Political Interests of Abdul Kalam and the ‘Dream’ for Subservience: The Wiki leaks Expose

 Wiki leaks accessed by The Hindu (18^th March, 2011) revealed that the former President APJ Abdul Kalam informed the then US ambassador David C Mulford that he too had met with the then opposition leader LK Advani to make a shift in his opposition against  Indo-US nuclear deal. This news item has indeed casted a shadow upon the integrity of the office Indian President.

According to the Article 74 of the Indian Constitution the Indian President may act according to the advice given by the council of ministers. The full text of the
Article 74 is given below:  “Council of Ministers to aid and advise President.—(1) There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at the head to aid and advise the President who shall, in the exercise of his functions, act in accordance with such advice: Provided that the President may require the Council of Ministers to reconsider such advice, either generally or otherwise, and the President shall act in accordance with the advice tendered after such reconsideration. (2) The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the President shall not be inquired into in any court.”

Still the President have some discretionary powers but they all are related to the appointment of Prime Minister when no party have any clear majority, to explore the options of government formation when the ruling government looses majority, to disqualify a member of legislature, returning the advice of council of ministers or a bill passed by the parliament and to pocket veto (the time delaying tactics). Apart from these, nowhere it is stated that the President has discretionary powers and can engage in activities that are independent of the advice of the council of ministers or can engage in any kind of lobbying of sorts.

But the Wiki leaks accessed by The Hindu (18^th March, 2011) showcased that the former President APJ Abdul Kalam informed the then US ambassador David C Mulford that he too had met with the then opposition leader LK Advani to make a shift in his opposition against  Indo-US nuclear deal.

 Why should the President APJ Abdul Kalam get worried about the political position taken by the Leader of Opposition?  The Leader of Opposition is supposed to reflect and air the views and concerns of general public and he is duty bound for that. The President is also constitutionally duty bound to ensure that all the organs and the various functionaries of the State are performing in a free and fair manner for the success of Indian democracy.  The Indian president is not supposed to lobby to change or influence the stand or position of anybody while occupying the real estate of Rashtrapathi Bhavan. And the Indian President is not supposed to divulge anything related to the opinion making process to an ambassador of any nation, let alone the ambassador of United States. 

But miserably, the former Indian president APJ Abdul Kalam, by forgetting or bypassing  all the above  mentioned  responsibilities and proprieties, engaged in lobbying of sorts and tried to influence  the then leader of opposition, LK Advani, to change his opposition against the Indo US nuclear deal for just to further  the  interests of the United States. The full text of the news coverage of The Hindu is given at the end. (See also: http://bit.ly/hjYcUa )

If the Wiki leaks accessed by The Hindu are true, it would be a highly unbecoming behavior from a person who occupied such a coveted apex constitutional position. If it is a fact, the alleged opinion making efforts from the former President would denigrate and demean the sanctity of the office of Indian President. The nation already witnessed several instances of politicking   from several former Presidents, but the cited politicking by APJ Abdul Kalam is the very first incident that came to the surface in acquiescence to the interests of a foreign nation (United States) and that too by the so called supreme commander of the nation! What a dream run for subservience in the US Kitchen!

The full text of the news coverage is given below:

U.S. plays politics for nuclear deal, woos BJP at cost of UPA coalition

Sarah Hiddleston

Washington was so keen on a nuclear deal with India that its New Delhi Embassy worked to “put Sonia Gandhi in a box” by wooing the opposition BJP and breaking the coalition with the Left parties, an Embassy cable sent on May 16, 2008, ( 154231, confidential) has revealed.

Ambassador David C. Mulford reported on a “carefully timed” approach to BJP leader L.K. Advani that he made in early May 2008. He urged Advani to “exhibit statesmanship and either back the nuclear deal or withdraw opposition to it”.

In the cable, Mulford also scripted out a rationale that the BJP could use to present its volte-face. The “possible script” included the BJP agreeing that it was a “good” overall deal and that it was “in the larger national interest,” and the possible enactment of the BJP's own Hyde Act if and when it came to power.

A new BJP posture, Mr. Mulford knew, would put the UPA in a spot: “It would … put Sonia Gandhi in a box; if she goes ahead with the deal, her Communist allies would be livid, might pull out of the coalition and possibly not have anything to do with the Congress Party post-election. If she does not go ahead with the deal, she will be seen as having let India down when it faced a crucial choice in order to stay in power for just a few more months. If Sonia goes ahead with the deal, she can call the Communists' bluff secure in the knowledge the BJP is pro-deal.”

It appeared from the cable that Mr. Advani turned down the U.S. advances at this May 8 meeting, though Mulford was later informed by Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon that Advani was “glad he came”. The Ambassador also called upon former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who informed him that “he too had met with Advani to seek a shift in the BJP leader's thinking.”

“Embassy,” an undeterred Mr. Mulford told superiors in Washington, “will keep reaching out to BJP opinion shapers to see if we can provoke a shift in the party that could bring the civil nuclear issue to a head by the end of May.”