The Great Indian Family

 

 

Central Asia has often played an important role in history unfolding in India. Perhaps one of the most bizarre and epoch making manifestation of this was in Tashkent in 1966, then a city in Soviet Union and historically the capital city of Uzbekistan. The Prime Minister of India, the diminutive Lal Bahadur Shastri had redeemed India’s honour and pride in the war against Pakistan-particularly after the humiliating loss to China in 1962. His war cry of Jai Jawan, Jai Kisaan had reverberated across India as thunderous applause. India was simply in love with the humble man with nerves of steel; and even the most cynical agree that he would have been reelected Prime Minister in a heartbeat in the fourth General Elections of 1967.

The 62-year-old Shastri led an Indian delegation to Tashkent for peace talks with Pakistan brokered by the Soviet Union. He never came back alive. The Congress party was then packed with ambitious leaders who all dreamt of becoming Prime Minister. The party bosses played safe and opted for Indira Gandhi, the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru who happened to be a minister in the Shastri cabinet. The rest, as they say, is history that is still unfolding.

History buffs and ‘what if’ afficionados will always grapple with that one question: Would the word dynasty become so popular and controversial in Indian politics if Shastri had not died so suddenly and unexpectedly? After all, even the most wild eyed optimist could not have said that minister Indira Gandhi was a certainty as Prime Minister. In fact, chroniclers of that era never fail to mention in hushed whispers how Shastri and Indira were not really on the best terms. But then, that is destiny; and that is history for you and me.

As the crown prince Rahul Gandhi bedazzles his fans and acolytes into paroxysms of hope, ecstasy and sycophancy, history is once again titillating India. It is no longer a matter of if; the betting is on when Rahul Gandhi will become the Prime Minister of India. The cynics, the intelligentsia and many intellectuals steeped in Left and Right hues will no doubt bemoan the ‘fact’ that the Indian electorate is still steeped in feudal ardour. But the ‘fact’ of the matter is: the love affair between the ‘Dynasty’ and the Indian voter is so enduring that it is touching as well as baffling; bordering sometimes on affectionate exasperation. As always, the pundits and the media seem to focus obsessively only on the Gandhi family when it comes to debating the role of dynasty in Indian politics. But then, Rahul Gandhi today is just the most charismatic and famous manifestation of the importance of dynasty in India. Literally from Kashmir to Kanyakumari, political families have become the norm in India. As the accompanying story will reveal, about 150 Lok Sabha members of Parliament belong to a ‘dynasty’-big or small. And, it would be downright wrong to say that dynasty is a Congress phenomenon. It is, in fact a South Asian phenomenon, with even the United States now dabbling in a bit of dynasty politics(See Box). In Kashmir, the colourful second generation Farooq Abdullah enters the Lok Sabha even as his son Omar Abdullah continues as Chief Minister of the state; this time as an ally of Congress. Incidentally, the father was Chief Minister when the son was a minister in the NDA cabinet of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Farooq Abdullah will get ample time to catch up on family gossip in the Parliament with his son-in-law Sachin Pilot who has won again from Rajasthan. Sachin himself is the son of the late Congress leader Rajesh Pilot. In yet another hilly state of Himachal Pradesh, the BJP candidate Anurag Singh Thakur has won the Lok Sabha elections. He happens to be the son of Himachal Chief Minister Prem Singh Dhumal. In distant Karnataka, BJP candidate B.Y Raghavendra has won the Lok Sabha elections. He happens to be the son of BJP Chief Minister B.S Yediyurappa. In Uttar Pradesh, two non-Congress father-son combinations have won Lok Sabha elections. They are Mulayam Singh Yadav-Akhilesh Yadav and Ajit Singh-Jayant Choudhry. In Orissa, the Biju Janata Dal candidate Kalikesh Singh Deo has won the Bolangir Lok Sabha seat. He is the grandson of a former Orissa Chief Minister Rajendra Narayan Singh Deo. Kalikesh defeated his aunt Sangeeta Singh Deo who was the sitting BJP MP from this constituency. Of course, you would find that the Marxists don’t often find a place in this burgeoning pantheon. Give due credit to the devil, you might say. You might also say that this is another reflection of the fact that Marxists are out of sync with the realities of Indian politics! It is actually a wonder why intellectuals and pundits harp so repeatedly on this dynasty issue. India has always been a hierarchical society where it was the norm for most of history for the son to do what the father did. And the nature of society does not change in a hurry (Hurry in history would amount to at least a 100 years or so, depending on your perspective) even if concepts like democracy are imported and imposed. On the positive side, daughters and bahus have joined the sons in joining their fathers’ profession. Harsimrat Kaur, Kanimozhi, Meira Kumar, Agatha Sangma and Supriya Sule are just a few examples from Indian politics. Rani Jethmalani and Mahesh Jethmalani are siblings who followed their father into law as a profession. In business, the Birlas, Goenkas, Modis, Chauhans, Piramals et al now have more and more women metaphorically breaking the glass ceiling. In cinema, till the recent entry of Ranbir Kapoor, it was sisters Karishma and Kareena who proudly flaunted the Kapoor legacy in Bollywood. Why, even Rohan Gavaskar, the son of cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar managed to play a few one day matches for India!

