Harish Khare’s defence of Manmohan Singh is sympathy-inducing at best, and pathetic at worst (The Man Who Wasn’t There?, May 19). Manmohan attempted to “make India a country with a robust rule of law”? What about the dozens and dozens of condemnations from the Supreme Court? Or the apex institution expressing a lack of faith in the cbi and taking over the supervision of the investigation into one of the biggest scams in the world? I actually laughed at Khare’s insinuation that the Anna Hazare movement was a corporate project. I have no objection to Outlook’s anti-Modi stand on moral and ideological grounds. But singing paeans to what was an apology for governance is a crying shame.
Sridhar Subramaniam, on e-mail
Manmohan Singh was an incredibly lucky man. To have been the PM without being elected to the Lok Sabha, enjoying all the privileges of office despite sidetracking bigger scams than 2G like isro, or in the airlines, coal and railways sectors.
Rajan Rajiv, Ernakulam
Your cover story was a defence of the indefensible, never mind the intellectual pretensions it was dressed in. Dual power centres may seem expedient at the time, but end up undermining both power centres.
M.K. Saini, Delhi
The “saint-making” industry in Outlook seems to have been working overtime; one more piece labouring to put a wretched human being on a pedestal erected on lies, deceipt and plain garbage. Just how stupid does Outlook think readers are?
Ravi Jain, Hyderabad
Spot on. The media began to be interested in corruption only after the first few industrialists went to jail. And instead of detailing their corrupt ways, began calling Manmohan Singh corrupt!
Deven V., Mumbai
There is no dearth of sycophants in India. Harish Khare was, after all, media advisor to Manmohan. It’s pointless to expect a critical evaluation of the man from him.
Ramesh Raghuvanshi, Pune
One can judge a person’s capability better if he or she is given a free hand. Manmohan flourished, therefore, under Narasimha Rao, but floundered under Sonia.
L.J.S. Panesar, on e-mail
Appreciative attempt, though futile. Using secularism to eulogise Manmohan and the UPA is creditable, but alas it convinced nobody. You can blame the corporates, but the electorate blamed Manmohan Singh. You also try to portray Sonia’s backroom management as effective, but it robbed a man of his spine.
Dipto C., New York
Manmohan Singh was never his own man as prime minister. A prime minister by accident, he was Sonia Gandhi’s man, one she pulled out of her hat in 2004 and installed as a safe bet who would never challenge her. Manmohan obliged fully, for which he was offered a second term. And he exercised power only to the extent he was allowed to; ministers in his team were more loyal to Sonia and coalition parties cared little about his authority.
M.C. Joshi, Lucknow
It is wrong to say that there were two power centres during the UPA regime. One did not qualify as a power centre at all!
P.B. Joshipura, Suffolk, US
Manmohan was not given a free hand to run his government, his potential was wasted. Perhaps new prime minister Narendra Modi could appoint him now as his economic advisor!
K.P. Rajan, Mumbai
The list of scams during Dr Manmohan Singh’s rule is long. He never called the shots and could not rein in corruption. He will be marked by the blot that he failed to tackle corruption at the highest level.
N. Venkata Sai Praveen, Chennai
