain political elements in the
outside world had been thinking of third .. party
mediation. The motives of these various elements were
different. Some were hoping for increased tension
hetween India and Pakistan so that they might be able
to sell their military hardware to both the countries.
Interest i ngl y, there were differing 'tunes' in this
orchestra. Meanwhile, economic crisis overtook
PakisLan and there was increasing uneasiness among the
Indian masses.
During US President Bill Clinton's visit to Russia
in the rainy season of 1998, he was reported to have
pressurised President Yeltsin to snap military ties with
India. Russia being the biggest seller of conventional
hardware to India could not afford to do so and Yeltsin
did put off Clinton on this issue. This decision of
Yeltsin provided a lot of satisfaction to the Indian
C;overnment and the public at large.
()n the domestic front, a disquieting trend was
obvious in the economic affairs of India. Inflation was
rising almost every hour. Prices were soaring. The
common man was suffering a lot of hardship. The prime
minister was busy tackling the affairs concerning the
security of India and was rushing about quite frequently
to foreign countries. Some other senior ministers did
not appear to visualise the woes of the common man.
A section of the middle class fell below the poverty line
in the third quarter of 1998. Not only the BJP but
others also were fully responsible for this state of affairs
but the BJP was more adversely affected.
214 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl VAJPAYEE

Taking advantage of the situation, very shrewdly,

Sonia Gandhi, the Congress president, did not talk
vociferously but was silently busy trying to erode the
Blass base of the Bharatiya Janata Party. During the last
ten days of Septemher 1998, she was hopping around
the country. She also strode through the fields in flood,
affected areas in Bihar and other places.
Though Delhi was buzzing with the talk of Chief
Minister Sahih Singh Verma's resignation and
appointment of Sushma Swaraj in his place, the hot
news among the people was again Bihar's law and order
situation and also Vajpayee's visit to the United States
and France in Septernber,Octoher 1998.
The cahinet had Inet on 22 September and had
recon1Inended president's rule and that the Legislative
Assen1bly of Bihar be kept in 'suspended animation'.
(Article 356 of the Constitution allows dissolution of
the Assembly as well, but perhaps the Centre had
envisaged the appointment of some other chief minister
from amongst the Assetubly members.) But the
president returned the recommendation with the
suggestion that the cahinet reconsider the whole
situation. The note sent by him to the cabinet was a
fairly long one. The newspapers next day had not
carried some of the details of the governor's
recommendations to the president. A leading journal
reported Bihar Governor S.S. Bhandari's charges as
follows:

• No law and order in Bihar, where crime figures have

lost their relevance. Murder, massacre, kidnapping
for ransom, contract killing and violence against
THE BJP ERA 215

women have become the order of the day. Law and

order deteriorated in the last one year under Rabri
Devi's chief ministership when 5327 people were
killed, 2472 abducted and 342 kidnapped for
ransom. Over 10,000 businessmen deserted the
state out of fear. Also; an increase in the number
of political killings. Extremists running parallel
governments in nine districts.
• State police was prevented from acting;
Government's failure to arrest Shahabuddin, RJD
MP from Siwan, against whom arrest warrants have
been issued. Similarly, 24 ministers facing criminal
charges were still unfettered. Also, notorious
criminals were released under pressure from the
political establishment.
• Patronising anti~national activity. No follow~up
action despite regular intelligence reports from the
Army about the lSI (Pakistan's Inter~Services
Intelligence) making deep inroads in the state.
• Large~scale corruption and abuse of authority.
State turned into a land of scams worth over Rs.
2000 crore by Laloo Prasad Yadav and Rabri Devi.
According to the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor
General) report, Rs. 232 crore was spent during
1996~97 to serve the political and business interests
of Laloo. Violation of Central Government
directive concerning financial and development
matters. State on the verge of near bankruptcy and
financial anarchy. State assets: Rs. 16,391 crore~
liabilities: Rs. 20,773 crore.
• One thousand two hundred contempt petitions
pending in the Patna High Court against the State
216 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AJPAYEE

Government. This amounts to subversion of the

Constitution.
There was a complete silence among the people
belonging to the myriad castes in Bihar. Only some
persons felt happy; it appeared a lull before the storm.
On the international front, important events took
place. India's prime minister had left for New York to
attend the United Nations General Assembly session
on 22 September itself. The diplolnatic encounter
between him and Nawaz Sharif at the New York Palace
Hotel resulted in more candid bilateral advances than
many formal meetings during the last two or three years.
Vajpayee was a perfect host and entertained his
Pakistani guests with delicious Punjabi and Mughlai
dishes and even before the first course soups were being
served the two prime ministers had established a jovial
rapport. They talked of constructing highways linking
the two countries. A Pakistani officer remarked: 'Our
prime minister's fondness for fast cars is known
throughout the country. He and Begumsahiba can drive
it at 250 km an hour on the Islamahad~Lahore highway
without any problem.' The talk was light indeed, and
the atmosphere was friendly.
By the time the guests busied themselves with other
vegetarian and non~vegetarian dishes, they appeared
very much enchanted by Vajpayee. One of the
Pakistani ministers was in such a good mood that he
said: 'I belong to Lucknow and if I were to vote in India,
I would also be voting for you.' Vajpayee was also in a
perfectly witty mood. He was reported to have said
to Nawaz Sharif: 'Where is the question of quarrelling?
We are eating your sugar. It is quite sweet.'
THE BJP ERA 217

In spite of all such bonhomie, terrorist actIvIty

continued in Kashmir. There were reports that a Saudi
Arabian citizen dealing in arms was striving to push
hundreds of armed men into the Kashmir Valley in order
to disturb the peace. The proxy war had not come to
a stop; nor did there appear any sign of its coming to
an end in the near future.
The CPI(M) held their congress in Calcutta at the
end of October 1998. In the earlier congress of that
party, the members had taken a line that they would
remain equidistant from the Congress and the BJP. But
after the BJP emerged as the largest single party in the
1998 elections, the CPI (M) was caught in a quandary
Their senior leaJers started declaring that they would
support the Congress if the latter tried to form a
government at the Centre. But the Congress president,
Sonia Gandhi, did not express any joy over such
statements of the communist leaders. Perhaps the
Congress leaders did not want to displease their
financiers who were quite disdainful of the COlllmunists.
()n the other hand, she expressed some happiness over
Jayalalitha having stated that she had all options open.
Sonia Gandhi had also responded the same way.
Similarly, lTIany Congress leaders, particularly their
intellectual from West Bengal, Pranab Mukherjee,
stated that they were not particular about the support
of Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo Prasad Yadav. It
appeared that Sonia Gandhi did not want a leftist image
for herself. Whom was she trying to please by taking
such a posture? It would remain a moot question for
sometime to come.
218 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A)PAYEE

There was no doubt in anybody's mind that even if

elections to the Lok Sabha were to take place in 1999
and the Congress improved its position a bit but fell
short of a majority this party would have to accept the
support of certain vociferous leaders from UP and Bihar
and they would certainly exact a price for supporting
it. In that eventuality, the Congress might join hands
with anybody and everybody to keep the BJP out of
power in the coming days. This situation is replete with
many ifs and buts. Firstly, there mayor may not be a
mid~term election for the Lok Sabha. Secondly, it
would be unwise to imagine that the BJP would not fi~d
powerful allies in some of the states. Thirdly, it will be
too much to think that the people in the north would
turn against the BJP simply because of a temporary
price rise for which many cross .. sections of society and
political groups were responsible to a great extent.
One should not forget that the political stature of
Vajpayee towers head and shoulder above that of other
leaders. Firstly, because he is considered an absolutely
honest leader, with undoubted integrity all these years.
Secondly, because of the nuclear tests for which the
credit is mainly his; he made India not only self..
confident but showered on the country a dignity
unknown for ages. Thirdly, he exhibited a lot of
courage during his speeches in the USA. At one such
gathering of Indians there, he declared that India had
exploded nuclear devices not only for the security
reasons alone but also to make deaf ears hear the voice
of India. When the authors asked a well .. known Indian
communist leader whether any other prime minister had
THE BJP ERA 219

ever shown such guts on American soil he simply said,

'no'.
On Saturday, 10 October 1998 the top leadership
of BJP, viz., Atal Behari Vajpayee, L.K. Advani and
Kushabhau Thakre, had asked Delhi's chief minister,
Sahib Singh Verma, to resign. According to some
observers, this was primarily because of his inability to
do anything about the sale of adulterated mustard oil
resulting in 'dropsy' cases and some consequent deaths.
Also, another 'vital ingredient' (the humble onion)
dominated the scene. Onion is an indispensable
vegetable in almost all households; its prices had soared
to dizzy heights within a period of one week and it
continued to remain so throughout September and
October 1998. Supporters of Verma protested
profusely. But the chief minister bowed to the wishes
of the top leadership and resigned.
Sushma Swaraj, the Union information and
broadcasting minister, took over as his successor. She
was unanimously elected leader of Delhi BJP Legislature
Party.
On Monday, 12 October 1998, Sushma Swaraj, a
member of the Lok Sabha from South Delhi, took the
oath of office and secrecy for the post of chief minister
of Delhi. Some people doubted whether she would be
able to put an end to suspected hoarding of some
essential kitchen items by some unscrupulous traders.
She plunged into her job in right earnest and put in her
best efforts during the limited time at her disposal
before elections. The prestige of the prime minister was
still high, mainly because people knew that the prime
minister of the coalition government, due to some
220 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

troublesolne allies, could not do much to stem the rot,

particularly when much of the administrative powers
lay with the state governments.
Meanwhile, there were reports of a rift in the
AIADMK's limited alliance in Tamil Nadu (October
1998). It was reported in a section of the press that
Jayalalitha had demanded that V. Ramamurthy, a
meluber of the AIADMK alliance, should be deprived
of the Union petroleulu portfolio which he held. This
news item appeared prima facie untrue. In fact, it was
very quickly disowned.
Kashmir again hit the headlines as the infiltrators
were sneaking in clandestinely and disturbing the peace
of the valley. On 12 October a bloody clash occurred
between the terrorists from across the border and the
Indian security forces. The evening news hulletins of
All India Radio and Doordarshan reported that many
of our security men had been killed. The loss on the
other side was not exactly known. The common lnan,
either in India or in Pakistan, did not want a war hut
the tension continued to build up.
The morning newspapers of 16 October 1998
carried the news that sharp differences of opinion on
the conduct of military exercises by India did not augur
well for the three,day foreign,secretary level talks
between India and Pakistan scheduled to hegin on
16 Octoher.
Etnphasising Pakistan's committncnt to the process
of dialogue the Pakistan foreign secretary, Shatushad
Ahnled, said: 'We are approaching this process of
dialogue with sincerity of purpose. This is my mandate l
THE BJP ERA 221

given to me by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.... ' He

added: 'Mr. K. Raghunath [India's foreign secretary] in
his opening statement said he was happy to be in
Islamabad to begin the process of a "composite"
dialogue that the two countries had agreed on.'
On 15 October, India asserted that there was no
question of New Delhi acting under international
pressure in dealing with outstanding bilateral issues with
Pakistan and categorically ruled out any third,party
involvement in resolving them. Answering questions,
a spokesman for the Ministry for External Affairs stated
the international community had strongly expressed its
desire that India and Pakistan should resolve all
outstanding issues peacefully and bilaterally.
That very day Prime Minister Vajpayee told the
Economic Advisory Council that GOP growth in 1998
would reach 6.3 per cent as compared to 5.1 per cent
last year. Perhaps, apart from Chinese, no other country
would be achieving this rate of growth with relatively
Inodest inflation, low current account deficit and a
halanced economic growth, he added.
For the last three decades, the Indian leaders,
whoever was in power, had been hoping that the GOP
wou Id increase hy 8 per cent as cornpared to the
previous year. With the ever,increasing population in
the country, an economic growth of less than 9 per cent
can never deliver the goods or raise the standard of
living of the common man, particularly in the lower
strata of society working in fields and factories. Besides
the less,than,expected growth and the inflationary
trend hit the poor hard, though the cOlnplaints are more
222 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

in the middle classes. There are many types. of

difficulties due to mismanagement indeed, though the
existence of a government headed by Vajpayee has
certainly checked corruption in high places.
In a statement in the middle of October, the new
chief minister of Delhi, Sushma Swaraj, pointed out
that the public distribution system was about to
collapse because of the shortage of transport to carry
foodgrains to the distribution counters. Was this a
pretext to smash the public distribution system under
pressure from the traders' lobby? Did they not realise
that the breakdown of the PDS would possibly cause
civil disturbances unknown so far? Any time in the
near future it would be highly unwise to scrap the
system under any pretext, particularly when the Delhi
Government had exhibited an utter failure to take any
action against the hoarders who had created enough
havoc in the months of September and October 1998
and might do so again if they got the opportunity.
Suffice it to say that the government of the capital
territory has to set an example of honesty of purpose
and efficiency. The public at large had doubted the
credentials of the local administrators on both these
counts.
The thinking persons have been absolving the prime
minister because of a soft corner for him but, surely, this
could not go on for long. The Central Government has
to do its best and take every possible measure to bring
down the present level of inflation and reduce the cost
of living of the lower middle classes and people below
the poverty line. They do not heed the advice from
weLl,meaning friends.
THE BJP ERA 223

Anyway, the prime minister tried to paint a

somewhat rosy picture of the days to come at a meeting
of top~level dignitaries. Vajpayee conceded that much
was needed to be done and that the country faced a
host of problems in infrastructure, in exports, fiscal
areas and in reducing the prices. The Union finance
minister, Yashwant Sinha, the deputy chairman of the
Planning Commission and the governor of the Reserve
Bank of lnd ia, Dr. Bimal ] alan, were present as special
invitees to that meeting.
Outlining six main areas of concern, Vajpayee
cautioned that in the short term it would be necessary
to reactivate growth impulses in the economy, improve
confidence levels and impart buoyancy to investor
decision~making. He sought advice from the economists
present on ways to kick~start the economy without
generating further fiscal pressures that could rekindle
inflationary forces.
Next, he underlined the need to take immediate
measures to further strengthen the financial sector. He
stressed that it was necessary to improve the quality of
portfolios, reduce the problem of non~performing assets
and ensure that infrastructure received adequate
finance. He pointed out that these factors were linked
with efforts to avoid what is now described as the
'contagion effect' of the East Asian economies. Further,
he underscored the importance of reining in the fiscal
deficit which appeared unacceptably high; this process
required concerted action to reduce government
expenditure, enhance the efficacy of public expenditure
with a sensible expenditure management policy,
224 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

achieve greater revenue buoyancy and improve the tax,

GOP ratio.
On the restructuring of the public sector, he said it
should be undertaken with a credible disinvestment
programme. 'The losses of these enterprises are a fiscal
drain and we cannot afford this,' he affirmed.
The prime minister warned that unless the fiscal
deficit was brought under control, macro,management
would be creating inflationary pressures. Moreover, the
reople's expectations in the face of shrinking
availability of credit and cost for the commercial sector
wou ld remain unfulfilled.
Yet another concern highlighted by Vajpayee
pertained to monetary policy and price stability. He
stated that there was a financial gap in the medium
term and measures to bridge this gap were not
unconnected with increased flows of direct foreign
investment and a pick,up in the export momentum.
Vajpayee also emphasised the need for a broad
national consensus on sequencing and pace of reforn1
measures. 'Our response to these wou ld need to be
lndia,specific since global benchmarks could be
misleading,' he clarified. He also noted the importance
of resettirig goals and according the requisite priority
to social sector development in the country's planning
processes.
And, finally, he felt there were many other long'
term issues connected with human resource
development, demographic policy, a sensible labour
policy and the restructuring of the planning process
which could receive attention in subsequent meetings.
THE BJP ERA 225

The prime minister referred to the external economic

environment with a large part of Asia in serious
economic difficulties triggered off by a financial crisis
which turned into a crisis of balance of payments and
exchange rate with significant contraction of the GOP.
He predicated that no one with confidence could
assert that the worst was over as Japan, an important
engine of growth, was in serious difficulties, while, more
recently, Russia had heen engulfed by several crises.
Economic growth in industrialised countries, he pointed
out, also showed signs of slowing down as their capital
markets had been affected. Also an international
consensus on what should be done had eluded the
world, he lamented.
In this context he highlighted the positive situation
in India, referring to recent data from the Department
of Statistics which had undertaken an exercise under
the special data dissemination standards showing an
increase in the (JDP growth for 1998,99.
()n the domestic front, it was in the middle of
October 1998 that Sushma Swaraj was sworn in as the
chief lninister of Delhi. The former chief minister,
Sahib Singh Verma, called on the prime minister in the
afternoon of 20 October. He handed Vajpayee a letter
in which he formally accepted the offer to join the
Central cabinet, but requested him to defer his
induction till the Novelnber 1998 elections (for four
state Assemblies).
Significantly, after Vajpayee's talks with the alliance
partners had failed earlier (in ()ctober 1998), he had
deferred the proposed cabinet expansion till
226 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Parliament's winter session was over. All types of

rumours kept floating around in the capital on the
evening of 20 October and throughout 21 October.
One of the authors (DPS) was at the residence of
K.L. Sharma, MP, when Sahib Singh arrived there
straight from the prime minister's office. He was happy,
and a bit emotional as well. Some journalists had been
informed that day that Sahib Singh might be sworn as
a Central minister on 21 October. This was probably
to put off the inquisitive mediapersons. The events
were to further unfold themselves in the evening. A
newspaper labelled it as a 'drama true to a pre . . written
. ,
scnpt.
Even granting this fantastic surmise of the
newspaper, one has to admit that a postscript, rather a
revised script, was written later on - mentally of
course. There were a news item in another English daily
on 22 October 1998. It revealed that there was more
to Delhi Chief Minister Sahib Singh's reported refusal
to join the Union cabinet in October 1998. The refusal
of Sahib Singh was reportedly forced upon him. The
party, after a mysterious letter written by Parliamentary
Affairs Minister M.L. Khurana to the prime minister on
20 October, took this decision. If true, the letter might
have been a strong protest which may have caused some
unhappiness to the prime minister. On the other hand,
the news item could have been totally incorrect as well.
In view of sustained diplomatic efforts, the
international pressures on Vajpayee had, of course,
eased considerably. On 21 October, the US Congress
passed a legislation empowering President Bill Clinton
THE BJP ERA 227

to relax certain economic sanctions imposed against

India and Pakistan in the wake of the nuclear tests
conducted by the two countries without any debate in
either House over the issue. The Congress approval
came after the Senate voted the legislation by 65 to
29 on 21 October in favour of lifting sanctions.
Earlier, the US House of Representatives had
approved a legislation (on 19 October) by a heavy
margin of votes, empowering Clinton to relax economic
sanctions against the two countries.
The entire amount wrapped into a 500,million
dollar, catch,all government,spending package will
give the administration the power to waive most of the
sanctions up to 12 months. Military sales to India and
Pakistan would still be prohibited. There was not an
iota of doubt that the US Congress adopted these
measures in the interests of US businessmen.
At home, disturbing trends became evident. The
ever, increasing caste factor in the entire polity caused
concern to all right,thinking men. This factor goes
against the unity of the society and, surely, it may cause
cracks of various kinds in the national structure.
In the Indian Parliament, whips are issued by some
party leaders on caste considerations in most of the
cases, putting paid to the conscience of the Members
of Parliament. In actual effect, the democratic spirit
in the country gets downgraded. Mental anarchy has
already overtaken the polity, adversely affecting the
quality of the administration. A prime example is Bihar
where law and order are completely absent, and caste'
dominated politics is the order of the day.
228 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

The president sent back a recommendation of the

cabinet on 25 September for applying Article 356 of
the Constitution (which en1powered the Central
Government to impose president's rule in any state).
One of the authors of this book (Dr. C.P. Thakur) wrote
a well,reasoned article on the issue of imposing
president's rule in Bihar, which appeared in the leading
Hindi daily Hindustan.
On 21 October Defence Minister George Fernandes
and Home Minister L.K. Advani stated that another
recommendation may probably he sent to the president.
On arrival in Islamabad, in mid,(_;ctober the Indian
Foreign Secretary K. Raghunath said that prior
intilnation to Pakistan ahout the Inilitary exercises was
a confidence,huilding measure, while his Pakistani
counterpart, Shamshad Ahlned, stated that 'the tiining
was unfortunate'. Raghunath also denied the Pakistani
charge that the exercises had vitiated the atmosphere
for the talks. The two foreign secretaries took up the
issue of peace and security, including confidence,
build ing measures on the second day of the talks.
In reply to a question, Raghunath ruled out any
prospect of third,party involvement in the India,
Pakistan dialogue process. He predicated the only way
to discuss relations between the two countries was
through a 'direct bilateral dialogue' and that there was
no room for any third,party involvement as desired by
Pakistan.
In response to another question on Kashmir,
Raghunath clarified the parameters of the discussion
had been well laid out and they would proceed on that
THE BlP ERA 229

basis in a 'constructive, professional and realistic

manner'.
One of the officers, when asked whether discussions
would take place on specific confidence .. building
measures, replied that no public comment was possible
at that stage. He added: 'We are yet to enter into the
process of talks. Please allow us to start the dialogue
in a normal manner. Diplomacy has to be conducted
at the conference table, not through the media.'
With regard to the Indian military exercise,
Raghunath remarked it was important for both
countries not to sensationalise these events: 'Military
exercises are part of the activity of the armed forces
all over the world - India conducts them, so does
Pakistan .... In this particular case, these exercises will
be held some time towards the end of November [1998]
and they are going to be held in an area well beyond
the zone adjoining the borders of the two countries.
This is a routine and normal event ... it is a transparent
k inJ of action.' When asked to confirm whether
Pakistan, too, was conducting its own military exercises
and whether India had been informed, AhmeJ merely
replied: 'Raghu [Raghunath] has already offered his
explanation. We on our part do not question the
sovereign right of any state to conduct military
exercises within its own territory. But in this particular
case, symbolically, the timing was unfortunate.'
Earlier, in his opening remarks, AhIned declared
India and Pakistan had agreed to specific dates during
the first half of November 1998 for holding separate
meetings in New Delhi on the remaining items of the
230 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

23 June 1997 agenda agreed to in Islamabad. The

foreign secretary affirmed Pakistan was committed to
a 'purposeful and substantive' dialogue with India
which could enable the two countries to live in peace
with each other on the basis of a peaceful settlement
of all issues, including the 'core' issue of Kashmir. He
went on to add: 'As you all know, South Asia today is
nuclearised. This situation presents us with new
challenges .... The challenge not only to avert the risk
of a conflict, but also to prevent an arms race in the
nuclear and ballistic fields and also a challenge to
develop a regime of mutual restraint and stabilisation
in the nuclear and ballistic fields. In this drastically
changed environment, it is all the more important that
we join together for durable peace and durable peace
requires durable solutions and durable solutions require
bold decisions in accordance with our international and
bilateral commitments .... '
On 26 October, Prime Minister Vajpayee addressed
the Commanders' Conference in New Delhi. Referring
to Indo .. Pak talks, he clarified: 'While we are
approaching these talks in good faith and a
constructive spirit, we will not compromise on our
security interests.' He added: 'India has the ability to
meet the challenge of foreign .. aided and abetted
terrorism.' He emphasised that the Pokhran .. II nuclear
tests by India were of 'far .. reaching strategic
significance' and also a manifestation of scientific
excellence. He pointed out that India had been
subjected to a 'technology blockade'. He affirmed New
Delhi would not be a party to 'any arbitrary and
THE BJP ERA 231

discriminatory regime'. He asserted that 'Ipdia's

nuclear diplomacy revolved around its possible
subscription to the CTBT provided the global
technological blockade against it is lifted and its larger
strategic accommodation as a leading power within the
ex isting global hierarchy is respected'. The prime
minister said that technology deprivation had to be
defeated through redoubled efforts at indigenisation.
At the saIne foruln, Defence Minister George Fernandes
underscored the larger geopolitical significance of the
Pokhran tests: 'The nuclear tests had hrought India into
the centre of the international security debate and had
profoundly impacted on its security and national
morale.' Even as Prime Minister Vajpayee and Defence
Minister Fernandes were explaining to the commanders
the various political implications of Pokhran,lI,
(--::ongress President Sonia Gandhi launched a tirade
against the BJP,led coalition government. While
speaking at Bikaner in Rajasthan, she declared rather
ilnperiously: 'There is a great difference between the
Congress and the other parties. The party [Congress]
has a vision, will and experience to run governments.'
She added that the Congress 'has always held the
diversity of India above everything and it will not let
any hann caine to the secular character of the country.
I want to emphasise that the Congress is the only party
which can uphold the secular tradition of the country'.
Sonia Gandhi was quite aggressive in criticising the
Central Government as well as the BJP Governn1ent in
Rajasthan.
232 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

On 27 October, Sonia Gandhi was addressing the

National Delegates' Convention organised by the
Indian Youth Congress. She vehemently asserted that
the Congress was the only party 'which stood between
the B] P and its success in attempting to destroy the
social and political fabric of the country'. She, of
course, had no evidence to substantiate her charge. She
could not explain how the B]P was 'destroying the
social and political fabric'. In fact, the BJP was
considered a great unifying force vihrating with
nationalism and drawing its inspiration frool the
knowledgeable sages and seers of the past. The BJP has
a modern outlook as well. This party has paid the
greatest attention to India's nuclear development
programmes. As expected, the BJP circles denounced
Sonia Gandhi's allegations. They termeJ her approach
as unlndian. The polemics were bound to gather
momentum keeping in view the Assembly elections in
four states in November 1998.
The month of November 1998 opened with a
strange phenomenon, i.e., a rise in salt prices in some
cities in India. This rise was very ohviously the result
of planned and deliberate mischief by sorne people.
The state governments took immediate measures and
arrested some culprits and the salt price came down to
the ,!-ormal level. People wondered whether this
phenomenon was also an outcome of a conspiracy hy
those who have heen trying to discredit the Vajpayee
Government. This event had some political fallout too.
On 3 November, Mamata Banerjee, the Trinamul
Congress leader from West Bengal, resigned from the
THE BJP ERA 233

