Former Vice-President Hamid Ansari recalls memorable encounters with PM Modi

I had an unusual experience around April–May 2007. At the request of a friend, I penned a review of Bob Woodward’s State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III for one of our journals. It concluded with the observation that the book has contributed to the documentation of deceit summed up in its concluding sentence: ‘With all Bush’s upbeat talk and optimism, he has not told the American public the truth about what Iraq has become.’

I cited Otto von Bismarck’s observation that: ‘Woe to the statesman whose reasons for entering a war do not appear so plausible at its end as at its beginning.’ The editorial board of the journal however felt that these views were not appropriate for a sitting Vice President of the Republic! Much to my regret, the review remained unpublished.

Around this time, I came across an interesting paper on The Indian Parliament as an Institution of Accountability by Devesh Kapur and Pratap Bhanu Mehta. The authors contended that the ‘Parliament has self-abdicated many of its functions’ by fewer sittings, inadequate committee oversight, less effective fiscal management and that while ‘unparliamentary’ behaviour by individual MPs has undoubtedly robbed Parliament of the mystique that often underpins authority, its weakness as an institution of accountability stems from many factors, both within and outside the institution. I had no idea at that stage that I would get a ringside seat for a whole decade to observe and assess the validity of these observations.

MODERATE AND LEFT-LEANING

I assumed the office of the Vice President of India after I had expressed indifference, in response to a query, about the preferred ‘auspicious’ time for oath-taking.

It was an unconventional journey to the second-highest public office of the Republic. Many years later, a former member wrote a laudatory essay beginning with an Urdu couplet:

Nairangi-e-siyasat-e-dauran to dekhye/Manzil unhain mili jo sharik-e-safar na the (Behold! Strange are the ways of politics. Those who did not run the race were the first to reach the goal.)

An interesting observation on my election came from the US embassy in a cable of 10 August and made public by WikiLeaks. It said (perhaps referring to my views on US–Iran relations) that ‘we found Ansari to be…moderate in most but not all of his views’, and described me ‘as an intellectual with left-of-center leanings’. It added that ‘while at the United Nations, Ansari led the Indian delegation’s successful resistance to Pakistan’s two-year effort to gain a UN resolution on Kashmir favourable to Pakistan’.

WHEN MODI CAME CALLING

For reasons of security, and while the official residence of the vice president at 6, Maulana Azad Road was being given the customary coat of paint, I was advised to shift to Haryana Bhawan (near India Gate) where the then CM Bhupinder Singh Hooda graciously made available his personal suite. It also facilitated my meetings with the large number of callers—political and personal—who came to see me in my new surroundings.

A very early caller was Narendra Modi, then CM of Gujarat. After the usual polite exchanges, I said that I had questions in my mind that would have been asked had we met in my previous responsibility as Chairman of the NMC. I referred to the post-Godhra happenings in his state in 2002 and asked why he allowed it to happen. He said that people look at only one aspect of the matter and pay no attention to the good work he has initiated, particularly for the education of Muslim girls. I sought its details and suggested that he should publicize it; ‘that does not suit me politically’ was the revealingly candid response.

WHY BILLS NOT PASSED IN THE DIN, ASKED PM

During the UPA period, I had taken a position that no bills will be passed in the din. This was appreciated by the principal Opposition leaders. This principle of ‘no bill to be passed in din’ was steadfastly observed throughout my tenure. It did bring discomfiture to both the governments, but the UPA took cognizance of my principled stand and compensated it by floor management and adjustments with the Opposition.

The NDA, on the other hand, felt that its majority in the Lok Sabha gave it the ‘moral’ right to prevail over procedural impediments in the Rajya Sabha. An expression of this was conveyed to me authoritatively, and somewhat unusually, when one day PM Modi walked into my Rajya Sabha office unscheduled. After I got over my surprise, I made the customary gestures of hospitality.

He said that ‘there are expectations of higher responsibilities for you but you are not helping me’. I said that my work in the Rajya Sabha, and outside, is public knowledge. ‘Why are bills not being passed in the din?’ he asked. I replied that the Leader of the House and his colleagues, when in Opposition, had appreciated the ruling that no bills will be passed in the din and that normal procedures of obtaining consent will be observed.

He then said that the Rajya Sabha TV was not favourable to the government. My response was that while I had a role in the establishment of the channel, I had no control over the editorial content and that a committee of Rajya Sabha members, in which the BJP was represented, provided broad guidance to the channel, adding that from all accounts, the channel’s programmes and discussions were appreciated by the viewers.

UNDERHAND COMPLIMENT

10 August 2017 was the last day of my term of office and my last day as Chairman, Rajya Sabha. The day’s proceedings record the details of the morning session. The interventions from party leaders, front and backbenchers, and nominated personalities were full of compliments and complimentary references. Procedural correctives, the ‘no legislation in the din’ rule and dignified impartiality were specifically mentioned.

One senior member on the back benches blessed me with a Sanskrit verse and wished me long life in Upanishadic terms! The PM participated in this, and while fulsome in his compliments was somewhat selective in his reference to my work. Hardly any mention was made of my period as Chairman, Rajya Sabha and while my professional career as a diplomat was alluded to and lauded, it was sought to be pigeonholed in the ‘atmosphere, thought process, debates amidst such people’ (meaning Muslim countries) where I was assigned, supplemented by work in Muslim surroundings as VC of AMU and as Chairman of NMC.

‘There may have been some struggle within (all these years) but from now onwards you won’t have to face this dilemma. You will have a feeling of freedom and you will get an opportunity to work, think and talk according to your ideology.’

The tilt in overlooking my work elsewhere as a representative of India and particularly in the UN in a critical period was fairly evident and so was the reference to ‘your ideology’ and can hardly be attributed to poor staff work; nor can the fact be evaded that a Representative of India, anywhere and at any level including the highest, works on the articulation of Indian views and promotion of Indian national interests uninfluenced by personal preferences or prejudices of host countries. The intended message of the seemingly laudatory remarks was picked up by party functionaries and sections of the media, as also by the ‘faithful’ in the social media, and by the listening public at large.

The reaction so generated has been sustained in various manifestations. Its rationale is perhaps summed up in the Urdu couplet:

Bhari bazm main raaz ki baat keh di/ Bara be-adab hoon saza chahta hoon (I have divulged in public what was hidden I am very insolent, chastisement I desire.)

MEDIA’S SELECTIVE REPORTING

Later that day, there was a farewell function in the Balayogi Auditorium on behalf of the Rajya Sabha members, where a Scroll of Honour was presented to me. It was attended by the vice president designate, the PM, the Speaker (Lok Sabha), the minister for parliamentary affairs, leaders of the House and the Opposition, and Deputy Chairman (Rajya Sabha).

The PM spoke there too; he referred to my family background and experience in public life, mentioned Brig. Mohammad Usman and his martyrdom in the 1948 conflict and said nothing adverse had come to his notice about my long spell in office. He hoped that the insights gained during the tenure would be recorded for public benefit.

This speech, different in content and tone, was not picked up by the media. The photograph of the function, with the Lok Sabha Speaker in the background, was!

(Extracted from the former Vice President and Rajya Sabha Chairman’s autobiography ‘By Many a Happy Accident’ published by Rupa)