Commentary/T V R Shenoy

A defence minister is supposed to keep his eyes on Lahore and Lhasa; Mulayam Singh can focus on nothing but Lucknow!

It began with Union Home Minister Indrajit Gupta giving the Lok Sabha his considered opinion that Uttar Pradesh was headed for 'anarchy, chaos, and destruction.'

Romesh Bhandari, the self-willed governor of the state, took offence at this. He forced the chief secretary to write that the home minister had got it wrong. Bhandari also smugly noted that the prime minister at any rate was satisfied.

Gupta, who has faced down greater men than Mulayam Singh Yadav's lackey, refused to be moved. He simply reiterated that the law and order situation in the state wasn't good.

The spectacle of a governor publicly squabbling with the successor to Sardar Patel and Govind Ballabh Pant takes one's breath away. Parliamentarians across the political spectrum joined to defend one of their own. (The Samajwadi Party of Mulayam Singh Yadav was a notable exception.)

More than one MP has already demanded Romesh Bhandari's resignation. There is a general consensus that the flamboyant governor has stepped well over the limit.

Fair enough. But in the ruckus over the charges and countercharges, everyone seems to have lost sight of the original point -- the stability of Uttar Pradesh.

It is useless debating Bhandari's atrocious behaviour. He was clearly in the wrong, and he must go (the sooner the better). But what happens next?

Uttar Pradesh isn't going to know any peace if Bhandari is replaced with another of Mulayam Singh Yadav's men. (A defence minister is supposed to keep his eyes on Lahore and Lhasa; the current incumbent can focus on nothing but Lucknow!)

It suits Mulayam Singh Yadav perfectly to keep Uttar Pradesh under President's Rule. He knows that he doesn't have a chance of winning power through the ballot box. But why bother to campaign if he can rule the state through Delhi?

That is fine for the Samajwadi Party boss. But can over 100 million citizens of India be forced to suffer to serve the political interests of one man?

Which brings us back to the original point: Is the situation in Uttar Pradesh truly deteriorating?

Romesh Bhandari, true to his bureaucratic roots, wants to squelch all criticism with a volley of statistics. This reminds me of Mark Twain's famous dictum that there are three kinds of untruth -- 'lies, damned lies, and statistics.'

Perhaps Bhandari should recite his statistics to someone like Vineet Jain. This man, the son of a rich builder, was abducted by AK-47 wielding goons. His family allegedly paid through the nose to get him back alive.

If Jain's abduction didn't raise a great ruckus, it was because of one grim fact -- kidnappings have become so common in Uttar Pradesh that they don't make news any longer.

In Ghaziabad district, just across the border from Delhi, kidnappings and contract killings are a cottage industry. The place is a magnet for criminal elements from across the State.

Some years ago Dawood Ibrahim confessed to an interviewer that the police could finish off every gang in Bombay if it were given its head. The unstated implication was that there was a politician-criminal nexus operating at the cost of the citizen.

That is just as true of Uttar Pradesh today as of Bombay yesterday. How is it that the swaggering gangsters of Ghaziabad are transformed into purring kittens once they cross to Delhi? Is it because they know that the Delhi police aren't hamstrung?

Of course, kidnapping is a rich man's problem. But it affects the man on the street as well. If industrialists refuse to set foot in Uttar Pradesh for fear of their lives, you can't expect them to invest in the state either. Money that should have gone to the state will be diverted elsewhere.

But assume, if you like, that the gangs are suppressed with a firm hand. Will that solve the problem? Scarcely, those goons are only the most visible face of crime.

White collar crime is just as destructive. And I would like to point out that it has reached new depths in Uttar Pradesh. So much so that even the indolent bureaucracy has been forced to take notice. In which other state would you have civil servants voting to elect the three most corrupt officers?!

Romesh Bhandari's response to all this is a public relations blitzkrieg. But wasting paper isn't going to improve the law and order situation in the state he treats as his feudal property.

Let us get rid of Bhandari by all means. But let us not kid ourselves by pretending that his removal is a solution to all of Uttar Pradesh's problems. If a governor feels free to flaunt the Constitution, can you blame lesser men too for breaking the law?

Tell us what you think of this column