Coordination Committee set set up by the BJP and its

allies. Prime Minister Vajpayee refused to accept her
resignation. George Fernandes, leader of the Samata
Party and also the Union defence minister, was rushed
posthaste to Calcutta to persuade Matnata Banerjee to
change her decision but in vain. The news of Mc:ltnatCl
Banerjee's resignation frorn the Coordination
C:olllluittee tnade headlines in a large number of the
newspapers in the country on 4 November 1998.
Another important event was that on 3 November a
division hench of the Madras High C:ourt upheld the
constitutional validity of the appointment of three
special judges to try corruption cases against the former
chief ruinister of TaInil Nadu, J. Jayalalitha, lnost of her
l~rstwh iIe cahinet colleagues and some lAS officcr~. The
hench, however, suspended the operation of the
judgement for eight days to enable the petitioners t()
arpeal t<) the Supreme Court.
Another development of significance also took
place at Chennai on the same Jay. The AIADMK
dishanded the front headed by it in Tamil Nadu. Each
group of the front had to fend for itself. This cutting
off political links with the PMK, the MONK and the
TRC, according to sources close to the l\IADMK
general secretary, Jayalalitha, would result in another
cOlnhine when a realigno1ent would take place at the
time of the next general elections. For the present, the
allies of the AIADMK would have to 'watch out' for
themselves.
()n 4 November, the TOP (Telugu Desam Party of
Andhra Pradesh) demanded that a conference of chief
234 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

luinisters be held as soon as possible to review the

situation arising out of the steep rise in prices of
essential commodities. The Central Government asked
the states for proper steps to be taken by them as,
ultimately, the implementation of the agreed steps
would depend on the state governments.
On 8 November 1998, a news report emanating from
Washington indicated that US President Bill Clinton
decided to partially waive the sanctions on India and
Pakistan, hut certain US officials maintained that only
Islamabad would get Clinton administration's support
for loans from the World Bank and other international
lending institutions. The sanction waiver (under the
Brownback Amendment), however, would not apply to
high technology and 'dual~use' technology exports to
India, an issue of great importance to New Delhi.
Clinton, according to the plan that was yet to hc
offiCially unveiled, had decided to pennit the US
Export-hnpon Bank, the Overseas Private Investlnent
Corp. and the Trade Development Authority to
participate in deals in hoth India and Pakistan, as per
an US official. In addition, Clinton would authorise
the Defence Department to resume international
military education and training programmes in hoth
countries.
Clinton's decision resulted from six Inonths of secret
diplomacy conducted by US officials led by Deputy
Secretary of State Strobe Talbott with Indian and
Pakistani officials. Their efforts were aimed at putting
sufficient pressure on the Vajpayee and Sharif
Governments on the nuclear issue.
THE BJP ERA 235

The official announcement on the sanctions was

likely to he luade when the so~called 'entities list' that
nmnes the various Indian and Pakistani organisat~ons
which the US cannot do husiness with would be
announced.
According to a Washington Post report (based on
certain officials' statements): 'Left in place [after the
lifting of most sanctions by Clinton] are bans on
military equipment sales to both countries, restrictions
on the export of US~made dual,use items that could
have military applications, and US objections, which
aluount to a veto to developlnent project lending to
India by the World Bank and other international
lend ing institutions'.
Because of Pakistan's tattered economy, the US
adlninistration, on a one,time hasis, attelnpted to help
shape an accord between the Sharif regime and the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). The official,
however, warned that any such support would he
contingent on the adoption of a credible reform
programme by the Islamic regime in Pakistan.
India has descrihed the US move to penuit Pakistan
to horrow from the multilateral financial institutions
to fulfil an IMF agreement as 'selective and
discriminatory' .
An Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesperson
declar~d: 'India had nothing against economic
assistance to Pakistan and has consistently voted in the
World Bank and other [international] fora in favour of
such assistance. The remarks attributed to US officials,
however, reveal a selective and discrilninatory
236 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

approach which we find hard to understand and

reconcile with.' The spokesperson, however, welcomed
reports of the lifting of some economic restrictions
ilnposed by the US against India: 'Such unilateral and
coercive measures are unjustified and counter,
proJucti ve and should be lifted,' the spokesperson
added. However, he emphasised that all such Ineasures,
particularly those relating to lending by multilateral
financial institutions, should go. 'The multilateral
institutions, in particular, are economic and
development,oriented organisations [and] should not
be misused for political purposes to suit the whims and
preferences of particular countries,' the spokesperson
clarified.
Strohe Talbott, on 4 November, observed in Los
Angeles that the nuclear contest between the SOllth
Asian rivals threatened 'an apocalypse in the cradle of
several of the world's great religions and civilisations.
Even if they do not unleash that ultimate catastrophe,
India and Pakistan are straining at the starting blocks
of a ruinously expensive arms race'. Talbot, who was to
resume his negotiations with the Indian emissary
Jaswant Singh on 10 November in Rome, further
observed that while there had been some 'tentative but
welcome progress' in discussions with India and
Pakistan, 'a lot of tough work remains'. He added: 'I
do not know if we - or they - will succeed.' However,
the US administration officials were singing a slightly
different tune with one of them claiming: 'This
[Clinton's proposed use of the waiver] is an effort to
create a more positive environment for our ongoing
THE BJP ERA 237

non,proliferation discussions.' In a telephonic

interview frolTI Washington D.C:., the aforementionecl
official contended that both New Delhi and Islamabad
had taken steps to halt their nuclear programme and
that 'real progress' had been made to which we propose
responding by lifting some of the sanctions.
The official also cited the speeches made hy
Vajpayee and Sharif at the United Nations in
September 1998, in which hoth announced that they
woulJ place a moratorium on further nuclear tests and
would cCHnply with the CTBT by September 1999.
They also agreed to work with the Alnericans to tighten
their export controls on nuclear Inaterials. The two
countries had also begun a dialogue on nuclear issues
as well as Kashmir, he added.
The official pOlnted out that the condition of
Pakistan, whose econonlY was virtually bankrupt, was
a Inatter of grave concern to the White House which
wa:-, deternlined to pitch in and assist that country. The
official stated: 'No one wants Pakistan going helly,up.'
Consequently, the official clarified the president
deciJeJ to make use of the waiver authority in a lilnited
and targeted way and the US was not proposing a full
lifting of sanctions.
Meanwhile, the domestic scene turned somewhat
disquieting, especially on the price front. In a speech
delivered on 7 November 1998, Prime Minister
Vajpayee expressed confidence that the price rise of
essential corumodities was not an 'all~lnJia
phenomenon and will not becon1e a overreaching issue
in the forthcoming Assembly elections·. Unfortunately,
his asseSSlnent was a bit off the mark.
238 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

Vajpayee pointed out that while the price rise was

in sharp focus in Delhi, issues in Rajasthan and Madhya
Pradesh were quite different. He also noted that the
Congress had no policy alternative to offer and was
purely banking on a 'negative vote' to hoost its
perfonnance. This claim had some substance to it.
Speaking to a group of journalists on board his
aircraft during his journey to MUlnbai, the prime
Ininister asserted that friction in the ruling alliance
would not be a disadvantage. While the allies had their
'small delnands', there was no disagreement on hasic
policy lnatters. Looking relaxed as he spoke on a range
of issues confronting the government, the prime
Ininister dismissed suggestions that he had not heen
assertive enough in that he had avoided convening a
chief ministers' meeting on the price spiral. As Vijpayee
put it: 'Such meetings see the states defending their
respective roles. The government is acting at all levels
on this issue.'
With reference to the forthcoming Delhi electoral
battle, Vajpayee said there was no connection, as
alleged in some quarters by some people, hetween
Ch ief Minister Sushn1a Swaraj and a notorious
husinesslnan'politician who had been recently arrested.
He pointed out the police had conducted investigation~
and had categorically established that she had nothing
to do with that criminal.
The prime minister admitted the state Assembly
elections would have a political fallout: 'The polls will
tell us what the people are thinking. But we are in the
Centre and have a majority. The onus is on the
Congress to do something or the other.'
THE BJP ERA 239

Asked about his recent statement that the

authorities would get more Bofors papers* soon,
Vajpayee stated that the sleuths expected the final
batch to arrive by December. 'The papers are expected
to indicate in which bank account the money received
hy the final beneficiary has been lodged,' he confirmed.
According to the CBI (Central Bureau of
Investigation) reports, the Italian husiness magnate,
()ttavio Quattarochi was one of the recipients of the
Bofors 'largesse'.
Throwing light on the government's efforts to hring
prices of essential commodities under control, Vajpayee
clarified that as the news that India was likely to import
certain cOlnmodities got out, international exporter~
pushed up their prices. Also, there were crop failures
in East Asian countries such as I ndonesia, which the
(JOVernlnent of India had approached.
Vajpayee conceded the Agriculture Ministry had
heen a hit slow to react to the developing crisis even
though the Union environment and forests minister,
Suresh Prahhu, had written a letter warning of the
shortfall in onion output in Nashik (Maharashtra).
The prime minister clarified there were liluits to the
government's scope of action. 'How l1lany raIds can you
conduct? The governnlen t has to act with in the
confines of the law to crack down on hoarders and black

* Refers to the documents pertaining to Bofors howitzer

contract of 1987 (during Rajiv Gandhi's tenure as PM),
which snowballed into a major scandal and was responsible
for the Congress defeat in the 1989 general elections.
240 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

marketeers who suddenly sense that they can make

profits.'
With reference to the nexus between politician and
underworld dons, the prime minister admitted there had
been a drop in the morale of the police forces: 'In
Maharashtra, this seems to be the case as courts have
come down heavily on action that the police took
against criminals.'
On 7 Novelnber 1998. the prilne nlinister visited
Mumbai. Putting aside his prepared address at the
Jamnalal Bajaj awards function, V3jpayee subjected hi!."!
spell in office to the scrutiny of an unrelenting
Inicroscope. In the process, he took his audience on a
brief journey laced with wit and peppered with
introspection: 'In the past six to seven months, I have
been confronted by the linlits of state and
administration. Having seen the facets of
administration, I have only become more worried.' The
veteran leader reflected: 'Kadam kadam /)e /)ratirodh hai
(there is opposition at every step).' With characteristic
self,depreciation, he candidly admitted that the past
was more attractive: 'Being in opposition was better.
There was need to only talk, no need to act. Now there
is responsibility and with it the compulsion to do
something' .
Noting the contributions of the Gandhians heing
felicitated that evening, he poignantly observed: 'En
logon ka smmaan karke aisa leg raha hai ki hum a/)ne aap
ki /)eeth thap,thaJ)a rahe hai' (by honouring these people
it appears as if the rest of us are patting ourselves on
the back for the deeds of an honest few).
THE BJP ERA 241

With the incessant deal .. making of coalition politics

seemingly at the back of his mind, the prime minister
pointed out that treading the straight and narrow path
was out. 'I t is the counterfeit coins that are gaining
currencYi genuine ones are swiftly devalued,' he
quipped.
The law, regretted the prime minister, not only did
not always help those in the right, but also it acted as
a brake in heading towards solutions. He pointed out
that this was a delicate matter, but excessive rules and'
the laws complicated and obstructed the process of
ohtaining justice. He wanted legal procedures to be
sitnplified and litigation made inexpensive.
AJnlittin'g that the state could barely meet the
Ininimum requirements of society, the prime nlinister
said that vikas (developlnent) was possible only when
it encompassed factors such as economics, ethics,
accountability and transparency.
In an introspective mood, he reflected: 'I fear for
the future. The past 50 years have not heen harren, but
sornehow satisfaction, peace elude us. There is a
silence and a VaCUUITI, even though those who predicted
withering of the state have met their just deserts.' At
another function in the city, Vajpayee had adlnitted
that the onion havoc could well demand a political
price. Here he chose to underline the frailties of the
government further: 'The Centre cannot even control
the fate of its funds. Kuch log panchayat ke paise kv
rashtra dhan man kar uska bhog kar late hain (some
panchayats consume public fund lavishly).'
242 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Telescoping his vision into the past, he pointed out

that as a first,time MP, he had spoken against
government enterprise in hotels. He had argued that
it was not hotels but hospitals that the government
should be building. 'Nehruji ko baat pasand nahin ayee.'
He said that the government will use the profits from
its hotels to build hospitals, Vajpayee recalled.
Again, emphasising the limits of governance, the
prime minister argued that today the state,run hotels
were in the red and there were still not enough
hospitals. As if coming out of a reverie, Vajpayee cast
a quick glance around the hall before ending his
speech: 'Recognise the thirst for development, for
change among the people.'
The Bihar 'controversy' continued to dog the
Central Government. A press report disclosed that
the government has not given up its intent to bring
Bihar under Central rule, but now it would move with
caution and seek "broader political consensus' to get
over the hurdle of a lack of a majority in the Rajya
Sabha which would be required to ratify the
proclamation of Article 356. Highly placed sources
in the government contended that a significant
reason why the previous attempt to convince President
K.R. Narayanan of the case for dismissing the Bihar
Government had failed was the rampant speculation
that an 'alternate' state government would be propped
up. Even though the Union cabinet had stopped short
of recommending the dissolution of the Bihar Assembly
in keeping with certain Supreme Court observations in
the S.R. Bommai case, the move turned out to be
THE BJP ERA 243

counterproductive. 'The government had also kept

under consideration the president's own views in the
matter,' the preceding sources affirmed. However, the
move to propose placing the Assembly only under
suspended animation had been adopted on expert legal
advice available with the government. The subsequent
reports that there would be attempts to break the
ruling Rashtriya Janata Oal (RJO) and replace the Rabri
Oevi regime appear to have weighed on the president's
mind.
Reliable sources confirmed that there was no strain
in relations between the Central Government and
Rashtrapati Bhawan even though there had been an
impression that the president was 'inclined' to see the
merits in invoking Article 356 in the case of Bihar. 'It
was felt that the president did see SOlne merit in points
raised by the government,' these sources clarified.
It was also felt that some allies in the ruling
coalition were uncomfortable with the Central
Government's action as soine of them had suffered
through motivated use of Article 356. 'The regional
parties have been at the receiving end on several
occasions; they will also have to be convinced by the
government in future,' the foregoing sources stated.
While sending back for reconsideration the Union
cabinet's recommendation, the president had pointed
out that the concerned state government had not been
issued 'warnings' about the conditions which were
amounting to a breakdown of the constitutional
machinery. For its part, the Centre assured the
president that this path would he adopted in future
244 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

whenever the Bihar case was considered relevant for

action.
The government had gone along with the view of
the president, but certain sources maintained that it
would also keep in mind some other steps as well. If
the government felt that necessary legal and
constitutional provisions had been met, the Union
cabinet would be well within its rights to use its
prerogatives in the new situation.
Elsewhere in the country, events were moving
swiftly. There were some fireworks from Chennai, the
capital of Tamil Nadu. The state government denied
the AIADMK leader J. Jayalalitha's charge that Chief
Minister M. Karunanidhi had entered into a secret
understanding with Prime Minister Vajpayee and signed
the accord on the Kavert dispute to save his DMK
ministry. (The Kaveri river has heen a 'hone of
contention' mainly between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka
for several decades, despite various efforts to distribute
the water equitably between the two southern states.
It was at Prime Minister Vajpayee's initiative, based
upon the Supreme Court's directive, that an accord was
signed.) In a resolute statement, Public Works Minister
Murugan asserted that Karunanidhi would never give
up the rights of the state to stay in power.
Murugan also claimed that Jayalalitha's statement
was aimed at diverting the attention of people from the
Madras High Court verdict upholding a government
notification constituting special courts to go into cases
of corruption during the AIADMK regime headed by
her some years ago.
THE BJP ERA 245

The minister dwelt· upon how the DMK ministry

headed by Karunanidhi was dismissed twice by the
Centre: once in 1976 because it stuck to its stand in
opposing the Emergency clamped by the then Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi and the second time, in 1990,
'for the simple reason that he spoke in favour of Sri
Lankan Tamils'. Had Karunanidhi 'surrendered to the
wishes of some persons', he could have saved his
ministry then, Murugan declared.
Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu unit of the BJP took
exception to Jayalalitha's charge that the Centre had
entered into a secret agreement with the DMK not to
dismiss the state government in return for Karunanidhi
signing the Kaveri accord in August 1998.
In a statement, BJP state vice,president,
V. Maitreyan, emphasised Prime Minister Vajpayee was
committed to protecting the interests of Tamil Nadu
in the Kaveri dispute and the signing of the accord had
nothing to do with the DMK Government's
performance. He clarified the BJP's stand on dismissing
state governments was well,established in that it would
not Inisuse Article 356 of the Constitution, but at the
same time, it would not hesitate to act against the DMK
regime, or any other state government, if it failed to
discharge its constitutional duties. He went to add:
'Merely because the DMK Government has accepted
the Cauvery [Kaveri] accord arrived at due to the prime
Ininister's efforts, the Centre will not remain silent
towards any misdeeds of the DMK Government.'
One day after Jayalalitha made her allegations, the
Centre hit back at her, denying any 'secret deal'
246 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

between the prime minister and the Tamil Nadu chief

minister on the Kaveri issue. The Centre dismissed as
'baseless' her criticism that the Cauvery River Water
Authority .lacked technical expertise to give effect to
the tribunal's interim order.
In November, Vajpayee visited Bihar for the first
time as PM. On 8 November, he was speaking at
Bodhgaya in Bihar. He spoke upon a variety of issues.
Regarding the sanctions, imposed by certain countries
after Pokhran . . II, he charged the United States with
'discriminating against India' and severely criticised
Washington for 'giving more privileges' to Pakistan
while announcing the partial easing of sanctions. 'This
is not good in the interest of the entire South Asian
Region,' he declared. 'Their actions,' Vajpayee pointed
out 'give the impression that India is an untouchab1e
but they must realise that the forces trying to isolate
us will ultimately be isolated' ..
Addressing a huge rally at the Kalchakra grounds
to mark the end of the Buddha mahotsav, he justified
the Pokhran tests stressing that they were conducted
keeping in mind the 'security of the country'. He
claimed that the partial withdrawal of sanctions against
India had vindicated this stand. In another refeIence
to the sanctions, he said: 'Whatever steps they [the
countries which had imposed sanctions] may initiate
against us, we are not going to succumb to their
pressure tactics. Washington knows it well that our
economy is quite strong.' He contended that the easing
of the sanctions had vindicated this stand. He also
stated that the sanctions had 'virtually shattered the
THE BJP ERA 247

economic conditions of Pakistan' and India had to be

'cautious and not allow its economy to face the same
fate'.
He repeared his stand on disarmament, saying that
countries which were sitting on piles of nuclear weapons
should stop lecturing India and instead create pressure
for disbanding these weapons. On his first visit to Bihar
as Prime Minister, Vajpayee was true to form. He
struck a philosophical tone in his speech: '1 was never
interested in becoming the prime minister. In fact, I had
told the president my party too did not get the absolute
majority. However, people made me the prime minister
and I am trying to live up to their expectations'.
The state government came in for attack when
Vajpayee called Bihar a 'sick state' where a 'mafia raj'
existed and cautioned the Rabri Devi Ciovernment not
to 'indulge in wasteful expenditure of Central money'.
He indicated that he was keeping a 'close, personal
watch on Bihar' and referring to what he called an
increase in 'criminal activities and politicians
patronising criminals', Vajpayee called upon the state
government to be 'responsible and keep its promises'.
Taking a dig at Bihar Chief Minister Rahri Devi who
was also present, Vajpayee quipped: 'She should not
mind but it is the responsihility of the state government
to provide roads to the people. Here there are only
potholes in the nanle of roads and it is difficult to
identify which is a road.'
On the issue of price hike, Vajpayee warned
hoarders and claimed that the government was taking
'every step to meet the people's expectations'. He said
248 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AjPAYEE

the situation had been aggravated by floods and 'other

natural calamities', beyond the government's control.
While Vajpayee was in Bihar one of the most bitter
criticisms of India's foreign policy came from Jyoti Basu,
the chief minister of neighbouring West Bengal
(on 8 November 1998). He charged the Vajpayee
Government with destroying the work done by the
previous government in the field of foreign policy and
described the 'proposed' signing of the CTBT a~
•a 1armIng.
.,
Repeatedly, the prime minister has heen
comphasising that India was not going to sign the
CTBT in its present form, unless the discriminatory
clauses were removed. Assurances did not come openly
regarding the flow of technology to our country.
For the forthcoming Assembly elections, the ground
was being prepared and foreign policy was also likely
to he dragged into the dispute along with the rise in
prices. Whatever he the reason, Jyoti Basu contended
that the BJP,led coalition was governing the country
with a slender majority and had no sanction to alter
India's foreign policy direction for the worse. [The
CPI(M) leader put forth his views in a write,up entitled
'the Peril of the Bomb' published in Atomic India, a
special issue of a quarterly journal.
Jyoti Basu called the bomb the 'BJP bomb' and not
India's bomb. That mindset itself showed up the man
in his true colours. Does it need cumment! Stating that
the nationally accepted position was not to sign the
CTBT, Basu observed it was 'alarming' that the BJP,
led government was still talking about signing it, as if
THE BJP ERA 249

a government formed with his support in future will not

sign it.
In a scathing attack on. the B]P, Basu thundered that
in the past 50 years, India has never been so crisis-
ridden and alleged that the Pokhran-II blasts
represented the BJP's desire to make the country go
nuclear in total disregard of popular opinion and
realities at home and abroad. Accusing the BJP-Ied
government of conducting the nuclear tests only to gain
'short-term political advantage', he held the view that
the BJP would he distorting history if it claimed credit
for India's nuclear capabilities. Both India and Pakistan,
Basu stated, stood 'scorned' for making the danger of a
nuclear war in South Asia very real. The jingoism
fuelled hy the pursuit of Hindutva and Islam, the
veteran Marxist leader said, had frustrated the attempts
of various democratic and progressive forces on either
side of the border to reduce tension and normalise
relations between the two neighbours.
In Basu's opinion, the nuclear tests also represented
the Vajpayee Government's 'desperate attempts to
divert popular attention from its luany inadequacies
and failure to tackle mounting problems on the
domestic front,' and the BJP's attempts to create a
nuclear India had adversly affected its relationship with
China.
The veteran leader felt that industrially advanced
countries would use the situation to play India, China
and Pakistan against one another and try to derive
business advantage from the Indian tnarket.
250 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

One may well ask the CPI (M) leader: Did not
China try to strengthen Pakistan against India, Jyoti
Basu's own country? Referring to sanctions imposed on
India in the wake of the Pokhran tests, Basu said that,
like many states, West Bengal too had experienced a
temporary halt in the inflow of foreign funds but
expressed confidence in managing the situation. The
chief minister, however, maintained the holier~than~
thou attitude of Western countries - particularly the
US - by way of sanctions was not only surprising but
also condemnable because their stockpiling of nuclear
arms and missiles was mainly responsible for the global
arms race.
Let us now, move on to the 'onion havoc'. The food
and chemicals minister, Surjit Singh Barnala, was
interviewed by a local journalist. He attributed the
then shortage of onions to the meagre production as
compared to previous years. He, however, did not deny
some hoarding by some unscrupulous traders. Barnala
pro~ided a proper analysis of events which led to the
final outcome:

It is not true that prices of all essential commodities

have risen all over the country. The prices of rice,
wheat and sugar, which are disbursed through the
public distribution system (PDS), have remained
stable. Only the prices of perishable commodities
like vegetables have risen, mostly due to had
weather conditions. The onion crop was badly
damaged due to rain just before the harvest;
similarly, the damage to tomatoes and potatoes. It
THE BJP ERA 251

resulted in a downfall of production and, therefore,

rise in their prices.
Of course, hoarders and middlemen too contributed
to inflation, especially when a particular commodity
becomes scarce. But their role in raising the prices
of vegetables like tomatoes and onions, which do
not have a long shelf life, is limited. We have not
received any specific report of hoarding of
vegetahles. Necessary action has been taken against
hoarders wherever detected.
Only a farmer understands the real cause of the rise
in prices. City people cannot understand the agony
of a farmer whose crop has been damaged. Just
imagine the plight of farmers in Punjab whose entire
onion crop has been damaged. The degree of
damage to the onion crop is different in different
areas in the country, depending on the extent of
rainfall there. Similarly, the pulse crop too has
suffered due to inclement weather. Urban people
can only talk abollt high prices without giving a
thought to problems of the farmers.
It is just a case of demand and supply. Rates will
come down as supply improves. And supply has
already started improving in Delhi. Onion rates in
Delhi's Azadpur Mandi have come down from
Rs. 35-40 a kilo to Rs. 25-28. The late kharif crop
of onion has started arriving from Maharashtra and
Gujarat. Besides ituported onion too is improving
the supply.
I do not remember the dates but I can assure you
that the delay was not due to us. The file must have
252 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

been cleared the same day it reached my office. The

rumour~mongering is being done by NAFED. The
Congress wants to take advantage of such rumours
in the forthcoming (November) elections. Just see
the rumours on salt which resulted in panic buying
in some parts of the country. But do you know why
nobody is importing onions even when they have
been kept in the open general licence (OGL) for
imports? Only because there are not enough onions
available even in international markets.
The government can only ensure a better supply of
essential commodities. And that we are doing by
ensuring the tax~free ilnport of pulses, onions and
edible oiL ...
We cannot do that because we have to protect
farmers' interests as well. Last year there was such
a glut of potatoes due to overproduction that
farmers had to dump the vegetable which could not
be kept in cold storage. This made them cut down
on the potato crop this time, which resulted in the
scarcity of the vegetable this year. But if we allow
free imports, rich countries would dump the ir
produce in India at such low prices that there will
be a glut and farmers would not get a good price for
their produce. Similarly, free export too can result
in artificial scarcity of essential commodities in the
country.
Let me assure you that there is no shortage of ei ther
rice or sugar in the country and there is no
impending crisis. This despite the fact that lot of the
paddy crop has been damaged due to recent rains
THE BJP ERA 253

during the harvest season. Only three days' faIn

damaged some 20 lakh tonnes of paddy in Punjab
alone. Moisture content has increased in the paddy,
the colour of the rice grain has changed to pale
yellow, the grain has shrunk in size and sllch rice
gets broken easily during processing in rice mills.
The Food Corporation of India (FC:I) has relaxed
its rice procurement specifications from the usual
3 per cent damage to 8 per cent this year to enSllre
that farmers do not suffer a loss especially since only
a few will be ahle to export their produce.
After the relaxation of procuretnent specifications,
the Fe} will he ahle to fulfil its requirement while
iH the SrlIne rin1c providing f(~r weather,hit paJdy
farmers. (jf course there is not enough covered
storage area for the FC:l to keep i t~ stlJcks, which is
why it uses tarpaulin to cover its procured stocks.
Then the FCI keeps disbursing its stock through the
PDS. But there is certainly need to enhance its
storage capacity from the present level of 57 lakh
tonnes.
I aln sure the sugar Inills will crush the quota of
sugarcane contracted by them. In any case, only 40
per cent of the total cane proJuced in the country
goes to n1ills, with the relnaining heing despatched
to the khanJsari (cottage industry producing low,
quality sugar and jaggery). Sometimes khandsari
owners pay a hetter price to farmers than even mill
owners. We have buffer stocks of sugar to tide over
the crisis if there is one.
254 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

At this stage, let us move over from very serious

matters to strike a lighter note. Around mid,
November, there was a very gripping satirical article by
L.M. Singhvi, a member of the Rajya Sabha and
formerly India's high commissioner to the UK. He
wrote:

We begin by making a voluntary disclosure. We are

the self,appointed champions of secularism in India.
We are the defenders of the faith. The first article
of our faith is to create and maintain vote banks in
the name of secularism. We make no bones about
it that our secularism is meant to divide the people
and to promote differences of caste, creed and
religion. That is the way of democratic politics, of
course, more politics than delTIocracy.
We hold it to be a self,evident truth that BJP and
secularism are incompatible. We, therefore, oppose
whatever BJ P does or wants to do, right or wrong.
We took potshots at each of the four hobby horses
fielded by BJP so far, namely, national consensus,
nuclear explosion in Pokhran, debate on Article
356 and finally Sanskrit and Saraswati Vandana.
Prime Minister Vajpayee's two hobby,horses,
national consensus and nuclear explosion, are doing
the rounds but we claim as political bookies that
they are not likely to hit the jackpot. Without
hatting an eyelid, we will advise the voters not to
put a het on them.
Not to be outdone, Home Minister L.K. Advani
brought his own hobby, horse of debate on Article
THE BJP ERA 255

356. He had assured every chief minister that it was

only a horse and not a tiger but we aroused the fears
and suspicions of the chief ministers. They were·
afraid that the horse could turn out to be a tiger and
one or the other of them might end up in its belly.
After all, jockeying for power is not the same as
riding a tiger masquerading as a horse.
Vying with the prime minister and the home
minister, the Minister for Human Resource
Development (HRD) came up holding the reins of
a handsolue white horse, pedantically called human
resource. A horse is a horse is a horse. How can
hUluan resource he a horse or vice versa? The HRD
luinister'said he silnply planned to introduce the
teaching of Sanskrit in Indian schools. Not so
innocuous as it may sound. Being worshippers of
power, we know that the horse is a metaphor and
measure for power.
I t is an embarrassment for us to be reminded that
PanJit Jawaharlal Nehru had once acknowledged
the greatness of Sanskrit as a language and wished
he had studied it. It is equally elubarrassing for llS
to be reminded that Jawaharlal Nehru was popularly
called 'Panditji', a usage which ought to be
proscribed in secular India. That prefix sends the
wrong signals.
We have been working hard for the last fifty years
to exercise the ancient ghosts of the so,called
heritage of India. We nearly succeeded in our
mission by putting Indian languages on the back,
burner and by pushing Sanskrit into oblivion. The
256 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

three . . language formula was our momentous

masterstroke. Killing at least two birds of culture
and Sanskrit with one stone. We had decreed that
the teaching of Sanskrit as an elective subject shall
he discontinued. Happily, in the wake of that
fonnula, schools began dismissing Sanskrit teachers
and putting parents on notice that the teaching of
Sanskrit would no longer dilute lTIodern curriculum
of modern India. But then, the Supreme Court
stepped in with a stay order as it always does in
matters in which it has no husiness to interfere. For
a moment we were down but not out.

