IFS: A Service without a Soul
(Unedited version of a TOI article)
By T.P.Sreenivasan
Chatting with a serving IFS colleague on the sidelines of a meeting, I said that the current theories on the weaknesses of the Foreign Service were widely off the mark. What ail the service are not bad recruitment procedures, inadequate training or unsatisfactory living conditions. It is not even that the best brains are not attracted to the service. “The service has no soul”, I said spontaneously as I described the fundamental flaws in the Service. He agreed with everything I said, but his conclusion surprised me: if he could rewind his life back to the days of the UPSC examination, he would not opt for the IFS. There I disagreed. I would join the Foreign Service itself if I ever had the choice again. No other profession could match the challenges of the Foreign Service.
Like the Keralites discovered Kathakali after it was staged at the Lincoln Centre, people inside and outside the IFS have begun to analyze the state of the IFS after an American analyst, Daniel Markey, came out with a critique. But Markey had nothing dramatic or novel to say. He stated the obvious that the IFS was small and that it was hobbled by the selection process, inadequate mid career planning and no outside expertise. Much of his paper was devoted to the importance of the other actors in policy making, such as think tanks, universities, the media and private business. He was of the view that the “software” of Indian foreign policy was not equipped to lead India to great power status.
Those who are in the service or those who have just come out of it know well that IFS is the least integrated of the civil services. By its very nature, IFS is scattered all around the globe, often in isolated pockets. There is little interaction with the rest of the service except in large missions, where a number of officers may be posted together. In many missions, which may be characterized as “one man and his dog” missions; there is no opportunity to work with other officers. In the Ministry of External Affairs, the official responsibilities are such that no one has the time to consult each other. It is a mad race to get the attention of the political masters. More time is spent in the corridors of power rather than in lunch rooms. As a result, every officer is an island, without any support system. The IFS is, therefore, not conducive to collective thinking or action. A recent effort at cyber communication within the service has revealed more fissures than bonds. Only a couple of voices were heard when false accusations were hurled at a colleague.
In no other service is one man’s meat another man’s poison. If one officer gets himself an attractive posting by any method, it follows that his peers have to be content with a less attractive assignment. The upward mobility of the service is such that waiting out for a particular posting is not practical. There are no established criteria for selection and being insensitive to the needs of others, the competition is most often unequal and unfair. The situation is compounded by the recent tendency to blur the gradation of posts in relation to the grades to which the officers belong. There are too many instances of a Grade I officer being replaced by a Grade III officer. Promotions become irrelevant as both in terms of work and compensation, stations matter rather than Grades.
In fact, the posting policy is the most contentious matter in the IFS, making its members run from pillar to post to secure advantages. While promotion policy is fairly established, there are no rules at all regarding postings. Successive Foreign Secretaries have insisted that postings should be an art rather than a science. Proposals for a scientific method like a points system for postings have been set aside. Promotion becomes meaningless unless it is matched by a commensurate posting. The rat race is intensified by this situation and each one is unto himself or herself in the quest for choice postings. In the case of heads of missions, there is not even a system of making known the availability of posts, not to speak of applying objective criteria. The soullessness is evident everywhere.
Specialisation is one of the victims of the heartless postings policy. After the Government and the officers have invested much in language training, many do not get any opportunity to use the languages, particularly one country languages, as the exigencies of the service keep the officers in areas where the language is not used. Multilateral diplomacy demands special talents, but New York, Geneva and Vienna are given as rotational blessings. Even those who have special talents for multilateral diplomacy are moved away thoughtlessly. Career planning is left to the officers themselves. Those who have remained in the neighboring countries or in multilateral posts for long have done so by hook or by crook and not by any deliberate design.
Politicians play havoc with the service because of the general atmosphere of self promotion. “Blue- eyed” boys and girls are a curse of the service as no rules seem to apply to them. They go from one good posting to another and they even move out without completing their terms if they find the famed attractions of the post are unreal. Ministers with feudal backgrounds and tendencies have a field day in the Foreign Service. No Minister can know every officer and those whom the Minister knows get undue advantages. The attraction of life in Government after retirement is another reason for officers to get themselves politicized. How do officers, who have been the beneficiaries of political largesse, set things right?
Training at any level in the IFS means listening to a series of lectures. These lectures vary in quality and usefulness. The probationers were virtual gypsies, moving from institution to institution before the Foreign Service Institute was established. At no time is any training given to do two of the most important functions expected of the officers at every level—political and economic reporting and recording of conversations. Of late, even proficiency in English is not insisted upon. When it was suggested that those who did not write their papers in English should not be considered for the Foreign Service, it was argued by some that it would be unconstitutional to be discriminatory! Language is an important tool in diplomacy, but we will soon have Indian diplomats without proficiency in English. It would be unpatriotic to exclude Hindi or Malayalam scholars from the Foreign Service.
