SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA
ARCHIVES

Saisuresh Sivaswamy

Patriot Games

Jitendra Prasada, the Congress vice-president, is a wise man, and nowhere is his brand of wisdom more in evidence than in his Friday circular seeking to explain why the Congress has seen it fit to serve an ultimatum on the United Front over the issue of dropping the Dravida Munnetra Kaghagam.

It's obvious from this document that he has not been through the Jain Commission's interim report, and has merely skimmed over the juicier parts of the media exposes. Frankly, I don't think any of those contorting themselves into knots and twists as per the wind's direction, have bothered to study what the judge has said about the assassination.

But being a wise man, Prasada believes it gives him a right to interpret and doctor facts to suit his and his party's thesis. In his circular he has called the choice before the UF a choice between nationalism and anti-nationalism implying in so many words that sticking by the DMK is anti-national. He also has a passing swipe at the latter's attempt 'to whip up Tamil chauvinism' as 'a cynical attempt to cover up its own misdeeds.' The issue, through Prasada's tunnel, is whether political parties today should support actions which are against the national interest, and who support a political party which is against national policy. Over and above all this, 'the DMK was an accomplice in activities aimed at threatening the unity and integrity of the entire country and helped those who are engaging in carrying on a war against Indian forces.'

It is a remarkable outpouring from the senior leader of a major political party and is virtually an indictment of the DMK over the issue of patriotism. But for someone so conscious of recent happenings, Prasada displays an amazing amnesia when it comes to not-so-ancient history, unmindful of the caveat that those who forget history are apt to repeat it.

The first fact that Prasada has overlooked, in his enthusiasm for explaining his party's inexplicable hurry for elections after having fought shy of them for near-on two years, is that the Jain Commission's interim report (at the judge's pace the final one should be in by another 6 years) does not indict the DMK in the assassination of former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi. It has passed several adverse remarks against the government of M Karunanidhi, V P Singh and Chandra Shekhar, for not doing enough in the matter of providing security for the ex-prime minister. Justice Jain has gone into the factors leading up to the assassination, the actual act itself to be tackled in his final outpouring.

It is well known that there was a lot of kinship between the Tamil rebels of Sri Lanka and the native population of Tamil Nadu, and successive state government have always provided normal and material support to those fighting for a separate Eelam. The DMK was among the supporters of the struggle, but it did not go to the extent of starting training camps for the rebels on Tamil Nadu's soil.

No, that honour goes to a former prime minister, also of the Congress, who too fell by the sword. Her son merely continued her brand of policies, and in his zeal for striking accords, was inveigled into signing one on the Lankan issue. What that past did was leave the baby in India's hands, while Colombo stood by to watch the fun. Rajiv Gandhi's murder was a direct fallout of this accord. before signing which there are no signs he consulted the other protagonists in the bloody drama.

Till this point, everybody had been helping the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. By turning the gun on former friends, Rajiv Gandhi virtually sealed his own fate.

The patriotism that Prasada talks about in his missive is a many splendoured thing, and often takes on the dimensions of the ruling party. The 'patriotic struggle' that the Indian army was waging in Jaffna was found a drain on the exchequer by the succeeding government: after all, is it patriotic to fight Colombo's battles for it?

What Prasada has done in his infinite wisdom, is to treat the Jain Commission report as the last word on the Lankan muddle. It is not. The interim report is a statement, an opinion based on the questioning of some of the key players in the drama, and by no means does it take on the hues of gospel truth.

Prasada should now cast aside his robes of wisdom, and ask some searching questions pertaining to the role played by his own organisation in muddying the Lankan waters. He should ponder over former home minister S B Chavan's statement to Parliament that disclosing all the relevant records to the Jain Commission 'would tarnish the image of one family'. Now that is a damnation worse than any issued from any judicial commission any time in free India. Which is the family Chavan was referring to and why was it so important to protect its name that files and documents were withheld from the Commission?

It's obvious which family the home minister was referring to. It's also obvious that Justice Jain was given only what the administration thought fit to be seen by him. At best, then, his work becomes a blinkered view; at worst, he has done what the Congress wanted him to do. And judging by the paroxysms the party has since gone into, the latter is not altogether wide of the mark.

Saisuresh Sivaswamy