Continuing in the same satirical vetn, the former

high commissioner, wo is considered as one of India's
constitutional experts, wrote:

We regrouped our forces and went to the Supreme

Court to fight our battle against Sanskrit and for
secularism. A battle against Sanskrit and goddess
Saraswati {goddess of learning} is after all a battle
for secularism. The unkindest cut of all came finally
frqm the Supreme Court from which we had
expected an unqualified approval of Lord
Macaulay's policy. But the Supreme Court in its
wisdom handed down a thumping judgement in
favour of Sanskrit and its teaching in schools. To
add insult to injury, another bench of the Supreme
Court defined Hindutva not as a religion but as a
way of life.
THE BJP ERA 257

We reject Hindu ism, goddess Saraswati and

Sanskrit, because we have a lurking suspicion that
BJP acquired some intellectual property rights over
them while we were cheering Americans who were
helping us to get rid of 'neem' and 'turmeric'. We
would now encourage the Americans to patent
Sanskrit, goddess Saraswati and Hindutva also.
India would then be safe for secularism. That is not
much of a price to pay for our secular credentials.

A masterpiece of an article, no doubt. Some US and

Western intellectuals must have disliked this article.
By the same logic, some of the US politicians and also
Pakistan and China might be pleased with some of the
staternents of certain Indian leaders opposed to Atal
Behari Vajpayee because of his burning of nationalism
and cooperative internationalisrn which has heen
appreciated by a large number of even such Indian
intellectuals who proudly upheld the extra-secularism
in the bygone days. Moreover, the issues have changed.
HinJutva, along with a rapid progress on the economic
front, has become a torch-light. Any attempt to
extinguish this light stands doomed despite temporary
variation in electoral fortunes.
Let us get back to rnore serious matters. On
10 November 1998, Trinamul Congress (TC) leader
Mamata Banerjee gave a call to all leaders who had
either been expelled from the Congress or left the party
to join hands to fight for issues troubling the common
man. 'We should adopt a common approach to ensure
that issues, mainly rising prices, hurting the common
258 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

people should be tackled,' she observed while speaking

at a gathering at the maiden convention of a political
group. 'The Congress is zero and the TC in West Bengal
and LCP in UP are the real Congress,' added the
firebrand leader.
Mamata, who could not speak in chaste Hindi, tried
her best to communicate her message clearly. 'Forgive
me for not speaking in Hindi but I will make it a point
that you understand me,' she affirmed. And as she had
touched upon basic issues, she was greeted with
applause. 'There will be no let' up on issues concerning
the man on the street. If the government does a wrong
thing, it is our cOlnmitment that we would build up
pressure, but this does not mean that we have any
intention to topple the government,' she clarified. She
emphasised that this was the reason why she had
suggested that there should be regular meetings of the
prime minister with chief ministers.
By and large, people admire Mamata Banerjee
because they helieved that she had enough courage to
fight for the cause she thought to be right. Perhaps the
best pressure she could have generated was to meet the
senior partners in coalition which is always supposed
to be like a family. If there is a quarrel in the family,
they should always talk first among themselves, this is
an age,old saying. When one member of the family
steps outside and shouts against the other members,
neither is there a constructive pressure nor can it be
taken a sign of perfect goodwill. In such cases, the step
is seen as a kind of threat and it is always better to
avoid such a course of action. Is it not a fact that the
THE BJP ERA 259

rising cost of living is pinching the common people,

who voted for the B) P, and even the party cadres.
When have the prices really gone down since
independence? There was some price stability when
Morarji Desai was the prime minister (1977,79). The
Congress regimes generated, by acts of omission and
commission, the rise in prices of essential commodities
during the long period of their rule at the Centre.
During a part of the period when H.D. Deve Gowda
was the prime minister (1996,97) wheat flour sold at a
double digits price per kilo, and wheat is the most
essential kitchen item in North India. But did anyone
of the leaders now raising the issue speak about it at
the time? The steep rise in prices of vegetables was
n1ainly due to unfavourahle weather throughout India.
Unusually heavy rain destroyed potatoes and onion
crops to a great extent. That some traders tried to take
undue advantage of the shortage and that there was
some delay in taking action against them are being
admitted by those in power.
Meanwhile, to essentially project the rationale
behind Pokhran,II, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee
presided over the newly constituted Consultative
Committee of Parliament for External Affairs. The
luemhers learned some new facts which made headlines
in some of the national dailies. One of the main aspects
which was brought to surface by the prime minister was
that India could have carried out a sixth (in addition
to the five already carried out) nuclear explosion on
13 May 1998, but it did not do so as further validation
of scientific data through another test was not
260 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

necessary. The sixth test, he explained, was not carried

out as the scientists had confirmed that enough
scientific data had been collected through the early
five tests to create the minimum nuclear deterrence.
India thereafter declared its unilateral moratorium on
further nuclear tests, announced the PM.
The prime minister took note of a suggestion that,
if necessary, the India .. Pakistan talks could be brought
under the ambit of political leadership if these talks
were not found to be making adequate progress under
the ministry officials. He, however, drove home the
point that, howsoever little, the talks had been making
some progress; though this aspect was not being
projected in some quarters. He added that the
problems between India and Pakistan were complex and
required patient handling, with perseverance and
determination.
Dismissing a member's suggestion, he asserted that
there was no question of serving an ultimatum on
Pakistan and that the 1972 Simla Agreement {signed
by Indira Gandhi and Zulfiqar Ali Bhtto} required that
the two countries resolve their problems through
peaceful negotiations.
While discussing the ongoing India .. US dialogue,
the prime minister assured the members that Parliament
would be taken into confidence and a broad consensus
arrived at before any major decisions were taken. The
reference was to some members expressing their
concern that India could be yielding to pressure due
to the secrecy being maintained over the talks.
THE BJP ERA 261

One member suggested that since the former prime

minister, l.K. Oujral, had created a near' consensus view
regarding the comprehensive test ban treaty the present
government should similarly generate a consensus for
signing it.
When some members expressed their concern over
the law and order situation in Jammu and Kashmir with
at least one wondering about the utility of talking to
Pakistan about the issue, Prime Minister Vajpayee
reassured them that his government would abide by the
parliamentary resolution declaring the state as an
integral part of India. However, he reminded the
members that the Simla Agreement enjoined upon the
two countries to find the final solution to the issue
through peaceful negotiations. The prime minister
reiterated that there was no change in his government's
policy on J &K. (He was responding to remarks by a
memher that there was contradiction in Vajpayee
Government's stand on J&K.)
Vajpayee re,emphasised that the BJP,led
government firmly stood by Parliament's resolution
declaring that J & K was, is and will remain an integral
part of India. At the same time, he pointed out that
India was abiding by the Simla Agreement under which
both neighbours have to talk to each other to resolve
outstanding issues. He categorically expressed the view
that 'there is no contradiction in the government stand
on the issue'.
Vajpayee disagreed with the observation by some
members that the ongoing Indo,pak talks were an
exercise in futility as there had been no progress on any
262 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I VAjPAYEE

issue. 'There have been convergence of views on several

areas,' Vajpayee said and emphasised that 'the important
thing is that we are continuing talks to find solutions'.
He added: 'There is slow and steady progress.' He also
observed that no one expected any dramatic results in
this round of parleys.
Some members also questioned the decision to go
ahead with the nu.clear tests, as they felt that the
government's focus should be on other pressing issues,
particularly the hardships faced by the common man.
Another member contended that a great deal of money
was he·ing spent on the armed forces which were
manning the Siachen Glacier, loca.ted very high in the
Himalayas and the world's highest 'hattleground'
(between India and Pakistan).
Some communist leaders have remarked (rather
pungently) that the Vajpayee Government had not
taken forword India's foreign policy but had actually
reversed it. Once or twice Congress President Sonia
Gandhi also spoke the same language. She did not
elaborate much, but merely echoed the utterances by
the leftists. This was an opposition purely for the sake
of opposition, totally devoid of merit.
Many rounds of laborious talks on the nuclear
question spread over months between the prime
minister of India's special envoy, Jaswant Singh, and the
US deputy secretary of state, Strobe Talbott, have not
succeeded much in resolving the differences. They
have perhaps reached an impasse. The Americans have
obviously not appreciated India's security concerns,
THE BJP ERA 263

and have been sticking to their original stand,

questioning India going nuclear.
One particular article was very acrimonious in tone:

Rather than rail against the US for pursuing its own

goals in South Asia, which have heen stated with
monotonous consistency, it would be more
educative to reflect on why India needs to hold
talks with it [US] at all in the wake of Pokhran#II.
Its sanctions provide only part of the answer. China
did not feel itself constrained to talk to either the
US or the erstwhile USSR when it held its first test
in 1964.
The talks on which India has embarked are no mere
exercise? for prornoting international
understanding. They became necessary in orJer to
help India get out of the corner into which its
feckless government had painted the country by
follies and worse. Mao's taunt to Khruschev,
apropos his recklessness in placing the missiles in
Cuba in 1962 aptly describes the Vajpayee
Government's predicament.

On the other hand, Dr. R Chidambararn, chairman

of the Atomic Energy Comnl iss ion, Inade an
acclamatory statement explaining the necessity of the
nuclear tests and how they raised India's prestige and
provided self,confidence to the nation. This statement
was published in the second week of November in many
newspapers.
264 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

The relevant question is: Should the Indian public

pay attention to articles which go against the patriotic
sentiments of a large number of men and women in this
country or should they respect the views expressed by
our leading scientists, namely, Dr. Chidambaram and
Dr.. APJ Abdul Kalam whose efforts, along with the
endeavours of many other scientists and technicians,
have brought glory to the motherland? It is for the
readers themselves to judge. Some of the Indian leaders
opposed to the BJP and their allies have criticised the
nuclear tests of 11 and 13 May 1998. A few of them
have merely opposed the tests for the sake of
opposition only. J.N. Dixit, the former foreign secretary
of India, has pointed out that in no other country have
opposition leaders criticised their governments for
having conducted nuclear tests from time to time. It is
only in our country that such things could happen.
In the middle of November 1998 the campaigning
for the elections to four state Assemblies (Delhi,
Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Mizoram) had started
in right earnest.
Prime Minster Vajpayee was in Indore (Madhya
Pradesh) on 15 November, whare he addressed a press
conference. He lashed out at the Congress and the
communists for what he termed as 'their Goebbelsian
propaganda' against his government, and accused them
striking an unnatural alliance to grab power at the
Centre. Reacting sharply to the criticism levelled
earlier against his governm~nt by Congress President
Sonia Gandhi at a function in Delhi, the prime luinister
dubbed it as 'hypocritical and baseless'. 'Instead of
THE BJP ERA 265

questioning the performance of our government,

Mrs. Gandhi would do well to answer people's questions
about the decades of misrule by successive Congress
governments in New Delhi and Bhopal,' he retorted.
In a strongly worded, two . . page statement issued at
the Indore press conference, the prime minister
contended the people had firmly rejected the Congress
and its overt and covert allies in the election to the
eleventh Lok Sabha. 'Instead of respecting the
democratic verdict gracefully and allowing the country
to have the benefit of stability, the Congress party is
showing unseemly hunger to ·grab power, It has found
an unnatural ally in this power game in the communists.
whose record of betrayal of the national interests is
well . . known,' the statement declared.
Mr. Vajypaee took umbrage to the Congress and the
communists' charge that the BJP . . led government was
posing a threat to communal harmony and the secular
fabric of the country. Dubbing the allegation as mere
propaganda, he said it stood 'rebutted by the fact that
India has n'ot witnessed a single comlTIunal riot in the
past seven months. It is my solemn assurance to all my
countrymen that my government will treat every citizen
equally, regardless of their caste and credal affiliations'.
The prime minister charged that the Congress Party's
castigation of his government was an attempt to divert
the people's attention from its (the Congress') own
long record of misrule. The PM went to the extent of
stating that the successive Congress and the Congress . .
supported governments, which created a system of
governance and administration which thrived on loot
266 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR! V AJPAYEE

of public money and corruption, especially in high

places, had become the biggest hurdle in the path of
India's rapid and all .. round socio .. economic
development.
Vajpayee zeroed in on a specific state to drive home
his points: 'Bihar is the most striking example of how
corruption and mafia raj can reduce one of the most
richly endowed states in India to abject levels of
poverty and backwardness.' He maintained that he was
determined to reverse the trend. Vajpayee steadfastly
maintained that most of the problems faced by the
country, including that of price rise, was on account of
the legacy he had inherited from the governments of
the past.
To tackle the vexed issue of price rise, the prime
minister said he had introduced a three,pronged
strategy to stabilise and control prices. The three
prongs were as follows: (a) monitoring of prices of
essential commodities in consultation with state
governments; (b) resorting to direct market
intervention if a rise in the price of any commodity
was anticipated; and (c) increasing the Centre's
allocation of wheat and rice to several states for
distribution through the PDS outlets.
When asked if he would regard the outcome of the
coming Assembly polls as a referendum on the
performance of his government, the prime minister
replied in the negative, 'but added that the election
results would have an impact on national politics.
Subsequent events proved him right.
The nuclear tests and their repercussions came to
the fore again. R. Chidambaram, chairman of the
THE BJP ERA 267

Atomic Energy Commission, while dwelling on this

topic at Allabahad, declared: 'India welcomes
international cooperation in the area of technology, but
it should become very clear to world powers that India
can do so now only on an "equal partnership basis".'
Talking to mediapersons at the Jawaharlal
Planetarium, Dr. Chidambaram observed that the
recent Pokhran explosions had brought India's status
at par with the developed nations insofar as nuclear
capability was concerned. Therefore, he felt that one
should not expect this country to accept a role before
other nations as a junior partner in the area of global
technological cooperation.
As far as the comparative status of India via~a~vis
Pakistan in respect of mutual nuclear capacity was
concerned, Dr. Chidambaram said one could draw an
inference from the fact India had exploded a total of
60 kiloton devices as against merely 15 kiloton devices
exploded by Pakistan.
While conceding that it could not right now be said
that India had acquired nuclear parity with China,
1)r. ChidambaraIn told newsmen that in making nuclear
power reactors, India was certainly ahead of China.
This was a pleasant revelation indeed. Never before
were our scientists so confident and exuberant. 'We
have already manufactured ten 220 MW nuclear
power reactors, and four more are in the pipeline,
disclosed Dr. Chidambaram.
Highlighting the country's significant achie\lements
in the atomic energy sphere, he underlined the fact that
India had already developed the capacity to conduct
268 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

'subcritical tests, though we have no plans to undertake

them'.
Dr. Chidalnbaram categorically stated: 'I do not
foresee any nuclear war taking place either in the
suhcontinent or in the world. Nuclear weapons have
only served as a valuable deterrence against aggression
by a hostile country, and it is with this objective that
India, too, had to go in for developing its own nuclear
deterrence. '
On 17 November, 1998 the eminent scientist
Dr. A.P.]. Kalam made a significant observation: 'In the
environment of sanctions, the concept of a global
village is a tnyth.' Later, reacting to the recent release
of a list of entities 'blacklisted' by the USA, he
affirn1ed: 'As long as the nation is strong, we can
cotnbat it (sanctions)'. He was speaking as the
chairn1an of the Technology Information, Forecasting
and Assessment Council at the inauguration of the
biannual meeting of the international association of the
council, in New Delhi.
Dr. Kalam had earlier observed that science,
technology and their subsequent transfer and
absorption were inter' linked. 'If you break the chain,
neither science and technology nor growth of the
country is possible,' he said. He further stated: 'In
today's world, unfortunately, technology and commerce
have become tools in the name of sanctions, embargoes
and technology denials.'
He .noted that it would appear that the United
States has really lost its sense of self. From
F. D. Roosevelt to Bill Clinton, it is a story of downfall.
THE BJP ERA 269

The we lfare of the world and regard for the real

democratic volumes are no more a concern with the US
leaders. What a change! And for what? However, he
expressed confidence that India would come out of this
phase unscathed and strengthened. 'India has
experienced that whenever embargo has been slapped
on this country, India has emerged as a cost,effective
technology developer in a big way including high,
technology areas,' asserted Dr. Kalam.
Dr. Kalam commented that for a developing country
to attain a 'developed' status, the selling and buying of
technology, intensive products in domestic and global
markets was essential. In the same breath, he added
that this principle applied equally to a developed
nation which wanted to retain its position. He went on
to say that since every country had some core fields of
COlnpetence, 'software engineering products, skilled
manpower and cost,effective manufacturing are some
. ,s "core competence, '" h
(.) f In d la Iuate
e eva d.
'As science is global, technology has to be in a
global system particularly in a WTO [World Trade
Organisation] environment and should not be described
hy technology denial regimes,' expounded Dr. Kalam.
As the days passed, the election scene began
'hatting up'. It was around 20 November that Mani
Shanker Aiyar, a functionary in the Congress office,
made a statement to mediapersons that the Emergency
imposed by Indira Gandhi in June 1975 was justified.
The BJP lost no time in making the Emergency an
election issue. Vajpayee lambasted this statement and
the Congress got panicky. The Congress immediately
270 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

backtracked on the Emergency issue. Another senior

Congressman, Shivraj Patil, while replying to questions
rosed by mediapersons claimed that the Congress had
never tried to justify the Emergency. However, even
though Patil did not try to justify the imposition of
Elnergency, he did not criticise it either. He merely
said: 'The issue which was relevant years ago is now
irrelevant. We are not trying to justify Emergency.
What is the point of raising the issue now?' Asked
about the Congress spokesn1an Aiyar's attelnpt to
justify the ilnposition of Elnergency, PatH responded:
'You all know what Aiyar had said. I have to say that
the Congress believes in democracy and I do not think
Emergency is necessary for the country.'
Aware that Prime Minister Vajpayee was trying to
gain political mileage out of Aiyar's statement, the
Congress attacked the former and observed that there
was 'no point raising the issue at this juncture'. Patd
said he did not understand why the prime tninister was
going on 'harping' on this particular topic. 'The 111ain
issue is not Emergency but inflation. I feel the issue of
Emergency was being raised to divert the attention from
the inflation, which is afflicting the country,' Patd
observed. But inflation was coming down gradually.
With regard to the BJP's allegations that a criminal . .
businessman alleged to have links with the underworld
was the creation of the Congress, PatH felt it was for
the government to find out the truth and then comment
on the matter. 'We also can level certain charges
against the government in this regard. We are not
doing so,' Pati! maintained. Asked whether he would
THE BJPERA 271

welcome the 'White Paper' on the bussnessman, which

the BJP .. led government intended to bring out, Patil
said the 'truth was always welcome'. He, however,
maintained the Congress was not against disclosure of
facts, but against their misuse. He said any kind of
information on that bussnessman should be brought out
after the elections.
Meanwhile, the senior Congress leader, Pranab
Mukherjee, ridiculed the BJP .. led government for
blaming the previous Congress government for the
price rise: 'These people are unaware of facts and live
in a make .. believe world,' he surmised.
Both Patil and Mukherjee claimed that Congress
prospects were bright in the forthcoming Assembly
polls. Asked whether the party president, Sonia
Gandhi, would be held responsible if the party faced
defeat, Patil maintained that under Sonia Gandhi the
Congress had been 'galvanised and the outcome of the
elections would be shared jointly by her and the party
melubers'.
The winter session of Parliament began on
30 November 1998. A couple of days earlier, results
of elections to the four state Assemblies had con1e. The
Congress secured a thumping victory in Delhi and
Rajasthan. In Madhya Pradesh, the Congress could
manage a narrow victory; they obtained just about 1.6
per cent more votes than the BJP. In Mizoram, the
Congress was pipped at the post by a front consisting
of two other local parties. The population of these four
states was only a small percentage of the total
population of India. Yet certain sections of the
272 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

opposition demanded the prime minister's resignation.

This partial mandate was for the states concerned and
definitely not for the Central Government. Elections to
the Parliament are fought on the basis of different issues
such as India's defence, foreign policy and economy
policies including inflation and price rise. A lot of lung
power was exercised by the opposition in the Lok Sabha
on the opening day and the House was adjourned.
 12

An Eventful Journey (II)

(December 1998 to March 1999)

On 1 December 1998, the minister of parliamentary

affairs, Madan Lal Khurana, challenged the local section
of opposition to bring a no,confidence motion against
the government if they dared. The challenge was not
accepted. The Congress benches kept absolutely mum.
On the financial front, the government was moving
towards opening up the national insurance to foreign
companies, offering them 40 per cent equity. This
proposal led to a large schism in the Sangh Parivar. On
6 December 1998 the BJ P president, ~ushabhau
Thakre, criticised the Central Government for
proposing to open up the insurance sector without
consulting the party. He said the BJP was opposed to
foreign equity participation in the insurance sector.
Thakre added that 'till yesterday, we were saying

273
274 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

something, and now our government is doing just the

. ,
Opposlte .
A day earlier, i.e., 5 December 1998, three lninisters
were sworn in: Jaswant Singh, Pramod Mahajan and
}agmohan. The BJP president and some others expected
that the prime minister would have consulted them
before appointing the ministers. But as the selection
of ministers was absolutely the prime minister's
prerogative, they did not mention their displeasure on
this score. Rather, they took up the issue of the equity
offered to foreigners in insurance business. They had a
strong point in that the party was not consulted on such
a vital issue. Indications were that the prime minister
may not like to annoy the party bosses and the issue
may be shelved for some time.
After elections to the four state Assemblies took
place in the end of November 1998 and the results were
declared, the media, particularly in the capital city of
Delhi, became all the more hostile towards the BJ P. The
media's tone was derisive and surely exhibited
shallowness. The leaders of the BJP were quite pained
though not so much surprised as this trend develops
after a defeat in elections. Just as when a person faces
adverse circumstances, many of the relations and so'
called friends take to derision and insult the sufferer.
But when the same person achieves success they again
flock to him. In public life also the same thing happens.
Similarly, when a particular party suffers a setback a
large number of people as well as the media change
sides or turn inimical very quickly. On the other hand,
there are always a few honourable exceptions who
THE. BJP ERA 275

remain royal and steadfast. Surely, the BJP has deep

roots in the psyche of the Indian people and it reflects
the aspirations of the people to a greater degree than
other parties. It is true that prices rose because of
various factors including some conspiracies as well as
due to lack of implementing effective measures in time.
But there has been some introspection within the party.
At the same time, a section of the media had been
saying that the Vajpayee Government might fall any
time. The crux of the matter was that the 'B) P
honeymoon' was over.
The lnedia's 'disillusionment' with the B)P caused
some anxiety to the prime minister, not for the sake of
his own self but for the party and the nation. Moreover,
Vajpayee was caught in a 'pincer' movement with one
'hand' heing that of the Opposition and the other of his
own party and some allies, which JiLl not see eye to eye
with him.
On 13 December 1998, a leading newspaper of India
published an article: 'Why the RSS Dislikes the
Bharatiya Janta Party Government?' It is absolutely
wrong to say that the RSS 'dislikes' the Bharatiya Janata
Party Government. There were differences, no doubt.
However, the differences were in perception of issues.
The differences were an effect rather than the cause of
disharmony. How many right,thinking persons in any
organisation or institution would deny the fact that
there was a steep rise in prices in September,October
1998? Was that the real cause of the jolt given to the
BJP in some state Assembly elections by the masses who
had fondly voted in March 1998 for Atal Behari
276 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR) V AjPAYEE

Vajpayee to shape or influence the destiny of India?

The writer of that article tried to hold Vajpayee
responsible for everything adverse that happened after
the BJP came to" power, as if the Congress was as
blameless as Sita and had no hidden role.
Surely, the BJP received a larger mandate than
others. The pertinent question is: What happened after
Vajpayee took over the office of prime minister? Some
persons inflicted constant pinpricks on him to retain
themselves in the headlines. They tried to defeat the
mandate of the people. They drew widespread ridicule
upon themselves; they knew it very well, yet they
persisted. These very persons explained things to the
press quite differently a day or two after intermittent
inflicting of pinpricks.
As just mentioned, a difference of opinion existed
regarding some developments. According to one
opinion some ministers in the Central Government
acquired some vested interests. Why and how they
worked on Vajpayee to fulfil their objectives was a
question discussed by intellectuals not in isolation but
by penetrating the fog surrounding the decisions taken
by the coalition government. Were such decisions
ideological or practical in orientation?
Let us, in this context, take up a relevant example.
When Indira Gandhi nationalised several banks in
1969, was it purely for ideological reasons pertaining
to the economy or a strategy for survival by way of
gathering the left,of,the,centre public opinion to
support her?
THE BJP ERA 277

Indira Gandhi's move had a populist appeal.

