In the Times Lit Fest held in Delhi a couple of days ago, ex-Finance and Home minister in the UPA government said ‘ If the PM had told me I have decided to demonetise or declare as illegal tender the 1,000-rupee note or a 500-rupee note, I would have told him, sir, my advice is don’t do it’, and had the PM persisted, ‘Well, if he had still said, sorry, this is my decision, you have to do it, let me tell you quite candidly I would have resigned’. This, coming from a man who has presented nine Union budgets is nothing short of a travesty. As an ex-finance as well as ex-home minister, one would expect Chidambaram, of all people to understand the unholy nexus between black money and terror activities. One would have hoped that Chidambaram’s opposition to demonetization notwithstanding, he would have come up with constructive suggestions to rid the Indian economy of the problem of black money. Clearly, not only did Chidambaram do nothing as the Finance minister to solve the black money problem, he is choosing to respond to the Demonetization initiative of Modi government by sticking to the political line taken by his party. Not for nothing did the ex-Finance minister, Yashwant Sinha, once famously describe Chidambaram as the ‘Spoiler of the Indian economy’.
Chidambaram’s record as Finance minister is patchy at the best and a tragedy at the worst. It is best to quote noted Chidambaram critic and former Finance Minister, Yashwant Sinha on Chidambaram’s track record as the Finance Minister. Yashwant Sinha, once referred to Chidambaram as the ‘4.8% growth minister‘. He also described Chidambaram’s reign as ‘Whenever he took over, there had been dip in the country’s growth rate‘. Sinha, also described Chidambaram as a ‘fraud Finance minister’, who dressed up numbers to hide the bitter truth. Performance as Finance Minister and Home Minister aside, one wonders why Chidambaram did not consider putting in his papers, when his Cabinet colleague, Raja was so evidently sought to cheat the system in the 2G spectrum case. Or when Manmohan Singh government chose to waive off farm loans, which inevitably would hamper future loan recoveries. Or when the Commonwealth scam broke out. Or for that matter, when he lied through his dirty teeth in the Ishrat Jahan case. Or when he stuck to his party line on Saffron terrorism. Or, when the July 2011 bombings rocked Mumbai. Or, when his son, Karti was accused of corruption. Not for nothing is Chidambaram, notorious as the ‘Robert Vadra of South India’. Clearly, there is a pattern here.
Had Chidambaram really ever wanted to resign, the Gods above were kind enough to accord him multiple opportunities to satisfy his desires.
The fact that he didn’t resign is only because there was a Gandhi at the helm, whose soles he was ever willing to lick. Chidambaram’s attention to the economy and India in general has now been aroused only because he wants to continue serving his political masters best by attacking the government over issues or non-issues.
But Chidambaram isn’t really new to this nautanki of threatening to resign to make a political point. He had called a press conference to put in his papers, expecting to win the then PM Narasimha Rao’s open support, following which he would withdraw his resignation. But the strategy backfired and Rao accepted Chidambaram’s resignation, leaving him shell shocked. At the time of the Maoist attacks in Dantewada in 2010, Chidambaram tried this strategy again, offering to resign to accept the moral responsibility for the worst-ever maoist attack in the country. The timing of the resignation could not be worse. It took the opposition parties, including the BJP to indicate that a resignation at this time will only boost the Maoist’s morale. Anyways, with a weak, Manmohan Singh leading the UPA government, only Sonia Gandhi’s clear displeasure could have resulted in Chidambaram’s resignation being accepted.
Hypothetically, what if Chidambaram had been the Finance Minister when the Prime Minister of the day wanted to implement Demonetization.
Well, Mr. Chidambaram, when you suggested that you would rather have resigned than implement the Demonetization policy, there are reasons to suspect that your resignation would have been accepted. And some might add, accepted gladly!
References:
