Pressing on

Sir — Don’t be surprised if there is another sensational botch-up at the re-scheduled common entrance test to the six Indian Institutes of Management. Murli Manohar Joshi and his human resource development ministry still have not got the six IIMs to toe their line (“IIM’s parry Joshi thrust”, Jan 2). The suddenness of the meeting — the IIM directors were informed on Friday about the Saturday meeting — and its timing — a week before the dissolution of Parliament — suggest that more is at stake than the lowering of fees and widening of course structure. While in all spheres, the government is trying to rope in external capital, why should it be so keen to offer crores in grants to the IIMs who seem to be quite capable of managing on their own? Joshi could well use this money to start some new management institutes which will teach “courses with an Indian context” at minimal fees. But where the idea is to take over the IIMs, anything less will not do.

Yours faithfully,
Sunil Baran Ray, Calcutta

Family pride

Sir — Rudrangshu Mukherjee raises a very pertinent question in the article, “In the family way” (Jan 25): “Is India ready yet to promote merit above family?”. The answer seems to be in the negative. When Priyanka Gandhi gave birth to a baby boy, Congressmen raised the slogan that their future leader had arrived. If people are not willing to banish the idea that their leader should belong to a particular family, then it is best to resign ourselves to the perpetuation of dynastic rule.

While the Bharatiya Janata Party is full of fanatic elements, the Congress continues to look up to the Nehru-Gandhi family. What does it say of the largest democracy in the world when people have to choose between religious fanaticism and family rule?

Yours faithfully,
Sujit De, Sodepur

Sir — Pramod Mahajan must be out of his mind to claim that only individuals born of Indian parents have a right to aspire to the prime minister’s post (“Pramod puts party in a quandary”, Jan 28). His comments are so outrageous that even his party is in a fix about how to react. Senior BJP leaders like Rajnath Singh are saying that the party will not oppose the candidatures of Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi. If Mahajan decides to don the mantle of an independent policy-maker, the BJP is in for a lot of trouble in the elections.

Yours faithfully,
Jayanta Chakraborty, Belonia, Tripura

Sir — If one can understand the argument behind the opposition to Sonia Gandhi as a prime ministerial candidate on account of her foreign origin, stretching it to cover Priyanka and Rahul Gandhi is not merely in bad taste, but completely illogical. If foreign origin is the only point of contention, then Mahajan should remember that two-thirds of India’s population living north of the Vindhyas — which would include almost all the top leaders of his party — are of foreign origin, being descendents of Aryans who came to India from central Asia. Following from Mahajan’s argument, it can be argued that only Dravidians can aspire to the prime minister’s post. And why, then, should the BJP wax eloquent about people like Bobby Jindal, who, in spite of their Indian descent, hold or contest for important administrative posts in foreign countries? It seems that it is alright for Indians to become prime ministers of other countries — which, of course, would make the BJP felicitate them with great fanfare — but not the other way round.

Yours faithfully,
Govind Das Dujari, Calcutta

Sir — Pramod Mahajan’s statement that “only someone whose both parents are Indians should be the prime minister” has no constitutional basis. The Constitution simply says that the prime minister should be a “citizen of India”, without specifying a particular kind of citizenship. Also, the manner in which Mahajan and company are saying that “papa and mummy both lost and so will the kids” is a rather disgusting way to predict the outcome of the elections. But if the BJP is so sure of the results, why are its leaders bothering to waste so many words on the Nehru-Gandhi siblings?

Yours faithfully,
Prashant Solomon, New Delhi

Sir — Indian politics has been a victim of dynastic rule ever since independence. Without going into its merits and demerits, it can be said that the entry of Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi into politics will benefit the Congress and the country, simply because they will give the country a breather from the “old men’s club”.

Yours faithfully,
Madhu Agrawal, Dariba, Delhi

Sir — The Congress, running for cover after the BJP’s attack on Sonia Gandhi’s foreign roots, has inducted Rahul and Priyanka into the party in a bid to contain the damage. But, as the editorial, “Family Reunion”(Jan 24), rightly points out, there can be no bigger sin in democracy than perpetuating dynastic rule. The induction of Rajiv Gandhi’s children reveals again that Congressmen feel helpless without a Nehru-Gandhi family member to order them around. After the death of dynamic young leaders like Madhavrao Scindia and Rajesh Pilot, the party is left only with leaders whose mission is to run after the Gandhi name.

Yours faithfully,
Sunil Garodia, Calcutta

Sir — The Congress is making scapegoats of Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi, just as it made a scapegoat of their mother. Sonia Gandhi was forced to join politics in spite of her reluctance to have anything to do with what claimed both her husband and mother-in-law. It suits Congressmen to have their leader from the Nehru-Gandhi family because that way, they do not have to shoulder any blame for the party’s poor showing in the elections.

Yours faithfully,
N. Bose, Konnagar