The Great Conciliator: Lal Bahadur Shastri and the Transformation of India; Author: Sanjeev Chopra; Bloomsbury India, Rs 899/-

Understanding one of India’s Finest Prime Ministers

There are few biographies, at least in the English language, that do justice to the tall stature of independent India’s second Prime Minister, Lal Bahadur Shastri. Historians and other chroniclers have largely ignored him or given him secondary preference. There could be two reasons for this apathy. One, the dazzle of his immediate predecessor and immediate successor overrode his own gentle persona. And two, his short—barely eighteen months—tenure in office was not sufficient to place him in the privileged list of the country’s most prominent leaders.

Both these reasons are flawed. While Shastri may not have commanded the shine that Jawaharlal Nehru had before him or Indira Gandhi would have after him, he grew in stature as Prime Minister faster than many imagined. His deft handling of the 1965 war with Pakistan firmly placed him in the list of greats. Besides, people tend to ignore his achievements as a minister in the Nehru government, and as an organisation man. As to the second reason, one can only say that it is not the length of the tenure that matters; the substance does. Even a casual study of Shastri’s Prime Ministership would show that it was full of important initiatives, some of which have delivered long-term results.

This is a definitive book on Shastri’s life and politics. Sanjeev Chopra, the author needs to be commended for his effort. A former Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer, a former director of the Lal Bahadur Shastri Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, a member of the Academic Council of Good Governance and the National Institute of Disaster Management, Chopra was well-suited to undertake the task.

Although, by his own admission, Chopra has relied largely on primary sources available in English—while accepting that a great deal of material in the other languages, particularly Hindi—he has made optimum use of those sources to craft a narrative that is both compelling and appealing. The story that Sanjeev Chopra relates is, of course, Shastri’s story, and it has been said in a manner that demonstrates the author’s respect and regard for the subject of his book. The author does not give a very detailed account of Shastri’s personal life. But then, that is not the mandate of book, whose title, The Great Conciliator, has to do with his role as a politician.

One of the book’s strong points is Sanjeev Chopra’s elaborate accounts Shastri’s performance as a party functionary. He points out that Shastri was the youngest secretary general of the province’s Congress committee, and had as the party’s Allahabad district chief, worked deftly with opposing factions within the party, bringing about a rapprochement. One of his important contributions in those days was the preparation of a report on Uttar Pradesh’s agrarian situation on behalf of the Congress party. He plunged headlong into the task and the result was a very detailed finding, offering more than a dozen key recommendations to improve the life of farmers.

Shastri’s commitment to the cause of the poor and underprivileged was also seen in his responsibility as a legislator. In one of his speeches, as the author notes, on the United provinces Agriculturists Relief (Amendment) Bill, 1937, Shastri said one had to always keep in mind the difficulties the farmers faced. While speaking on another Bill later, his understanding of the subject came in handy as he countered opposition from landlords. His deep understanding of all facets of rural India would be on display time and again in the years to come.

From the years of the independence struggle, Shastri impressed Nehru with his commitment and his ability to take everyone along. This brought him close to the charismatic leader, who would entrust several important responsibilities to Shastri, both in the party and in the government. He was trusted by not only Nehru but also other senior leaders of the Congress party. As the author writes, Shastri was appointed as one of the parliamentary secretaries by G.B. Pant when the latter became the premier of UP.

This meant that he would have to relocate from Allahabad to Lucknow, a prospect that annoyed his wife Lalita Shastri, who wondered how she would manage the household expenses in a city that was more expensive to live in. When Shastri informed her that he would be getting a monthly salary of Rs 700, ‘Lalita was more than willing—she was excited at the prospect of finally having a regular home and salary.’

Sanjeev Chopra refers to the tussle between Nehru and P.D. Tandon, another tall leader of the party, and says that Shastri believed he could have brought a reconciliation between the two stalwarts, as he was close to Tandon as well. But with Sardar Patel’s death, ‘Nehru became the tallest leader of the party’ and Tandon made a tactical retreat. Nehru then asked Shastri to move to Delhi and assume bigger responsibilities as the party general secretary—Lalita Shastri was dismayed because her husband would be giving up his job as a minister in the UP government and the regular salary that came with it.

