This article I read quite a while back. I was outraged at the idea, for a number of reasons, decided I wanted to write about it, and how it wasn’t the right thing to do, and wanted to wonder how and why someone from an IIM – that gives the person’s views some prestige, doesn’t it? – would put forward such an article.
Well, I never really got down to it, and now the work has been done for me. Well, at least the first part about the whys and hows of the idea being a bad one. Here: go read. It’s an excellent post on why India should really refrain from having military strikes in Pakistan.
More, while discussing the situation, the author appreciates the role that the PM, Dr Manmohan Singh, and the Foreign Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee have played. In particular, he writes about the PM:
I’m glad the current administration is low on posturing and high on procedure. That’s what you get when policy wonks are in charge rather than poets. No charisma at all, little to appeal to the media or the public at large, but in the end more effective in making India’s case to the world. I can’t bear to watch Manmohan Singh speak for more than two minutes, but there’s no man I would rather have at India’s helm during the current global financial crisis.
Contrast the above with the following, from this blog post:
It would be good if Shourie were the PM. The man is smart, courageous, ethical, and has the national interest at heart. Which is more than you can say about Shri Manmohan Singh. I wish India had good political leadership but if wishes were horses . . .
My idea has more or less been that Dr Singh has more positives than negatives as PM. Of course, there’s a lot that I don’t know, but what has Dr Singh done (or not done) to deserve the above comment?
Someone, please enlighten me.