Similarly, the coalition government's action in opting
to open up the insurance sector to foreign investment
was also termed by some as a 'strategy for survival'. If
it was for this reason then it might prove
counterproductive. One may have raised the vital
question: Had Vajpayee's thinking on economic matters
undergone a drastic change as he appeared to be
moving away from swadeshi or had he fallen a prey to
the machinations of those who perhaps took the
decisions while relaxing in hotels in the United States
of America? The country will know the reality only
later when certain developments are analysed further
by those very individuals who had spearheaded a
movement to instal certain people in positions which
could undo the economy of India if they were allowed
to work unhindered. Some people have considered it
as unfortunate that the prime minister could not have
a free hand to choose his colleagues to begin with. Later
on, when he added three more persons of his choice to
the cabinet, the media reaction, by and large, turned
out to be in his favour. Vajpayee has been a symbol of
the aggregate thinking of the nation - a combination
of the various shades of thought spread over many
organisations.
The proper course for the BJP's allies could be to
hold more meetings with the prime minister. Other
friends should do likewise. Everyone should provide the
cooperation he needs and should accept his decision
in vital matters concerning the nation. If the other
leaders assure him the desired cooperation for at least
278 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

one year more, most of the acute problems facing the

nation will be solved soon.
The event that took place on 11 December 1998,
in the Lok Sabha, symbolised how vitriolic the
differences of opinion between different parties could
be. On that day, the government had planned to
introduce the Women's Reservation Bill in Parliament.
However, this move was thwarted by a certain member
of the Opposition, Durga Prasad Saroj, in a crude and
uncouth manner. This member got involved in a scuffle
with a lady member (Mamata Banerjee) of the Lok
Sabha in the well of the House. Moreover, another
Opposition member physically prevented the minister
from tabling the motion in the House. Such was the
degrading level to which parliamentary democracy had
fallen!
Reverting to the economy of the country, let LIS
focus what the Noble Laureate, Dr. Amartya Sen, said
in Europe on 7 and 8 December 1998. He spoke about
the removal of unemployment and stressed that this
factor should form the core of all economic planning:
He underlined the importance of increasing
educational facilities and health services. He expressed
his views against the erstwhile thrust ot thinking
regarding the ups and downs of market economy as
reflected in the share market. The pertinent question
is: Is he right or is the thinking of some others in the
Central Government correct?
We, the two authors, are strongly on the side of the
masses themselves as reflected in the statements of
Dr. Sen. Some 'heavyweight' economists have opined
THE BJP ERA 279

in private that if the line suggested by Dr. Sen were

adopted; it would lead to recession. We are of the
opinion that it shall not lead to recession and Dr. Sen's
thinking is nearest to that of the late Deen Dayal
Upadhyaya and also many of Gandhian economists. It
does not clash with the current trends of liberalisation
and globalisation. Even if his line of thought were to
lead to a temporary recession, it would he in the
interest of the masses as against the desired 'boom' in
the share market. Unless there is rethinking in the near
future, the time will soon come when imposing an
'econolnic emergency' would become inperative. There
is very little time to lose.
The opening up of the insurance sector to foreign
players raised many hackles. It was Dattopant Thengri,
the leader of Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh and a very senior
leader of the RSS, who first criticised the opening up
of the insurance sector to foreign investtnents. Thengri
has been an organiser l)ar excellence. Besides, his
following anl0ng working classes has been significant
and sl)lid. His views represent the thinking of a very
large number of people, and he would be the last person
to suggest that Vajpayee should step down, and of
course, he did not do so. A discord of the type
envisaged by the political opponents of the BJP would
never occur between it and the RSS. A couple of days
later, the RSS itself made it clear that the insurance
sector should not be opened up to foreign investment.
Some 'via media shall certainly be found.
The free voicing of opinion has proved, beyond a
shadow of douht, how democratic has been the
functioning of the BJP.
280 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

The communists, irrespective of their past, did

exhibit some logic sometimes. They have never been
quick enough to take advantage of any situation. The
Congress did so through a statement published on
14 December, which highlighted intraparty and
interparty differences vis . .a. . vis the BJP and its allies. The
OPI leader, A.B. Bardhan, expressed the view that the
two~party system would never be evolved in India. It'
may be right to some extent. Regional parties are hound
to prevail and, after every Lok Sabha election, there
will be a tendency on their part to come together to
make a bid for a share in power at the Centre. The
combined regional representation at the Centre Inay
prove to be a source of strength for Atal Behari
Vajpayee.
In the second week of December 1998, the RSS had
concluded its deliberations at Nagpur, its birthplace.
Nearly 400 important workers had gathered there to
take stock of the prevailing situation in the country.
Professor Rajendra Singh, the Sarsanghchalak, presided
over the deliberations. Among those who attended the
meeting of the Akhil Bharatiya Karyakari MandaI
(ABKM) was the RSS joint general secretary,
K. Sudershan. The president of the Bharatiya Janata
Party, Kushabhau Thakre, was also present. A couple
of general secretaries of the BJP also attended. Swadeshi
Jagran (a nationalist forum) chief, S. Gurumurthy, also
contributed to the deliberations. The meeting which
ended on 13 December 1998 emphasised that greater
efforts were needed to make women part of the
decision~making process at every level. The gathering
THE BJP ERA 281

divided itself into several subgroups to take up

different subjects for discussion.
The RSS strongly censured the BJP,led government
for its proposal to allow foreign direct investment in
the insurance sector. Thus, what Dattopant Thengri had
declared a few days back was more than repeated in the
Nagpur meeting. K. Sudershan told mediapersons at
Nagpur that Kushabhau Thakre had also expressed his
unhappiness on the issue. The resolution on economic
affairs described the decision to allow foreign
investment in the insurance sector as 'impr9per'. The
RSS also opposed FDI (foreign direct investment) in
the cigarette industry as it would render lakhs of bidi
workers jobless.
The RSS meeting also took strong exception to the
government's decision to make the sale of iodised salt,
con1pulsory, thereby forcing the comlnon man to pay
four tilnes more. Sudershan pointed out this aspect to
the journalists. He emphasi-sed that the RSS never
supported any particular party but always supported
parties which subscribed to its overall views.
At Nagpur, another resolution was passed. It
deplored efforts by some disgruntled elenlents to spread
false information about Hindu organisations such as
the RSS and the VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad) for the
alleged persecution of the Christian community in
India. The resolution also defended the decision of the
Uttar Pradesh Government to make 'Vandematram'
(a patriotic song written by Bankim Chandra
Chatterjee) and Saraswati Vandana compulsory in
schools. The rationale was as follows: If the memhers
282 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

of the Lok Sabha and the state legislatures could sing

the national song ('Vandematram'), why not the school
students? The resolution pointed out that the UP state
government should not have withdrawn the order
regarding singing of 'Vandematram'.
The decisions taken in Nagpur by the RSS mayor
may not prove critical to the BJP . . led government in the
short run, but they are bound to effect the inner
working of the party. Some immediate measures have
to be taken to prevent the erosion of the basic support
the party received from its original supporters. Prime
Minister Vajpayee should try to explain the
government's stand to party workers and convince them
to accept it by establishing constant rapport with them
in small groups. Surely, the PM would not be ahle to
function efficiently hy being isolated from grassroot
workers. There have been serious complaints from the
party workers that Vajpayee has heen a bit inaccessible
to them as well as to eminent sympathisers. Unless
Vajpayee sets apart an hour or two of his time for this
'damage control', the party will find it difficult to rise
in the esteem of the people. We apprehend that unless
Vajpayee Vajpayee this advice there might be a
substantial erosion of his former popularity, which has
started coming under a cloud. Either he should be able
to convince his we ll . . wishers or should get himself
convinced of the righteousness of their approach.
Highly placed bureaucrats cannot really understand
and solve the various problems of the masses. Vajpayee
must put a halt to further disillusionment. The prices
of essential commmodities shall have to be brought
THE BJP ERA 283

down. Drastic steps have to be taken forthwith. The

alarm- bells have been rung by the combined onslaught
of hostile forces and it is time to stand up and check
the price rise. The prime minister has merely referred
the matter to some committees and subcommittees. The
vital questions in this context are: Why has he not
explained the ramifications of the issue to the people
on television or through other media? Why has he not
taken the people into confidence in a more forthright
Inanner? Why has there not been an admission of the
lapses of his government on the price front, particularly
with respect to the lapses of the finance minister,
Yashwant Sinha, in not spelling out the steps taken to
bring down the prices? Those are the questions which
demand his immediate attention. There is no doubt
that, on the external front, Vajpayee's Government has
done very well as compared to some previous
governments, but that will not be enough consolation
to the Inasses to keep them happy with the BJP. Of
course, the Inasses believe that Vajpayee deserved to
he given some more time; they helieved that he was a
very well'lueaning leader at an all, India level. They
also believed that if his government fell on the basis
of a vote in Parliament, it would be a tragedy for
democracy in the c\_)untry,. The vote for the Congress
in the four state Assembly elections can be considered
a negative vote. Therefore, the remedy would be for
Vajpayee to go in for some drastic steps to lift the
economy and simultaneously bring down the prices of
essential cOlnmodities to such an extent that the' masses
support him more and more during the election to the
13th Lok Sabha.
284 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A} PAYEE

The afternoon news on 14 December 1998 reported

that the government had been successful in introducing
the Women's Reservation Bill in the Lok Sabha, after
all. This news brought some relief to certain sections
of society. Thi~ Bill had been introduced in the Lok
Sabha earlier too during the prime ministership of Deve
Gowda but because of the opposition from the
members of his own party, it could not be discussed and
passed.
The Bill was introduced in spite of strong protest
by two parties, i.e., the Samajvadi Party and the
Rashtriya J anata Dal. They were afraid that if the Bill
was passed the seats will be mainly cornered by the
ladies belonging to the forward castes. They wanted
reservations for women from 'backward castes'. These
leaders were obsessed with the caste factor and
forgot that Ranl Manohar Lohia, the great champion
of reservation for backward classes, had stated very
strongly that all women were backward. Another
controversial Bill came up in the Lok Sabha on
15 December, namely, the Bill for opening up the
insurance sector to foreign companies. The Bill
envisages that 26 per cent of equity in shares would be
invested by the foreign players and another 14 per cent
by NRIs (non .. resident Indians).
Actually, this Bill was being introduced under very
peculiar circumstances. The BJP .. led government
wanted this Bill to be introduced and the Congress also
promised to support the Bill. However, the CPl and the
CPI(M) were opposed to the Bill. They feared that if
the foreign companies entered this field, the present
THE BJP ERA 285

employees would lose their jobs. From the side of the

government it was argued that we would get funds
which could be invested in infrastructure and that it
would bring in better technology, better products,
better results alt .. round and healthy competition with
the public sector undertakings, i.e., the LIC (Life
Insurance Corporation) and General Insurance. The
RSS came out heavily against the foreign investment
in the insurance sector. (As of April 1999, this Bill had
yet to he passed.)
(_)n the ex ternal affairs front, some leaders,
particularly I.K. Gujral, the former prime minister,
have heen demanding that they should be taken into
confidence ahout the Jaswant Singh .. Strobe Talbott
talks. Taking note of this persistent demand, the prime
minister decided to speak on the topic of 'bilateral talks
with the United States' in Parliament. Addressing the
Lok Sahha on 14 December 1998, he laid bare the
intricacies of the financial aspects of bilateral talks with
the United States and made the position of India
absolutely clear as far as the diplomatic efforts vis .. a-vis
the USA were concerned. Vajpayee made a historic
statement on that day, which runs as follows:

1. Since the 11 and 13 May tests, the Government has,

froln tilne to time, taken the House into confidence
and sought views of the Hon'ble Members. This was
done through statements and discussions in the
House on 27 .. 29 May and 3 .. 4 August. Nevertheless,
1 wish to re .. emphasise some salients of our policy.
286 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

2. I take this opportunity to reiterate that India's

cotnmitment to global nuclear disarmament remains
undiluted. As Hon'ble Members are no doubt aware,
India has consistently maintained that a nuclear
weapon~free world would enhance not only our
security but [also] the security of all nations. That
is why numerous initiatives in this direction were
taken during the last 50 years; such steps as would
encourage decisive and irreversible measures for the
attainment of this objective. Regrettahly, the
international cOlnmunity, particularly countries
that have based their security on nuclear weapons,
or a nuclear umbrella, have been reluctant to
elnbrace this objective. Keeping open our nculear
option, therefore, hecame a national security
imperative three decades ago, an imperative equally
valid for India in the post~Cold War period. The
option that was exercised in May 1998 was thus a
continuation of a decision taken nearly 25 years
earlier, during which period India had Jenl0nstrated
an exemplary nuclear restraint, given the
exceptional sec uri ty~re lated complex i ties of our
region. I wish to place on record that successive
governments continued to safeguard this option,
demonstrate our capability and take such steps as
were necessary to ensure the viability of the option
through weaponisation.
3. Just as our conventional defence capability has
been deployed in order to safeguard the territorial
integrity and sovereignty of India against any war
or threat of use of force, the adoption of our nuclear
THE BJP ERA 287

deterrent posture has also followed the same logic.

We have announced our intention to maintain a
minimum nuclear deterrent, but one that is
credible. Mindful of our global and enhanced
responsibility to address concerns of the
international community, and in order to reassure
all countries ahout the defensive nature of our
nuclear capability, we have engaged in bilateral
discussions with key interlocutors. In international
forums, like the United Nations, India is the only
country possessing nuclear weapons to raise a call
for negotiating a gradual and progressIve
elimination of all nuclear weapons, within a time,
bound framework.
4. We also have an established tradition of
consultation with friendly countries on all inportant
international issues. Successive governments have
pursued an open, positive and constructive
approach in our foreign relations. This is in keeping
with our national ethos. It is within this framework
that India had heen engaged, even before May 1998,
in wide ranging and broad,based dialogues with the
United States. This included discussions on
disarmatnent and non,proliferation and on larger
s tra tegic issues.
5. Following the 11 and 13 May nuclear tests,
apprehensions were expressed in some quarters. It
was, therefore, decided to have more focussed and
intensive discussions. Accordingly, Shri Jaswant
Singh, Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, was
designated as our Representative, to carry forward
2BB INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

this dialogue. Sim'ilarly, President Clinton

designated Deputy Secretary of State, Strobe
Talbott, as the US interlocutor.
6. This dialogue has been conducted on the basis of a
set of comprehensive proposals, put forward by
fndia, to the international community, soon after the
May tests. As the House would recollect, these
proposals comprise: a voluntary moratorium on
underground nuclear test explosions; our willingness
to move towards de jure formalisation of this
commitment, a decision to join negotiations on a
treaty for a ban on future production of fissile
material for weapons purposes; and our
determination to make more stringent the existing
system of export controls over sensitive materials
and technology.
7. Since the 11 June 1998 Washington meet, six
rounds of discussions between Shri Jaswant Singh
and Mr. Talbott have been held. Both teams have
worked purposefully to narrow gaps of perception
and to establish comnlon ground. These exchanges
have been marked by a sense of responsibility,
candour and a sincere attempt to understand each
other's concerns and points of view. The
Government is entirely mindful that the issues
involved touch upon matters of vital interest to
both countries. In these talks, 'we have firmly put
across our security concerns and the imperative of
maintaining a minimum, credible nuclear deterrent.
B. The talks have focussed on issues related to
disarmament and non .. proliferation. It is agreed that
THE BJP ERA 289

regional issues shall be kept distinctly apart. As

Hon'ble Members are well aware, India's concerns
in these matters go beyond the South Asian region,
and involve a wider perspective.
9. After six rounds, talks have narrowed and are now
focussed on the following four issues:

CTBT
lO.India remains committed to converting our
voluntary moratorium into a de jure obligation. In
response to the desire of the international
community, as expressed to us in our bilateral and
n1ultilateral interactions, that the treaty should
come into effect in September 1999, in my address
to the United Nations General Assembly on 24
September [1998], I reiterated broadly what I had
said in Parlialnent that: "India is now engaged in
discussions with our key interlocutors on a range of
issues, including the CTBT. We are prepared to
hring these discussions to a successful conclusion so
that the entry into force of the CTBT is not delayed
heyond September 1999. We expect that other
countries, as indicated in Article elY of the CTBT,
will adhere to this treaty without conditions."
11 . For the successful conclusion of the talks, creation
of a positive environment by our interlocutors is a
necessary ingredient.
12. The House will be reassured that in the assessment
of our scientists, this stand does not come in the way
of our taking such steps as may be found necessary
in future to safeguard our national security. It also
290 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

does not constrain us from continuing with our

R&D programmes, nor does it jeopardise in any
manner the safety and effectiveness of our nuclear
deterrent in the years to cOlne.

FMCT*
13. We have expressed our willingness to join the
FMCT negotiations in the Conference on
Disarmament at Geneva. It is our understanding, as
that of many other countries, who have confirmed
this to us, that the objective of these negotiations
is to arrive at a non,discriminatory treaty, that will
end the future production of fissile material for
weapons purposes, in accordance with the 1993
consensus resolution of the UN General Asselnhly.
We are willing to work for the early conclusion of
such a treaty.
14.lt was suggested to us that we might examine
announcing a moratorium on fissile material
production. We have conveyed that it is not
possible to take such steps at this stage. We will,
of course, pay serious attention to any negotiated
multilateral initiatives in the course of the FMCT
negotiations.

EXPORT CONTROLS
15. Discussions in this area have registered progress. An
expert level- meeting of officials from both sides was

* Fissile material cutoff treaty.

THE BJP ERA 291

held in New Delhi on 9 .. 10 November [1998]. In

light of our additional capabilities, as a responsible
state possessing nuclear weapons, and as earlier
•
announced, we are taking steps to make more
stringent our laws in this regard. We have also
con veyed that Ind ia should be provided better
access to dual .. use and high technologies in view of
India's ilnpeccable record of effective control over
sensitive technologies. The expert level meeting was
categorised as helpful by both, India and the US, to
the prospects of continuing cooperation in this area.

DEFENCE POSTURE
16. As Hon'ble Members are, no doubt, aware, matters
relating to defence postures are sovereign functions,
not subjects for negotiations. In fact, our talks are
based on the fundalnental prernise that India will
define its own requirements, for its nuclear
deterrent, on its own assessment of the security
environlnent. The US and other interlocutors are
interested in understanding our positions and our
policies better.
17. We have formally announced a policy of no .. first ..
use and non .. use against non .. nuclear weapons states.
As Hon'hle Memhers are aware, a policy of no .. first ..
use with a minimum nuclear deterrent implies
deployment of assets in a manner that ensures
survivahility and capacity of an adequate response.
We are also not going to enter into an arms race with
any country. Ours will be a minimum credible
deterrent, which will safeguard India's security -
292
,"
INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

the security of one,sixth of humanity - now and

into the future. The National Security Council,
with the assistance of its subsidiary bodies, the
establishment of which has been announced, will
make important contributions to elaborating these
concepts.
18. We have expressed our reservations about
provisions of certain export control regimes that
ostensibly seek to promote non,proliferation
objectives, hut are discriminatory in application.
India's missile development programme is an
indigenous programme, that was launched almost
15 years ago. This programme is regularly reviewed,
taking into account our security environment,
particularly missile acquisitions and deployments in
our region. We have announced that a new version
of the Agni [a long' range ballistic missile], with an
extended range is under development. Flight,testing
of such an enhanced range Agni will he conducted
fully in accordance with established international
practice. While our decision is to maintain the
deployment of a deterrent which is both minimum
and credible, I would like to reaffirm to this House
that the Government will not accept any restraints
on the development of India's R&D capabilities.
Such activity is an integral part of any country's.
defence preparedness and essential for coping with
new threat perceptions that may emerge in the years
ahead. This Government remains unequivocally
opposed in any suggestions that seek to place India
THE BJP ERA 293

at a technological disadvantage through intrusive

or sovereignty~violative measures.
19.At the same time, we will continue to take
initiatives in the international forums towards
fulfilling the ohjective of complete elimination of
all nuclear weapons. At this year's [1998] UN
General Assemhly, we had taken the initiative for
what could be an important first step, through a
resolution on 'Reducing Nuclear Danger'. This
initiative was intended to urge countries to move
hack frorTI the nuclear hair~trigger response postures
of the Cold War. If such initiatives are
ITIultilaterally accepted by other nuclear weapon
states, they will, of course, be accordingly reflected
in our own position, too.
20. In the course of these discussions with the United
States and other countries, I have kept in touch
with leaders of various political p:uties. We have
issued staten1ents frutn time to time on
pronouncements and dec larations by various
countries. This corpus of statelnents in Parlianlent
and through official spokesolen conveys our
position and is well known to Hon'ble Members.
These issues have also been discussed, at
considerahle length, in meetings of the Standing
Committee and the Consultative Committee of
Parlianlent. The viewpoints expressed by Hon'ble
Memhers in these discussions have provided us
valuable guidance in conducting discussions with
the United States and other countries.
294 INDIA UNDER A TAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

21. The dialogue with the United States will he

continued at the next meeting scheduled to be held
in the second half of January [1999], in New Delhi.
22. While there is no time frame for the conclusion of
these talks, it is the intention of both countries that
a stable understanding should be reached on the
remaining issues at an early date. This would
provide a further momentum to bilateral relations,
which is desired by both countries.
23. In addition to the talks between Shri Jaswant Singh
and Mr. Strobe Talbott, we have had detailed
exchanges with France and Russia. Discussions have
also taken place with the UK and China at the level
of Shri Jaswant Singh and at the official level with
Germany and Japan as well as with other non'
nuclear weapon states. I have heen in regular
correspondence with President Clinton. OUf
correspondence has touched not only upon i~,sues
under discussion between our Representatives but
also on larger aspects of Indo,US relations. It is my
view that the future of Indo .. US relations is much
larger than the four issues under consideration.
President Clinton has also expressed his desire for
a broad, based relationship with India that befits the
two largest democracies of the world. I have fully
reciprocated these sentiments. Indeed, our ongoing
dialogue with the United States is geared towards
that end. 1 am confident this House will want to wish
it all success.
THE BJP ERA 295

While India was trying to improve relations with the

USA, the news bulletins on 16 December 1998
announced the shocking news that the war planes of
the United States of America and the United Kingdom
had bomharded Baghdad. Some years back a similar
event had taken place. There was a sharp reaction from
the world community. Russia deplored this act and
China also condemned it. Anguish and anger were felt
in the Arah world. At some places American offices
in the Middle East were attacked. In India, too, there
was great sympathy for Iraq.
Prime Minister Vajpayee spoke against the action
of the United States of America and the United
Kingdom. An official statement was released by the
Government of India:
We have been closely following developments
relating to Iraq. India has close historical ties and
strong affinities with the countries and peoples of
the region. We have been deeply concerned about
the sufferings of the people of Iraq, and have called
for the lifting of sanctions in tandem with Iraq's
compliance with the relevant UN Security Council
resolutions. We have consistently counselled
restraint and moderation in resolving differences
that have emerged from time to time in the
interaction of the UN Special Commission
(UNSCOM) with Iraq.
The Government of India is gravely concerned and
deplores these air strikes heing carried out on Iraq
hy the US and the UK. It is particularly regrettable
that this unilateral step has been undertaken at the
296 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR I V AJPAYEE

very time when the UN Security Council was in

session to discuss developments arising from the
report of the Head of UNSCOM, which the UN SG
[Secretary~General] had forwarded to the Council
with his recommendations proposing alternative
courses of action. This attack raises serious
questions regarding the functioning of the collective
and consultative procedures of the UN Security
Council. I t also undermines the ability of the
Council to verify Iraq's compliance with the
relevant Council resolutions.
It has been our considered view that use of force in
this situation would be counterproductive. This
issue needs to be resolved diplomatically through
peaceful means and dialogue. We have supported
efforts by the UN in this direction. We have noted
the statement of the UN Secretary-General
expressing deep regret at the latest development.
We call for an immediate halt to the military action
and a resumption of diplomatic efforts under the
ausrices of the UN.
The Indian community in Iraq numbering about 50
persons is safe. We have been in touch with our
Embassy and are taking all measures to ensure their
welfare.

The entire US, in fact, almost the entire world, was

agog as William Jefferson Clinton, popularly known as
Bill Clinton, was about to be impeached on
18 December 1998. Whatever may have heen the
motives of the American attack on Iraq, the
THE BJP ERA 297

impeachment process was postponed for a day. On

Saturday, 19 December, the House of Representatives
in Washington held a 20,hour debate. Clinton was at
the focus of discussion. The two charges against him
were debated: one, lying under oath about his sexual
affair with Monica Lewinsky and, two, the obstruction
of justice. The first charge was approved and
established by 228,206 votes. The charge regarding the
obstruction of justice was upheld by 221,212 votes.
The bombardment on Baghdad continued on 17, 18
and 19 December. On 19 Decemher, Moscow clearly
warned that if the USA and the UK did not stop the
bombing of Baghdad, serious consequences would
follow. In the morning of 20 December, the Russian
prime minister, Yegnev Primakov, arrived in New Delhi
for negotiations with the Indian Government. The visit
was pre,scheduled, no doubt. A fresh Indo, Russian
treaty was expected to be signed between the two
countries. The news of Primakov's arrival in Delhi was
immediately taken note of by the Western media,
especially by the Americans. The USA and the UK
decided to stop the bombing of Baghdad on
20 December. The news was disseminated all over the
world. In India, there was great relief. Clinton claimed
that their objectives had been achieved for the time
heing but they {nay resort to such action again. !?uring
the news bulletin broadcast by AIR (All India Radio),
the Middle East correspondent sent a message for the
benefit of Indian, listeners to the effect that the
Americans and the British had failed in their objectives
as the people in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and
298 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

many other nearby countries, were not demoralised and

a surge of anti, American feelings spread throughout the
reglon.
While in Delhi, Primakov held important talks with
Vajpayee. Complete identity of views prevailed
between India and Russia on the issues thrown up by
the US and British air strikes on Iraq. Primakov and
Vajpayee signed a key document on long, term military
cooperation between India and Russia. This agreement
was aimed at spelling out the general direction of their
defence ties till 2010.
The wide,ranging discussions on the international
situation between the two sides acquired fresh
significance in the light of the US attacks in the Persian
Gulf. Primakov, in his interaction with the media, soon
after he was accorded a ceremonial welcome, reiterated
Moscow's rejection of the Anglo,American bid to
unilaterally redraw the strategic map in the region.
India and Russia also signed a memorandum of
understanding (MoU) for the possible purchase of the
40,OOO'tonne Russian aircraft carrier, Admiral Gorshkov.
The MoU was signed by India's defence secretary, Aj it
Kumar, and his Russian counterpart. Under this
arrangement, Russia will give the aircraft carrier to
India 'free of cost'. However, New Delhi would have
to bear the cost of around US $ 400 million required
for the modernisation of this ship. Some expenditure
will also have to be incurred for purchase of the aircraft
which will be aboard this carrier.
Further, New Delhi and Moscow have signed an
extradition treaty as well as an accord to counter
THE BJP ERA 299

criminal activities. An air services accord and a

consular convention were also signed.
Despite the convergence of views between India
and Russia, New Delhi and Moscow appeared far from
agreeing on including China as a third partner in a new
strategic arrangement. In response to questions,
Primakov expressed the view that he favoured a
'strategic triangle' involving New Delhi, Moscow and
Be ij ing in order to promote a new As ian securi ty
halance, but no consensus could be reached.
Prime Minister Vajpayee, however, later indicated
that India's ties with China had not yet sufficiently
improved as to acquire a security dimension. 'India's
relationships with Russia are time,tested and hased on
traditional friendship. With China, we are trying to
improve the relationship, Vajpayee declared when
asked to comment on Primakov's earlier observation.
A 'formal proposal' on this subject had not been made,
Vajpayee clarified. India was a 'strong and appropriate
candidate to ocupy a seat in a reformed UN Security
Counc iI,' Primakov categorically stated in response to
a question.
The visiting prime rninister's busy schedule
included a 'suhstantial meeting' with the external
affairs minister, Jaswant Singh. He called on the
president, K.R. Narayanan, and the vice,president
Krishan Kant. One,to,one talks with the prime minister
were also held, followed hy the delegation's talks which
were held in the evening. A meeting with the
Confederation of Indian Industry (ClI) was also
scheduled.
300 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