In Delhi, he worked closely with Nehru in the selection of candidates for general elections; this was the year of 1951. The author writes, ‘As Nehru was preoccupied with prime ministerial responsibilities, he began to rely more and more on Shastri for all party-related works… He [Shastri] did exercise his influence but had a very non-adverbial way of putting his points of view across.’ He became the backroom strategist while Nehru became the party’s public face and chief campaigner.

Shastri’s tenure as the Union Railways Minister has been well chronicled, especially his resignation after taking moral responsibility for a couple of train accidents that happened in quick succession. To this day, his decision remains a benchmark for public accountability and propriety. Equally importantly, though were the measures he took as the minister to improve the functioning of the railways. He also had the portfolios of the transport ministry (which included civil aviation, shipping, ports and highways). He faced a populist demand to scrap the first-class compartments from trains. He took the middle path; while he agreed to the increase of general class compartments in most trains and a reduction in the first-class coaches, he said that it would not be prudent to altogether do away with first class compartments.

Sanjeev Chopra, gives a riveting account of Shastri’s term as Prime Minister, his clarion call of Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan, and his helming of the 1965 war. Few people outside of India knew him in June 1964, when he assumed office; on the other hand, the Pakistani leader Ayub Khan was a recognised figure in large parts of the world, including in the US. If at all West had any idea, it was that the unassuming Indian Prime Minister was soft and unassertive. Nobody expected, least of all the Pakistanis, that he would suddenly roar like a lion when Pakistan under General Ayub’s leadership, initiated a war with India.

The author quotes Prime Minister Shastri as telling the nation, after it had become clear that a war had become inevitable, ‘Those who want peace will always have our supporting cooperation, but they must face the realities of the situation. A ceasefire is not peace. We simply cannot go from one ceasefire to another and wait till Pakistan chooses to start its hostilities again.’ He gave a free hand to the Indian military—so much so that one point during the war, the Indian forces were knocking on the doors of Lahore.

He wasn’t fazed by the fact that China was actively supporting the Pakistanis. Sanjeev Chopra quotes Shastri as saying earlier that ‘we are fully vigilant, and that if we are attacked, we shall fight for our freedom with grim determination. The might of China shall not deter us from defending territorial integrity.’

As the war progressed, Pakistan, shocked by the Indian response and counting its setbacks, rushed to the United Nations for a resolution. The UN called for a ceasefire. It is important to note, as the author emphasises, that India under Shastri’s leadership did not bother to approach the UN or any world power. The Indian Prime Minister was ‘cool, collected and very clear’, in the words of the US ambassador to India, who met Shastri in the midst of the developments. The Tashkent agreement followed thereafter, with the mediation of the Soviet Union.

One interesting anecdote that the author provides relates to a short conversation between the Pakistani President Ayub Khan and Shastri. When Ayub Khan pleaded for some sort of concession on Kashmir so that he (Ayub Khan) could face his people back home, Shastri replied politely, ‘Sadar saheb, mein bahut maafi chahta hoon ki main is mamle mein apki koi khidmat nahin kar sakta’ (Mr President, I profusely apologise that in this matter I cannot be of any service to you).

Shastri’s decision to give up Haji Pir to Pakistan drew dismay back home. Chopra, quoting sources, writes that, when Shastri dialled home after the understanding was inked between India and Pakistan to formally end the 1965 war, he was met with disappointment. His ‘favourite’ daughter Kusum remarked, ‘Babu ji, hamein accha nahin laga’ (Father, we did not like it).’ Kusum added that her mother too had not approved of the pact. Shastri observed that, when even his family did not like the Tashkent agreement, what could one expect of outsiders. Hours later, he was dead.

While the 1965 war has gone down in history as Shastri’s finest moment as Prime Minister, there are other, less discussed but equally important contributions. It was during his tenure and through his initiative that the White Revolution was seeded, the Border Security Force was created, and the Central Vigilance Commission was established. The Central Bureau of Investigation was set up when he was the country’s Minister for Home Affairs.

The Great Conciliator is not only a fitting tribute to one of our country’s finest Prime Ministers but also a valuable addition to the literature on contemporary Indian politics.