Tavleen Singh's 'Durbar': Sonia said she would rather see her kids beg than enter politics

November 29, 2012
rajiv-sonia-nov29

November 29: The 'real' Sonia Gandhi, a young mother of two children, that veteran journalist and columnist Tavleen Singh knew from mingling in Delhi's influential social circles in the mid-70s was a woman partial to expensive shahtoosh shawls and fur coats and one who fervently stated that she would rather see her daughter and son beg on the streets than allow them to join politics.

Singh, who started working for the newspaper 'The Statesman' in the summer of 1975 and was a regular in the city's social circles that remained largely unaffected by the Emergency, offers a unique glimpse of the Gandhi family and especially into the married life of Rajiv and Sonia in her latest book 'Durbar' which she said she began to write soon after Rajiv's death.

"I knew him well from the days when he was not a politician and found myself in a unique position to tell the story of how a prime minister with the largest mandate in Indian history ended up as such a disappointment," Singh writes.

But interestingly, the powerful and controlled image that Sonia has cultivated over years of shouldering the responsibility of the Congress Party, clashes with her impression as a petulant 30-something wife of the young pilot son of one of the nation's most influential prime ministers.

It was a hot evening in June a few days after the Emergency was declared when Singh recalls having first met Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi at a dinner party given by her friend Mapu or Martand Singh, a prince from the state of Kapurthala.

"It must have been a few minutes after Navin (Patnaik) and I had repaired anti-socially to our distant corner that I saw Rajiv and Sonia walk in through the open French windows," Singh recalls.

Rajiv wore a kurta-pyjama and Sonia a lacy white dress that just reached her ankles. Back then she preferred wearing Western outfits - long skirts and dresses. Singh describes Sonia as "small and slim, with a prominent, sulky mouth and thick brown hair that hung loose down to her waist."

Her initial impression of Sonia was not pleasant, though Singh concedes later on in the book that Sonia could go out of her way to help the people she was close to. In Singh's case it was arranging for an interview with Amitabh Bachchan, then a close friend of the Gandhis.

Even then, Sonia guarded her privacy fiercely. Singh says this gave her a "reserve that was forbidding". "I remember just one instance of trying to engage her in conversation at this time at one of Vicky's dinner parties. I asked her if she had ever missed Italy after coming to live in India and her answer was, 'No. Not at all. Sometimes maybe some food... some kinds of bread.' She made it so clear that she was not interested in the conversation going any further that I scuttled off and found someone easier to talk to."

Of her handful of foreign friends, (Indira Gandhi was not very encouraging about her daughter-in-law socialising with foreigners) Sonia seemed most comfortable and relaxed with Ottavio and Maria Quattrocchi who were nearly always invited where Rajiv and she went.

Sonia's parents stayed with them when they came to Delhi, Singh writes.

The complete Indianisation of Sonia Gandhi may have happened over several tragedies that hit her family and her entry into the politics she tried to stay away from for most of her life with Rajiv, but back then in the turbulent 70s and 80s, "she seemed terrified of India in a deep, deep way," said Singh.

"It was summer and there must have been a new outbreak of malaria that the ladies were talking about. I heard Sonia say that when her children were babies she was so worried about them being bitten by mosquitoes that she would put anti-mosquito coils under their cradles. She only stopped when the family doctor told her that they were more in danger from the smoke of the repellent than from mosquitoes," she said.

It seemed that Sonia played no political role after Rajiv's election as prime minister. But she began a process of "weeding out from Rajiv's inner circle people whom she considered unsuitable or those she took a sudden dislike to."

By his second year in power, there were mostly unconfirmed stories about Sonia's shopping sprees. A Kashmiri shawl-seller gossiped that she was buying shahtoosh shawls in large quantities. A diplomatic source in Moscow said Sonia bought an expensive sable coat.

"Sonia's taste in fur coats was so refined that she was not satisfied with Soviet tailoring and had the coat sent to Rome to be redesigned by Italian fashion house Fendi. These were the stories that are never possible to confirm, but gossip rarely needs confirmation to be believed," Singh said.

Singh explains the fascination of her small social set with the Italian wife of Rajiv Gandhi. "We were deeply impressed by all things foreign not just because we had been ruled by White men for so long but because secretly we believed that Western culture and civilization was superior to ours. It may sound like a funny thing to say, but Sonia's foreignness made it easier for her to be accepted in Rajiv's circle of friends."

Singh argues that had Rajiv married an Indian woman of her background, she would have been "permanently held in contempt by the broken-down aristocrats and aspiring grandees who were Rajiv's closest friends."

Soon after the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, the Congress party's working committee had met and a decision had been taken to make Sonia the party president.

"But she is a foreigner! She doesn't even speak Hindi. Shje never reads the newspapers. It's a crazy idea," Singh is said to have told a colleague.

When Singh asked her if she would like her children to be in politics some day, Sonia had apparently responded "I would rather my children begged in the streets than went into politics."


Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 12,2024

ikramuddinkamil.jpg

The Taliban regime has appointed Ikramuddin Kamil as the acting consul in the Afghan mission in Mumbai, Afghan media has reported.

It is the first such appointment made by the Taliban set up to any Afghan mission in India.

There was no immediate comment from the Indian side on the appointment that came.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan has announced the appointment of Kamil as the acting consul in Mumbai, the Taliban-controlled Bakhtar News Agency reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"He is currently in Mumbai, where he is fulfilling his duties as a diplomat representing the Islamic Emirate," it said.

The appointment is part of Kabul's efforts to strengthen diplomatic ties with India and enhance its presence abroad, the media outlet said

Kamil holds a PhD degree in international law and previously served as the deputy director in the department of security cooperation and border affairs in the foreign ministry, it said.

He is expected to facilitate consular services and represent the interests of Afghanistan in India, the report added.

Kamil's appointment comes days after the external affairs ministry's point-person for Afghanistan held talks with the Taliban's acting defence minister, Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, in Kabul.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's deputy foreign minister for political affairs, also posted on X about Kamil's appointment.

The appointment of Kamil is seen as part of efforts to facilitate consular services to the Afghan population in Mumbai.

There has been almost negligible presence of diplomatic staff at the Afghan missions in India.

Most of the diplomats appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government have already left India.

In May, Zakia Wardak, the seniormost Afghan diplomat in India, resigned from her position after reports emerged that she was caught at the Mumbai airport for allegedly trying to smuggle 25 kg of gold worth Rs 18.6 crore from Dubai.

Wardak had taken charge as the acting ambassador of Afghanistan to New Delhi late last year, after working as the Afghan consul general in Mumbai for more than two years.

She took charge of the Afghan embassy in New Delhi last November, after the mission helmed by then ambassador Farid Mamundzay announced its closure.

Mamundzay, who was an appointee of the Ghani government, had moved to the United Kingdom.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.