The winter session of Parliament began on

30 November and ended on 23 December 1998. This
session can be termed as 'very successful'. The Vajpayee
Government managed to introduce several important,
hut controversial, bills in the winter session in spite of
stiff resistance by different political p"arties. This
achievelnent has been unique. The COlnlnencement of
the express highway programme (to link various parts
of the country) from 1 January 1999 can be viewed as
a landmark accomplishment of the ruling coalition
government which will lead to an acceleration in the
economic development.
The last day of the year 1998 brought sombre news
to all thinking Indians. The headlines of various
newspapers invariably highlighted the sacking of the
naval chief, Vishnu Bhagwat. The last straw on the
caulel's back was the appointment of Harinder Singh
as the deP':lty chief of the Indian Navy. According to
reliable reports, the Navy chief was in a defiant mood
and, therefore, had to be sacked. He got some
sympathy from the media. Most articles criticised the
government's action. The event fizzled out soon as the
public attention could not be riveted on the issue for
long. Some other earlier events demanded more
attention. ()n Christmas day there were clashes
between Christians and Hindus in the Dang district of
south Gujarat. A section of the press blew up the story
out of proportion. Even the dislnissal of the BJP state
government in Gujarat was demanded. The new year
(1999) saw India's prime minister in a confident mood.
The BJP's National Executive met in Bangalore in the
THE BJP ERA 301

first week of January. The prime minister took a strong

stand there. The differences between various sections
were mainly with respect to allowing foreign direct
investment in the insurance sector. The prime minister
was for allowing foreign participation. Some others had
opposed this stance. Ultimately, the prime minister had
his way. The resolution was adopted. Full support to
Prin1e Minister Vajpayee was declared by the Bharatiya
Janata Party.
()n 8 January 1999, a leading newspaper published
an article with a focus on attacks on the Christians tn
(3ujarat. A few relevant excerpts are as follows:
The fact that the assaults had not stopped and that
the VHP has not toned down its rhetoric suggest
that we were being na'ive. The attacks on Christians
are not isolated instances. They are part of the
Sangh Parivar's latest campaign to stoke the anger
of Hindus hy reminding them of ancient injustices
and uniting theln against what they clailu are the
descendants of foreign invaders and imperialists.
Most of us missed the significance of Ayodhya by
refusing to accept that it had the potential to
unleash a Hindu wave and set Hindu .. Muslim
relations back by three decades. Let us not make the
same mistake with the attacks on Christians. If we
do nut take a stand now India will tumble into the
[new] Iuillennium with a dangerously vitiated
communal atmosphere.
The point to be noted is that the writer has none,
too .. subtly hrought in the 'Sangh Parivar' as if the BJP
302 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

or the RSS had something to do with the incidents in

Gujarat. The Sangh Parivar (a family of brotherly
organisations) had nothing to do with the Gujarat
incidents. Nobody termed any group of people as 'the
descendants of foreign invaders and ilnperialists'. Was
this not one of the attempts to build up support for the
'anti~BjP' political organisations? The column referred
to the Ayodhya incident of 6 December 1992, when the
Babri structure was demolished? It was in Ayodhya that
Lord Ram was born. Ayodhya enjoys a special place of
honour in Hindu mythology and folklore since ancient
times. The very mention of the word 'Ayodhya' reflects
our ancient culture in the Hindu mlnd. Ayodhya i~
deeply ingrained in the Hindu psyche. For many
centuries Ayodhya has been a symhol of Hindu unity.
Such unity is not aimed against any other religious
community.
Reminding people of the Ayodhya incident of 1992
is surely part of a political game aimed against the BjP.
That some anti,BjP Hindus are more vocal about this
incident than others is a proof that taking political
advantage at the hustings is the chief aim. When Atal
Behari Vajpayee sought the vote of confidence in the
end of March 1998, even then some persons in the Lok
Sahha spoke about the Ayodhya incident. The Ayodhya
'weapon' is being used more and more by the opponents
of the BJP. Does it help them? In the view of the
authors, it recoils and hits back; it has proved most
counterproductive for the anti,BjP crusaders.
News of the possible expansion of the Central
cabinet was in the air for many months. The prime
THE BJP ERA 303

minister had been deferring such expansion for many

weeks. Trinamul Congress leader Aj it Panja met the
prime minister in the first week of January 1999. On
8 January the news bulletin of Akashvani (All India
Radio) announced that the Trinalnul Congress would
be joining the government. This was good news not
only for the BJP supporters but also for all those who
wished stability in the country.
The Congress moved into the act. Sonia Gandhi
visited the Dang area of South Gujarat to meet the
Christians, including some priests and missionaries.
Prime Minister Vajpayee also visited the same area of
Gujarat a day or two later. He met Christians as well
as Hindus. Two eminent Gandhian leaders of Gujarat
also met the prime minister and gave him their
diagnosis of the problem. Vajpayee gave a call for a
national debate on the issue of conversions. Most of the
newspapers in the country splashed the call for debate
on their front p;:lges. A hush descended on some
Congress leaders. They were completely taken aback
as they knew that the debate would inexorably lead to
electoral setbacks for them. The prime minister could
feel the pulse of the nation much better. The
Congressmen were apprehensive that their attack on
the BJP may boomerang, i.e., it may expose their double
standards.
A leading newspaper published an article
underscoring the differing perceptions within the BJP.
In this context, one should remember that even before
independence there were differing viewpoints within
the Congress. Subhash Chandra Bose, Jayaprakash
304 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Narayan and Ram Manohar Lohia differed with

Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Differences
in perception are a sign of ment~l vitality; they prove
beyond a shadow of doubt that the BJP is not
monolithic in thought. I t is not a block of bonded
labour. It does not believe in dynastic rule. Painting the
situation as if there were a rebellion the foregoing
article observed:

However, the crucial question remains. Who will

bell the cat? Party president Kushahhau Thakre, who
swears even today by the core ideology? Mr. Advani
who is a known regular at Jhandewalan, the RSS
Delhi headquarters? Mr. Kalyan Singh, whose entire
cabinet - resplendent in khaki shorts all - has
been photographed receiving sermons from RSS
Chief Raju Bhaiya? Or Mr. Vajpayee, who on
2 October 1997 -_- months hefore being sworn in
as Prime Minister - took the RSS oath at a puhlic
ceremony in Delhi? Who? Should Mr. Vajpayee
hreak free, it cannot be as a leader of the BJP, whose
top echelons and the bulk of whose cadres are drawn
from the RSS. He has to start alone or join another
party. Will he do it?

What an off-the-tangent logic! Differences in

perceptions with others need not make a prime minister
suspect, when, by and large, he is accepted as the
numero uno leader who cannot do anything against the
interests of the nation and democracy. Where were
these 'brave' hired columnists when Emergency was
THE BJP ERA 305

imposed in June 1975 on an innocent country in an

attempt to impose the dynasty on the nation.? History
is replete with instances when good and honest leaders
were InaligneJ. After some years India may get another
pritne Ininister but perhaps not a leader. Vajpayee has
been a towering leader all these years. Provincial
satraps of some other parties will not probably acquire
that stature. Vajpayee is capable of defending India's
integrity unlike many others who imagine themselves
as mass leaders. He will guide the nation well, whether
in power or out of power, whether in Parliament or
outside. Most of the attacks on Vajpayee are really
helnw the helt. ()n 12 January 1999 Rashtriya
Loktantrik Morcha leaders Inet President Narayanan
a n J J e III and edt h e dis m iss a 1 0 f the G tl jar at BJP
(Jovernmcnt.
The BJP in Gujarat enjoyed a comfortable majority
in the state Assembly and there were only a few
incidents of attacks against Christians in the last week
of 1998. The state is one of the n10st peaceful ones in
the country. In fact, Bihar and certain areas of north~
eastern India have been the 1l10St disturhed. Why this
S \l J J end e In an J for the J ism iss a 1 0 f the (~ u jar at

C30vernn1ent. While cmnpaigning for BJP through his

puhlic speeches in (Jujarat in 1995, one of the authors
(DPS) found theln absolutely free from bigotry.
The answer is that frustration reached its height in
anti~B]P circles because of press reports that the prime
Ininister was going to announce a cabinet expansion in
the middle of January 1999. Moreover, it was reported
that ahout two dozen ministers might he added. Surely,
306 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

everybody knew that such an expansion would give

more stability to the Vajpayee Government. The very
thought that the Central Government would hecome
stronger was most disturbing to some leaders. Though
some persons in the BJP, particularly those who had not
gained importance in Vajpayee's regime, were reported
to be more eager for fresh elections, the number of such
persons was just three or four. Alnong the masses, the
majority wished him well in spite of high prices of
certain consumer items. But they certainly desired that
the price of mustard oil and pulses should come down.
The price of mustard oil doubled during the first ten
months of Vajpayee's regime. Such a steep rise had
never occurred before. In more than one,third of Indian
homes this oil is the medium of cooking. The official
media has been flaunting a slight fall in inflation in all
its news bulletins. People listen to such news with
derision. We have heard government employees and
old pensioners say that all these figures were
unbelievable and that the purpose of the entire
exercise was meant to pay less than due dearness
allowance to the employees. This charge mayor may
not be true, but prima facie it provokes criticism of the
government in some quarters.
The Congress next got into the act in order to
I

avoid being sidelined. In January 1999, four ewc

(Congress Working Committee) mernbers asked the
Central Government to refer the issue of religious
conversion to the Supreme Court. The idea probably
was to mute a possible public debate for which the
prime minister had given a call. Addressing a function
THE BJP ERA 307

at the Ramakrishna Mission (to mark the birth

anniversary of Swami Vivekananda) on 12 January
1999, Sonia Gandhi 'discovered' India was secular
primarily because Hinduism, both as a philosophy and
as a way of life, has been based on what ancient Indian
sages had sagaciously observed: 'Truth is one, the wise
pursue it variously.' Sonia Gandhi went on to claim
that Swami Vivekananda, who swore by India's heritage,
'had been sought to be appropriated by certain people
who were seen to distort the very message of Hinduism,
that of tolerance, harmony and understanding of
different faiths'.
It was clear whom she was referring to in the last
sentence of her statement. This reference was uncalled
for. She could have paid a straight and simple tribute
to Swami Vivekananda by practising his preachings if
at all she had an admiration for him. Was this talk of
'appropriation' in good taste?
C)n 17 ] anuary there was an interesting headline in
a leading newspaper: 'Hinduism and Secularism Not
Incompatihle Is New Congo Line'. The news item reads:

The Congress Working Committee today adopted

a new stance that seeks to prove that the party
would not hesitate to be openly proud of India's
heritage .... The strategy, the ewe members
decided, would nail the BJP's "game" of charging the
Congress and other parties with pseudo,secularism
and majorityislu versus minorityism.

Shifting from its earlier emphasis on minority

interests for protecting 'Indian' secularism, the ewe
308 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl V AJPAYEE

adopted a resolution that states that attacks on

minorities in the country is a serious affront to basic
Hindu beliefs and values. 'Hinduism is the most
effective guarantor of secularism in India,' the CWC
declared. It accused the Vajpayee Government and the
BJP Government in Gujarat of violating the
Constitution by failing to protect minorities and their
places of worship. It appealed to the people to be
vigilant and checkmate the Sangh Parivar's 'diaholical
agenda to divide people'.
The CWC took the cue for this approach from a
speech delivered by Sonia Gandhi on 12 January paying
tributes to Hinduism. This speech was soon after her
visit to trouble,hit areas of Gujarat which drew
criticism from the BjP, VHP and other such
organisations that she was only concerned with the
cause of Christianity and only wished to protect the
interests of that community. This charge against Sonia
Gandhi mayor may not be true but why she invited all
the criticism against her shall remain a moot question:
for want of vision or something else?
By moving away from its earlier emphasis on India's
secular heritage to the core of Hindu teachings, the
cwe sought to blunt the campaigns of pro,Hindu
parties and organisations that have been attacking the
Christian background of the Congress president in
particular. Chaired by Sonia Gandhi, the CWC
pointed out that it was tragic that the RSS groups were
relentlessly targeting the minorities, their places of
worship, and intimidating individuals through violence
and vindictive action instead of protecting them as
THE BJP ERA 309

enjoined by the Constitution. The CWC observed: 'The

Prime Minister is only s'uggesting a national debate on
the illegal actions perpetrated by the Sangh Parivar
instead of setting the law in motion against them.' The
ewe's views reflected a faulty diagnosis, erroneous
thinking and an attempt to wrong history itself.
The resolution of the Congress did not say a word
about the riots that shook Karnataka (in Mangalore)
during that very week, where a non,BJP (i.e., Janata
Dal) government was in power. Is it not a very partisan
way of internationalising a slight problem in Gujarat?
Was there a resolution of the cwe about the Bombay
riots where nearly a thousand persons, both Hindus and
Muslims, were killed in 1993 following the bomb blasts,
when a Congress government was in power? Was there
a resolution mentioning the 1993 Bhagalpur (Bihar)
riots? Was a dismissal of Congress governments in
those states demanded by the Congress Working
Committee?
On 18 January 1999 an article by Arun Nehru was
published in the Pioneer. (Arun Nehru was a former
minister for internal security and a cousin of the late
Indira Gandhi.) He observes, inter alia: 'While there is
a great deal of good work being done, there is also a
clear case of subversion. It is for the government and
the home Ininistry to enforce the law, and the VHP and
Bajrang Oal are no substitutes for the home ministry
and Mr. L.K. Advani. Many years ago, in the internal
security ministry, we raided and brought to book several
Christian groups receiving funds and violating
provisions of Indian laws. We also discovered several
310 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

institutions being run in Uttar Pradesh and Kashmir, in

particular, where the source of funds was unexplained.
Action was taken against all the fronts and all the
groups without discrimination. Today, the situation is
such that huge funds continue to come in from abroad
both through legal and illegal means. As a matter of
fact, conversions do take place and in areas of extreme
poverty and deprivation, where the next meal is a
struggle and the government is non .. existent, there is a
great deal of tension. The situation in Gujarat is bad
but so is it in the North .. East. MP, Bihar and Orissa also
fall in the same category.'
The ex .. minister has some claim to credibility when
he states that huge funds continue to come in from
abroad both through legal and illegal means. The
country has a right to know what are the illegal means
through which huge funds continue to come in. Also,
the follOWing facts need to be known: What were the
actual amounts and which were the organisations
receiving these funds?
On 21 ] anuary 1999 several developments took
place. The Rashtriya Loktantrik Morcha (RLM)
condemned the Congress stand on Hinduism and
announced a nationwide campaign to expose that
party's 'hollow commitment' to secularism as 'evident'
in the stand in a recent resolution of the Congress
Working Committee. Morcha president, Mulayam
Singh Yadav, told newspersons that he would travel in
his well . . equipped 'Kranti Rath' (Revolutionary
Chariot) for the campaign to be launched with a public
meeting in Farrukhabad (UP) on 27 January 1999. He
THEBJP ERA 311

said it would target the religion .. based politics of the

BJP. Nothing was heard of his 'Kranti Rath' later on.
Yadav asserted he would court arrest during the
campaign on 8 February in Lucknow. The same day,
former prime minister, V.P. Singh, pointed out the
emergence of a strong third force was possible only
after another spell of a Congress .. led Government at the
Centre. Complimenting Congress President Sonia
Gandhi, V.P. Singh held the view that the Congress had
behaved very maturely, looking to long .. term interest
on the issue of formation of an alternative government
and various other issues.
He maintained he had always held that there should
be two secular combinations for occupying ruling and
Opposition spaces, though the third force has itself got
dissipated.
V.P. Singh may not have forgotten that when
L.K. Advani was stopped during his Rath Yatra (chariot
journey in 1990) in Bihar, a major force (Sangh Parivar
of which the BJ P is only a part) struck and a no ..
confidence motion against his government was
introduced. He was shown the exit door of Parliament
by a majority of the representatives of the .Indian
people. The margin of his defeat was. shocking even to
his friends.
The middle of January 1999 witnessed the Shiv Sena
protesting against the proposed cricket test series
between India and Pakistan. The supremo Bal
Thackeray ordered the cadres to dig up the pitches at
various stadia. Surely, it is difficult to defend what the
supporters of Thackeray did to the pitch at Delhi's
312 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A)PAYEE

Ferozeshah Kotla grounds. They certainly had a right

to protest, but peacefully. We wish they could offer
satyagraha. Taking everything in consideration, the
Government of India decided that the test series would
be held as scheduled. The home minister, L.K. Advani,
flew into Mumbai in the early evening of 21 January
and persuaded Bal Thackeray to call off his movement
against the test matches between India and Pakistan.
All right#thinking people appreciated this gesture. That
this withdrawal of his movement was an act of
statesmanship was the opinion of a large number of
observers. Bal Thackeray, generally speaking, is a man
of great conviction. The cause of Hinduism is, of
course, dear to him. He feels strongly against Pakistan,
no doubt. These two cardinal points of his thinking
bring him in conflict with Congress quite often.
On 24 January 1999, a horrific inc ident occurred.
A Christian missionary from Australia, Graham Stewart
Staines, and his two sons were burnt to death in a jeep
in Manoharpur village in Orissa by some anti;social
elements. The media played up the gruesome details
and there was indignation against the Hindus as such
in many quarters outside India. The Bajrang Dal has
heen the prime accused in this case.
The facts of the case are yet to be established.
Mamata Banerjee threatened to withdraw support to
the Central Government if such incidents were not
stopped at once. She asked for the resignation of
Home Minister Advani. The Telugu Desam Party'chief,
Chandrabahu Naidu, also expressed his annoyance. On
the heels of the Orissa incident some armed militants
THE BJP ERA 313

massacred some innocent villagers in Jehanabad in

Bihar. Thousands of people there have died at the
hands of one group or the other. Each group enjoys the
support of one political group or the other in Bihar.
Many partisan persons claim that these murders are
'qualitatively different'. Then do they hecome less
heinous?
With regard to the Staines case, early on 28 January
a team of three Central ministers - George Fernandes,
Dr. Murti Manohar Joshi and Navin Patnaik - flew to
Orissa and visited the village and met many people.
They reported to the prime minister that the culprits
did not belong to the Bajrang Dal. Speaking to the
press, George Fernandes expressed the opinlon that
there appeared some conspiracy within and outside
India to destahilise the Vajpayee Government. The
prime minister decided that the entire incident would
he inquired into hy a Supreme Court judge.
On 28 January, Sonia Gandhi worshipped at Sri
Venkateshwara Telnple at Tirumalai (near Ttrupati) in
Andhra Pradesh and addressed Congress workers there.
She called upon the allies of the BJP to withdraw
support to the Vajpayee Government.
On the morning of 30 January many newspapers
carried the news item that a commission headed by
Justice D.P. Wadhwa of the Supreme Court would hold
an investigation into the hurning of the Australian
missionary in Orissa. The prilne minister observed a
one,day fast against the growing violence in puhlic life
on the day on which Mahatma Gandhi had been
assassinated in 1948. Some Opposition leaders scoffed
at this noble gesture of the prime minister.
314 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

Another very important news item on 30 January

was the reported statement of human resources
development minister, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, that
there should be legal ban on conversions in India.
Vajpayee had obviously not made up his mind on the
issue, but he is not inclined in favour of any such ban.
On 30 January, yet another significant event took
place. Madan Lal Khurana, minister for parliamentary
affairs, met Prime Minister Vajpayee. Khurana had sent
his letter of resignation to Vajpayee in protest against
what he termed as the attempts of 'some Sangh Parivar
people to spoil the image of the prime minister'.
The capita 1 was fu II of rumours that he was
prompted to resign by the prime minister himself. The
prime minister was reported to have remarked that
Khurana had become a martyr for his (Vajpayee's) sake.
The prime minister withheld Khurana's resignation for
a few days but ultimately he forwarded it to the
president for acceptance.
The situation was prone to differing interpretations.
Khurana was perhaps 'freed' to influence people to
silence the prime minister's severe critics. According
to some, this move was a signal to Sangh Parivar leaders
that Vajpayee was ready for a confrontation.
The other interpretation was that in a meeting of
the BJP's national executive, Khurana was not allowed
to continue his tirade against the Sangh Parivar leaders.
Kushabhau Thakre, the BJP president, could not have
allowed this tirade as he could have been charged with
(promoting dissensions'.
THE BJP ERA 315

Thakre has devoted all his life to the cause of the

RSS, the Jana Sangh and then the BJP. To protect the
whole family from rise of dissension was his sacred duty,
and he performed it well. Thakre was, of course,
annoyed with Khurana and if the former asked the
prime minister to ease out Khurana, it was bound to be
carried out. Khurana himself had been saying that he
would resign. He said he was feeling suffocated. Senior
leaders in the national executive of the BJP might not
have liked the way he launched his attack. He said he
wanted to atone for the burning of the Australian
missionary Graham Staines. Some persons considered
it a publicity stunt. In the ultimate analysis, Khurana
merely harmed himself by being impulsive.
Another startling event took place in Mumbai. Bal
Thackeray, the Shiv Sena chief, sent a one .. line letter
to Manohar Joshi, asking him to tender his resignation
from the post of chief minister of Maharashtra. On
1 Fehruary 1999, Narayan Rane (of the Shiv Sena)
took over charge.
In Delhi, Madan Lal Khurana declared that he
would remain in the BJP and that he was not planning
to float a new party. He asserted that he still belonged
to the RSS.
The Coordinating Committee of the BJP and its
allies met on 2 February in New Delhi. Most of the allies
demanded that the recent price hike in wheat and rice
sold through the public distribution system be with~
drawn. Consequently, the government announced a
partial rollback of its earlier announced increase of
wheat and rice prices. The meeting passed a resolution
316 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

which lauded the performance of the Vajpayee

Government. After the tneeting the Telugu Desam MP,
Yerran Naidu, remarked that his party was not fully
satisfied and hoped that price rise would be rolled back
fully in a couple of weeks. Mamata Banerjee, who had
threatened to withdraw support a day earlier did not
attend the meeting of the Coordination Committee; no
one from her party attended the meeting. There was a
crisis brewing for the government.
At the end of the first week of February 1999, the
prime Ininister went to Jamaica to attend an important
meeting of G~ 15 countries. At this meeting, voices were
raised against the advanced countries and the WT()
(World Trade Organisation). After the prilue minister
had left the country, C)m Prakash Chautala of the Indian
National Lok Oal announced that his group comprising
four MPs would withdraw support to the Vajpayee
Government if, within two days, it did not roll back the
proposed increase in prices. The prime nlinister
telephoned Chautala a few times from abroad and the
latter decided to postpone his decision about support
till 21 February. On 11 February, the Ranhir Sena, an
armed group of landlords in Bi har, assassinated 12
Dalits (n1emhers of depressed classes) in Jehanahad
district. Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo Prasad Yadav
visited the scene of crime hut people shouted slogans
asking them to go back.
Congress leaders in Delhi vociferously insisted that
the Rabri Devi Government in Bihar should resign on
moral grounds. But they did not ask for the dismissal
of this government. Home Minister L.K. Advani said
THE BlP ERA 317

that his ministry had asked for' details of the incident.

Railway Minister N itish Kumar proclaimed that the
ultimate limit had been crossed in Bihar and the Central
cabinet should meet immediately to consider the
dismissal of the Rabri Devi Government in Bihar.
On Friday, 12 February, a huge political suspense
ended temporarily. The RJD party's chief minister, Rabri
Devi, was dismissed. Events moved very swiftly that day.
It came to many as a bolt from the blue. Rabri Devi's
husband, Laloo Prasad Yadav, led a procession of protest
in Patna.
The communists decried the action of the Central
(")overnlnent in dismissing the Rabri Devi Government.
Jayalalitha, the AIADMK supremo, hailed the Centre's
decision and asked for the dismissal of the DMK
Government in Tamil Nadu headed by M. Karunanidhi,
the chief political foe of Jayalalitha. The elite of Delhi
also welcomed the timely action of the Central
Government; many considered it a belated action,
though.
It was on that very day itself that Sonia Gandhi, the
Congress president, visited the families of Dalits who
had been butchered by the Ranbir Sena a few days
earlier. She was not, of course, shouted out like the two
Yadavs who had gone there a couple of days back.
In Orissa, Janaki Ballabh Patnaik, the chief minister,
placed his resignation in the hands of the state governor
as directed by Sonia Gandht on 13 February. There was
heavy resentment and near revolt among large segments
of the Congress party in Orissa over Sonia Gandhi's
action in making Patnaik resign. Patnaik had a real grip
over the Congress party apparatus in his state.
318 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A)PAYEE

Only a few days back the Australian missionary and

his sons were burnt to death in village Manoharpur in
Orissa. It was no doubt reflective of administrative
failure on the part of local authorities that such a
murder could not be prevented. But even after the
unfortunate incident, Patnaik and his friends had never
dreamt that they would be paying the price for it. The
rift hetween the Christian population in Orissa and
others had been growing in Orissa's tribal belt for more
than a year. According to some reports it was not the
conversion to a new religion, but the attempt to behave
differently at a cultural and social level which was at
the root of the trouble. Social and educational work by
Christian missionaries was alright but some persons
must have felt sore over the disdain with that the new
converts Looked upon their erstwhile friends and
relatives, which could not but increase the social
tensions. Graham Staines was a noble soul and was
known throughout Orissa's tribal belt, be they Christian
converts or Hindus.
To make Patnaik quit on the heels of this tragedy
shall certainly not benefit either Sonia Gandhi
personally or the COI1:gress party. His unceremonious
exit only sowed the seeds for further dissent in the party
ranks.
A slightly disquieting incident occurred on
16 February 1999. Om Prakash Chautala's Indian
National Lok Dal (INLD) announced its withdrawal of
support to the BJP,led Government over the latter's
failure to roll back prices of essential commodities. The
formal communication to President Narayanan in this
THE BJP ERA 319

regard was to be sent soon, Chautala clarified. This was

the first major rumbling of discontent.
On 20 February 1999 the Third Front, comprising
some non,BJP non . . Congress parties held a meeting at
New Delhi's Mavlankar Hall. They vent their spleen on
all others. A group of four MPs led by Om Prakash
Chautala wrote a letter to the president of India
withdrawing support to the Vajpayee Government. All
this happened on a day when the noble prime minister
of India, Atal Behari Vajpayee, broke new ground in
bilateral relations between India and Pakistan.
Vajpayee entered Pakistan in a bus through the Wagah
border gates. A regular bus service was inaugurated
between Delhi and Lahore. From Delhi the prime
minister flew to Rajasansi airport (Amritsar) from where
he boarded the golden coloured hus. Other persons in
that hus were Prakash Singh Badal, the chief minister
of Punjab, and some well,known personalities of the
Indian film world such as Dev Anand and Sunil Dutt.
The entire journey was covered by Indian television.
Millions of people throughout India, Pakistan and some
other countries witnessed how pleased the prime
minister was. As soon as the hus crossed the no . . man's
land into Pakistan territory, Vajpayee got down from
the bus to be warmly received by his Pakistani
counterpart Nawaz Sharif. They had a brief one,to . . one
talk for a little while and then a Pakistani helicopter
transported the two prime ministers to Lahore.
An ugly incident happened in Lahore. Stones were
thrown by some members of Jamaat . . e-Islami, a
fundamentalist outfit in Pakistan. A day earlier about
320 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR) V AJPAYEE

