But one thing is for certain. Some people are just not amenable to reason. The only way to handle them is with force. Every peace initiative is seen by them as an occasion to recoup and prepare for an even more spectacular strike. Any lowering of guard just because the terrorists are lying low can be disastrous. For instance, it will have to be probed how the militants could trigger an improvised IED on the Jammu-Srinagar highway soon after the road had been cleared by the CRPF. Heightened security is all the more necessary in the light of the forthcoming Amarnath yatra.

Pakistan will, however, remain on the Commonwealth's watch list in view of General Musharraf's promise to step down as Army Chief by this yearend. His uniform is the subject of an intense debate in Pakistan and nobody is sure if he will really shed it by the promised date. It will be greatly embarrassing for the Commonwealth if he continues to hold the position of Army Chief along with that of the President of Pakistan beyond December. Whatever progress towards genuine democracy is being seen in Pakistan will then appear meaningless. Withdrawing its decision may be difficult for the Commonwealth owing to extraneous pressures (read the US), which are bound to come.

Some questions were pertinent. Why wait till the last moment, after initially appearing to give in after her senior advisers’ attempts at persuading her to change her mind had seemingly succeeded? Second, was it an expression of Congress culture that while she had no real intention of saying “yes”, she had to subject herself and the country to a rendition of a collective “don’t go”.

The secrets will be revealed in the fullness of time but we are in possession of sufficient information to suggest possible motives. There cannot be two opinions on the wisdom of her decision, as far as the country is concerned. The vulgarity and vehemence with which such Bharatiya Janata Party leaders as Mrs Sushma Swaraj and Ms Uma Bharati campaigned on the issue of Sonia’s foreign origin, to be joined by the party ideologue Govindacharya, who emerged from the wood work, meant that Sonia’s assumption of Prime Ministership would have proved a highly divisive issue overshadowing the performance of the government.

As it was, the foreign origin question was persistently raised by BJP leaders during the election campaign. At times it appeared that this was the single issue on which the then ruling party was fighting the election. It is true that the inadvisability of Sonia assuming the highest political office in the land had a resonance among India’s middle class. But Sonia had shown during her indefatigable election campaign that she could connect with the poor. The farmers and the less privileged had no quarrel with her provenance and the BJP’s collective onslaught on her perhaps helped her collect additional sympathy votes.

On the second question, there is little doubt that the drama over her decision, as it was played out, reflected Congress culture. It began with the adulation Jawaharlal Nehru evoked. In those decades, he was not merely the tallest leader but also a mascot of the party. He won elections and he enthused the grassroot Congress worker. The Congress has never been a cadre-based party and it relied on the leader’s charisma.

Indira Gandhi had to win her spurs after emerging victorious in a bruising intra-party fight and although her political career followed a tempestuous path — victory interspersed with defeat — she triumphed in the end, her standing reaching its acme after the Bangladesh war. Despite the imposition of the Emergency, she was the undisputed leader even though scarred by Sanjay’s accidental death until death caught up with her. This brought Rajiv to centre-stage. After winning a memorable election and losing a subsequent one, he too became an assassination target.

Mrs Sonia Gandhi resisted the call of the party to don Rajiv’s mantle. She remained as much of a private person as she could — until circumstances in the shape of a dispirited party and perhaps her own resolve to make a mark and continue to promote the family’s legacy persuaded her to assume the party’s presidency. The rest, as they say, is history.

What is now openly acknowledged as the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty has had some deleterious effects on “Congress culture”. At times, the party’s ambience acquires a court atmosphere, with whispers among courtiers seeking to counter each other’s influence. Leaders zealously guard their self-assumed pecking order and formulations on policy are perennially circulated because all bases must be covered.

Mrs Sonia Gandhi did not create this culture. It evolved because, despite the democratic set-up, the party became over-dependent on one king or queen winning elections, and kings and queens acquire courtiers, irrespective of their own preferences. Sonia’s problem was that her relative inexperience in politics gave greater salience to her advisers who claimed proximity to her.

By her act of self-denial, Sonia has enhanced her stature and will remain an important leader influencing policy. The foreign origin issue is punctured for the moment, despite the BJP’s need to evoke the equivalent of another Ayodhya. If the BJP comes to the conclusion that it can win power only on the basis of raising divisive issues which can blur the distinction between right and wrong, it would represent a new political escalation portending conflict

On her part, Sonia must now help the new Prime Minister in fighting his battles in the party and in keeping her difficult coalition partners together. The more time Dr Manmohan Singh can spend on governing in taking the economy forward and egging on his ministerial colleagues to greater endeavour, the more optimistic the country’s and the party’s outlook will be.

