Rajasthan is not the only state having problem of leadership. It is universal in the country. Declining morale values and our acceptance of it are the reasons for our problems. It requires a lot of courage and will to sacrifice to stand up against what is wrong and what must be changed. The very fact that we are talking about a JAT leader itself looks to be a poor starting. I would say we need an aggressive INDIAN leader in every state as well as the center.
Now let us analyze the names Mr. Netrapal Singh has suggested.
1. Sh. Om Prakash Chautala: I had an opportunity to meet with Mr. Chautala. He looks sharp and even speaks reasonably well. However, he is not the type of leader we may need/we may be looking for. My reasons are as follows:
(a). He inherited a great legacy. He did not have to work hard to get to the CM’s position. Yet to me he has been a failure. He might have done some thing good, but may be he did more bad than good and hence was defeated in elections. If we carry out an analysis of his party structure, you may find most of the yes man around the center of power. When such situation happens, you tend to go wrong. That has been the case with every single party that where the decision is made by one single person, be it Chautala, Ajit Singh, Mulayam Singh or Sonia Gandhi. Such a situation can work very well, if the leader is above petty gains and is not afraid of taking hard decisions. Mr. Chautala certainly does not meet my definition of a strong or aggressive leader.
2. Ch. Ajit Singh: Another story of wasted legacy. Probably Mr. Ajit Singh was even better situation than Mr. Chautala was. If you really want to get some thing from the system, be prepared to give it some thing first. The system will definitely return your investment with profits. And let me assure you, longer it takes more permanent it is going to be. We would see, UP results soon. I hope Mr. Singh retains his own seat. Favoritism and opportunism might cost him his job to say the least.
3. Dr. Balram Jakhar: Dr. Balram Jakhar has been more or less non-controversial candidate. He has been in the power for most of his political career, yet he did not have a political legacy of his own. To me he looked more like a yes man to his master who was being rewarded for unflinching loyalty to the political party he represented. He did not come out against his own political party when some thing wrong was going on. May be that is how the democratic system works. To me a political leader must oppose any policy that he feels is not in the national interest. After that if the majority of ruling party of the parliament adopts that policy, that is fine. At least such a leader maintains his identity. To me, Mr. Jakhar probably did not have his own identity as such in true sense. His charisma was probably limited to his own constituency. In such a scenario to expect some one to be strong may just be wishful thinking.
4. Sh. Saheb Singh Verma: He probably comes from a more regulated political system. I think he did get an opportunity as CM of Delhi to make his mark on the National Politics. Since he did not do that, it can be another case of missed opportunities or say incompetence. What we assume is our own perception.
5. Mr. Natwar Singh: Again easy rise to success. A devoted and dedicated vote bank. Valuable opportunities lost due to poor political vision, incompetence or lack of self-confidence. Mr. Singh had been a yes man to power brokers in the congress party which had been truly rewarded throughout his political career. He also did well for his family I guess, like Mr. Chautala, and Mr. Ajit Singh.
6. Mr. Sheesh Ram Ola: I personally do not have much knowledge about him, so it would be incorrect on my part to comment on him. However I know that he has been around for a very long time and has not been able to rise to the level the community expected, is the reason enough for him not qualifying for the type of leader Mr. Mukesh is looking for.
7. Ch. Tikait: I think, it is the clear case of a rising star falling to arrogance. Mr. Tikait started very well and had a very large following among the farmer community across the caste line. I think one can never ask for a better platform than that for success. I had seen the Bhartiya Kisan Union’s agitation in Meerut. It was probably best organized agitation and full marks to Mr.Tikait for that. However, I believe that the force behind that organization taking off so well was a retired Justice Ch. Mahavir Singh. There were couples of more guys some of them retired army officers who were the force behind that agitation. It drew national support and CM of UP late Mr. Veer Bhadra Singh was shaken up. What I learnt from some people who were in the close circle, that once the success came to Mr. Tikait, he became arrogant and did not listen to the people who were helping him out in organizing the affairs of the BKU. I don’t know how far that is true, but the fact that Mr. Tikait did not get any notable success after those people left his organization, speaks well enough for his own capabilities.
I have tried to be as objective as I could be. I know it is not going to be to the liking of many ardent supporters of these political leaders and certainly not to the liking of those for whom, being a JAT is good enough qualification for any assignment.
I would say, we do need aggressive/strong leaders at all levels of our government, they may not be JAT by caste. Let us support those who fulfill the definition of strong, fair and aggressive leaders irrespective of the caste they come from. I would like to support an honest non-Jat to a dishonest Jat, a competent non-Jat to an incompetent Jat. Once we start realizing the importance of the qualities like competence and honesty, caste would become irrelevant.
Looks too idealistic to be practical. But let me assure you, unless we try we would never know whether or not it is practical. Once we adopt this attitude, these leaders would stop playing with caste sentiments and would start working for the communities.
