It seems incredible that the most powerful man in the world can be brought to his knees in the full glare of worldwide television because he had a fling with some silly girl and then fibbed about it.It just goes to show that Kipling was right when he said "East is east and West is West". It is almost impossible for those of us in more ancient lands to understand why a chunk of Americans should turn against a good president, a popular one too, because of a minor indiscretion.For a start, we would never permit $40 million in taxpayers' money to be spent proving that one of our leaders had a bit of fun on the side. In some of our more macho states, like Punjab, it would amount to an image-building exercise for the man. It would also give the bimbos who haunt Delhi's power circles all kinds of ideas, illusions of going down in history like Monica Lewinsky is certain to. We are more tolerant about these things. Since we are also more tolerant about being ruled by foreigners - the Constitution doesn't forbid it, as readers keep reminding me - if Bill Clinton is rendered unemployed, the Congress party should jump at the chance to offer him the job of future prime minister of India. If he refuses, they should offer it to his wife. I heard her speak in Davos last January and found her more impressive than any leader we currently have in stock. More seriously, as I watched Clinton admit that he had lied about his "inappropriate contact" with the intern I found myself gasping at what would happen in India if our own leaders were forced to be truthful. .preferred-source-banner{ margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom:10px;}Or if they could be indicted for something as small as telling a lie. We would have no leaders left. You realise that, don't you? Not a single one. Because even the least corrupt of our politicians - the ones who live in Gandhian austerity despite the vast government bungalows they may inhabit - can't get up and tell the Indian people they have never lied to them.They can't because their career in politics usually begins with a lie. They have to begin by swearing on oath to spending less than Rs 15 lakh on their Lok Sabha election campaign. This, when they know, as do those of us who cover the campaign that they spend at least three times the amount. In fact the biggish leader collects, whether he spends it all or not, between Rs 30 lakh and a crore for his campaign. The money is obviously black money which politicians launder even as they spend it. It is obtained either by begging industrialists in exchange for hints of future favours or by getting someone else to do the begging.There is a wonderful story about V. P. Singh that comes from the days when he was crusading against corruption. The crusade was at its height at election time. But crusades and campaigns don't come cheap. So one of Singh's emissaries showed up in Mumbai at the doorstep of a big industrialist and made the usual request for "blessings".To this the industrialist is believed to have said he would be most generous with his blessings. But only on condition that he be given the chance to hand over the money to Singh personally. The emissary fled.Why pick on Singh? The story could apply to almost any India politician; and this, of course, is only small-time lying. Of big-time lying, there are other examples. Laloo Yadav saying he knew nothing about the crores of rupees which poured out of his government's animal husbandry department to feed animals which - if the records were true - would have been living better than the people of Bihar.Mulayam Singh saying, only a couple of weeks ago, that the charges against Laloo were all politically motivated. Sonia Gandhi saying, through her spokesmen, that she hardly knew the Quattrocchis. Jayalalitha saying she did not know what her friend Sasikala was up to.The list is a long one. Let it suffice to say that if we had grand juries in India, investigating the lies our political leaders tell, they would be swamped with work. In our case, the lies are not harmless little fibs about sexual peccadillos. They are serious lies invariably connected with money-making. This is where we really need our own Ken Starr equivalents. Starr is not an attractive creature, having all along given the impression that he is witch-hunting and not investigating. But he is, alas, the kind of hound we need. Proving corruption charges in India is a convoluted business. It takes so long that it becomes irrelevant long before it's over. But what the Starr-type hound could do for us is concentrate only on investigating the assets of our political leaders. Just as we, ordinary Indian citizens, are subjected to raids by the government, so should we be able to enter the homes of our politicians. All we would need to do then is tot up - as happened with Jayalalitha - the number of Rolex watches, brocade saris, shatoosh shawls, Gucci shoes and Mont Blanc pens and other little knick-knacks to be found in the house.We will instantly be able to prove whether the political functionary in question is living beyond his paltry official earnings or not. The prime minister proudly told us from the Red Fort that he had put himself under the Lok Pal's jurisdiction. What's the use when the process takes so long? What we need is a small army of Starrs under the Lok Pal, an army which can be released into the right homes at the right time. Imagine what it could find if even the lowly Sukh Ram had Rs 3.6 crore lying around? This is the only lesson to be learnt from America's sad little scandal.Published By: AtMigration Published On: Aug 31, 1998--- ENDS ---