Sonia has injected her son Rahul into the political process so as not to interrupt the family’s legacy. Judging by her explanations, she does not see it as unnatural for Rahul to contest and win the family seat of Amethi. After all, a mother or father can only give their progeny a head start and they must prove their mettle to survive. Did Sonia decline the Prime Minister’s post because of her children’s influence, as was suggested? On balance, it is difficult to believe that being the strong-minded woman that she is, her children’s views would have been a decisive factor in the momentous decision she was asked to make.

The world he chose to take on was the world of one of the oldest residential schools in the country, a school as colonial as it had been when the British left India 50 years ago. His simple rustic ways clashed with the sophistication of the school and he became the object of much derision. But he was an excellent teacher, intelligent, hard working, keen to do well and above everything, a man of tremendous enterprise.

As Headmaster of the school I knew it was only a matter of time before his students and colleagues recognised his true worth and before he acquired the veneer of sophistication which would enable him to survive in the hot house culture of the school.

Before we could reach this point of time tragedy struck. He arrived at my doorstep one evening, grim and ashen faced and held out a piece of crumpled paper. It was a telegram.

“Father serious, come immediately”.

I sent him on his way, and worried for him, worried that should something happen to his father I would lose him and, as all Headmaster’s know, a good maths teacher is an extremely rare commodity to come by.

Two days later I got a telegram from him. “Father passed away. Request 10 days’ leave.”

I was sorry for him but reassured by the second sentence in his telegram —he intended to come back. I announced the death at assembly the next morning, we observed a minute’s silence in memory of the departed soul and I wrote to offer him condolences on behalf of the school, to tell him that we missed him.

The 10 days passed. He did not return. His father did. He arrived late in the evening and was guided straight to the Headmaster’s lodge. I told him his son was on leave and though he looked surprised he offered no comment. I fed him and put him to bed in the guest room.

The son returned early next morning, his head dutifully shaved a mournful expression on his face. I gave him a perfunctory embrace and offered him a cup of tea. A minute later his father came down for breakfast. I wish I had been able to make a video recording of the encounter between the father and son. It was soon revealed that the boy had “killed” his father to get leave: leave that would enable him to save his girlfriend from a forced marriage.

Needless to say the enterprising young man is now successfully heading a new and well thought of school on the outskirts of Delhi. His wife has efficient hold of the Junior section.

It was a four-cornered contest in Haryana — two regional parties, the Haryana Vikas Party (HVP) and the Indian National Lok Dal (INLD), and two national Parties, the Congress Party and the BJP, with some parties and independents being in the fray. One significant pointer indicates the growing marginalisation of regional parties in Haryana. Both were humbled at the hustings and drew a blank.

The HVP’ performance has been quiet dismal. Its candidates lost their deposits in nine of the 10 parliamentary constituencies. The party supremo’s son lost in his home constituency of Bhiwani. He had declared during electioneering that in case he lost he and his father would take political “sanyas”. It is to be seen when they would implement this decision. His party has received a lethal blow. It is gasping for breath and no amount of resuscitating can bring it back to health.

The performance of the INLD — the ruling party in Haryana — is equally miserable. It was trounced in all constituencies. Its candidates came third in as many as six constituencies — Bhiwani, Rohtak, Ambala, Sonepat, Karnal and Mahendragarh. The Chief Minister’s two sons were in the fray and both were humbled. The INLD could lead only in ten out of the 90 assembly segments. it seems that the voters of Haryana were not only angry with the INLD; they were, in fact, itching to punish the ruling dispensation. Had their been simultaneous assembly and parliamentary elections in Haryana — an idea the Chief Minister once toyed with — the intensity of the electorate’s wrath would, in all probability, have been much deeper.

The BJP’s performance too has been equally disappointing. It could win only one seat of Sonepat and that too with a margin of only 7,522 votes. The victor in this battle is obviously the Congress Party. With nine out of ten seats in its kitty, it is leading in all assembly segments in Rohtak, Karnal, Mahendergarh and Kurukshetra parliamentary constituencies. In Hisar too it has established its lead in all the assembly segments except Narwana, which is the constituency of the Chief Minister. Even in Sirsa, the home turf of the Chief Minister, it is leading in six out of nine assembly segments. If the Congress leaders of Haryana interpret it as a positive mandate in their favour, they would be committing a grave folly. More on this later.

