:: P.C. Alexander

A salute to Mumbai as we bid 2008 goodbye

By P.C. Alexander

This is the season when people specially remember their friends and relations and send them good wishes for a happy New Year. This year, every Indian, wherever s/he may live, will specially remember Mumbaikars for the fortitude and resilience they have shown in the face of the dastardly attacks in Mumbai on 26/11 which left about 184 persons dead and over 311 injured.

Unfortunately, Mumbaikars had to go through several such bitter experiences in the last one-and-a-half decade, including natural calamities like cyclones and floods and man-made miseries through serial bombs in crowded places and railway carriages. In all such situations, Mumbaikars have held their head high and not allowed even personal loss — be it the death of a near and dead one or destruction of property — to outweigh their confidence and optimism. The nation salutes them while wishing them a Happy New Year.

However, those who have been closely observing the post-26/11 mood of the people would not have failed to notice an intense sense of dissatisfaction, if not anger, among the common people on why those elected to power on their votes have repeatedly failed to protect them from violence and terror. Their immediate reaction after the horrendous events of 26/11 was an expression of disgust at the political class as a whole whom they consider mainly responsible for their plight. What they ask for is change, something on the lines of the mantra which brought a fresh wind to blow across America in the presidential elections.

Let us take a look at some of the traumatic experiences which Mumbaikars have had to go through in the last one-and-a-half decade. The first serious man-made calamity in recent years were the large-scale communal riots of December 1992, instigated by mafia leaders from outside and supported by Indian politicians’ vote-bank politics. I had taken oath as governor of Maharashtra on January 12, 1993 when the city was still in the grip of violence and rioting. The top leaders of the ruling Indian National Congress in the state had come in for severe criticism by the people for not doing enough to prevent the riots from spreading and to provide the much-needed assistance to thousands of people who had taken shelter in temporary camps.

People were quite bitter in their complaint that chief minister Sudhakar Rao Nayak and his senior Cabinet colleagues had not even visited them to see the miserable conditions of the camps and lack of basic facilities like drinking water, sanitation, lighting etc. Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao, after his visit to Mumbai on January 15, 1993, made up his mind to replace the chief minister with someone who could handle the situation more effectively. After a few days, Sudhakar Rao Nayak was replaced by Sharad Pawar, who was then serving as defence minister in the central Cabinet. By the time Mr Pawar assumed charge, riots had subsided to a great extent, though people’s disenchantment with politicians, which started in December 1992, was growing rapidly.

On March 12, 1993, a week after the new chief minister assumed office, Mumbai was struck by deadly serial bombs in several crowded places, killing 257 persons and causing injuries to 710. Though unlike in the earlier riots, Mr Pawar was able to restore normalcy to the city very quickly, common people continued to be distrustful about the will and ability of the government to ensure their safety and security.

On July 17, 2006 Mumbaikars had to again endure the bitter experience of international terrorism when terrorists let off a series of bombs on the western line route of the suburban train from Mumbai, killing 209 and injuring 700 persons. The victims included people who were living outside but would commute daily to Mumbai for work.

The term "Mumbaikar" should not be confined to the 12 million people living in the city (50 per cent of whom live in slums!), but should also include the six-seven million people who commute for work every day from neighbouring places to Mumbai. These commuters are equally bitter in their criticism of the government’s failure to deal with international terrorism.

The resignation of a few ministers has failed to assure them as well as other Mumbaikars about the government’s preparedness to meet the challenge of terror. Of course, if these ministers had not been shown the door after 26/11, people’s anger would have been at a much higher pitch. But this does not mean that in the eyes of the common people these ministers alone were responsible for the failure to provide security to the people. That is why their anger is against the whole political class now.

Take the case of former home minister Shivraj Pail. The policies he was trying to implement, and defend in Parliament, were those that had been endorsed by the entire Cabinet. A Cabinet minister for home affairs does not formulate national security policies on his own; though he may take the initiative in some matters, the entire Cabinet has to be involved in approving all major policies. The Prime Minister would have found it almost impossible to retain him in the portfolio and his exit had become unavoidable after 26/11.

The resignation of state chief minister Vilas Rao Deshmkh as and home minister R. R. Patil was inevitable in the circumstances arising out of 26/11.

But people of the country, and particularly Mumbaikars, will not feel assured of their safety unless they see real "change" in the policies of the government on this most-important issue.

An intriguing situation has been created by the resignation of A.R. Antulay, another minister in the central Cabinet, following his demand for an enquiry into the circumstances in which ATS chief Hemant Karkare and two other police officers were killed at Cama Hospital on 26/11. The government had rightly disagreed with Mr Antulay’s demand, but the Prime Minister pronounced that "to err is human" and that the Antulay episode should be treated as closed after Mr Antulay himself accepted the government’s statement in Parliament on the killing of these officers by terrorists.

The dictum that all is well that ends well may be a good title for a drama, but doubts whether 26/11 really deserved to be declared closed in the manner sought by the Prime Minister or whether it had really ended well, are likely to persist.

P.C. Alexander was formerly governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra