Senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar has claimed that the UPA-II government in 2012 would have avoided a “paralysis of governance” if Pranab Mukherjee had been appointed Prime Minister and Manmohan Singh had been elevated to the President’s position.
In his book A Maverick in Politics, the 83-year-old leader expressed his belief that the Congress missed a critical opportunity by keeping Singh as Prime Minister and shifting Mukherjee to the Rashtrapati Bhawan. Aiyar argued that this decision “doomed” the party’s prospects of forming UPA-III.
Aiyar, who served as a minister in UPA-I, pointed out that in 2012, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh underwent multiple coronary bypass surgeries and never fully recovered physically, which impacted his ability to govern effectively. The leader also highlighted the absence of an official statement about Congress President Sonia Gandhi’s health when she fell ill around the same time as Singh.
Aiyar noted that this resulted in a “stasis” in both the offices of the Prime Minister and the Congress President, with governance being severely hampered during several crises, including the ‘India Against Corruption’ movement led by Anna Hazare.
Reflecting on the choice for President in 2012, Aiyar said, “Personally, I was of the view that Pranab Mukherjee should have been given the reins of the government and Dr. Manmohan Singh elevated to President of India when the office of Rashtrapati became available.” According to Aiyar, this would have ensured an active Prime Minister in good health, capable of leading the government, while Dr. Singh, a man of great distinction, could have served as President. Aiyar added that Mukherjee’s memoirs suggest this option had been considered at the time.
Aiyar also referenced Mukherjee’s memoirs, where he recalled that Sonia Gandhi had given a “vague impression” while on holiday in Kausambi Hills that she might consider Singh as the presidential nominee. This uncertainty led Mukherjee to believe that if Singh were selected for the presidency, he might be appointed as Prime Minister. However, the decision was made to retain Singh as PM and appoint Mukherjee as President.
Aiyar believes that this misstep prevented the Congress from forming UPA-III and severely damaged the party’s image, with the media, including Time magazine, attacking Singh’s leadership. Aiyar further suggested that if Mukherjee had been made Prime Minister, it would have avoided the governance paralysis and possibly prevented the rise of Hindutva in the 2014 general elections.
Lastly, Aiyar addressed Mukherjee’s “Left-wing reputation,” which he believed might have unsettled the business community and foreign powers like the United States if Mukherjee had been appointed PM. However, he added that no one else had the experience and capability to lead the country at that time.”
If this obvious step had been taken, we would not have experienced a paralysis of governance, and perhaps avoided the worst excesses of Hindutva,” Aiyar concluded.
