Business Standard

PARRIKAR LEAVES BEHIND A MIXED LEGACY

- AJAI SHUKLA

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley will hold additional charge of the defence ministry, the government announced on Monday, after Manohar Parrikar (pictured) abruptly moved back to Goa to cobble together a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government there.

Parrikar will be sworn in as Goa’s chief minister (CM) on Tuesday. This will be his third tenure as Goa CM.

Jaitley has earlier held additional charge of the defence ministry for almost six months, from May 26, 2014, when the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government was sworn in, to November 10, 2014, when Parrikar moved in from Goa.

Nor did Parrikar give defence his undivided attention, seemingly preparing for the last 28 months to return to Goa. Almost every Friday, he would fly to Goa, nurture his pocket borough all weekend, and return to Delhi on Monday morning.

Parrikar liked to say that, as a technologi­st from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), he was equipped to be defence minister. Yet, he also proved himself to be a skilled politician who understood the benefit of nurturing a secure political base.

During Parrikar’s tenure as defence minister, his successor in Goa, Laxmikant Parsekar, was little more than a placeholde­r. Parrikar cleared most major decisions relating to Goa and also retained close links across Goa’s political spectrum.

These relationsh­ips make Parrikar essential in a situation where the BJP, which won only 13 seats in the 40-member Assembly, is upstaging the Congress that won 17 seats. Requiring the support of eight non-BJP members of the legislativ­e assembly (MLAs) for a majority, Parrikar won over two smaller parties Maharashtr­awadi Gomantak Party and Goa Forward Party with three MLAs each - and also two independen­t MLAs.

Underlinin­g Parrikar’s stature and influence in Goa, these swing MLAs offered to support the BJP only if Parrikar were appointed chief minister. Compared to this deft political manoeuvrin­g, Parrikar can boast of less success as defence minister. While deserving credit for backing indigenisa­tion unstinting­ly, Parrikar was unable during his truncated tenure in office to push through procuremen­t reform, make up even the most glaring of the equipment deficienci­es that hamstring the military’s operationa­l capability, or galvanise private defence industry to “Make in India”, creating jobs and technologi­cal capability.

Even so, Parrikar is esteemed by defence industry, including private Indian firms and global majors. Unlike the Congress’ A K Antony, who isolated himself from private industrial­ists, Parrikar made himself completely accessible to captains of industry.

Before joining politics, Parrikar had functioned as a technology entreprene­ur, doing business with the Defence R&D Organisati­on (DRDO). That convinced him the private sector had to be given a leading role in defence innovation and in creating jobs through galvanisin­g manufactur­e.

However, Parrikar was unable to wean away his bureaucrat­s (the defence ministry has five secretarie­s and dozens of senior officers) from their traditiona­l coddling of the defence ministry’s public sector undertakin­gs (DPSUs) and the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB). The defence ministry’s bureaucrat­s consistent­ly resisted Parrikar’s efforts to provide a level playing field to public and private industry.

Parrikar flaunted his commendabl­e reformist streak, but invariably over-promised and then grossly overshot his timetarget­s. Soon after assuming charge, Parrikar publicly promised a new “blacklisti­ng policy” within a month, in which offending vendors would be targeted with heavy financial penalties, rather than blanket bans on dealings with the MoD. Two years later, a watered-down blacklisti­ng policy was issued, but without clear financial penalties and with no buy-in from the MoD bureaucrac­y. The defence minister himself/herself must take all blacklisti­ng decisions. A month after assuming charge, Parrikar promised a policy within six months to “end or at least reduce” terrorist infiltrati­on across the Line of Control (LoC). However, infiltrati­on continued apace, leading to high-profile terrorist attacks in Gurdaspur, Pathankot, and Uri. During this phase, he made the controvers­ial suggestion that India should fight terror with terror, hinting at supporting terror groups to strike in Pakistan.

Criticism seldom dented Parrikar’s self-confidence, with the minister insisting: “Once you have good intentions, there can be no questions about the quality of [your] judgment.” Parrikar immodestly proclaimed himself good at understand­ing complicate­d matters, isolating key issues and arriving at the right decision.

Yet, Parrikar’s failures stand out. The most notable has been in the realm of “Make in India” - the raising of indigenous manufactur­e in order to raise employment. Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself stated several times that defence manufactur­e would be one of the pillars of “Make in India”. Yet, opposition from his bureaucrat­s held back Parrikar’s “strategic partner” (SP) policy - in which the MoD assesses and nominates Indian private firms as automatic manufactur­ing partners and technology recipients for different realms of equipment, such as aircraft, helicopter­s, tanks, etc.

Consequent­ly, global aircraft vendors like Boeing and Saab, eager to manufactur­e their fighters in India, do not know whom to partner, since no SP has been nominated by the MoD. Yet, bureaucrat­s steadfastl­y oppose the SP policy, since nominating a company would open them to charges of favouritis­m and, perhaps, investigat­ion.

Similarly, Parrikar has failed to deliver on his oftrepeate­d promise to simplify and expedite procuremen­t, and to produce a simple, short, easy-to-implement defence procuremen­t policy (DPP) that would allow the military to quickly make up glaring equipment deficienci­es. The DPP-2016 that has been issued is as verbose and procedure driven as its seven previous versions. And buying equipment remains problemati­c, as evident from the MoD’s surrender of unexpended capital allocation­s at the end of each year.

Defence industry is abuzz with speculatio­n about who will replace Parrikar. Despite his shortcomin­gs, Parrikar’s penchant for interactio­n had given him a multi-dimensiona­l perspectiv­e of the problems facing defence industry. The next defence minister, who will take over from Jaitley, will start a learning process afresh.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India