Dear readers: some Anna clarifications

A flood of comments on my post yesterday ; some in support, some calmness, some rubbish, some insults and some vitriol. I responded twice during the day as responses kept coming in and decided to write an updated post this morning. Let me make some things clear – it’s apparent that, though I thought I wrote with clarity, a number of readers think differently. 1) I do think that the movement initiated by Anna Hazare and his team is commendable and a step in the right direction. 2) I did support his first fast; I DO NOT support the proposed second fast. 3) If Anna Hazare stands for elections, I will vote for him. 4) I did hope that we would see a Lokpal Bill introduced in the next session of Parliament; after the Anna Hazare movement gathered momentum, I was increasingly convinced that the Bill would be passed as well. 5) I do not for a single moment believe that the government team and Anna Hazare’s team would agree on the draft in totality. I was convinced, as many are, that there would be numerous issues on which the two have divergent views. 6) I was not prepared for, and did not anticipate, that Anna Hazare’s team would take an all-or-nothing position. 7) If this position continues, a Lokpal Bill will, indeed, be introduced, but the inputs and views will not include team Anna Hazare’s – and that would be a shame. [caption id="" align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Anna is close to getting a seat at the table – a very powerful table. This is not a T20 match, this is not like an ODI, this is more than climbing Mount Everest. Reuters”][/caption] The support for Anna Hazare’s all-or-nothing position stumps me. All of us, every day, engage in dealing with our own enemies – and the game is never all-or-nothing. You go to the market and negotiate for a kilo of potatoes. The vendor offers a price, you negotiate downwards, he pulls you up a bit, and a deal is done. It’s not done at the price that you first suggested, it’s not done at the price that the vendor proposed, but a deal is, indeed, done. And both of you walk away, both of you win. Negotiations happen in commerce, in personal relationships, in things important and unimportant. Negotiations lead to solutions and to closure. Poor negotiators don’t close deals. They get out of the game if, for long enough, they remain poor negotiators. I did not vote for Anna Hazare and his team to represent me in negotiations with the government (which is why I call the team Team Anna Hazare and NOT Civil Society). However, I am grateful that Anna chose to do what he did end up doing, because I could be a beneficiary of his efforts. Imagine, for a moment, that I am trying to do a big deal with a mammoth company. Imagine that this deal is worth many thousands of crores. Imagine that I have no contacts in the company that I am trying to do the deal with and that, as a consequence, I am despondent. At this moment, along comes Anna Hazare, who has nothing to do with the company I work for, and gets my target company to notice me and my product. And Anna offers to negotiate for me, proposes a price, and the target company offers a price lower than that – but a price that I would happily accept. Anna refuses to budge, sticking to his offer. And the buyer gets pissed off – and walks from the deal. And I lose — when a deal was so close. Anna is close to getting a seat at the table – a very powerful table. This is not a T20 match, this is not like an ODI, this is more than climbing Mount Everest. Please do negotiate hard, bearing in mind that you need to close a deal. Get a joint draft through, and celebrate that victory. I will celebrate it with you. Work on the government in power in the days, months and years to come to understand what changes need to be effected. As in the case of climbing Mount Everest, which one can’t do in one rush, do not expect to get to defeating the monster that is the government in one fight or one battle. Do it as the climbers do; climb a bit, set up camp. Climb some more, set up a second camp. And a third and a fourth, and so on. In mountaineering, one needs to do this to allow the body to get used to changing pressure and temperature. So it is with the politicians; they need to get used to the changing pressure and temperature too. If one has to describe the current position broadly, this would be it: 1) There are some points on which Team Anna Hazare and the UPA team are in complete agreement. 2) There are some points where there are differences, but some give and take can resolve the issue. 3) There are some points where there is no hope for common ground. For the moment, Anna, think of a proposed bill with all of point 1) above and as much of point 2) as the government agrees to. Forget about point 3). This would be like setting up base camp. It makes you better placed and far fitter to make the assault on the mountain peak – NOT weaker, as many suggest. The laws of the land can be amended again and again and again. Once the first bill is passed into law, it does not mean that your job is done and your work is over. Negotiate with the government on the outstanding issues, build consensus in society, and use the consensus as a weapon. The first bill would make the country incrementally better than it is today; make politicians and bureaucrats incrementally less corrupt and more fearful of the law. That’s a first step. That’s not the last step, though. Keep walking, and remember that it will be a long journey.