It is important to consider the character of the so-called regional parties of Haryana. To characterise them as regional is a misnomer. A regional political outfit generally emerges in response to regional aspirations of the people in a particular state and it epitomises regional identity. Various Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu grew as offshoots of the rationalist, self-respect movement coupled with anti-Brahminical crusade launched by Ramasamy Naicker with the backdrop of the Justice Party in the pre-Independence period. The Telugu Desam Party in Andhra Pradesh grew to reaffirm the Telugu pride. The Shiv Sena in Maharashtra stands for Maharashtrians, who feel threatened by non-Maharashtrians occupying a pride of place in trade, commerce, industry, transport etc. in the state. The same can be said of the AGP in Assam.

Even the Akali Dal in Punjab has some history behind it. The regional parties in Haryana lack all this rationale to earn the label. They are, in fact, the pocket-parties of individuals who, for various reasons, could not find a significant slot in other parties. There is no such thing as Haryanvi identity in Haryana as yet. One comes across Jats, Brahmins, Ahirs etc along with the broad configuration of ‘locals’ and Punjabis.

Unlike some other states, people of Haryana have yet to develop a sense of belonging to the state and thus it is well-nigh impossible to meet a Haryanvi in Haryana. In this milieu a regional party in Haryana is an anachronism. Regional parties in Haryana, to use Buddhist terminology, are mere extensions of individuals’ ego and avarice. This tends to make the state a fiefdom of the ruling family, up for grabs to amass private wealth and an instrument of terror to silence any dissenting voice anywhere in the party or outside. They are historically extinct, but physically alive. The recent election results have dealt a serve blow to their physical existence.

It would be highly instructive to analyse the rout of the ruling party in the recent elections. The over-hyped concept of anti-incumbency — a convenient device to escape hard analysis — does not explain much. To put it succinctly, there are three major causes for its debacle.

First, the elected representatives in the Parliament, assembly, panchayat and other local bodies are a link between the people and the ruling set-up at the apex in the state. In Haryana this link was snapped, leaving the people high and dry and the elected representatives powerless. The decision-making mechanism in every important aspect, be it recruitment, posting, transfer of officials, grant of a licence, quota, contract etc was centralised in the ruling dynasty and any citizen who approached a local representative for any help was directed to approach the apex. This left the citizens exasperated and embittered. It was a common sight during electioneering in Haryana to see legislators, MPs and ministers of the ruling party being ridiculed by voters for their ineffectuality in the power structure.

Power and pelf often go together in politics these days. In many cases in India — Haryana providing a glaring example — the state has become a money-spinning industry for the power-wielders. The industry too was monopolised in Haryana, leaving a host of power brokers, fixers and swindlers jobless. Novel methods were devised to mint money. It would be a fascinating study if some social scientist were to conduct research in this field in Haryana. The present exploitative acquisitive system provides enough opportunity to corrupt elements at various levels to flourish, who in turn, grease the party machine to keep it in fine fettle at the time of elections. The emasculating of this process in Haryana this time made the party machine coming to a grinding halt. Party workers at different levels were different and leaders at lower levels sullen. Thus, the top brass often in elections meetings was seen holding out a threat to teach a lesson to those party men who have no heart in the campaign. The lack of full involvement of the rank and file of the ruling party proved suicidal.

Lastly and quite importantly, the alarming law and order situation in Haryana proved costly for the ruling party. Roads in the state are not safe. Snatching of vehicles on the highways is a daily occurrence. Anyone going to bank to deposit or withdraw cash may be looted on the way. Women in towns have stopped wearing gold chains for fear of hoodlums. There has been a terrific upswing in the incidence of murder, rape, dacoity, robbery, kidnapping for ransom and other heinous crimes. In people’s perception, let alone curbing the menace, there emerged a nexus among criminals, policemen and politicians that played havoc. To be fair to the ruling party, there was a spurt in developmental activities all over the state and the record of the ruling party in this respect is quite commendable. However, what is the use of development thus argued many voters during electioneering, if one’s life and limbs are not safe.