The season of winter was starting when on an arbitrary day, sweets were brought to our home for no apparent reason. At that age, nothing else was important but sweets. Simply getting as many as possible was the goal. So, I happily focused on the sweets. That very night, overhearing a conversation between my father and my two uncles, I learned that a man named Shri Chandra Shekhar who was from my birthplace, Ballia, had become the Prime Minister of India. I learnt that he was also the Member of Parliament for Ballia. From their talk, I gathered only that the Prime Minister was the highest-ranking official. When I asked, my grandfather explained in simple words that the Prime Minister was the country's king! Those were the days when my mother or grandmother would tell us bedtime stories about kings and queens every night. At the time, I actually imagined that Chandra Shekhar had killed the king and seized the throne! That was my first real political awakening outside the realm of fairy tales! Later, after the Babri Masjid demolition and the dismissal of the Kalyan Singh government, I learned that Chandra Shekhar had become Prime Minister by a margin of vote; not by killing anyone! Back then, I was a student at Saraswati Shishu Mandir in Ratsar and the environment was very tense. I remember going door-to-door with friends, chanting the "Ayodhya Chalo" slogan and scribbling it on walls in exchange for lemon candies.
Anyway!
I recall that shortly after he became Prime Minister, rumors began circulating that Chandra Shekhar had sold off the nation's entire gold reserve. Everyone had a different theory about it. All I really understood was that the "King" had sold the country's gold; what I couldn't grasp at the time was why there was such an outcry when the King had merely sold his own gold! It felt unsettling back then, and I had many questions that were only answered years later, during my college years.
I was watching the movie ’Governor’ on Amazon Prime Video. In the film, the character portraying Chandra Shekhar says, "I got power but no cooperation; I got the chair but no real authority. History will likely forget a Prime Minister who served for only seven months. But if anyone ever turns the pages of time to look back at this era, perhaps they will realize that I truly tried our best." That dialogue stopped me in my tracks, and everything I’ve written above came flooding back to me.
The Balance of Payments crisis of 1991 did not erupt suddenly in June of that year; it was the culmination of problems that had been accumulating for years; problems to which the tenures of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi had contributed significantly. Rajiv Gandhi had both the information regarding this issue and the opportunity to address it, yet he chose to buckle under pressure rather than tackle the problem head-on. Consequently, the fiscal deficit and foreign debt mounted, while sluggish exports and a closed economy fostered inefficiency.
The Gulf War precipitated the crisis, catching India ill-prepared and lacking the capacity to cope. Soaring oil prices and dwindling remittances from the Gulf region caused the fiscal deficit, current account deficit, and inflation to spike, shaking investor confidence. The war was merely a trigger; the underlying issue was structural.
This crisis forced the government to alter its course. Ultimately, during that turbulent period, the Chandrashekhar government, in collaboration with the Reserve Bank of India, had to pledge the nation's gold reserves to foreign central banks to secure the foreign exchange needed to avert bankruptcy. This difficult and highly unpopular decision was unavoidable. If India holds such global significance today, the foundation stones were laid by the then-Prime Minister Chandrashekhar, despite his immense unpopularity at the time.
After years of studying economic affairs, while writing about the 1991 Balance of Payments crisis, I realized that when the history of independent India’s economy is discussed in terms of courageous politicians, Chandrashekhar might well appear even more significant than Narasimha Rao. A socialist politician, acting in the national interest while leading a caretaker government, from which he stood to gain no political or personal advantage, effectively sacrificed his socialist image. Narasimha Rao merely followed the precedent set by Chandrashekhar.
Anyway!
I recall that shortly after he became Prime Minister, rumors began circulating that Chandra Shekhar had sold off the nation's entire gold reserve. Everyone had a different theory about it. All I really understood was that the "King" had sold the country's gold; what I couldn't grasp at the time was why there was such an outcry when the King had merely sold his own gold! It felt unsettling back then, and I had many questions that were only answered years later, during my college years.
I was watching the movie ’Governor’ on Amazon Prime Video. In the film, the character portraying Chandra Shekhar says, "I got power but no cooperation; I got the chair but no real authority. History will likely forget a Prime Minister who served for only seven months. But if anyone ever turns the pages of time to look back at this era, perhaps they will realize that I truly tried our best." That dialogue stopped me in my tracks, and everything I’ve written above came flooding back to me.
The Balance of Payments crisis of 1991 did not erupt suddenly in June of that year; it was the culmination of problems that had been accumulating for years; problems to which the tenures of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi had contributed significantly. Rajiv Gandhi had both the information regarding this issue and the opportunity to address it, yet he chose to buckle under pressure rather than tackle the problem head-on. Consequently, the fiscal deficit and foreign debt mounted, while sluggish exports and a closed economy fostered inefficiency.
The Gulf War precipitated the crisis, catching India ill-prepared and lacking the capacity to cope. Soaring oil prices and dwindling remittances from the Gulf region caused the fiscal deficit, current account deficit, and inflation to spike, shaking investor confidence. The war was merely a trigger; the underlying issue was structural.
This crisis forced the government to alter its course. Ultimately, during that turbulent period, the Chandrashekhar government, in collaboration with the Reserve Bank of India, had to pledge the nation's gold reserves to foreign central banks to secure the foreign exchange needed to avert bankruptcy. This difficult and highly unpopular decision was unavoidable. If India holds such global significance today, the foundation stones were laid by the then-Prime Minister Chandrashekhar, despite his immense unpopularity at the time.
After years of studying economic affairs, while writing about the 1991 Balance of Payments crisis, I realized that when the history of independent India’s economy is discussed in terms of courageous politicians, Chandrashekhar might well appear even more significant than Narasimha Rao. A socialist politician, acting in the national interest while leading a caretaker government, from which he stood to gain no political or personal advantage, effectively sacrificed his socialist image. Narasimha Rao merely followed the precedent set by Chandrashekhar.
No comments:
Post a Comment