20 Indian citizens in J&K were brutally murdered by

Pakistani terrorists who had infiltrated into the state
obviously in an attempt to vitiate the atmosphere.
Right,minded people, both in India and Pakistan, were
happy over Vajpayee's visit to Pakistan. On Indian
television, J.N. Dixit, a former foreign secretary, hailed
the event. He had been India's high commissioner in
Pakistan for nearly three years.
There were cynics, both in India and Pakistan, hut
a large luajority of people felt that it was a step in the
right direction. On 18 February Mamata Banerjee, a
leader of West Bengal, and J. Jayalalitha, former chief
minister of Tamil Nadu, had met in Chennai and after
a long deliberation the two ladies came to the
conclusion that there was no alternative to Vajpayee
for the office of the prime minister of India. Talking to
media persons on 20 February 1999 Jayalalitha not only
said that she would strengthen Vajpayee's hands but
also offered to talk to Om Prakash Chautala and
dissuade him from withdrawing support to the Vajpayee
Government, but it was a few hours late. Chautala had
probably dispatched his letter to the president of India
withdrawing his support. But this move did not affect
the majority support of the Vajpayee (Jovernment in
the Indian Parliament. Jayalalitha said she had phoned
the prime minister earlier in the day (on 20 Fehruary)
and congratulated him on undertaking the historic bus
journey to Lahore and hoped that as a result of his
initiatives, the relationship between the two countries
would take a turn for the better.
THE BJP ERA 321

A renowned author remarked that Vajpayee's

decision to take Sharif up on his offer to ride the bus
was almost as dramatic as when the late Egyptian
President Anwar Saadat took the late Israeli Prime
Minister Menachen Begin's invitation to visit Tel Aviv
nearly two decades back.
The US State Department commented that the bus
trip to discuss the issues that divide the two countries,
including peace and security in Kashmir, was a very
positive development and that they were very
supportive of it. India's former foreign secretary,
J.N. Dixit, observed that India and Pakistan were like
melnbers of the same family having a property dispute.
The new approach will prove extremely fruitful to end
the Lunily feud, he added. The outcome of the talks
between Vajpayee and Sharif was very important as it
would decide the future course of bilateral relations.
The Chinese defence minister was on a visit to
Pakistan when Vajpayee reached Lahore. He said: 'I am
very glad to note that the leaders of Pakistan and India
are Ineeting. I think that is very significant for peace
and stability in the whole of Asia.'
The entire federal cabinet of Pakistan had turned
up in Lahore to be at hand during the Indian prime
Ininister's two-day stay. But much against protocol, the
three service chiefs of the host country absented
themselves. The Pakistani military leadership was
reportedly uncomfortable with the idea of having to
salute the Indian premier.
In India the rank and file of all political parties were
quite happy over Vajpayee's visit to Pakistan. They
322 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

admitted in private conversations that it was another

feather in Vajpayee's cap. But the leaders of some
groups were bent on trying to belittle Vajpayee's trip;
there were many among them who imagined themselves
as the future prime minister of India.
All newspapers had carried front~page stories of
Vajpayee's historic visit.
On 21 February Vajpayee visited Minar~e~ Pakistan
and a couple of other places of interest. In the evening
there was a ladies' party at the governor's place in
honour of Vajpayee's foster~daughter Namita.
A declaration of goodwill was signed by India and
Pakistan. Immediate steps were to he taken to prevent
nuclear mishaps. Both sides agreed to keep each other
informed about their missile tests.
An Urdu edition of Vajpayee's poems was also
released in Pakistan which enjoyed brisk sale.
On 26 February 1999 the external affairs minister,
J aswant Singh, said in the Rajya Sabh~, the Upper
House of Indian Parliament: 'The Lahore Declaration
is a movement towards a no war situation but not a
movement towards a no~war pact.' He ruled out any
foreign intervention in the subcontinent stating that
the foreign powers, in the past, had attempted to fish
in troubled waters.'
India and Pakistan, Jaswant Singh added, were born
of the same womb, they spoke the same language. 'We
do not need interpreters to convey to others what we
are doing,' he clarified. This statement of Jaswant Singh
was received with a prolonged thumping of desks in the
Rajya Sabha. About Prime Minister Vajpayee's recent
THE BJP ERA 323

visit to Pakistan he stressed that it was the most

significant ellgagement between India and Pakistan in
over a quarter of a century. 'The two prime ministers
have agreed that all outstanding issues including
Jammu and Kashmir would be resolved through 'the
composite dialogue process'. 'The two countries agreed
to appoint a two .. member committee relating to
civilian detainees and missing prisoners of war,' the
minister pointed out. He added that during the talks
with Pakistan there was no hint of any foreign
intervention either 'accepted or hinted'. 'Foreign
intervention in any form destablises the balance and
the destabilisation lasts for a long time,' he declared.
He went on to say: 'The genius lies in capturing the
moment and utilising it for the benefit of the people.'
Besides the bus ride of Vajpayee to Pakistan and the
goodwill generated among the right .. thinking citizens
on both sides of the border, another significant event
was the presentation of the annual budget of the Union
government to the Parliament of India (on
27 February) by the finance minister, Yashwant Sinha.
Earlier, on 25 February the railway budget was
presented to the Lok Sabha by N itish Kumar, the
railway minister. There was no passenger fare increase
for those travelling in ordinary class but travel was
made slightly costlier for those intending to travel by
II class airconditioned coaches and in the first class.
Freight charges were increased by 4 per cent. By and
large, there was almost no criticism of the railway
budget.
324 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

He slapped taxes worth Rs. 9334 crore to trim the

fiscal deficit to 4.4 per cent of the GDP in an attempt
to restore fiscal discipline. He imposed a 10 per cent
surcharge on the tax paid for those earning Rs. 60,000
and above per annum. On the day of the budget
presentation, the finance minister was reported to have
said that he had decided to exempt from tax all income
from UTI (Unit Trust of India) and other mutual funds.
But the next day he was quoted as saying that "earnings
from monthly return schemes of the UTI were not to
be exempted from the amount to be taken into
consideration for calculation of income~tax'. This
statement annoyed various categories of people,
especially the retired persons. They had reason to be
angry. The finance minister did not seem to realise that
he was hitting a large number of important opinion~
makers. A minor relief was provided on cooking gas
after the government had raised it a couple of months
earlier to the budget. The price of diesel was, however,
increased by Re.1 per litre.
A day after the presentation of his mixed proposals,
the finance minister confirmed that there would be no
roll, back of surcharge on income, tax at least for one
year. Certain definite concessions were announced for
the rural economy. By and large, the economists and
politicians praised the budget. However, the leftists
considered the budget as inflationary.
On 1 March 1999 the Reserve Bank of I nd ia
announced a 1 per cent cut on interest rates. Some
financial experts thought this cut would he ahle to stem
the ongoing recession. In the situation in which the
THEBjPERA 325

Indian economy is placed there can be no budget

totally free from inflationary trends.
I t was on the last day of February that the
communist chief minister of West Bengal, Jyoti Basu,
termed the BJP Government as 'self. . serving, uncivilised
and barbaric'. Such harsh invectives against the
Vajpayee Government were sure to amuse people and
they considered such utterances themselves as most
barbaric and in bad taste. The BJ P vice,president,
J.P. Mathur, proclaimed that such a statement was born
of a 'growing frustration of the communists and that
their conspiracy to topple the government with the
help of the Congress came a cropper as was evident
from their ignominious defeat in the Lok Sabha on the
Bihar issue'. *
In a separate statement the human resources
development minister, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, said
that to call the Vajpayee Government 'self,serving'
only demonstrated the political myopia and ideological
paranoia of the Marxists. Dr. Joshi added that Prime
Minister Vajpayee was one of the finest democrats of
our times and his leadership was being hailed world over
for vision, sobriety, statesmanship and missionary zeal.
Joshi further observed that 'the CPI(M) still
fashions itself as a Stalinist party. They have condoned

* When the Presidential Ordinance proclaiming Central rule

in Bihar was to be ratified by Parliament, the B) P and its al-
lies scored a victory securing the required number of votes in
the Lok Sabha. However, the Ordnance had to be withdrawn
as the BJP and its allies did not have the requisite numbers in
the Rajya Sabha.
326 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAjPAYEE

the Stalinist brutalities, justified Pol Pot barbarism and

also the Tiananmen Square massacre'.
The minister pointed out that the CPI(M) had no
qualms about 'sucking up to a party whose involvement
in, the violation of democratic and human rights
(during the Emergency, 1975,77, and the killing of the
Sikhs in 1984) was matched only by their Marxist
. ,
reglmes.
The venomous verbal attack by Jyoti Basu took
place a few days before the festival of colours, Holi,
which fell on 2 March. The prime minister was in a
joyful mood during HolL We, the authors, saw him
mingling with the people and spreading the colours of
his wit all around. We saw him dancing with the people
for the first time.
On the Holi day itself, some members of a particular
caste of landlords were mercilessly butchered in
Jehanabad district of Bihar. This act was in
retaliation to earlier massacres of Dalits which had
forced the president of India to dismiss the Rabri Devi
Government in Bihar state. Massacres and
countertnassacres in no small number are representative of
a miniature civil war on caste lines.
The Lok Sabha met on 4 March 1999. The raging
Bihar issue crippled the functioning of both Houses of
Parliament. Mulayam Singh Yadav's party members and
those of Laloo Prasad Yadav's party rushed to the well
of the Lok Sabha shouting at the top of their voice.
They ultimately succeeded in getting the proceedings
stalled. Some Congress members wanted to know the
date when the government would announce about the
THE BJP ERA 327

expected discussion in the Rajya Sabha or its next

move. They were given the date: 8 March 1999.
As the days of March rolled by, significant
developments took place, in quick succession, most of
which were characterised by acrimony, volatility and,
above all, uncertainty, as revealed in the next chapter.
 13
Rumblings of Discontent

AtaL Behari Vajpayee was sworn in as prime minister

on 19 March 1998 after the much~awaited letter of
support from the AIADMK leader, J. Jayalalitha,
reached the president of India. Vajpayee felt duly
grateful to Jayalalitha and more often than not he willy,
nilly accepted her demands. The Akalis had also once
threatened to withdraw support over the issue of
Udham Singh Nagar, a small town in western UP, which
was to fall under the proposed state of Uttaranchal. The
Akalis wanted it to remain in UP. This issue soon got
shelved and the BJP heaved a sigh of relief.
The proposed cabinet expansion was postponed two
or three times in 1998. In January 1999 many persons
in New Delhi and elsewhere were sure that the cahinet
would be expanded by the prime minister. Mamata
Banerjee of the Trinamul Congress, a breakaway group
of the Congress, had been supporting the Vajpayee

328
THE BJP ERA 329

Government through thick and thin. But when the

matter regard ing the proposed cabinet expansion
appeared in the rned ia, she made it clear that her
nOlninee should get the railway portfolio. N itish Kumar,
the incumbent minister for railways, was reportedly
reluctant to give up his post.
Such contradictions among the alliance partners
were projected in a manner as if the very existence of
the Vajpayee Government appeared to be in jeopardy.
But again, very shrewdly, the prime minister postponed
the cahinet expansion. But the most dangerous
potential trouble for Vajpayee lay in some inner
contradictions aluong the Sangh Parivar.
In the Jain hawala case, charges of corruption were
levelled against Macial Lal Khurana, the then chief
minister of Delhi. Consequently, he resigned from his
post. He was ultimately exonerateJ by the court and
expected to be reinstated. But the BJ P leadership did
not consider it discreet as the next chief Ininister of
IJelhi (Sahib Singh Verma) enjoyed a lot of support in
the rural areas around Delhi. Khurana was, however,
given two important portfolios in the Central
Government, yet he carried a grudge against certain
leaders of the Sangh Parivar. At the Bangalore session
of the BJP National Executive at the close of 1998,
Khurana spoke against some leaders without naming
them. He took the stance of being the 'chief defender'
of Vajpayee who ultimately spoke vehemently at the
Bangalore session where the Insurance Bill came under
heavy attack from the orthodox wing of the party.
Dattopant Thengri, the labour leader of the B1P, spoke
330 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

vociferously against the proposed Insurance Bill. In the

words of Khurana he felt
, 'suffocated'. He wrote a letter
to the BJP chief Kushabhau Thakre, and after a few days
he despatched his letter of resignation from the cabinet
to the prime minister. Vajpayee kept it pending for a
few days. Khurana met the PM on 30 January and again
pressed that his resignation be accepted. The prime
minister eventually forwarded his letter to the
president, who accepted the resignation of Khurana.
On 1 February, the editorial of a leading daily
commented on these differences:
Both by appearance and temperament, Mr. Madan
Lal Khurana makes an unlikely t11artyr. A
quintessential organisation man who had nursed and
nurtured to strength his party - the BJP and the
Jana Sangh earlier - in Delhi, Mr. Khurana has
chosen to become the first victim of the battle
between the diehard in the party and the moderate
government of Atal Behari Vajpayee. While the
Prime Minister is under growing attacks in party
meetings and gatherings of Sangh Parivar outfits,
persons trying to speak in defence of Mr. Vajpayee
are being denied opportunities in these forums.
Mr. Khurana has heen feeling suffocated ever since
the current wave of attack against the Christians had
begun. He reportedly wrote a letter to the BJ P
president, Kushabhau Thakre, on 7 January
suggesting official organisational atonement for the
atrocities against the Christians and offering to
resign from the party's national executive. Not
getting any positive response, he has now resigned
THE BJP ERA 331

both from the Union cahinet and the party's apex

policy, making body. This is the second time in less
than four years that the BJP leadership failed to be
fair to Mr. Khurana. When he resigned as Delhi's
chief. minister in the wake of the hawala avalanche
of chargesheets and got cleared by the court, the BJP
leadership failed to do the right thing by restoring
to hinl the chief ministership. It paid the price
dearly when it again hypassed his claims hefore the
Novenlber Assembly poll.
I t is pren1ature to say that the decks have been
cleared for a war between the ministerial and
organisational wings of the BJP - a somewhat
distorted and miniature version of the Congress split
in 1969. Mr. Vajpayee is not Indira (Jandhi -
where the lady would choose the head,on collision
course, the present Prilne Minister would prefer to
duck or slither sideways. But the escapist options
are running out and after the Khurana episode, he
could po~sibly be dragged into a battle where a
tTIoderate segment of the B]P and almost all the
coalition partners will be with him. The party
leadership has only hard choices to make.

What wishful thinking on the part of the writer! The

leadership could digest these events and n1arch ahead.
()n 7 Fehruary 1999, an article in an English daily tried
to highlight the internal differences among the Sangh
Parivar. To understand the real substance of this article,
one has to first understand the genesis of the differences
in perceptions. These differences are the current fallout
332 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

in the shape of not so friendly undercurrents. People

in India and abroad have to be candidly aware that the
genesis lies in perceptions of Hindutva, a Sanskrit
derivative of the word Hindu, plainly meaning
'H~nduness'. But slightly different interpretations have
been given by some persons. The word Hindutva was
not in vogue in earlier centuries or even in the early
years of the twentieth century.
So far as 'Hinduness' is concerned no person horn a
Hindu would probably like to take offence to it and if
sOll1ebody suggests that Vajpayee possesses less
'Hinduness' or that leaders outside the BJP have no
'Hinduness' in them, then it would certainly seeln
incredible. We can say with SaIne personal knowledge
about politiCians, and the society in general, that a
large number of leftists too are not devoid of SOIne
'Hinduness' because a portion of a man's thinking is
genetic in nature, particularly in India. Then what do
the strong votaries of Hindutva mean by the term? Do
they mean that even their sympathisers do not have
'Hindutva' in them? Do they mean plain Hinduisin hy
the word Hindutva? C)r do they mean 'the feeling of
political Hinduisation'? The great freedom fighter
V.O. Savarkar was probably the first to put the word
'Hindutva' in circulation through his writings. Plain
Hinduness is accepted widely by people across the
hoard. In fact, plain 'Hinduism' has affected a large
number of non .. Hindus as well, in India and abroad. The
greatest preacher of the Hindu way of devotion was
certainly Swatni Prabhupad, who in just ten years (from
A. D. 1965 to 1975) steered the minds of a few Inillion
THE BJP ERA 333

•
people outside India towards Hinduness. Vajpayee and
some former prime ministers have had some strong
feelings of this 'Hinduness'. His poem on the title page
of Rashtra Dharma's first issue speaks of this 'Hinduness'.
V.P. Singh claims that he has no 'Hinduness' in him. To
disclaim one's Hinduness is not required to. run a
secular government. Even Rajiv Gandhi had a clear
shade of Hinduness in him.
Hinduism is like a garden containing many fragrant
flowers. Atal Behari Vajpayee is a great Hindu, and,
certainly, his Hinduness is pragmatic. I have known
people who have jeered at his taking morning walks
with his pet dog. Does this go against his 'Hinduness'?
Incidentally, these jeering persons referred to do not
belong to the BJP or the Sangh Parivar. To suggest that
some other leader of the BJ P has heen nourishing
ambitions to hecome the prime minister by compelling
Vajpayee to resign is being unfair to all concerned.
Surely, it is one thing to say that Vajpayee could not
COlne up to the expectations of some other people on
the satne side of the fence and is absolutely another that
they want to throw him out and put some other leader
in his place or to say that in case the governlnent goes
down, some other leader in the allies' group nlight take
over. This canard has no substance. The unhealthy talk
of some people is more or less based on hearsay. Very
few sensible leaders in India would like themselves to
he counted among those who might be aspiring to
throttle the Vajpayee Government.
On 4 February 1999, the political situation appeared
serious. A 7 February article observes: 'The tension was
334 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR! V AJPAYEE

palpable, the situation desperate. The hate rhetoric of

the Sangh Parivar affiliates had become shriller, the
attacks on the Christian community showed no signs
of abating, and some coalition partners were
threatening to withdraw support on this issue as well
as the decision to hike prices of cooking gas and certain
food items. The government was tottering, the Prime
Minister looked out of control and it should SeelTI the
Centre would not hold together any longer.' The hopes
of the writer, who indulged in spreading the poison of
lies, were again dashed.
There was optimism among the top office bearers
of the BJP that the crisis, if any, would blow over. There
were some minor rumblings among some allies, but they
were temporary. They stood with Vajpayee when the
chips were down.
In the eyes of all right,thinking Indians, the image
of Vajpayee and his government's as well stood as
bright as on that fateful evening of 11 May 1998 when
the entire country came to know about India's nuclear
tests.
A particular newspaper carried anti,BJP articles, all
concocted, for many days in a row. Some months back
the same newspaper had indulged in spreaoing the
canard that Jayalalitha held secret meetings and
telephonic conversations quite often with a particular
Congress leader. Later on, the story was denied by the
Congress leader. As far as Mamata Banerjee's anger was
concerned, it was always candid and clear. She had
wanted the railway ministry for her party so that new
railway lines could be laid in West Bengal.
THE BJP ERA 335

The cabinet expansion was postponed in January as

some non~political friends of the prime minister were
reported to have advised him that February 1999 might
he the hest time so that they may face the budget
session of Parliament with utmost cohesion.
As the Indian National Lok Dal leader, Om Prakash
Chautala, threatened the coalition government a day
after the prime minister left to attend the G~ 15 meeting
in Jamaica (in the heginning of the second week of
February), political gossip again took a new turn.
(~hautala del11andcd that the proposed increase in
prices of wheat and rice sold through the puhlic
distrihution system should he rolled hack within two
days. FrOlTI ]alnaica itself, Prime Minister Vajpayee
telephoned Chautala thrice. C:hautala and his
associates Inet at Panipat (Haryana) on 11 Fehruary
and decided to heed the prinle lninister's appeal to
discllss the 111atter with hiln. The decision was kept in
aheyance till 21 Fehruary. This situation gave rise to
justified speculation that the cabinet \vould be enlarged
in the third week of Fehruary. Sonia Gandhi knew it
very well that, individually, VaJpayee was 1110re popular
than she alnong the intellectuals outside the n1edia, e.g.,
lawyers, leaJing poets, scientists, economists, doctors
and adluinistrators. She must have known that heing
Rajiv Ciandhi's widow was not enough to acquire power
or Inaintain it if acquired by some freak of politics.
Everyone was reluctant to go to the polls so soon as the
general election had taken place only in Fehruary
March 1998. Most of the politicians wanted to wait.
336 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Disturbing events continued to occur. In Bihar, on

25 January 1999, nearly lWO dozen Dalits were killed
by some armed militants. The killing of Dalits in Bihar
on 11 February and of Bhumihar farmers on 18 February
were unfortunate. Many impartial observers had, by
this time, come to believe that some foreign hand was
at work in creating such havoc in Bihar. The Congress
P~lTty asked Rabri Devi, the chief minister, to resign on
moral grounds. Sonia Gandhi did not ask for the
dismissal of the Rabri Devi Government though. The
Congress obviously thought that such a dismissal might
prove a feather in the cap of the BJP. But if the Congress
was really interested in a two'party systenl gaining
ground, it should have candidly asked for Rabn Devi's
dismissal in Bihar and imposition of president's rule.
That would have heen in the long,tenn interest of the
Congress.
The Union cabinet met in the evening of
11 February to consider the situation. The rneering was
demanded by Nitish Kumar, the railway minister, who
came from Bihar. There was another meeting of the
cabinet on the morning of 12 February. The prin1e
minister's nod was received though he was out of the
country, in Jamaica. A presidential proclamation was
issued from Calcutta as President R.K. Narayanan was
there on the evening of 12 February. Rabri Devi's
dismissal put an end to minor dissensions in the allies
camp for a short while.
Some of the allies of the B1P, which were more
vociferous than others, came in for attack by the home
minister, L.K. Advani. Commenting on Advani's
THE BJP ERA 337

criticism, a daily observed: 'Mr. L.K. Advani was only

revealing a part of the problem when he blamed the
BJP .. led government's allies for tarnishing its image.
True, the attitude of some of the partners has left a lot
to be desired. It is quite evident that one of their main
ohjectives has been to extract as much as possible from
a government with a precarious majority since they
know it cannot afford to displease them beyond a point.
Hence, Mr. Advani's complaint about parties with three
or four MPs trying to hully the government.'
Another article ran as follows:

The latest two instances in this respect are the

"Bengal package" which the Centre has offered to
Miss Mamata Banerjee and the legal moves it has
tried to make in favour of Miss Jayalalitha in Tamil
NaJu. When such desperate attenlpts are made to
placate some restive allies, surely the others too are
hound to step up their delnands. The measures taken
wi th regard to Trinamool Congress and the
AIADMK also tend to refute the Home Minister's
claim that the BJP's intention is not to stay in power
at any cost but to provide a corruption .. free society.
There is little doubt that the sole purpose behind
the Bengal package is to retain Miss Banerjee's
loyalty for some more time and thereby prolong the
BJP's tenuous hold on power, while the moves in
Tamil Nadu are intended to delay the investigations
into corruption charges against Miss Jayalalitha. But
the attitude of the allies is not the only reason why
the government's image has suffered. Arguably, what
338 INDIA UNDER ATAl BEHARI V AJPAYEE

has hurt it even luore is the behaviour of the BJP's

fraternal organisation in the Sangh Parivar, whose
anti .. Christian campaign has disgraced India before
the eyes of the world, just as their demolition of the
Babri Masjid (on 6 December 1992) had damaged
this country's secular image. In fact, it will be
reasonable to assume that if the allies had not put
pressure on the government and compelled it to
make a promise that it will keep the Sangh Parivar
outfits in check, the situation tTIight have become
even more disturbing. If the allies have been keen
in boosting their popularity in their respective areas
of influence by securing whatsoever they can from
the Centre or safeguarding the personal interest of
leaders, the saffron organisations have been
recklessly pursuing their sectarian agendas in the
belief that their time has come with the BJP's ascent
to power. As a result, the so .. called national agenda
of the alliance has been a casualty.

This write .. up, though biased against the Vajpayee

Government, reveals the signs of discord which had
become manifest between the BJP and its allies hy
February 1999.
A failure on the part of Om Prakash Chautala (the
Indian National Lok Dalleader who had four of his men
in Parliament), to make the prime minister agree to his
viewpoint that the increase in prices of rationed articles
and urea should be rolled back, made him announce the
withdrawal of support on 16 February. The formal letter
to the president of India in this regard was scheduled
to be sent on 19 February.
THE BJP ERA 339

On the price issue, the one .. member Sikkim

Democratic Front (SDF) had also threatened
withdrawal of support a few days ago. The report that
the SDF had already withdrawn support was refuted by
SikkilU Chief Minister Pawan Cahmling who let it be
known that his party was not treating the matter as a
closed issue.
On 15 February, the 12th National Convention of
the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh was held at Hedgewar
Smriti Bhavan. Dattopant Thengri, t~e founder of this
labour organisation, attacked Vajpayee, describing him
as a petty politician playing into the hands of his
political advisors with doubtful credentials. He
contended that the previous governments had blindly
followed the globalisation policies on the diktat of the
Western powers. He had hoped that the Vajpayee
Government would be different, but it had belied the
expectations of the nationalist forces on the economic
front. The three .. day convention was inaugurated by
Vivekananda Kendra President P. Parmeswaran. Draft
resolutions circulated in advance demanded the
withdrawal of India from the World Trade Organisation
(WTC)) and attacked 'power .. thirsty' political parties
for their willingness to surrender before the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. It
was for the second time that Thengri chose to lash out
at Vajpayee publicly. Thengri vehemently declared that
every top hureaucrat advising Vajpayee on crucial
issues was from the past regimes and had his own
agenda. He accused the Vajpayee Government of
letting down the nation by giving up the swadeshi
agenda.
340 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AjPAYEE

On 16 February 1999, the home minister, L.K.

