Indian Express columnist, C Raja Mohan’s articles are generally, nay politically safe. Neither here nor there. Critical but not overly critical. However, in the Indian Feckless Service, he springs a welcome surprise.
New Delhi’s salute to an ordinary worker who died in harness far away from home, however, can hardly mask the growing pusillanimity of India’s babudom. As more Maniyappans come under fire in Afghanistan, one simple fact stands out. There are no volunteers from the Indian Foreign Service to join the rough and tumble in Afghanistan. Only promotees on the verge of retirement can be dragged in, kicking and screaming.
Not exactly hard hitting, but on the spot.
While Pakistan’s ISI raises the bogey of a threat from the Indian presence in Afghanistan — which appears to be the reason for the killing of Maniyappan — the reality is rather different. Indian civil servants are too afraid to step into the political minefields in Afghanistan or elsewhere in defence of India’s interests.
As he says, the same traits characterise almost the entire Indian bureaucracy, which in my personal opinion, needs to be urgently dismantled. The taxpayer money spent on them is grotesquely disproportionate to the “services” they render to the Indian state. It doesn’t fail to amaze me that the hard work they put in to clear their exams, the knowledge they accumulate, and the training they undergo doesn’t make them better human beings; in short, it seems to me they lose character upon entering service. If for any reason we can excuse the current political class, it must surely be for their criminal/uneducated background. What reason can we give when these civil service dons behave in the same manner?
Enough of my tirade. Read the full piece.
Tags: Indian Politics, Media Watch
On 11.29.05 Nitin says:
Sandeep,
Yes, the mandarins of the civil service bungled this. But Raja Mohan is cleverly deflecting the blame away from the political failure that is more responsible. Civil servants will do what their political masters want them to do. It’s naive to expect the bureaucracy to demonstrate leadership. Especially when their political masters lack it.
On 11.29.05 Sandeep says:
>>…Raja Mohan is cleverly deflecting the blame away from the political failure
True. But don’t you think that the politician-bureaucrat combine is dependent on one another? There is also a limit to which a politician can push the bureaucrat by way of transfers, frameups, and other dirty tricks. If the bureaucrat stands firmly, there’s little chance that his political master will succeed like the way it’s happening now? I mean, tell me seriously can you expect a person of Lalu’s “calibre” to think of a coherent policy? This is where the IAS/IPS/IFS guys need to lend their voices. Your thoughts?
On 12.01.05 Nitin says:
Sandeep,
I was referring to the politician-civil servant distinction at a more fundamental level. The civil service folks are nothing more than executors; the directions must come from the political masters. As much as I detest incompetent politicians, I would hesitate before supporting the view that unelected (and hence unaccountable) bureaucrats running away and taking major policy decisions. I would even hesitate before supporting the view that fast-tracked Rajya Sabha members end up with Cabinet positions. While these practices may be started out of good intentions, once they become precedents, they will end up further perverting the letter and spirit of the constitution.
On 12.01.05 Sandeep says:
Nitin,
Absolutely agree. Well said.
>>I was referring to the politician-civil servant distinction at a more fundamental level.
Unfortunately, nobody wants to look into/understand the fundamentals. Those who attempt to do so are labelled “fundamentalists.” That puts an end to discourse.