A strong character is essential for anyone to survive for nearly forty years in the IFS with its culture shocks every three years. There is no safety net for those who fall by the wayside. The casualties in terms of physical and mental diseases, alcoholism and family dislocations are as common in the IFS as in the fighting forces. Even victims of armed attacks and robberies get no compensation of any kind. But if someone gets into trouble on account of any indiscretion, every one throws stones at them till he is completely destroyed. His solid service to the nation is never set off against a temporary weakness of the flesh. The lack of a support system is compounded by the heartless treatment of victims of professional hazards.
The truth remains, however, that, with all these deficiencies, the IFS has coped with its responsibilities and has done better than many of the more equipped diplomatic services around the world. Even if much of Indian diplomacy is conducted in person or on the phone, as Markey claims, it has served the nation well. Living conditions have also improved, though they are nowhere near to the standards of even other developing countries like China, Indonesia or Malaysia. If the Foreign Service has lost its luster for new entrants, it is because the other services have greater avenues of securing power and wealth. Young people seem to be motivated more by those than by idealism or desire for adventure.
The South Block has its cupboards full of reform proposals by many ignited minds. But as long as the service does not get a soul, a sense of belonging, arising out of a sense of fairness, equality and justice, no reform, no expansion will transform the software of Indian diplomacy.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The Times of India
Opinion
TOP ARTICLE
IFS: Service Without A Soul
T P Sreenivasan23 October 2009, 12:00am IST
Just as Keralites discovered Kathakali after it was staged at the
Lincoln Centre, the state of the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) began to
beexamined after an American analyst, Daniel Markey, came out with a
critique. Markey had nothing novel to say. He said the IFS was small,
and hobbled by the selection process, inadequate mid-career planning
and lack of outside expertise. He highlighted the importance of other
actors in policymaking: think tanks, universities, the media and
private business. He believed the "software" of Indian foreign policy
was not equipped to lead India to great power status.
Those with experience in the service know the IFS is the least
integrated of the civil services. It is scattered around the globe,
often in isolated pockets. There is little interaction with the rest
of the service except in large missions. In the ministry of external
affairs, official responsibilities are such that no one has the time
to consult each other. More time is spent in the corridors of power
than in lunchrooms. Every officer is an island. The IFS is, therefore,
not conducive to collective thinking or action.
In no other service is one man's meat another man's poison. If one
officer gets himself an attractive posting by any method, his peers
have to be content with a less attractive assignment. There are no
established criteria for selection and the competition is most often
unequal and unfair. A recent tendency is to blur the gradation of
posts in relation to the grades to which officers belong. A grade I
officer can be replaced by a grade III officer. Promotions become
irrelevant as both in terms of work and compensation, stations matter
rather than grades.
IFS's contentious posting policy makes members run from pillar to post
to secure advantages. While promotion policy is fairly established, no
rules govern postings. Successive foreign secretaries have insisted
that postings should be an art rather than a science. In the case of
heads of missions, there is not even a system of making known the
availability of posts, not to speak of applying objective criteria.
The soullessness is evident everywhere.
Specialisation is a casualty. Though government and officers invest in
language training, many do not get any opportunity to use the
languages. Multilateral diplomacy demands special talents but New
York, Geneva and Vienna are given as rotational blessings. Even those
with special talents for multilateral diplomacy are moved
thoughtlessly. Career planning is left to the officers themselves.
Those who have remained in neighbouring countries or in multilateral
posts for long have done so by hook or by crook, not by the
government's deliberate design.
'Blue-eyed' boys and girls are a curse of the service, as no rules
seem to apply to them. Ministers with feudal backgrounds and
tendencies have a field day. No minister can know every officer and
those whom the minister knows get undue advantages. The attraction of
life in government after retirement is another reason officers get
politicised. How do officers, themselves the beneficiaries of
political largesse, set things right?
Training at any level in the IFS means listening to a series of
lectures. These vary in quality and usefulness. At no time is any
training given for two of the most important functions expected of
officers at every level: political and economic reporting and
recording of conversations. Of late, even proficiency in English is
not insisted upon. When it was suggested that those who did not write
their papers in English should not be considered for foreign service,
some argued that it would be unconstitutional to be discriminatory! We
will soon have diplomats without proficiency in English.
A strong character is essential for anyone to survive nearly 40 years
in the IFS. There is no safety net for those who fall. Casualties in
terms of physical and mental diseases, alcoholism and family
dislocations are as common here as in the fighting forces. Even
victims of armed attacks and robberies get no compensation. If someone
gets into trouble for any indiscretion, everyone throws stones at him
till he is destroyed. His solid service to the nation is never set off
against a temporary lapse. Lack of a support system is compounded by
the heartless treatment of victims of professional hazards.
However, with all these deficiencies, the IFS has coped with its
responsibilities and done better than many of the more equipped
diplomatic services around the world. Even if much of Indian diplomacy
is conducted in person or on the phone, as Markey claims, it has
served the nation well. Living conditions have improved, though
nowhere near to the standards of even other developing countries like
China, Indonesia or Malaysia. If the foreign service has lost its
lustre for new entrants, it is because the other services have greater
avenues of securing power and wealth.
South Block has its cupboards full of reform proposals by many ignited
minds. But as long as the service does not get a soul, a sense of
belonging, arising out of a sense of fairness, equality and justice,
no reform, no expansion will transform the software of Indian
diplomacy.