The multi billion dollar question is: Are dynasties bad for India and Indian democracy? In an ideal and mature democracy, dynasties would surely not play such an important role in politics. That India would be a genuine true blue meritocracy where your talent and skills would play a far bigger role than your family background. But then, as in every other profession in India, the entry barriers for a newcomer to politics are quite high. Has that actually enabled talent to sprout in Indian politics? While we grapple with that question, why not respect what Indian voters decide in their infinite wisdom? The first families

As democracies and capitalism mature, hierarchies tend to crumble and family legacies seem to matter less. Those blessed with famous fathers (or mothers) no doubt lead a privileged life. But don’t expect them to automatically join the profession of their parents. A classic example is Paris Hilton, heir to the Hilton hotel Empire and fortune. Even the most whacky of page three journalists don’t expect her to stop partying and start running the Hilton chain of hotels (Thank God for that!). Nor did the children of first generation billionaire Bill Gates step into his shoes when he called it a day last year. And you didn’t have the son of the iconic Margaret Thatcher follow her as the Prime Minister of Britain. But this kind of ‘egalitarianism’ has taken centuries of democracy to imbibe and absorb.

Despite this, America narrowly missed the ‘dynasty’ mark last year when Barack Obama was elected President of the United States. If Hillary Clinton had won and won a second term-as most American presidents do-a member of either the Bush or Clinton family would have been President continuously for almost 30 years-from 1988 to 2016. But there was a time when it was clear that the word Bush had become closely associated with the word dynasty. There was George Bush Sr who had already served as the President. One son George Bush Jr was the Governor of Texas while the other-brighter-one Jeb Bush was the Governor of Florida. How belonging to a dynasty can be a huge help was apparent in 2000 when rivals George Bush Sr and Al Gore finished in a dead heat in Florida. Jeb Bush was around to help as Governor and his brother became President despite getting less votes than Al Gore. At the moment, it does look doubtful if the Bush progeny will follow their fathers and grandfather in politics.

But the most compelling and charismatic dynasty in America has been the Kennedy. Younger brother John F Kennedy became President while elder brother Robert Kennedy was certain to become one till he was assassinated in 1968. The other Kennedy Ted has remained a life long Senator despite a scandal in his younger days. But it does look as if the doors have been closed even for this dynasty. The daughter of John, Caroline Kennedy wanted to replace Hillary Clinton as Senator from New York after she became Secretary of State. After a public outcry, she was forced to withdraw from the race.

Globally, dynasties-whether American or South Asian-share another trait; and that is tragedy through assassinations and untimely deaths. Two Kennedy brothers were assassinated and one son died in a plane crash. The husband of former Philippines President Corazino Aquino was assassinated. So was the father of Aang San Kyu in Myanmaar. So was Mujibur Rehman, the father of the current Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina. So were Indira and Rajiv Gandhi. Nobody has been able to explain this bizarre conincidence and the mystique this has created.