Opinion - News Analysis

All the king's men

By Sudhanshu Ranade

The king's horses can certainly wreak a lot of damage. Riding high, the fellow can trample underfoot all those who come in his way — and even those who merely get on his nerves. Most people, however, including the king, do not realise the amount of damage that can be done by the king's men; even without the help of horses.

It is all too easy for the people at large, and advisors, to believe in the infallibility of the king's judgment — even though the former usually discover this trait in him only after he becomes king; until then it is mostly a case of choosing between the lesser of two evils. But there is no need to be too cynical. After all, once the coronation is over, the king has enormous resources at his disposal. He has only to snap his fingers to gather the very best people around him. The trouble is that this logic only works if the king can recognise a good thing when he sees it. But because people say no to nay-sayers, after the fleeting moment has gone, history tells us this is not always the case.

Hence the spectacular-ness of sunsets. I particularly liked the test flight of a newly unveiled Airbus at Toulouse 15 years ago. The flight was magnificent, the descent superb. The plane flew past the runway and descended majestically in the forest beyond. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was greatly impressed. I'll take a dozen of those, he said.

Something similar seems to be going on in respect of the present President of the United States. Consider for example George Bush's famous walkout of Kyoto; living in a cold country himself, he said, global warming did not worry him too much. In the meantime vested interests in and outside the United States were amplifying for our benefit the conclusions that had been reached by advisors of their choosing. The world was in fact likely to get cooler in the years to come. The reason: the first-round effects of the melting ice caps.

Palestine is another pre-9/11 issue that comes to mind. The U.S. was cautious or at least tactful in the beginning, but as time went on it became obvious that nobody was likely to get hurt apart from the Israelis (and of course the Palestinians). So, President Bush threw caution to the winds. Soon Ariel Sharon began describing him as the best President that the U.S. had ever had. Later, after 9/11, as the cry `not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims' gained ground, worries about the spillover effect of Palestine vanished entirely.

This however created the problem of what next? And that was when Saddam became a target. The U.S. is capable of beating him to a pulp, no matter how many thousands of people it has to kill or maim to do this. But in terms of brain rather than brawn, it is Saddam who has managed to prove smarter than Rice and Rumsfeld.

As if anticipating this, they began saying that it was not for the U.S. to prove that Saddam had culpable capabilities; it was for Iraq to prove that it did not. Uncertain about how to deal with this odd request, Saddam has now requested them to send in the CIA to guide the weapons inspectors; who have begun saying in private that it `could take years'.

Meanwhile, the hawks in Israel have privately been told that it will all be over before the January elections.

Such an assurance may have become necessary because Sharon's previous government collapsed primarily because of the stand taken by moderates against the allocation of large additional budget funds for Israeli settlements in occupied territory; whatever money was available should be used to improve the living conditions of people in Israel. The signal was obviously intended for both Palestinians and Israelis. Despite the upset in the Knesset during the budget session, it is hard to believe that moderates constitute a silent majority.

On the other hand, what other message can one read into the fact that the U.S. has decided to withhold the grand plan of the `mid-east quartet' (U.S., U.K., U.N. and Russia) for the `final' settlement of the Palestine problem till the Israeli elections are over — on the ground that it would `confuse' (scare?) the Israeli `electorate' (the moderates in particular)?

We will soon know what the New Year has in store for us. So I shall instead conclude with one of the puzzles left over to us from the time of the Mahabharata war: Whence arose the word `rajan' that is used on earth. Tell me this, O scorcher of foes.

Possessed of hands and arms and neck like others, having an understanding and senses like others, subject like others to the same kinds of joy and grief, inhaling and exhaling breaths like others, possessed of body and soul like other men, resembling others in birth and death, in fact similar to others in respect of all attributes of humanity, for what reason does this one man, the king, govern the rest of the world, numbering many men possessed of great intelligence and bravery?

Whence is it that one man rules the wide world teeming with brave and energetic and highborn men of good behaviour? Why do all men seek to obtain his favour? Why is it that if this one man becomes delighted, the whole world becomes delighted, and if he is troubled the whole world is troubled?

There must be a grave reason for all this since it is seen that the whole world bows down to this one man as to a god.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu