• Investment World
• eWorld
• Brand Line
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest
• The New Manager

Stocks

• Quotes
• SE Diary
• Scoreboard
• Open-End Mutual Fund

Cross Currency

• Rates
  
  

Shipping

• Ports
  
  

Archives

• Yesterday
• Datewise
• Resources
• In Focus
• In Depth

Group Sites

• The Hindu
• The Hindu ePaper
• Business Line
• Business Line ePaper
• Sportstar
• Frontline
• The Hindu eBooks
• The Hindu Images

The shot that Mr Shashi Tharoor has had as India's official candidate at the top slot of the UN has ended true to the adage above.

There is no doubt he is a nice guy, and he made a good showing as a strong second, right until the last straw poll, adding to the number in his favour with each poll.

At the last count, out of 15 members of the Security Council, he had 10 going for him, and five against, of whom one was a permanent member whose vote counted as a veto.

The battle has not been in vain. The worldwide exposure he has had as a candidate and that too at such a young age of 50, and his own personal credentials and record of service in the UN have secured for him the status of a prominent public figure for the rest of his life enabling him to play an influential role in whatever he walk of life he chooses. Most of all, Mr Tharoor's was a clean fight (unlike the unsavoury rumours of payoffs and unseemly horse trading over prestigious jobs by countries voting for the successful candidate).

Certainly, with his sunny temperament, it must all have seemed good fun while it lasted. OK, now for some serious questions: Should India have fielded its own candidate and lobbied so hard for him, to the extent of the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, reportedly asking the heads of governments he met to support India's nominee?

Objections to India's decision can be on two counts: The first is the relative lack of gravitas of the candidate backed by it, due to his young age and want of any background of dealing on a par on momentous issues with heavyweights of important member-countries. The reply is plain: Youth should not be held against anybody, nor should Mr Tharoor's apparently inconspicuous role in the offices he has previously held in untangling complex situations in various parts of the world.

Grey heirs and being in the news and photo-ops do not necessarily mean that the person concerned is fit for becoming the Secretary-General (SG) of the UN.

What is needed in this post is not a run-of-the-mill resume, but an indefinably incandescent personality with a capacious and nimble mind capable of an objective grasp of the many thorny problems confronting the world body and persuasive savvy for resolving conflicts. Mr Tharoor had the makings of a live wire in these respects, and India's choice could not, therefore, be faulted.

The second reservation can be that India should not have directly engaged itself in the kind of sordid power play that the selection of the SG by a cloistered cartel involves, and, if at all it wanted its own person, should have gone about it indirectly in a circumspect fashion, without staking its authority.

This again is an unacceptable argument, since a democratic Government gains far greater respect by functioning in the open and not by adopting surreptitious means. And finally, the speculation about the identity of the country which vetoed Mr Tharoor out of the race: Is it China or the US? Does it matter?

Once an appointment is left to be decided by voting, the various contestants and their sponsors should be mature enough to take the outcome in their stride, and not go behind it looking for motives.

B. S. RAGHAVAN

More Stories on : Politics | Offhand | Foreign Relations

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
A milestone in retailing

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line