The author begins the book by introducing quotes from Machiavelli’s Prince and the story of Narasimha Avatar from Bhagavata Purana. These quotes indicate one understands that the first half of the title Half-Lion traces its influences from Machiavelli’s Prince. The title’s second half tries to draw similarities between Narasimha Rao to the Narasimha Avatar (Half man and Half Lion) of Lord Vishnu. A confluence of the eastern and western traditions of thought in the title makes it attractive to go through the book to understand what the author has to offer.
The author implies that in mythology, Hiranyakashap required Half lion and half man of nature to kill the demon. Similarly, India was grappling with a multitude of evils post Independence. Narasimha Rao, bearing the name of Narasimha, was an apt man-lion Indian society needed to fight the evils. Narasimha Rao was a man of contradiction, Who could play lion, fox, and mouse. He witnessed a multitude of challenges in the initial stages of his life. Neighbors adopted him to save property. He married early, at ten thus embraced all these challenges in the early stages. At the same time, he was an unfaithful husband and had a hard time with his family. This event is one of the contradictions Narasimharao has at a personal level. The author summarises his qualities in three main points. He has incredible survival skills and remains curious (Eg. he Spoke ten languages). He was a person who could adopt and adapt. He plays the role of lion, fox, and mouse to get the best out of the situation.
The author extends this contradiction to the political level (or) public sphere. The book makes it more interesting how the author narrated and praised contradictions as adaptability and leadership qualities of the former Prime minister. Narasimha Rao started as a staunch socialist who supported Capitalism by becoming a torchbearer of LPG reforms. He came from a landlord and a Brahmin family, yet fought for land reforms and the rights of the marginalized. He fought against landlord dominated Andhrapradesh assembly to bring land reforms to the state.
He was a visionary, at the same time, was corrupt. He was reform-oriented at the same time and wanted to maintain the existing institutions. He wanted to win but did not project that he would win. He was suspicious of all people at the same time but remained cordial with everyone. He had ambitions; goals; however, he did not mention his goals outside. He had no political legacy however turned out to be a prime ministerial candidate at a crucial juncture of Indian polity.
The author mentions various examples to highlight Rao’s curiosity. Rajiv Gandhi told a friend that he intended to open up electronic and computer imports to India. ‘But the old guard in my party will not understand,’ Rajiv complained within earshot of his defense minister(Narsimha Rao). This message was not directed at Rao specifically, yet Rao went on to learn computers and became proficient in – Unix, Basic and Cobol.
The author justifies Rao’s qualities by mentioning that To kill a demon, you need half a man and half a lion. Contextually India needed such a leader. Narasimha Rao Inherited a country no other Prime minister has inherited. There was political instability due to the Killing of Rajiv Gandhi. Economically India was going through the Balance of payment crisis, and RBI started selling off Gold secretly. There was external instability due to the Collapse of the Soviet Union, which was considered a strategic friend of India. The author mentions that Narsimha Rao’s qualities became a political virtue for India during this juncture. He was least potent, as powerful as a Dead fish with the lowest levels of Charisma. He was boring and did not project himself as ambitious in front of the crowd. These qualities helped him become a consensus candidate, as he had no friends or enemies then.
In the Parliament, various minority governments (2 minority govt before Rao and four governments after Rao) Collapsed. But he not only survived the minority government (completed five years) but also transformed. He is an astute politician who understood the political situation, his weakness, and his opponents who helped him to play Lion, mouse, and fox.
Then the book narrates various instances of Rao’s political career, thus justifying the hypothesis that Rao was curious and played the role of lion, fox, and mouse to secure a stable polity, economy, and External relations. For example, the non-imposition of presidential rule in Uttar Pradesh during the Babri masjid demolition had multiple facets. Rao didn’t want the minority government to collapse at the critical juncture of the reform period. He tried to resolve the issue by negotiating with BJP, VHP, and Hindu leaders. However, this turned out to be an error of judgment; trusting them.
He brought all the necessary reforms to the table. However, he held that he was continuing what his predecessors had done. Brought reforms while praising the past. This technique helped him to carry out reforms without much resistance. To gain trust, he didn’t disinvest in public sector enterprises and didn’t indulge in firing employees.
This way of handling a crisis comes from a unique understanding and experience. He started his career in state politics and worked as a Chief minister. Later worked in Delhi in various diverse roles. This unique experience helped him to be an ideal candidate for getting consensus in all his endeavors. He understands how states and Delhi work better than any other prime minister.
There are debates about who should get the credit for the success of liberalization and foreign policy, As Rajiv Gandhi mooted these ideas in 1985. For example, Rajiv Gandhi Expanded -General Open list and tried to open up the economy. After interviewing 100s of people involved in the process, including Rao’s critic, the author concludes by crediting Rao.
The author also mentions the nuclear program, the Look east policy, the establishment of diplomatic relations with Israel, and overcoming the history of hesitations with the USA to testify to his assumptions. However, the author highlights the drawbacks of having such a personality. These qualities led Rao to become more lonely with gain more enemies. Others quickly blamed him for all the wrong decisions, as he didn’t take any credit for any reforms (Ex. Babri Maszid, Sikh Riots.). No political party owned Rao and his legacy and branded him as communal and indecisive. The author mentions that he didn’t get the treatment other former congress presidents got after their death. His dead body was cremated in Hyderabad with little attendance from the political fraternity.
Positive Takeaways From The Book
The author provides a better analysis of the events with documentary evidence of his claims. He did thorough research to come up with hypotheses and conclusions. The timing of the book release was apt, as, after the book’s launch, many political parties also started claiming his legacy. For example, BJP in the center and TRS in Telangana started celebrating Rao’s ideas. This book also gives a nuanced understanding of politics. It helps as a guide for people who want to enter politics and remain in politics. Rao’s, without having specific expertise, led various diverse roles. It helps one to understand that leadership is beyond just having subject expertise.
Critical Appraisal
The book doesn’t dwell much upon corruption charges against Rao and his family. The author conveniently compares Rao with Deng Xiaoping, Ronald Ragan, and Margaret thatcher.