Udta Rajan, Reh Gaya Pahlaj

On the 8th of June I was shepherded into the Governor's office at the Reserve Bank of India by its redoubtable but extremely anxious spokeswoman Alpana Killawala. "I hope you have seen the many mails I've sent you," she said in a soft, persistent snarl more suited to an over-protective lioness watching over her ward.

Since Raghuram Rajan's office had confirmed time for what many believed could be his penultimate interview as RBI chief, his communications aide wanted me to focus "on policy, not personality," perhaps understandably worried about how a contentious utterance in an already inflammable situation could throw the entire option of a second term up in flames. I told her I would be mindful of her concerns but that I also needed to be mindful of the news. Curiously, at his press conference the day before - right after he announced status quo on interest rates - no one prodded him on Subramanian Swamy's open attacks. 

Alpana needn't have worried. For one it's now more than clear that the government had already decided to push Rajan out before a second term and what he said or didn't say wasn't going to change that. And two, Rajan himself came more than prepared.

"I said - Oh no - when I saw it's your interview," he laughed, as he took his seat to be miked up, "I knew right away it wasn't going to be a dull monetary policy interview." You got that right, I said, joking back. "I reserve the right to be boring," he said with elan and humour, as the cameras rolled.

Boring is the antonym for Raghuram Rajan's tenure. Had he been either prosaic or pliable his second term would have been a sure shot. As only the second Governor since 1991 to not get the customary five years, the message that the Modi government has sent is that there is no space for public intellectuals who are independent-minded; the Sarkar will never let you forget that you are expected to be a supplicant. This is why you hear the orchestrated whispers that Rajan went beyond his remit. And that's why Rajan must exit while a shyster like Pahlaj Nihalani gets to stay. One, a globally respected economist with unquestionable personal integrity who went after cronyism and bad bank loans; the other a sycophantic, self-declared 'chamcha', so bumbling and dangerous that you have to hold your head in embarrassment and rage each time he speaks - yet it was 'Udta' Rajan and 'Reh Gaya' Pahlaj. That was just one of the striking contrasts of the Rexit week. 

The other of course was the brazenness of so called 'proclaimed offender' Vijay Mallya who cocked a snook at the government with his smugly defiant presence at a London book launch attended by an unsuspecting Indian High Commissioner among others. The fat-cat cronyism that Mallya has come to symbolize is exactly where Raghuram Rajan's clean-up of the banking sector was directed. "Equity should be junior to debt and that was not respected, especially for the larger players," Rajan told me, unflinching in his response to my questions about Mallya. 

While his detractors among BJP supporters have charged him with hurting the interests of small business by keeping interest rates high, they choose to ignore his intervention against the big boys who knew how to game the system. 

"We have draconian laws that worked quite well against the small guys," he said, accepting that those who could manipulate the gaps in an "unfair system" would get away and that is what he was intent on changing.
 Confronted with the 1.14 lakh crores of bad loans written off by public sector banks over a period of just two years, Raghuram Rajan confirmed to me that he was readying to make public the list of wilful defaulters. Is this crackdown at least part of the reason his continued presence was a problem? The irony was glaring; Rajan's exit was coincidentally confirmed on the same day Mallya reinforced his impunity in London. So the clown at the censor board would survive, the man who subverted Indian law would live it up in London but an industrious and searingly bright economist would be squeezed out; the message to accomplished Indians abroad was quite clear - don't come home, the world is a better stage to shine a light on your talent. And if you still decide to come back, do know that you need to be a chamcha or cheerleader - not a self-respecting professional.
   
Supporters of Rajan's exit warn against placing individuals above institutions. But when individuals are targeted with ad hominem attacks - and there is barely a murmur of support from the government - it IS the independence of the institution that is weakened. In the last couple of days the truism that has been bandied about the most is that no one is indispensable. The triteness of that comment speaks for its own irrelevance to the debate. Rajan's departure is not routine or mundane or even voluntary; it has come against the backdrop of a concerted vilification campaign. And it has been mired in subterfuge and opacity. 

So we still don't know - does the government agree with its MP Subramanian Swamy's proclamation that the RBI governor's green card made him less than Indian? Is this the most concrete proof yet that Swamy's utterances are what the Prime Minister thinks but can't say? Or did the government use Swamy's shoulder to shoot from in a bid to get Rajan out for other more insidious reasons (corporate- bank-politico nexus)? Was Rajan just too opinionated and high profile for the comfort of the government? Did he take away media attention and credit from them? Was this simple envy or a crass reminder of who's the boss? Was the irritation that Rajan's public speeches underscored that free thinking was as critical as free markets? Or that the RBI governor was not congratulatory and gushing in the way that the BJP wanted him to be? Among the silliest things he was targeted for was his use of a colloquialism to describe the Indian economy as a 'one-eyed King in the land of the blind.' "I think it would be the wrong thing to jump up and beat our chest and say that we are the best in the world," Rajan told me when I asked him about the comment, "Yes we have done a reasonable job and let's look at the cup as half-full and say that we have to fill it some more."

When I met Raghuram Rajan it was clear that despite everything he was open to a second term. "A lot of people have been writing my obituary in the newspapers", he laughed, "this gives me time to reflect on what remains to be done and work on that." At the very least the government should own the decision to oust him instead of pretending it was his choice to make.  

The only moment I saw a shadow fall over Raghuram Rajan's calm and confident visage was when I pressed him to react on how he was dealing with the vitriol directed against him. Yet, in an environment where anti-national has become a lazy and commonplace slur used against almost anyone who is slightly non-conformist, the RBI chief was blunt as ever. Taking on Swamy's description of him as "mentally not fully Indian," he challenged the reductionist definitions of patriotism. "Look when you think about Indianness or the love for your country, it's a very complicated thing and we tend to reduce it...For every person there is a different way to show respect for your country...My mother-in-law always says 'Karmayogi is the way to go, do your work and hope that it reflects your love for your country. That's what I try to do." 

Raghuram Rajan showed India respect and commitment. The tragedy is - he did not get the same in return.  

(Barkha Dutt is an award-winning journalist and Consulting Editor with NDTV.)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.