Advani, publicly stated that the governor of Bihar,
Sunder Singh Bhandari, might have to be replaced. This
announcement led to sharp reactions. The next day, the
Bihar BJP unit as well as the central office bearers of
the BJP headed by Kushabhau Thakre protested against
the proposed removal of Bhandari. Four BJP MPs from
Bihar (including one member of the Rajya Sabha) sent
their resignation to the prime minister. They wanted
Bhandari to stay on as Bihar governor. But Bhandari
took it as an unbearable blow to him. He packed his
personal belongings on 17 February and hoarded a train
to Delhi. Before that the prime minister telephoned the
governor at Patna twice in order to pacify him.
Notwithstanding such requests, he did not stay on at
Patna. He met the prime minister on 18 February.
Bhandari later went back to Patna. But then it could
be no pleasure for him to stay on in Patna where the
very air seemed to bite him. (He later got himself
transferred to Gujarat as governor.) Meanwhile, Bihar
was the cynosure of all eyes!
It came as a great relief to the supporters of stability
and honest Leadership that in the early evening of
26 February, the Lok Sabha ratified the imposition of
president's rule in Bihar, with 279 members supporting
the motion, 250 opposing it and three abstaining from
voting. A little earlier to the voting, the Telugu Desam
Party announced its decision to vote for the motion
instead of merely abstaining from voting.
The Coordination Committee of the ruling coalition
met on 27 March 1999 in New Delhi. Jayalalitha also
THE BJP ERA 341

attended it. She demanded that George Fernandes be

shifted from the Ministry of Defence to a less. sensitive
post. Her other demand was that the dismissed chief of
the Indian Navy, Vishnu Bhagwat, be reinstated. AU the
other allies of the BJP stood solidly together to defend
the defence minister against the attacks of the lady
from Chennai. She stayed on in Delhi to attend the tea
party hosted by Dr. Surhamaniam Swamy (the person
most disliked by the B]P), a member of the Lok Sabha
from Tamil NaJu. The tea party was held on 29 March,
and was attended hy the former prime ministers,
Narasimha Rao, Chandra Shekhar and Deve Gowda. A
junior minister of the BJP, Uma Bharati, was also seen
at the party. Sonia Gandhi, the Congress president,
came for about twenty minutes. Jayalalitha was
photographed sitting by the side of Sonia Gandhi.
The next day Mamata Bannerjee roundly attacked
Jayalalitha and declared that a corrupt person like
Jayalalitha had no moral right to attack George
FernanJes who, she said, was a very upright and honest
person. Then, on 31 March, R. Kumaramangalam, the
lninister of power in Vajpayee's Government, also spoke
in the same vein. He made a statement to the effect
that Jayalalitha had changed her mind five times in five
days.
His remarks greatly upset the AIADMK ministers
and its supreme leader, Jayalalitha. The top leaders of
her party met in Chennai and demanded that the prime
tninister should have immediately clarified whether he
agreed with Kumaramangalam. They added that if the
prime minister agreed with his lninister, then within an
342 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

hour they would go to the president of India and inform

him that they no longer supported the Vajpayee
Government. In fact, an hour or two before the Chennai
statelnent, Vajpayee had told the media that the
relnarks hy Kumaramangalam were the own personal
opinion of the minister.
Thus in the evening of 1 April 1999 most of the
people thought that the fall of the Vajpayee
Government was imminent.
Top leaders of the BJP had all gathered in Goa for
their National Executive meeting scheduled for 2 and
3 April. The mood was sombre but very surprisingly
there was no nervousness at all.
A day earlier Sonia Gandhi was in Sou.th Inaia
where she said that the Parliament session scheduled
to begin in the second week of April (after a recess)
was likely to be very momentous. On 30 March itself
the prime minister and his trusted friends in the
coalition had "finalised their strategy to meet the likely
'very momentous' attack from those bent on
destabilisation.
Most of the thinking people thought that the
coalition might collapse any time. Congress circles
genuinely feared that if the Vajpayee Governl1}ent
survived the April,May period, it would consolidate
itself and may become impregnable.
A large number of Congress MPs felt that the
Vajpayee Government's fall would result in a terrific
destabilisation and inexorably lead to another election
to the lower house of Indian Parliament.
THE BJP ERA 343

Some of them were very clear in their perception

that the fall of the Vajpayee Government in April,May
period would not result in any good for any leader. At
that stage, i.e., in the first few days of April 1999, they
did not convey tpeir views to Sonia Gandhi, either
directly or indirectly, but they spoke of their
apprehensions in hushed tones.
Whether the time bomb set for mid .. April would
explode or get defused was a moot question indeed.
The BJP National Executive which met in Goa on 2 and
3 April appealed to all its allies in the government to
observe the ethics of a coalition.
The AIADMK's General Council met in Chennai
and Jayalalitha put forth her three demands again
publicly. The demands were: (I) sacking (not shifting)
of George Fernandes from the post of defence minister,
(2) reinstatement of the sacked Navy chief, Vishnu
Bhagwat, and (3) setting up a Joint Parliamentary
Committee to probe into allegations made by George
Fernandes against Bhagwat.
On 3 April, the prime minister addressed a public
meeting in Panaji and accused the Congress of being
'power hungry' and compared its condition at the time
to that of a fish thrown out of water. That very day
Jayalalitha, addressing her followers, declared that she
was like an engine and he (Vajpayee) was like a driver.
She added that she would be the engine even if another
government were formed and others will be merely be
like the coaches of a train.
Everybody across the political spectrum felt amused
at this view. The facts, as they. stood that day, were that
344 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A) PAYEE

neither the BJP and its allies were ready to treat her as
an engine nor the others opposed to the Vajpayee
Government cared much for her. The Congress
President Sonia Gandhi, nor any other Congress leader,
nor any leftist commented upon her statement.
The cabinet met a few hours after she repeated her
three demands at Chennai and rejected them. Atal
Behari Vajpayee asserted that indiscipline by anybody
in the armed forces could not be tolerated, in an
obvious reference to the Bhagwat episode. Kushabhau
Thakre, the BJP pre~ident, said that the party would
support whatever action the Vajpayee Government
would take to tackle the crisis. On 5 April the office
bearers of the BJP were exhibiting confidence. Pramod
Mahajan, information and broadcasting minister, was
also confident that they would win the day.
Though it was clear to many that the leaders in the
so~called Third Front and the Congress were all aspiring
for the post of prime minister, some Congressmen
wanted Vajpayee to continue as prime minister so that
elections may get postponed and their own seat may
not be at stake.
The BJP leaders declared that there would be no
horse~trading. The sword of Damocles did hang on the
Vajpayee Government at the close of the first week of
April 1999.
On 6 April Vajpayee visited Bateshwar, his
ancestral village in Agra. He addressed a public rally
there which was largely attended.
The Congress put forward two names,
Dr. Manmohan Singh and P. Shivshankar, in case the
THE BJP ERA 345

Congress was to be called upon to fo~m the government.

Mulayam Singh Yadav said he was ready to step in if
the Congress did not take any initiative.
George Fernandes, the defence minister, addressed
a crowded press conference and accused Vishnu
Bhagwat of leaking out a top--secret project.
It was on 6 April that the two Central ministers of
the AIADMK met the prime minister and handed over
their resignations from the cabinet at the instance of
their party chief.
The prime minister appeared unfazed over all these
Jevelopments. How he would tide over the looming
crisis was a big question mark.
The defence minister appeared to be on the
defensive in the evening of 6 April 1999. The situation
appeared grim as the days in April sped by.
 14
The Fall of the
Vajpayee Government and Beyond

April 1999 will go down in history as a month which

witnessed a series of dramatic developments, leading to
a denouement which the BJP and its allies would have
definitely liked to avoid. These developments, which
occurred at a rapid-fire pace, led to a nail-biting climax.
Let us put events in perspective.
On 9 April the BJP leader from Tamil Nadu and a
Central minister, R. Kumaramangalam, declared that
the BJP-Ied Government was not to seek a vote
of confidence despite ]. Jayalalitha's threat to
withdraw support. The resignations of two ministers
of ]ayalalitha's party, AIADMK, had already been
accepted by the president of India.
The same day Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee
spoke at Ahmedabad. He charged the Congress with
hatching a conspiracy to ·bring down the coalition
346
THE BJP ERA 347

government at the Centre. Addressing the 'Parivartan

Rally' organised by the Gujarat unit of the BJP on the
occasion of the foundation day of the party, Vajpayee
assailed the Congress for trying to usurp power at the
Centre through dubious means. Vajpayee added that
attempts by the Congress, 'blinded by its lust for power',
would not fructify and expressed the hope that the
crisis faced by the coalition government would blow
over.
'We are short of some seats but it should not cause
us any undue worry', Vajpayee clarified, hinting at a
situation after the withdrawal of support by the
AIADMK. Saying that the Congress resorted to
'opportunism', the prime minister made a reference to
Bihar where a dismissed Rabri Devi Government was
reinstated because the Congress did not support the
move to impose president's rule in the state which was
facing a serious law and order situation. On 10 April
Venkaiah Naidu, the general secretary of the BJP, said
that 'it is either Vajpayee or general elections'.
K.L. Sharma, BJP vice,president, also opined that the
real wish of the AIADMK leader Jayalalitha was the
dislnissal of her bete,noire, M. Karunanidhi, and
withdrawal of the cases pending against her in court.
On 9 April Home Minister L.K. Advani spoke to
Karunanidhi over the telephone and requested him for
his support to the BJP Government at the Centre.
Karunanidhi remained non,committal.
On 10 April the Union minister of human resources
development, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, spoke on the
telephone to Jayalalitha. The contents of the talk were
348 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

not revealed. When mediapersons tried to get

something out of Dr. Joshi, he merely said: 'No
comments.' Prime Minister Vajpayee also spoke to
Karunanidhi over the telephone on the night of
10 Apri l. Obviously, the PM must have sought
cooperation from him. After a few hours, Karunanidhi
declared that he could not he on the same side as
Jayalalitha. He said he could back the Congress if they
did not depend on the support of Jayalalitha. Thus,
Karunanidhi had given a sort of notice to Sonia Gandhi
to keep away from Jayalalitha.
On the evening of 11 April the prime n1inister
appeared on TV to address the nation. He mentioned
the tricentenary of the birth of the Khalsa and said that
Guru Gobind Singh had said in a couplet that he would
definitely ensure his victory when he had to hattle
against the enemy.
The day 11 April was a Significant day. The
information and broadcasting minister, Pramod
Mahajan, declared that Indian scientists had testfired
'Agni,II', a ballistic missile. Two days earlier India had
informed many countries, including the USA, of its
intention to test Agni. It was another milestone in the
path of Vajpayee's glory. India was marching from
strength to strength and from glory to glory day hy day
under the able leadership of Vajpayee.
India achieved a record 200 million tonnes of
foodgrain production. Development work progressed
day by day. In spite of all these achievements of the
country, some Opposition leaders lambasted the
government. Political circles of the Opposition
THE BJP ERA 349

partners didn't show any pride or joy even on testfiring

of the Agni missile.
Public opinion showed Vajpayee having a lead over
Sonia Gandhi in the event of a general election. Yet
the danger loomed large as the clock was ticking fast.
The crucial date was 15 April, when Parliament was
scheduled to meet after a three,week break.
On 12 April Jayalalitha's huge luggage consignment
reached Delhi by the morning flight from Chennai. The
lady herself arrived by the evening flight of Jet Airways.
When she was leaving her residence for the airport at
Chennai, her supporters shouted slogans in her support
and referred to her as the would .. be prime minister of
India. On her arrival at Delhi she declared that she had
come to Delhi to form a new government. She was sore
over the fact that Prime Minister Vajpayee and Home
Minister Advani had talked to Karunanidhi, the .chief
minister of Tamil Nadu, over the telephone. She
declared that there could he no rapprochement hetween
her and the BJ P. The BJ P also declared that the doors
for any talks with the AIADMK {read Jayalalitha} were
definitely shut. Karunanidhi had already declared that
he would not be in. the camp which formed a
government with Jayalalitha's support.
Meanwhile, a likely meeting between BJP's
M.L. Khurana and the Indian National Lok Dal leader,
Oln Prakash Chautala, cou Id not materialise on
12 April 1999. Most of the observers in Delhi thought
that Chautala's 'NO' to support the Vajpayee
Government was not his final word and then there was
a difference between the final word and the final deed.
350 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

Even as early as breakfast time on 13 April, it was clear

beyond a shadow of doubt that Jayalalitha's political
gaIne was up and the jet of her politics was nosediving.
It was on Karunanidhi that all eyes in India were riveted
on 13 April and also on Chautala. The Bahujan Samaj
Party {led by Kanshi Ram and Mayawati} had declared
that it would decide its course of action on the floor
of Parliament. The fog was expected to get cleared by
the sunset of 14 April 1999. People, by and large,
ardently wished good for Atal Behari Vajpayee. A
minister in the Vajpayee Government even said that
Sonia Gandhi would never be able to attain the post
of prime minister. To a large number of people in the
country this appeared a truism. Opposition to her
becoming the prime minister at any time appeared to
be hardening hour by hour. Large sections of
Congressmen also did not want her to become the prime
minister. One activist said, 'anybody except the lady'.
Yet, if the Congress were to do better than the BJP in
the elections to the 13th Lok Sabha, she may very well
emerge as the prime minister. But Vajpayee is a far
better campaigner and his image is brighter than that
of any other political leader in India. This fact is
conceded by a large number of rank and file of other
parties as well. A leader (non .. BJP) said, 'even if he loses
the prime ministership at some point of time in 1999,
the most likely possibility is that he could again come
. ..,
up as pnme minister.
JayalaHtha performed Kali puja in the five .. star hotel
in which she was staying in New Delhi on 13 April. The
same day the DMK Executive Committee met in
THE BJP ERA 351

Chennai and declared that the party 'shall not have

anything to do with the group that shall depend on
AIADMK for its support'. Jayalalitha was declared more
dangerous (for the country) than 'communalism'. Jyoti
Basu also a expressed a similar view in Calcutta on
13 April.
Meanwhile, Sonia Gandhi declared that she was
ready to meet Jayalalitha. For his part, Om Prakash
Chautala changed his stand and expressed his
conditional support for the Vajpayee Government. It
was clear that Vajpayee enjoyed some sneaking
admiration of a part of the Opposition rather than the
possible Sonia .. Jayalalitha combine.
Some Congressmen thought that the two Yadavs
(Mulayam Singh and Laloo Prasad) would support the
Sonia Gandhi, Jayalalitha combine if the Vajpayee
Government were to fall in the third week of April. This
combination of a little more than 200 MPs of the Lok
Sabha could certainly trigger off a very powerful
realignment of political powers with the TOP, the DMK,
the Akalis and the Trinamul Congress on the same side.
Communists shuddered at the very idea. The
Congressmen, AIADMK members and the followers of
the two Yadavs were very anxious for the immediate fall
of the Vajpayee Government and usher themselves
in - even as a minority government - for some time.
But why would the president of India impose a general
election on the country with the aforementioned group
in power after dislodging the Vajpayee government
even if the latter failed to prove its majority? Was there
any chance of the Vajpayee Government losing the vote
352 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR! V AJPAYEE

of confidence? These were the questions being asked

by the people in the evening of 13 April.
In mid, April 1999, it would be true to say that
India appeared to stand at political crossroads. The fate
of the Vajpayee Government appeared quite uncertain
to many observers on 14 April 1999. They raised
certain questions regarding the security of the nation,
economy and the CTBT: surely, the questions related
to the national interests and not party interests and
some of the comments appear to underline the same.
A pro,Congress newspaper commented: 'The
domestic political compulsions that forced
Mr. Vajpayee to stop dithering and test the Agni,II
have done good to national security, India finally has
a missile that can reach the heartland of China, which
by concluding missile detargeting pacts with the US and
Russia, has an added capacity to target India with its
increasingly lethal missile arsenal. In a global setting
in which power respects power and the weak remain
meek, the IRBM test will only boost India's
international stature. The test fits well with the main
lesson of the US, launched NATO war in the Balkans.
A country will incur exceptional national costs if it
lacks adequate defences. The US criticism of the test,
however, does not fit with its non,proclivity to fire
missiles on helpless nations or its public claim that it
accepts India's basic deterrent needs.' This compliment
to Atal Behari Vajpayee comes from a newspaper which
has been responsible for the hype and the jingoism
aimed at strengthening the Congress in general and
Sonia Gandhi in particular. But the lady has not spoken
THE BJP ERA 353

a word on international affairs; even on national affairs

her words have been few. Tightening her hold on her
party has probably attracted her attention the most.
Jayalalitha was cut to size within 24 hours of her
arrival in Delhi by the sharp comments of
Karunanidhi and Jyoti Basu emanating from Chennai
and Calcutta, respectively. Meanwhile, what people
thought of the budget (1999,2000) is reflected In
another article by a well,known journalist:

Even if the Vajpayee Government falls, the Union

budget must he saved. Failure to do so will damage
the economy far more than what a politically
convenient realignment can deliver in the
immediate future. This happened when Mr. Sitaram
Kesri nearly aborted Mr. P. C~idamharam 's forward
looking hudget two years ago with dire
consequences that are all too visible now.
Notwithstanding the criticism levelled against
Mr. Yashwant Sinha that he has hidden the real
nurnbers of fiscal deficit or he has merely
oversimplified the government's social spending
programmes without actually providing matching
resources, the fact remains that an attempt has been
made to import transparency in economic decision
making by introducing a rule, based system through
the budget. The move towards a value,added tax
(VAT), withdrawal of zero ilnport duty facility to
refineries, fertilisers, etc., encouragement to
knowledge,based industries, particularly software,
boost to the capital, and debt market through
354 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V A)PAYEE

changes in capital gains tax, appropriate tax and an

administrative regime to encourage speedy
corporate mergers and acquisitions, drastic
rationalisation of customs and excise duty structure
are some vital proposals which need to be
implemented to put the economic house in order.
The budget has proposed to encourage housing and
infrastructure activity through tax incentives, and
the repeal of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation
Act will act as a catalyst in reviving housing activity
and boost important sectors like steel and cement.
This is expected to kickstart the economy out of
recession.

The Central plan outlay of Rs. 103,527 crore for the

fiscal year 1999 .. 2000, higher than the revised estimate
of the previous fiscal year and 1.6 per cent lower than
the actual estimates, has the potential to boost the
suppressed consumer demand. If the budget were not
passed, all these development schemes on government
account will come to a halt as no expenditure can be
undertaken without parliamentary approval.
On 13 April, Digvijay Singh, Samata Party MP from
Bihar, claimed that foreign interests were at work to
dislodge the Vajpayee Government. The motives of
such interests were to keep India weak and submissive.
On Thursday, 15 April 1999, the Lok Sabha
reassembled after three weeks' recess. Vajpayee moved
a one .. line motion of confidence as directed by the
president on the night of 14 April.
THE BJP ERA 355

The debate began if). right earnest. Sharad Pawar, a

serior Congress leader, castigated the government for
not being successful on any front. Then L.K. Advanl
delivered a powerful speech, defending the government
by putting forward forceful arguments. The most
important event of the day was that DMK leader
Karunanidhi announced that he would support
Vajpayee. As the clock ticked on, one trenchant
speaker after another 'fired' verbal volleys against his
or her opponents. For instance, in his characteristically
pungent style, Laloo Prasad Yadav kept the House
amused with his barbed witticisms. He claimed that as
soon as the Vajpayee Government fell, it would take
just one minute for the Opposition parties to form a new
government. The finance minister (Yashwant Sinha)
defended his budget in a cogent and forthright manner.
Mulayam Singh Yadav dwelt upon various shortcomings
of the Vajpayee Government.
When Parliament reassembled on 16 April, the
Samata Party member from Bihar, Prabhunath Singh,
made some allegations against Sonia Gandhi which
proved quite unsavoury to Congress members. They
rushed to the seat of Prahhunath Singh; there would
have been 'a physical clash between the two groups but
for the· intervention of some senior leaders from both
sides. Other spirited speeches were those of Mamata
Banerjee and George Fernandes. True to form, Mamata
Banerjee did not pull any punc.hes and demonstrated
her oratorical skills in her inimitable volatile manner.
George Fernandes packed his speech with irrefutable
charges against the Congress, with wry humour, with
356 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

acerbity, and above all, with dysamism, especially with

regard to the Vishnu Bhagwat (the sacked Navy chieO
episode. The galaxy of other speakers - some for and
some against the motion - was studded with
luminaries such as S.S. Barnala (Akali Dal),
P. Chidambaran (TMC), Indrajit Gupta (CPI), Somnath
Chatterjee (CPI,M), Natwar Singh (Congress), Dr.
Subramaniam Swamy (Janata Party) and Navin Patnaik
(Biju Janata Oal). All of them put forward their
thoughts and views eloquently and forcefully.
On 17 April the prime minister spoke (see
pp. 355,60 for details', As the .clock struck twelve
noon, the Opposition members starting asking for a
division on the mution. There were heated exchanges
on whether a particular MP, (J iridhar GUlnang, could
vote, After being appointed to the post of chief
minister of Orissa, Gomang had· not yet resigned and
given up his Lok Sabha seat. (Three persons did not
vote; one was too ill and two were abroad.) The
relevant portions of the Constitution and
commentaries on the Co.nstitution were read out by
both sides. Ultimately, the speaker, G.M.C. Balayogi,
ruled that Gomang may act in accordance with his
conscience. Gamang exercised his vote. Atai Behari
Vajpayee's second stint as prime minister drew to a
close due to a single vote. The proceedings were replete
with tension, suspense and dr~ma and had all the
ingredients of a cliff~hanger. Vajpayee lost the
confidence vote in a neck~to .. neck finish after a long
night of political intrigues and last,minute change of
sides in the political crisis caused by the AIADMK's
THE BJP ERA 357

withdraYJal of support. On 17 April 1999, Vajpayee's

motion was rejected by 270 to 269 votes after a two,
Jay marathon debate. The electronic voting machines
faiLed (as they had done earlier in 1996) and voting
slips had to be distributed manually.
Vajpayee went to meet President K.R. Narayanan.
L.K. Advani, the home minister, also went with him.
Vajpayee submitted his resignation and urged President
Narayanan to ask those staking a claim to form the
next government to produce letters of support from
parties backing them.
Soon after, on the same day, a group of BJP members
and its allies urged the president not to instal a
(-:ongress,led government as a 'caretaker'. The president
asked Atai Behari Vajpayee to continue in office till
'alternative arrangements were made'.
In retrospect, it was the Bahujan Samaj Party's stand
the served as the proverbial 'last straw'. Five memhers
of the Bahujan Samaj Party, which had earlier
announced that they would be neutral, voted along with
the l)ppos ition. Earlier, when Atal Behari Vajpayee
spoke, he was in good spirits and quite confident of
winning. The graceful man hardly knew that he could
be stabbed from the front as well as from the back.
Vajpayee addressed the house in a calm, dignified and
eloquent manner. The speech runs as follows:
I have been associated with the Parliament for the
last 40 years. I have see,n many minority
Governments during this period. During the time of
Shrimati Indira Gandhi, the Government was in
minority. At that time, no body made a charge that
358 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARt VAjPAYE.E

she was violating morality. Even Shri Narsimha Rao

led a minority Government. If the Opposition
wanted to test the majority of my Government, it
could have brought a No Confidence Motion
. against me. I fail to understand as to why the
Opposition had to join together to knock at the
doors of the President instead of bringing a Motion
against me. When the Hon. President directed us to
get the Vote of Confidence, we readily agreed. I do
not claim that I am an able administ'rator, but I do
claim that I want to serve the nation sincerely.
When I was in the Opposition, no body made a
charge against me that I am working to the
detriment of the country's interests. Have I changed
when I have come to power?
During the last elections, the formation of coalition
Government seemed inevitable. We had finally told
the Hon. President that in a democratic setup, it is
the game of numbers and we do not have numbers
with us. Therefore, we are ready to sit in the
Opposition for some more days and if any other
party is able to form a Government you should
invite them. But at that moment, nobody was ready
to form a Government. Today, after 13 months of
our assuming power, they have come together to
form a new arrangement. I t is good. The main
Opposition party had so far stated that they would
play a constructive role as an Opposition party.
They would not hobnob with anybody nor would
they go along with anybody. They would wait till
they get clear majority. But today it seems that they
THE BJP ERA 359

have forgotten the Panchmarhi Resolution. New

alliances are being forged by them whereas they
have criticised our alliance. We had fought
elections on a common minimum programme with
our alliance. When we took over the reins of power,
we presented the National Agenda of Governance.
Toda y, there is a negati ve trend to oust this
Government. Parties which have nothing in
COlnmon, and have ideologically divergent views,
are coming together and forming an alliance with
the sole aim to remove us.
Today, the Indian politics is at a juncture, where
regional parties have a vital role to play. In fact, the
emergence of regional parties syn1bolises the
diversity of our nation. It also indicates that the
national parties have not fulfilled the aspiratIons of
different regions.
I would like to recall what the Congress party had
stated about the regional parties in its election
Inanifesto of 1998. It had condemned the regional
parties which was not a healthy attitude when it said
that, hy their very nature, regional parties lack a
national perspective· and can never rise ahove local
ethnic considerations. Besides, for the Leftists they
had said that a even after seven decades, the CPI
and the C:PM have not heen ahle to integrate
themselves into the national mainstream. About the
Janata Oal, the Congress had said that the Janata
Oal was born in a convulsive fit of anti,Congressism
in 1989. It is a collection of disparate groups. It can
hardly be called a serious political formation. Its
360 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI VAJPAYEE

platform of social justice is hollow. If this is the basis

of their coming together then stability is irrelevant.
Attempts have been made to destabilise my
Ciovernment and a charge has been made that this
Government is full of internal contradictions. But
have you ever thought what would be fate of the
structure that you want to ra ise? It there any
harmony? Is there any ideological similarity? Is there
any programme? Are they unanimous about the
choice of leader? This House should have heen
taken into confidence about' this Inatter. The people
of this country do have a right to know why the
Government which had got the tnandate is heing
removed.
When we assumed office, everybody knew what we
got in legacy. We improved the situation in every
field whether it was economy, the question of
security and diplomatic relations with different
countries. We have been successful in every sphere
of activity. We have been criticised for conducting
nuclear tests. We were asked what was the threat?
When Shrimati Indira Gandhi conducted nuclear
tests in 1974, we welcomed it, though, we were in
the Opposition hecause that was done for the
security of the nation. What was the threat at that
time? Should preparedness for self~defence he done
only when there is danger? Should we not be self,
reliant in the matter of security? Pokhran,ll was not
done for show of power, but it has been our policy
and it has been the policy of this nation over the
years that there should be minimum deterrent.
THE BJP ERA 361

Agni .. II has also been criticised. During the

1.3 months of my tenure, I daresay that we have not
taken even a single decision under international
pressure.
The security of the country is of paramount
inlportance to us. The sovereignty and
independence of the country should always remain
intact. When the country is safe, we can work for
social justice and march ahead in all fields. A
question was asked as to what was the relation
he tween Pokhran .. ll and the Lahore bus journey.
These are two sides of the same coin. We have
shown to the world that we are powerful, but at the
salne time we have extended the hand of friendship
with all sincerity and yet there is no slackness as far
as preparedness for self.. defence is concerned. Thu~
we have made allout efforts to improve relations
wi th our neighbours.
Trade agreement has been signed with Sri Lanka and
transit agreement with Nepal. A bus service
hetween Calcutta and Dhaka is likely to start.
Neither we want to interfere in the sovereignty of
any neighbouring country nor would we permit any
country to do so in our matters.
My effort is to find a solution for the problems with
consensus decision and cooperation. Yesterday, I was
made centre of criticism on the issue of
representation to women. If assurance is given that
this move will not he opposed. I am ready to
introduce a Bill tomorrow itself in this regard.
362 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHAR! V AJPAYEE

When I came to power, the economic condition of

the country was very poor. But during the last six
months, it has improved. Some untoward incidents
have taken place but immediate steps were taken
to stop them. There is a' record production of
foodgrains but credit goes to farmers. There is a
need of unity to face natural calamities. We should
change our attitude of gaining political mileage
through these calamities.
A decision was taken to increase the prices of urea.
I would like to assure the farmers that every
possible measure will be taken to lighten their
burden. 'Crop insurance scheme is almost ready and
agricu Itural po Iicy is be ing finalised. The
Government has taken a decision that it would
bring a Bill before the House for extending the
reservation perihd for another ten years. A method
should he evolved to fill up the SC/ST and
backward class vacancies in services.
An issue of sacking a Naval Officer was also raised.
I would like to appeal the Hon. Members to go
through the document published by the Ministry of
Defence. This document can be made the basis of
dicussion. A committee can also be constituted
comprising some Hon. Members to look into this
matter. The document published by the Ministry of
Defence was in accordance with the decision of an
all . . party committee. But when any allegation is
levelled against the minister of defence, it is deemed
to be on attack on the entire system.
THE BJP ERA 363

We have been fighting against corruption for the

last 40 years. Now,. there is no question of
comprising with corruption. The coalition
Government has its limits. We have yet to
understand those limits. Democracy is our greatest
asset as well as a weapon in which every citizen
enjoys the guarantee of equality. For the unity of
this country, strengthening of democracy is a must.
I have taken all the necessary decisions in the
interest of the country with full vigour and
determination. During the last 13 months, I have
shown a glimpse of my future governance to bring
a sea .. change in the country if I get the full tenure.
People want that my Government survives the full
term. I believe that this House will take a decision
in my favour.

