Anna is in the air, once again. For all reasons good and bad. I admire Anna for what he is attempting to do, but cannot agree with what he does. Here are my reasons for why I do not support Anna:
- Corruption is a serious issue. However, in this case, Anna is fighting the corrupt, the ruling elite, by refusing to talk to them. Surely that is not going to work. The first rule of negotiations is that you try to find common ground, and then try to prioritize the items that you are willing to keep and those that you are willing to let go. By drawing a line where nothing can be given and everything must be accepted, Anna and team have painted themselves into an unnecessary corner from which it will be very difficult to extricate themselves.
- Fasting has become fashionable. It is now a tool of the politicians much more than others. Adopting the same methods which Gandhi had applied many many years ago does not hold water any longer. Moreover, if one decides to fast at a drop of a hat (seriously, there have been too many fasts, and threats of fasts), the fatigue factor does set in.
- What is the agenda? Besides harping on corruption, which every citizen is aware of, and willing to discuss, there is no clear agenda. Well, let me correct myself here. The panacea to corruption is a strong Lokpal bill. This kind of a thought process was successful in bringing in the RTI Act, which has dramatically changed the way we access and view information. Unfortunately, corruption cannot be expected to be challenged the same way. Tackling corruption requires multiple areas to be addressed, perhaps simultaneously. A critical element is the introduction of strong IT systems, better checks and balances (bear in mind that we already have the CAG, which does a fantastic job), and then perhaps a Lokpal. Lokpal is not a magic wand that can brush away corruption.
- While I have little doubt that politicians are corrupt, one cannot forget the complicity of the corporate sector at all. A politician's first window to large scale corruption is provided by a corporate entity which wants to maximize its profits by any means. By only raising issues with politicians while entirely ignoring the other equally important angle of private sector complicity, one does not gain any sympathy.
- Doing the same thing again and again does not change the impact. There has been no change in tactics, strategy, or even position over the last few months. With a government that is hell bent on muzzling every initiative from the Anna camp, they must certainly change tack, if they indeed want to succeed.
- Finally, as with any corporate strategy, there must be coherence. Having a number of voices all speaking together in different tones does not show the Anna in very good light. On the one hand, we have clandestine meetings (where is transparency now?), and on the other, we have intemperate language being used against the very people with whom one intends to negotiate!
