New Delhi, May 21 (ANI): During the last month, there have been a number of articles in the media which recalled 1986, when about 200 Chinese troops occupied the Sumdorong Chu area in Arunachal Pradesh, some seven kilometers into Indian territory. Then, the Indian Army deployed troops at heights above the Chinese troops, convincing the latter to withdraw.
Commentators in the media were keen that India should stand up to the Chinese. The impression is that India did not give in and there was some 'understanding' following which the Chinese withdrew from the Depsang Valley in Ladakh and India too dismantled some shelters.
The Chinese Premier, Le Kequiang, who is presently in India after taking note of the recent happenings in Ladakh has asked for a 'handshake' across the Himalayas.
Looking back, India has learnt a great deal during the brief Prime Ministership period of Rajiv Gandhi and his efforts to establish peace in Punjab, the northeast, and cordial relations among the neighbouring countries, including Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and China.
In May 1991, the nation was looking forward to a stable government in Delhi and was hopeful that Rajiv Gandhi, would return a wiser leader, and build on the initiatives which facilitated the country's entry into the 21st century through development and technology mission-related initiatives.
The Ninth Lok Sabha was dissolved on March 13, 1991 and Chandrashekhar was in charge of a caretaker government as the country headed into yet another general election. One of the most unfortunate incidents to happen was the brutal assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. As Principal Information Officer of the Government of India, I had gone through some of the tense moments of my career in May that year.
Rajiv Gandhi had gone to Tamil Nadu to campaign for the Congress Party in May 1991 for the general elections that began on May 20.
On May 21, I received a call at around 10.30 p.m. from the Secretary of the Power Ministry Vasudevan who had earlier been a Joint Secretary in the Prime Minister's Office that he had heard of the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi near Chennai a little while ago.
I rang up the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, who confirmed that there had been an attack on Rajiv Gandhi, but they were still getting details. I then got in touch with Cabinet Secretary Naresh Chandra, who confirmed that the worst was feared and that he was convening a meeting of the core group in his office.
I drove down to the Rashtrapati Bhavan complex where the Cabinet Secretariat is located. The time was around 11.00 p.m. The atmosphere was very grim. The Director of the Intelligence Bureau, the Secretary of the Research and Analysis Wing, the Secretaries of the Home, Foreign and Information and Broadcasting Ministries were present. Cabinet Secretary Naresh Chandra confirmed the report of the assassination.
The question before us was when to announce the report and what and how much to say.
Officially, Rajiv Gandhi was a Member of Parliament and a former Prime Minister. Who could have killed him? Rajiv Gandhi had adversaries in the Khalistani forces who were annoyed with him following the Black Thunder operations which had exposed them.
He also had enemies among the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam for sending the Indian Peace Keeping Forces to Sri Lanka. He was assaulted by a navy ensign while inspecting a guard of honour in Sri Lanka in 1987 after signing an agreement.
The Intelligence Bureau was not sure of the identity of the suicide bomber, but suspected it to be a Sri Lankan militant owing allegiance to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or a Sikh terrorist, but it was unlikely that they would choose Tamil Nadu as the venue for the attempt.
Chandrashekar was away addressing election meetings in eastern India and was not expected to return to Delhi till next morning. The discussion in the Core Group covered the arrangements to bring the body to Delhi, the impact of the event on the law and order situation and the new schedule for the rest of the Lok Sabha elections.
Keeping in mind the events that followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi, I suggested that we should immediately announce the assassination and indicate that the 'needle of suspicion pointed to the involvement of a foreign militant group'.
Such a statement would rule out the suspicion being directed against Sikh terrorists. I recalled at the meeting, our experience of 1984 and the violence that followed the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was still fresh in our minds.
There was some discussion, and Naresh Chandra told me that as Prime Minister Chandrashekar was out of the capital and one could not get directions. I should handle it as carefully as possible, but agreed on my general approach.
The announcement had to be made at the earliest before rumours could spread. I scheduled a briefing in the Press Information Bureau around midnight. It was a crowded briefing, with the national and international press being present in full strength.
Besides the announcement of the tragedy, I said that according to the information available the needle of suspicion pointed to the involvement of a Sri Lankan militant group.
The media grilled me on the evidence available, but I responded by saying that nothing further could be said at that stage.
Doordarshan had closed for the day and people in the country followed the news by tuning to international television, through cable channels. Most of the television channels abroad got the coverage from Asian News International.
Incidentally, my daughter Smita Prakash, who was a correspondent of the ANI announced the story to the whole world.
Looking back, it was a wise decision to indicate the involvement of Sri Lankan militants in the assassination. There was sorrow, but it did not spark off internal disturbances.
All India Radio announced the death of Rajiv Gandhi in their midnight bulletin, but there were no follow up bulletins till six next morning. The nation had to depend on the British Broadcasting Corporation and CNN, who continued their telecasts the whole night.
The mortal remains of Rajiv Gandhi were brought to Delhi during the early hours of 22nd May. There were minor demonstrations in front of 10 Janpath, the residence of Rajiv Gandhi. From the PIB, we sent some officials to help the media, as many VIPs, including the President, R. Venkataraman, called on Mrs. Sonia Gandhi.
I met Prime Minister Chandrasekhar as soon as he returned to the Capital, cutting short his election tour. I reported to him the announcement made by me previous night. I still remember the remark made by him. He said Mohanrao, the media should take some responsibility for Rajivji's death. It pushed Rajivji to take the risk of mingling with the crowd, resulting in the tragedy.
The reason for the remark of Chandrasekhar was that during the previous week Rajiv Gandhi had made a number of statements that the Government was preventing him from meeting the people. Because of these statements, the security was made a little more flexible to enable Rajiv Gandhi to mix with the people during election rallies.
Officially, Rajiv Gandhi was a Member of Parliament, leader of the Congress and a former Prime Minister. The arrangements for the cremation of the last remains of Rajiv Gandhi were comparable to that of any Head of Government. He was cremated on the banks of Yamuna River.
In the Press Information Bureau, we were flooded with requests from the World Press for permission to visit India. Hundreds of media persons landed in New Delhi overnight to cover the developments in the country.
Among the foreign correspondents who arrived in Delhi was Steve Wiseman, the Correspondent of the New York Times in Tokyo, who was earlier posted in Delhi. Steve told me that the correspondents were expecting large-scale disturbances in New Delhi as it happened in 1984, following Indira Gandhi's assassination. He suggested that I might dwell on the law and order situation during my briefing.
In my briefings I focussed on the funeral arrangements, as also the law and order situation and tried my best to convey that there was no fear of riots breaking out in the country.
Hundreds of media persons who had arrived in the Capital stayed on for a week or so and left India soon after.
In the elections, held for the next phase on June 12 and 15, there was a sympathy wave and the Congress won 226 of the 511 seats for which elections were held. Narasimha Rao formed the next government in New Delhi, which lasted a full term with Manmohan Singh unleashing the economic reforms that transformed the socio-economic landscape of the country.
I recall the statement made by Narasimha Rao many years later that the death of Rajiv Gandhi was a greater loss than many of our earlier leaders, as in his death the country lost a person who could have provided leadership to the nation for a couple of decades more.
Today, Rajiv Gandhi would have been just around seventy years of age.
Attn: News Editors/News Desks: The views expressed in the above article are that of Mr. I. Ramamohan Rao, former Principal Information Officer, Government of India. E-mail: raoramamohan@hotmail.com(ANI)
|
|
Comments:
