Natwar At War

The Parliament could well be a bad poets society, and former external affairsministers from Rajasthan seem to be vying with each other in who can do moreharm to their respective parties. While Mr Jaswant Singh's mole controversy mayhave been an unintended and incidental self-goal, Mr Natwar Singh is clearlyheaded all out for a full frontal confrontation with his party over hisindictment by Pathak Inquiry Authority.

Amidst hoarsely shouted slogans and bad shairi,the controversial Pathak Inquiry Authority report along with theAction Taken Report (ATR) was finally tabled in Parliament today. While theopposition chanted " "Natwar ko fasaya, Sonia ko bachaya" (Natwar madeinto a scapegoat to save Sonia)" and " "Congress ke pole kholne do, Natwar ko bolne do (Let Natwar speak and expose Congress)", the former external affairs ministerremained enigmatic. "Aage aage dekhiye, hotaa hai kyaa (wait andwatch what unfolds)" is all he would say when pressed by the media, afterfinally admitting that he plans to go ahead with the privilege motion againstthe Prime Minister for "leak" of the report to media before it wastabled in Parliament.

In many ways, this is Congress' worst nightmare, withalmost all the parties uniting on the breach of privilegeissue. While the party had been aware and wary that Natwar Singh could prove tobe a dangerous loose-cannon, and had been trying to distance itself from him,even they were caught unprepared when news of Mr Natwar Singh's notice to theRajya Sabha vice-chairman -- unprecedented in the country's Parliamentary history -- first became public on Saturday. "Humto duubenge sanam, tum ko bhii le duubenge (if I drown, my love, I willensure you sink with me)" murmured a Congress MP, about a man who just somemonths back proclaimed his special proximity to the Congress president from theroof tops. Only Priyaranjan Das Munshi, the parliamentary affairs minister would speakup: 'For any Congress member, giving a privilege notice against the PM will bean act of indiscipline."

Apart from the BJP, which moved its own privilegednotices in both houses today, 33 MPs belonging to the Samajwadi Party, TDP, and theAIADMK joined Singh in his breach of privilege notice, for which at least 25 MPsare required. Singh's move is also getting support from the Left, which whilenot moving its own breach notices has expressed a willingness to go for a"sense of the house" statement. CPI's A.B. Bardhanhad already supported his stand while in a carefully worded statement, the CPI(M) had said: "There has been a violation of the privilege and it should beprobed. Let the house privileges committee go into it." After theopposition to the US nuke-deal, this makes it the second time in recent dayswhen the opposition has been so united against the government, even if themotivations are different for each party.

The controversy has once again led to demands first bythe Left and now by the Samajwadi Party that there should be an inquiry againstReliance Industries Ltd (RIL), which is named as one of the beneficiaries in theIraqi oil-for-food scam. "Reliance is thebiggest beneficiary in the oil-for-food scam. Why is Mukesh Ambani being sparedwhen there was an inquiry against Natwar Singh?" SP leader Amar Singhargues, "fully supporting" the demandraised by CPM general secretary Prakash Karat this week-end for a probe againstRIL. Reacting to Prakash Karat's demand for a probe, RIL had said on Saturday ina statement that it "has always followed national and international lawsand norms in all its dealings"

Interestingly, in November 2005, in an article in theHindu Mr Karat had argued that "This issue must be clarified: was it a caseof an illegal deal through political patronage or a business transaction likethe other contracts entered into by Indian business enterprises?" He hadgone on to argue, "But it should be noted that he is being targeted forleading a Congress Party delegation to Iraq in 2002 and for opposing thesanctions and the invasion of Iraq. For the Congress and Mr. Singh, an impartialinquiry would help counter the charges that they were "beneficiaries"in the oil deal."

The Pathak report should therefore actually have"clarified" the matter to Mr Karat's satisfaction because it clearly says, "Natwar Singh utilised his presence in Iraq not merelyfor the purpose of representing the Congress party in a goodwill mission butalso took the opportunity of lending his assistance in the procurement of theoil allocation to Andaleeb Sehgal who accompanied him on the visit to the OilMinister."

But it would seem that the Left is not putting muchcredence to the findings. a feeling that they seem toshare with the BJP -- for entirely different reasons. On its part, theBJP has said that "this report has no basis asnowhere in it is there a mention of the letter of introduction by the Congresschief to the Iraqi authorities." A charge that Natwar Singh denies.

Meanwhile, as we write, the Natwar flip-flop continues (Please see Congress Is Not Letting Me Speak...'), perhaps symptomaticonly of the last-ditch attempts at some sort of a rapprochement with the party. Das Munshi denies, as he would, that there is any pressure from Congress on Natwar to withdraw his privilege motion, claiming that Natwar is not even taking his calls: "I rang up five time yesterday to ascertain about his notice, but Natwar did not come on line Perhaps my voice is not like Amar Singh's?"Natwar, on his part, now says that "the privilege notice is against the Prime Minister ofIndia, which is an office, an institution. There is nothing personal againstPrime Minister Manmohan Singh." He continues to assert that along with theCongress party, he too should have been given a clean chit in the matter butadds that he would not say anything against Congress President Sonia Gandhi oragainst the party.

When asked if had introduced Andaleeb Sehgal to the Saddam Hussain regime, hesaid there was nothing wrong in it and added that the then Petroleum MinisterRam Naik had also introduced many companies to the Iraqi government. Which isindeed the argument used by the Left and the SP as well. The difference is this:while the Left wants Natwar Singh to be exonerated as well (a feeling not shared by his own party), the BJP and the SP are upset that the Congress was exonerated.