The next day, i.e., on Sunday 18 April, an article

appeared in a national daily trying to analyse the
situation. The writer of the article quoted a historian:
'To say that coalitions per se are unstable is to say that
the country's federal structure is unstable.' There is
some truth in this statement. But then the columnist
added that 'the BJP did not create an atmosphere of
trust'. This is far from the truth. Atal Behari Vajpayee
was betrayed; he had tried to create trust. He gave a
long rope to his colleagues but some of them eventually
put it round his own neck.
On 17 and 18 April the overwhelming number of
citizens felt that 'Vajpayee has been wronged'. People
were blaming only two or three persons in particular.
364 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI'VAJPAYEE

Party politics has. of course, to go on and shall go on,

no doubt.
On 19 April, the nation came to know some more
interesting aspects about the voting in the Lok Sabha
(on 17 April). Chandu Majra, an Akali Dal member,
had. pressed his huttons on the electronic machine in
favour of the Opposition, hut, ultimately, realising that
he would be expelled from the Akali Oal and also lose
his membership he filled in the slip (the ultimate thing
in the voting process) in favour of the Vaj payee
Govternment. But National Conference memher
Saifuddin Soz voted against the government in spite of
his party's whip. He has soon expelled from his patty.
News had appeared in the print media ahout Soz's
meeting with CPI (M) leader, Harkishan Singh Surjeet.
His defying his party and voting against the Vajpayee
Government was not a big surprise.
The BSP leader Mayawati, of course, had announced
with glee that she had exacted her revenge on the BJP.
She thought she had been wronged by the BJP and that
she had lost the chief ministership of UP some time
hack because the BJP had pulled the rug from under her
feet. There were contacts between Mayawati and some
Congress top brass' (read Sonia Gandhi) in the
I

morning of 17 April. But the BJ P leadership was

hanking on the assurance given by her on the floor of
the Lok Sahha that she would abstain and remain
neutral. As a result of Mayawati's volte face, the entire
ci ty of Delhi was talking of her 'vishwasghat'
(treachery). Nohody blamed Mulayam Singh or Laloo
Prasad or the communists as they had openly declared
THE BJP ERA 365

their stubborn OppOSltion to Atal Behari Vajpayee

continuing to occupy the seat of prime minister. People
disliked. what was happening behind the scenes, secretly.
The country expected full transparency in the matter.
Despite all the murky subterfuges to bring down the
government, Vajpayee remained a hero of the hour a~
he was hetrayed by those who had assured him
otherwise. After his resignation, Vajpayee elnergeJ
more honourable, more dignified, more serene and
more graceful.
On 18 April George Fernandes met President K.R.
Narayanan and gave him a letter stating that as the
l)pposition had failed to elect any leader even after
24 hours of the resignation of Atal Behari Vajpayee,
the president should readminister the oath of office to
/\tal Behari Vajpayee. The president was urged by
Vajpayee, Fernande~ and tuany others leaders that he
should apply the same yardstick for others. Vajpayee
was asked to produce letters of support frolu the
supposed allies; the president should insist on the same
criterion again in relation to the fresh claimants for the
post of prilne minister. The country's eyes were focussed
on Rashtrapati Bhavan.
Meanwhile, addressing party workers at hi~
residence on 1 R April, Vajpayee asked rhein to get
ready for fresh elections to the Lok Sabha.
()n 19 April 1999, Jayalalitha met Sonia Gandhi,
J yoti Basu and Mulayan1 Singh Yadav. After 111ceting
Basu he said she would the happy if Basu became prime
minister. The leftists met each other hut the few
memhers of the Revolutionary Socialist Party and the
366 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARl VAJPAY!.E

Forward Bloc continued to stand sol~dly against the

prospects of the Congress assuming power. Mulayam
Singh Yadav also refused to support a Congress
Government, which put paid to Sonia Gandhi's hopes.
On 20 April BJP leaders were talking more of the
dinner at Vajpayee's residence in the evening than of
anything else. Sonia Gandhi was active. She met Jyoti
Basu and some others. After meeting Basu she told
mediapersons that he was not interested in becoming
the prime tninister. Sonia Gandhi also called on
l.K. Gujral and Deve Gowda on the same day. Lalon
Prasad Yadav, Kalpnath Rai of the Samata Party and
Bura Singh, an independent member, went calling on
Sonia Gandhi.
The Congress functionaries were not idle. Arjun
Singh, a senior Congress leader, held discussions
J ayalalitha. He reportedly tried to get some
clarification from her. But this might not have been
the sale purpose. He may have wanted to know the
latest thinking of J ayalalitha as to whether or not she
was actively in favour of Sonia Gandhi. It was soon
after Ram Jethmalani, a minister in Vajpayee's cabinet,
had spoken in terms of withdrawing the notification
that was issued by the former law minister (an AIADMK
man) without consulting the cabinet. The threat of the
stubborn lawyer (Jethmalani) was not put into practice
probably because the higher leadership of the BJP may
not have found the time very appropriate as everything
was in a flux.
On 21 April 1999, a leading newspaper came out
with the headline: 'Sonia Inching Closer to Leading New
THE BJP ERA 367

Govt'. A colour photograph of Sonia Gandhi and Jyoti

Basu, sitting side. by side, was also published. Things
appeared to be improving for Sonia Gandhi, no doubt.
All eyes were on Rashtrapati Bhavan, of course.
On 21 April, things started moving fast. President
K.R. Narayanan called Sonia Gandhi, and asked her to
explore the possibility of forming a government and
give him letters from parties which wanted to support
her. After meeting the President she told the media
that she would be able to show to the president a
strength of 272 members in two days. In the afternoon
there was a meeting of many non .. BJP, non .. Congress
leaders at the residence of Mulayam Singh Yadav. Jyoti
Basu, I.K. Gujral, Deve Gowda, Chandra Shekhar and
Jayalalitha attended the meeting. A consensus eInerged
among these leaders in favour of Jyoti Basu.
Imlnediately after this was known, Arjun Singh and n
couple "l other leaders Inet Jyoti Basu and Mulayam
Singh Yadav. Jayalalitha went to see Sonia Gandhi.
That Jyoti Basu would not be acceptable to large
numbers of Congress Inembers was obvious. Some
patch .. up formula might emerge. But in a power game
of this type, when any major group would support Sonia
Gandhi, the choice of Basu appeared unthinkable.
Basu's name was suggested perhaps to 1110unt pressure
on Sonia Gandhi to agree to a coalition and stall
possihle elections. PMK, a party of Tcunil Nadu,
declared that it would side with the BJP. The seven,
member group of the Revolutionary Socialist Party and
Forward Bloc declared that they wanted Jyoti Basu as
prime minister and not Sonia Gandhi. They could not
368 INDIA UNDER ATAL BEHARI V AJPAYEE

be reconciled to accept Sonia Gandhi by anybody. On

21 April large numbers of people thought that Sonia
Gandhi would form the government by 23 April and
that the leftists and Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo
Prasad Yadav would be joining forces with the Congress.
"The BJP and its allies proclaimed that that the
postures adopted on 21 April by the non,Congress
parties were mere pressure tactics.
L.K. Advani and many other leaders, including
George Fernandes and Murasoli Maran of the DMK,
met the president and urged him to swear in Atal Behari
Vajpayee again as prime minister.
The budget could not be passed in the Lok Sabha
on 21 April as there was pandemonium. The president
of India insisted that the BJP and its allies should
ensure the passage of the Finance Bill on Thursday,
22 April. It was eventually passed on that day by the
Lok Sabha by a voice vote.
On 26 April, after a crucial meeting, the cabinet
decided to recommend to the president the dissolution
of the 12th Lok Sabha. The president accepted the
recommendations and the Lok Sabha was adjourned
sine die.
Sonia Gandhi just could not garner adequate
support to form a government. The inevitable had
happened. The only alternative was mid .. term polls,
which could prove not only an expensive but also a
cumbersome process. As this book goes to the press,
elections loom large on the horizon, scheduled for late
September and early October 1999.
 Index

Abdullah, Dr. Fawoq, 60, 69, 110 Habas;lheb Ghatate. 14

Abdul Kalam, Dr. A r J, U2. 264. 26f! Bahri masjid, SI. 124,302 . .3'S
Adval1l, Lal Knshna, 23, 26, '1, 32. Badal, Prakash Singh, 319
~',48,49,66,67\219.109,312, B.lhuguna, Hemvati Nandan, 26
)16, B6, 140,.357. }68 B<thlljan Samaj Party (aSP) . .3 7, 40,
Agnihotri, R.L.. SO 41,4,,60,.3';7
Acnill Balavogi, () M C. 69,74.356
test flTtng of, )4H, }:; 2 BanerJee, Mamata. 37.45,71, 25i. 258.
Ahm('d, Shamshad, 228 17R, 312, 'l8, 337
:\.hI111:,1, SIT Syed, 72 B.mglaJcsh, 127
AIDS, 90·92 B,mks. narionnlisation of, 276
AIY;IT, Mani Shanbr, 42. 269 Bardhan. A.B., 280
Akali DC-II. 46,59 B.lfnala, S. S.,n. 66, 250·53
Akhandananda. Swami, 14 Harnda dynamit~ case, 27
Asal Alt, Arum, 16 BaslI. JYDti. 24H. 249, 325. 353,365,
All-India Anna Dravida Munnetr<l ,66. 367
Kazhagam \AIADMK). 42, 62. Bengal Package, 3 n
66,231 Bha~.'wat, VI<ihnu, .300, 341, 34" 156
Anand, Dev. 319 Bhar.niya Janata Parry (BJP)
Annan, Kofl, 100, 201 an evenrflll journey I (May 1998 w
Af(lde 370,49, tn November 1998), 185
Association of South· East Asian an eVt~ntful journey II (December
Nations (ASEi\N), 127·28 1998 to March 1999), 273~327
Auslralia, 188 climb fO summit, 35·62
Ay()(lhya d\."\:rion alliances, 56-62
Ram temple at, _H, n, 48, ~ I-52. fall ofgovemmenr of, )46
54, 191 foreign policy under (see under
A:md. Ahul K.,lam. 5 Forei." Policy)
Azad, Chandrashckhar. 12 Govt. at Centre, 35·36
origin of, 1

369
370 INDEX

rise of, 20·34 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty

rumblings of discontent. 328-45 (CfBT), 130,133,1.36,187.192.
workers' arrest during Emer~ncv. 25 202,203,204,211.212,289
Bharatiya Jana Sangh, 2.6. 19,23.28 lA1ngress Party. 8,10,12,16,20.21.
Bharati. Urna. 341 30.31.35.36.43,49,51.58.61,
Bhargava. Narayan Prasad. 76 64.85,98.119,197·98.269,270,
Bhai Parmanand, 4.13 276
Bhuria, Dilip Singh. 46 Constitution Commission. 50
Bhutto. ZuLfiqar Ali, 260 Corruption, 266
Bihar Criminal'politician nexus. 99·100
corruption in. 266
killings in. 316. 326.336 Dani. Prabhakar Balwant, 17·18
President'sruLe in, 214·16. 228. 242. Das, Pulin Behari. 2
336 Defenrc postures. 291
Bhandari. S.S .. 214 Denmark. 187
Bihar Fodder Scam. 113 Deora~, Bala Saheb, 4.7. 13 ..32.79
BijuJanata Dal. 43, 61 Desai, Morarji. 26, 27,120.206.259
Bodo militants. 102 Deshmukh, Nanaji, 22. 24
Boer War. 11 Deve Gowda. H.D., ]6. 38. 43. 259.
Bofors scandal, 31, 57 341, 367
Bose. Krishna, 45 Dhar, D.P., 119
Bose, Subhash Chandra, 3, 15,45 Disarmament. 247
Brownback, Sam, 140·41 Dixit, J.N .• 152·57,320
Budget (1999·2QC(). 189·90,323,324, Dnnking water. 93
368 Dubey. Devendra. 191
Bus ride wlahore, 321 Dun, Sunil. 319

Chandrn, Gulab, 79 Education for children. 88

Chandumajra ..364 Emergency (in India). 6. 22·24. 58.
Lnauhan. Chetan. 161·68 95,269
Chautala, Om Prakash, 60, 316, 318, European Union, 188
319.320,335,338,349,350 Export Controls. 290
Chavan, tB., 27 Fernandes. George. 27. 66, 68, 134.
Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, 11 313,341.343.355,365
Chidambaram. Dr. R .• 132. 263 Fissile material cutoff treaty (FMCT).
Chidambaram, P.• 353 290
China. 117·18. 125. 133. 136. 141, Foreign Policy (India's). 115·30
294 under Chandra Shekhar, 1 22
Clinton. Bill, 133, 141. 187,201,213, under I.K. GUjntl. 122
227,234.268,288,296 under Indira Gandhi, 119·21
Communist Party of.lndia (CP1), 36 under Jawaharlal Nehru, 115·17
Communist Parcy of India (Marxist) under L~l Bahadur Shastri, 119
(CPl)M. 49,217.284,325.326 under Morarji Desai. 121
under P.Y. Nal""'dsimha Rao. 122
INDEX :371

France, 136,294 Illiteracy, 86, 87,95

Gandhi, Indira, 6, .7, 20, 21, 22, 24, Inderfurth, Karl. 139-40. 195
26,27,28,84,119,120,132,260, India
269,276.277,303,342,351,365 and ASEAN. 128
Gandhi. Mahatma, 3,5.9, 12, 16 and UN, 129·30
Ci:mdhi, Sonia. 45.51,54,57,63,64, nuclear tests by (see under Nuclear
190,214,217,231,232,303,308, tests)
317,350.355.367,368 partition of. 5
Gandhi. Rajiv. 29,30,31,34,37,102, revolutionary activities in, 12
109 sanctions against (see under
Germany. 133,187 Sanctions)
Ghafur, Abdul, 21 Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) ,
Godse, Nathuram, 5.16 30
Goenka, Ramnath, 24 India Wins Freedom, 5
Golden Temple, 29 Indo-Russian relations, 125 .
Oolwalkar, Prof. Madhav Sadashiv. 3, Indo-Olina relations, 117-18, 125.299
S, 1.3, 14, 15 Indo·Japanese relations. 126·27
(. Jomang, Giridhar. 356 Indo~Pak wars, 84, 109
Gujral, l.K .• 36. 37. 38. 49. 59. 121. Indo~Russian relations, 125,298·99
148·52,261,285,367
Indo· USSR relations. 120
Gulf cnSlS, 36, 122
Indo~US relarions.120. 123. 125,260
Gupta, Hans Raj, 16
Indo~Uk reiarions, 12 7
Uupta. Indrajlt. 36, 67, 356
(. Jurumurrhy. S, 280 Insurance Bill. 329·30
Insurance sector. opening up of, 273.
Health care. 89·90 285
Hedgewar, Dr. Keshavrao BaHram, 1, Iranian diplomats, killings of, 210
2.3.7.8. 10·14 Iraq, attacks on. 296,97
and Congress. 12 Iran.lraq war, 120
and Hindu strength, 4·5 Iyer, Justice Krishna. 98
and Non.cooperatlCm Movement. '}
and revolutionary movement. 11. 12 Jagmohan.274
and RSS. J Jammu & Kashmir, 81. 105. 106,
childhood, 2 107·09,124,220,261
early yean. 10 accession to India, 104~05, 123
education. 2. 11
invasion in. 106
imprisonment,4,13
NAM and. 199
on Hindu culture, 10
Pakistan's involvement in, 124
passing away of. 5.14
Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front
relationship with eminent leaders. 4
speeches, 4, '}. 10 (JKlF) , 110
Hegdc. Ramakrishna. 44, 66. 68 ]ilnata Oal. 31, 40.61
Hiroshi, HirahOlyclshi. 170-74 Janam Party. 2.26.28
372

Japan. 126. 132. 187 Maitreyan, y.. 245

JClyalalitha. J.• 42.44.-64,66,220.244. Malaviya. Madan Mohan. 4.9
245.317.320.328.340,341.343. Mandela, Nelson. 200
146,350,351.365.367 Maran, Mur<lsoli •.368
Jethmfllani. Ram, 366 Mayawati,364
Joshi, Dr Murti Manohar. 66. 68. 71. Mbeky.199
. 72,313.314 • .325. 347, 348 Mehta, Alok, 10R~ 70
Mehta, Harshad. 112
Kant. Krishan. 299 Mishra. ChatLIranan, ]6
Karamat. Jehangir, 137 Mishra. Vinod. 100
Karunanidhi. M .• 244. J 17..347.355 Misra, Dr. Jagannad1. 11.3
KClshmiri Pandits. killin~s of. III MilO NatlOn,ll Front (MNF). 102
Kaveri water dispute. 193. 244~46 Moonesinghe. Mangala. 174- 77
Kem. 11 Moopanar. G.K .• .38
Kesri. Sitaram . .36. 45.51. 57.63 Mounthatten. Louis,S, 105
Khanwalkar. B.L., 76 MukherJee, Dr. Shyama Prasad, 6,15.
Khan. Aslam Sher, 58 81
Khan. Ayub. 84 MukherJee, Pranab. 42. 217,271
Khan. Ciauhar Ayuh, U 5 Mukherjee. Sir Ashutosh. 15
Kh:m. Jftikar Chaudhary. 137, 196 Munje, B.S., 4,11,12
KhilafLlt movement. 9 Murugan, 244~41
Khurana, M.L.. 226. 27),314, 329. Muslims, R
330,349 Mussolim, Benito, 6
Kohl. Helmut. 206 Mustclrd oil adulteration, 97
Ktnkel. Klaus. 206 Myanmar, 127
Knptllani. Acharya. J.B .. 16.23
Kumaramangalam. R.o 45. 68,341,342, Naldu, Chandmbflbu. 38. 6S, 69. ,12
346 Naidu. Vcnkaiah. 64, 347
Kumm, Ananth, 66. 68 Naidu. Yermn, 72. 316
Kumar. Dr. Shiv. 87 Narayanan. K.R., 64, 66, 206, 207.208,
Kumar. Nirish. 66. 317 • .323,.3 36 209,299,336.365.367
Kumar. R.K., 67 Naray.m.layaprakash.]. 5.16,20,21.
LJhore Declaration. 322 22,20, 85, 115~17, JOJ
Lal. Bansi. 60 Narayan, Raj, 26
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam Nasbandi {male stcriliSiltion}. 9S
(LITE), 11 NassN, Ahdul Gamel. 116
Lohta. Dr. Ram Manohar. 284, .304 Narional Conference. 60
LonJ:.rfellowoH. W.o 1 NATO,116
LongowaI. Sam H.S., 31 Naxalite movement, 100#101
Lok Shahi. 61 Nehru, Arun, 309
Nehru. Jilwaharlal, 6, 15.16, H, 81.
Mafia (in politics), 97 ~99 83, 105, 115,304
Mahajan. Prnmod, 274 Nepal,127
INDEX' 373

New Zealand, 188 Patnnik, Navin, 43~44. 61, 313, 356

North East, insurgency in, 103 Pawar, Sharad. 47, 355
Non~aligned Movement, 116, 127 Pollution. 93·94
Non~cooperl-ltion Movement, l) Population explosion, 94-96
Nuclear non~prolifenHion treaty PllVerty. 86
(NPT), 130, 192 Prabhakamn, v., 31
Nuclear tests, 131~44, 185,266,267, Prabhu, Suresh. 239
268 Pradhan, K.K., 78
india's stand on, I.B~ 34 Pms:ld, Ajit Bihari. 191
reactionsoforhercounrries, 1.32-33. Price rise, 266
l}6 Pnmllkov, Yegnew, 297 -98
~;1nctions against India, 132,
187 -88 Quatt<\fOchi. Ottavio, 239
UN Security Council on, 187 Quit India Movement, 3
view!'. of emment foreigners on. QUI( India resolution, 16

170~R4
Bhekh B. Thapa, 182·tH Rabn Devi. 33,59,243,247.336, .347
Mang'ala Moonesinghe, 174-77 Ibdhakrishnan. Dr. S., 83
VIt'WS of eminent Indian" on, Raghunath. K .. 221, 228-29
14S-hl) ltll. Kalpnath, 366
Alok Mehta, 168- 70 RajagllHI. 12
Chcmn Chauhan. 161-68 Ramamurrhy, Vazhapadl, K., 45, 220
l.K.GlIjrnl.148-S2 Ram, Jagjivan, 25, 26
J.N. Dixie, 152·57 Ram, Kanshi, 37, 44. 45
I.K. uujml. 148~S2 Rnnbir Sena, 316
Klishahhnu Thakre. 14S~4 7 Ran. Bhaskar, 42
Rao, Prabhakar. 114
()ak. Vasamrao, 1] Rao, r.y. Naraslmha. 34 . .35. 51. 114.
Onion crisis, 97. 219 341
Operation Bluestar. 103 Raphael, Robin. 123. 12S
()r~aruseT, 32 Rashtriya Swttyamsevak Sangh (RSS).
1,2.5,7,77.79,80,280,281
Pakistan, S. 82. 106. 1.19, 140. 141. -as it p()liti~al organisation, 6
267 ~h;ln on. 6. 17, 18
nuclear tests by, 13 5 ·fuundation of, 2, J
Pill. Sum, 46 -in Sind ~nd Punjtlb. 13
PanchjanYll, 80~81 -membership, 15
Panjfl, Ajit. 45 ·!\trength,3
Parikh, Dilip, 49 Rashtriya }:mam D... l. 40
P<lrmeswiltan. P., 339 Rashtriya Loktantrik Morcha (RLM).
Paswan, Ram Vilas. 43,59 191,310
Patel. Vallabhbha;, 6, 17 Rashtra Dlumna, 80
Plltll, Shivmj, 270 Ram temple. 31,33
374 INDEX

Reddv. Neelam Sanjeeva" 27 Singh, Digvijay, 354

Republican Party, 4-7.61 Singh. Dr. Manmohan, 344
Riots Singh, Dr. Rajendra, 4
against Sikhs, 2.9.30 Singh, Dr. Shivmangal. 76
communal,29 Singh, Dushyant, 46
Hindu-Muslim. 8 Singh. Harinder, 300
ROQsevelt. F D, 268 Singh. Hari, 104, 123
Singh,Jaswanr, 66,139,195.201. 204.
SAARCsummits. 127, 128, 142 205.206.236.274,294
Sachar, Bhimsen, 22-23 Singh, Natwar. 356
Salt. price rise of. 232 Singh. Prabhunath, 355
Samajvadi Parrv, 37, 4.3.53,60 Singh. S.K., 49
Samata Party, 61 Singh. v.P.•.31, 33, 34. 36, 46. 109.
Sanctions, 132. 139. 140. 186, 187, 121.311
195.227,234 Singh, Zail, 29
Sarkar, Ajit, 191 Sinha. Yashwant. 67,189.323
Sangma, P.A., 69,71 Sino-Indian war, 117·18
Sangh Shiksha Var.e-as, 8 Slums, 93
SarllSwati Vandana, 281 Soma Devi. 76
Saroj, Durga Prasad. 278 South Asian Preferential Trade
Savarkar, Saba Rao, 4 Agreement (SAPTA), 129
Savarkar, Y.D., 4, 33Z Soz. Saifuddin. 364
Scam (stock market), 35, 112. 113 Srivastav, Trilok Nath. 78
Sen. Prof. Amartya, 86-87, 89 Sri Lanka. 30·31, 127
Shakha.s. 2, 78, 79 Staines. Graham Stewart, 312, 318
Shakhawat. Bhairon Singh, 32 Steinberg, 204
Sharif, Nawaz, 135,142,212.237,319 Sudershan. K.• 280·81
Sharma. KTishan Lal. 29.158-61,226 Suez C'Alnal crisis, 118
Sharma. Mauli Olandra. 7,18 Sukhadia, Mohanlal. 32
Shastri. Lal Bahadur, 84. 108, 119 Surjeet. Harkishen Singh. 38,49,364
Shekhar. Omndrn. 22.26.34,67.122. Swamy, Dr. Subramaniam, 341. 356
341. 367 Swaraj. Sushma. 68. 71. 214. 219. 225
Shimla Agreement, 260 Sved. Rubaiya. 110
Shivshanlcar, P., 344
Shiv Sena. 47 Talbott. Strobe. 195. 202. 204, 236.
Sikhs,S 285.288.294
Singhal, Ashak, 13,51. 52 Tamil Manila Congress. 38, 62
Singhvi. L.M .• 254,57 Tamil Nadu Congrl"ss. split in, 45
Singh, Ajit, 46 Tashlc.ent Agreement. 84.109
Singh. Arjun, 198 Telugu Desam Party. 38. 65
Singh. Atj un. 366 Terrorism
Singh, Bhagat, 12 in Punjab and J&K, 103. 111
Singh,CJharan, 14,26,27,28.46. 120 Thackerav, Bal. 47. 53, 54. 57,311.
312
INDEX 375

Thackeray, Kushabhau, 145, 219, 273, election contests, 81, 83

280.314,315,330 lection to Rajya Sabha, 83
Thakur, Karpuri, 24 fall of the Government of, 346
Thambidurai, M., 67 joining RSS, 2
Thapa, Bhekh B., 182~84 on attacks on Iraq, 295
Thengri, Dattopant, 279, 329 on Colombo SAARC Summit,
Tilak. Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar, 2,9, 143~4
12 on CfBT, 211
Trinamul Congress, 37, 45,257 on disarmement, 247
Tripathi, Kamlapati, 30 on dowry system, 82
Tripura National Volunteers (TNV), on Emergency, 269~ 70
102 on Muslims, 56
Trishul missile, firing of, 185~86 on sanctions against India. 138
political stature. 218
UK, 127,133,136,294 a long journey, 75~85
UN schooling, 7~ 79
India and, 129 speeches. 81, 172,85
United Front, 36, 37, 38, 39,58 speech in Parliament on INo
United Liberation Front of Assam Confidence' motion. 357,63
(ULFA), to2 Vajpayee. Pandit Krishna, 76
Upadhyaya, Decn Dayal, 7, BO, 279 Vajpayee. Shyam Lal, 76
Uria scam, 114 Verma, M.M .• 78
USA, 120, 123, 125, 126, 132, 136, Verma. 5ahibSingh, 214, 219, 226
137,140,141,186,195,196,268, Vishwa Hindu Parishad, 13, 51.52
285,293,294,295 Vivekananda. Swami, 2, 3,14

VaJ;'!hela, 5.S., 42 Wadhwa, Justice D.P., 313

Va;payee, Atal Behan, 2, 7, 23, 26, 29, Women
.H, 35. 41. 44, 47.50,53,56,64, reservation of seats in Parliament,
65, 131. 13~ 135, 142, 185~272 57
and nuclear tests. 132-38, 186-87, Women's Reservation Bill, 193~94
188-89
af\d poetry, 79 Yadav, Chandrajeet, 198
imd RSS, 78. 79, 80 Yadav. Laloo Prasad. 33, 39, 40. 46,58,
appointed as prime minister, 65 64,113,217,316,364,368
arrests of. 23 Yadav, MulayamSingh,37. 40. 41,43.
as foreign minister, 121 52.59,64,217,310,311,316,
at the summit, 63~ 74 345,364, 368
birth t 75 Yadav,Sha~,43.59
bus ride to Lahore. 321~23 Yediyurappa,48
early years, 76·77 Yeltsin, Boris, 213
 ISBN 91-7476-250-7

f!tiA IT g,PD
U BS Publishers' Distributors Ltd.
9 I "I
788174 762504