Remembering the leader who placed national interest above politics yet paid the price for his trust and ideals.
On the occasion of Rajiv Gandhi's 81st birth anniversary, India once again paid tributes to him. This anniversary holds special significance as it marks the birth of the man who is often hailed as the architect of modern India. He is remembered for his vision for the country and his sacrifice for the unity and integrity of the nation. Despite his effective articulation of his vision, he is still considered the most misunderstood Prime Minister. I had the opportunity to read a recent book written by Mani Shankar Aiyar, a close aide, titled 'Rajiv I knew' by Juggernaut Books. This book sheds light on the inner workings of the Rajiv Gandhi administration and the reasons why he remains an enigma to millions of Indians.
In the book, Mr. Aiyar is quoted as saying, "Prime Ministers can either be suspicious, secretive, even paranoid. Not being duplicitous himself, he did not understand that others might betray him for a host of reasons". This quote illuminates Rajiv Gandhi's unique leadership style. He placed his trust in those to whom he delegated responsibility, believing they would not violate his trust. His unwavering belief in the inherent goodness of others, as he led a virtuous life rooted in core values, is a testament to his character.
If we look at various controversies that clouded his term as the Prime Minister, he appears not to have been in control of what was happening around him and his name. Mr. Aiyar has pointed to several examples like the story behind the unlocking of the Babri Masjid gates, the Boors scandal, and his legislative efforts in the Shah Bano issue. On many of these issues, Rajiv's style of confronting the issues head-on did him in, yet he stands vindicated by subsequent history.
Rajiv was widely criticized for his stand on the Shah Bano case, a controversial case that tested the intersection of personal and civil law in India. The case was about the Supreme Court's award of maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman, Shah Bano, in April 1985 under the vagrancy provisions of the criminal procedure code, overruling the process of Muslim Personal law. Answering a question at the Aligarh University, he said the following:" I understand that all our many communities have their own way of life and we must take that into consideration to preserve our unity in diversity".
However, he was a champion of women's rights and went on to affirm their rights in passing the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights and Divorce) Act in 1986,u which remains on the statute books to this day. This act was a significant step towards ensuring gender equality and protecting the rights of Muslim women in India, particularly in the aftermath of the Shah Bano case. He was a man who truly believed that reform had to come from within the community, and until that happened, the constitutional guarantees should be safeguarded. Aiyar said, 'What Rajiv Gandhi did was to incorporate the personal law into the civil law and then make the judiciary responsible for ensuring its implementation, especially in terms of gender equality in a society where religious dogma is dominated by hierarchy'. RG's handling of the Shah Bano case revealed his style of governance: listening to all points of view and then making the final decision.
His approach to the Shah Bano case exemplified his approach to politics and governance. He believed in standing on principles rather than compromising for opportunistic advantage. Mr. Aiyar went on to reveal Rajiv's mindset: "he preferred being ultimately exonerated than allowing or encouraging any alienation of any section of Indian citizens, even if this meant sacrificing party interest. He was confident, in controversies and in accords into which he entered, that the Congress would bounce back".
Rajiv Gandhi's handling of the Assam issue is a clear illustration of his commitment to national interest. He inherited the violence and brutality in the Brahmaputra valley, where the All Assam Students Union was agitating for land rights of the Assamese people. His goal was to bring the students to the negotiating table. He assured them that any agreement with them would be put to the test in free and fair elections, even if that resulted in a premature end to the Congress government in power at that time, an offer Prafulla Mahantha, the student leader, could not refuse. In the subsequent election, the Congress party lost as Rajiv Gandhi paid a heavy price for achieving peace and tranquility in the valley. Mr. Aiyar would say, "That was typical of the man, putting national interest above party interest, knowing full well that it was only a matter of time before Congress was back in office. It was a sacrifice never popular with the rest of the Congress leadership, but it went down extra-ordinarily well with ordinary citizens".
In 1986, during Rajiv Gandhi's tenure as Prime Minister, the locks of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya were ordered to be opened, allowing Hindus to perform worship inside. This move has since been widely debated and criticized, and Rajiv Gandhi was accused of playing "communal politics" for short-term political gain. However, the truth behind the opening of the gates lies elsewhere. Mr. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal, a leader of VHP, visited then Chief Minister Veer Bahadur Singh together with retired Chief Justice Shiva Nath Katju and argued that the locks were placed without court orders. When the matter was finally brought to the attention of the District Magistrate, the order was issued to remove the locks.
One would argue that since Congress was in power, it was responsible for unlocking the gates. Rajiv Gandhi, responding to one of the queries, said the following: 'I knew nothing of this development until I was told of it after the orders had been passed and executed. He forever regretted that he was not informed of this action. According to Mr. Aiyar, RG suspected his MoS for Home Affairs, Arun Nehru, and his political Secretary, Makhan Lal Fotedar, of being responsible for this misdeed. By now, everyone understands the political upheaval and the heavy price exacted on the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh's electoral politics due to this deceitful action by some individuals close to him, who violated his trust.
The Bofors case was one of the biggest political scandals in India in the late 1980s, and it badly tarnished Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's image. In 1986, the Government of India signed a ₹1,437 crore deal with the Swedish company Bofors AB to purchase 400 155mm Howitzer field guns for the Indian Army. The deal was meant to modernize India's artillery after the lessons of the 1971 war. However, in 1987, Swedish Radio reported that Bofors had paid bribes to top Indian politicians, defense officials, and middlemen to secure the contract. These payments were allegedly disguised as 'commissions' and routed through secret bank accounts. The scandal not only damaged Rajiv Gandhi's reputation but also had far-reaching implications for Indian politics and the defense sector.
As this huge controversy erupted, Rajiv Gandhi asked that the Swedish authorities investigate the allegations. If he is guilty, why would he, on his own volition, put his fate in the hands of a foreign investigating agency? The Bofors case dragged on in Indian courts for more than three decades, but it ultimately ended without any convictions. The Delhi High Court quashed charges against Rajiv Gandhi, the Hinduja brothers, and others, saying there was no substantial evidence. In 2011, Rajiv Gandhi and his family were legally cleared of wrongdoing, though the scandal left a deep political scar. Legally, the Bofors case ended with no guilty verdicts — but politically, it destroyed Rajiv Gandhi's clean image and shaped Indian politics for decades.
Mr. Aiyar saw him most in those trying periods and wondered why he never looked stressed. "He was never fazed. His dazzling smile never left him. Bofors was never a scam but a sting operation mounted by his cohort on the inside track and their allies in the media and opposition". While his detractors were busy undermining his work along with his reputation, he maintained his concentration on issues that mattered most: secularism, modernizing the nation, peace overtures to China and Pakistan, and Technology Missions. In addition, his accomplishments also include accords on Punjab, Mizoram, Rajiv-Farooq, and Darjeeling, emphasizing reconciliation to achieve unity and harmony.
In the final analysis, Rajiv Gandhi emerges as a leader whose vision was ahead of his time, but whose trust in people and commitment to principle often left him vulnerable to betrayal and misunderstanding. The controversies that clouded his years in office, from Shah Bano to Assam, from Babri to Bofors, reveal not corruption or cynicism, but a leader determined to uphold national interest even at personal and political cost. His legacy endures in the technology missions, the seeds of modernization, and his belief in India's unity in diversity. As we remember him on his 81st birth anniversary, what lingers most is the unfulfilled promise of what more he might have given to India, had his journey not been cut short.
