Critiquing Kalam

I've stopped following Indian presidential race now. It makes no sense now to follow it after all the logic has been thrown into a dustbin by our political class. However, one of my friends asked me that, do i have any point that says Pratibha Patil is a better candidate than Kalam. I didn't had any point. However, if he would have asked me, is Kalam the best choice? I perhaps would have raised a few questions. It's not that i am against Kalam. In fact, I have immense respect for him as one of the top scientists of India, as head of Missile division of DRDO and serving as its head for 8 years.

However, precisely that's why I raise a few questions. Few months back, a story appeared in Hindustan times which criticized DRDO.

Two years short of its 50th anniversary, the DRDO’s record is not just shabby, it is a disgrace. The annual budget of the 25,000-strong outfit has risen from Rs 500 crore in 1988-9 to nearly Rs 5,000 crore today. Yet there is not a single major or minor product, barring an excellent sonar system and the INSAS rifle, that has found usage in the armed forces. In sum, the Indian armed forces have been forced to do with less, and suffered more, because of the inadequacies of the DRDO.

A great deal of the responsibility for this rests with A.P.J. Abdul Kalam who was the head of the missile development programme from 1982 to 1992, and then the chief of the DRDO till 1999. During this period, the DRDO made it a practice to claim that it could provide services in, and make any product related to, aeronautics, armaments, electronics, combat vehicles, engineering systems, instrumentation, missiles, advanced computing and simulation, special materials, naval systems, life sciences, training and information systems. So while DRDO budgets grew exponentially, the armed forces were forced to do without products because they were either interminably delayed, or never performed anywhere near the claims made by the DRDO. The result has been that the country’s defence system has suffered from several dangerous gaps during the last decade and a half.

Now, it is nobody's claim that India should be the world's biggest superpower. India started its own indigenous defense weapon programs after achieving independence and to be able to achieve nuclear capabilities, build missiles, satellites, guns etc. in just 60 years is no mean feat. but that does not mean that we make our defense forces and related organization 'sacred cows'. Arjun, designed to be India's main battle tank and LCA (light combat aircraft) by DRDO and HAL are yet to achieve their critical approval status from army and airforce (okay, the light aircraft is nowhere near its completion target.. still it doesn't change my point).

The journalist who wrote the above HT story got a very measured and apt response in one of his comments which defended DRDO. I wouldn't put the contents of that comment here but suffice to say, it was able to defend DRDO on many points logically.

However, I still feel that Kalam is a great visionary but not a great leader. His books and speeches, all of them are based on same theme. He dreams big, and i certainly am not criticizing him for that. However, what i dislike about his track record is, his failed leadership. If he were to be a great leader then DRDO projects wouldn't have shot their deadlines and budgets by decades and thousands of crores respectively.

Recently, many stories have appeared in media about a number of DRDO scientists doing suicides. Also, the attrition rate in DRDO is one of the highest in government organizations. By writing all this, I just want to say that Kalam definitely is responsible for the legacy he has left in the institution - DRDO.

Nobody is perfect in this world. Still.. when we talk of president, we could have thought of some alternate choices too.. Narayanmurthy, Amartya Sen. Kalam is a great visionary, a brilliant individual scientist but an angel to be emulated in every sense.. perhaps not. However, when it comes to choosing between a passionate dreamer for India's future and an intellectual "Abdul Kalam" and only-a-woman-and-nothing-else "Pratibha Patil", i would any day have chosen Mr. Kalam as my choice.

Update: Mint has an editorial on Why this blind criticism against Pratibha Patil is being done in bad taste. Bad taste? Yes, perhaps. But then unless she proves herself in office, what else do these politicians expect from us. Sing paeans for Mrs. Pratibha Patil just because she's a woman? By the logic that she's a woman and hails from a subnational political level, any women who has any credentials at subnational politics can be made a president. Obviously, when you're choosing a person for presidential post, you've got to look at alternate choices and then compare which one amongst them best fits the bill and why. Alas, all such considerations seem to leave some 'bad taste' in the mouth of politicians. If so, then, why blame we Indian citizens for decrying over Mrs. Patil?