The writer is a former ambassador.
Opinion
TOP ARTICLE
IFS: Service Without A Soul
T P Sreenivasan23 October 2009, 12:00am IST
Just as Keralites discovered Kathakali after it was staged at the
Lincoln Centre, the state of the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) began to
beexamined after an American analyst, Daniel Markey, came out with a
critique. Markey had nothing novel to say. He said the IFS was small,
and hobbled by the selection process, inadequate mid-career planning
and lack of outside expertise. He highlighted the importance of other
actors in policymaking: think tanks, universities, the media and
private business. He believed the "software" of Indian foreign policy
was not equipped to lead India to great power status.
Those with experience in the service know the IFS is the least
integrated of the civil services. It is scattered around the globe,
often in isolated pockets. There is little interaction with the rest
of the service except in large missions. In the ministry of external
affairs, official responsibilities are such that no one has the time
to consult each other. More time is spent in the corridors of power
than in lunchrooms. Every officer is an island. The IFS is, therefore,
not conducive to collective thinking or action.
In no other service is one man's meat another man's poison. If one
officer gets himself an attractive posting by any method, his peers
have to be content with a less attractive assignment. There are no
established criteria for selection and the competition is most often
unequal and unfair. A recent tendency is to blur the gradation of
posts in relation to the grades to which officers belong. A grade I
officer can be replaced by a grade III officer. Promotions become
irrelevant as both in terms of work and compensation, stations matter
rather than grades.
IFS's contentious posting policy makes members run from pillar to post
to secure advantages. While promotion policy is fairly established, no
rules govern postings. Successive foreign secretaries have insisted
that postings should be an art rather than a science. In the case of
heads of missions, there is not even a system of making known the
availability of posts, not to speak of applying objective criteria.
The soullessness is evident everywhere.
Specialisation is a casualty. Though government and officers invest in
language training, many do not get any opportunity to use the
languages. Multilateral diplomacy demands special talents but New
York, Geneva and Vienna are given as rotational blessings. Even those
with special talents for multilateral diplomacy are moved
thoughtlessly. Career planning is left to the officers themselves.
Those who have remained in neighbouring countries or in multilateral
posts for long have done so by hook or by crook, not by the
government's deliberate design.
'Blue-eyed' boys and girls are a curse of the service, as no rules
seem to apply to them. Ministers with feudal backgrounds and
tendencies have a field day. No minister can know every officer and
those whom the minister knows get undue advantages. The attraction of
life in government after retirement is another reason officers get
politicised. How do officers, themselves the beneficiaries of
political largesse, set things right?
Training at any level in the IFS means listening to a series of
lectures. These vary in quality and usefulness. At no time is any
training given for two of the most important functions expected of
officers at every level: political and economic reporting and
recording of conversations. Of late, even proficiency in English is
not insisted upon. When it was suggested that those who did not write
their papers in English should not be considered for foreign service,
some argued that it would be unconstitutional to be discriminatory! We
will soon have diplomats without proficiency in English.
A strong character is essential for anyone to survive nearly 40 years
in the IFS. There is no safety net for those who fall. Casualties in
terms of physical and mental diseases, alcoholism and family
dislocations are as common here as in the fighting forces. Even
victims of armed attacks and robberies get no compensation. If someone
gets into trouble for any indiscretion, everyone throws stones at him
till he is destroyed. His solid service to the nation is never set off
against a temporary lapse. Lack of a support system is compounded by
the heartless treatment of victims of professional hazards.
However, with all these deficiencies, the IFS has coped with its
responsibilities and done better than many of the more equipped
diplomatic services around the world. Even if much of Indian diplomacy
is conducted in person or on the phone, as Markey claims, it has
served the nation well. Living conditions have improved, though
nowhere near to the standards of even other developing countries like
China, Indonesia or Malaysia. If the foreign service has lost its
lustre for new entrants, it is because the other services have greater
avenues of securing power and wealth.
South Block has its cupboards full of reform proposals by many ignited
minds. But as long as the service does not get a soul, a sense of
belonging, arising out of a sense of fairness, equality and justice,
no reform, no expansion will transform the software of Indian
diplomacy.
The writer is a former ambassador.
Ambassador Muthamma
Ambassador Muthamma will be remembered as much for her intellectual
abilities as for her grit, determination and absolute fearlessness. As
a pioneer, she faced many adversities in life and in the IFS itself,
but remained steadfast in her faith in gender equality and rule of
law. Consequently, she appeared aggressive in her ways and very few
knew that she was also a very sensitive and friendly human being.
I did not work with Ambassador Muthamma, but I had a few glimpses of
her in my early years in the service. These were mostly during my
stint as the Special Assistant to Foreign Secretary Jagat Mehta, with
whom she had a complex relationship. What struck me most about her was
that, unlike some others in the service, she did not allow her
problems with the Foreign Secretary to colour her attitude towards me
as a young officer. She would rant and rave about Mr. Mehta as she
stopped at my perch in the corridor leading to the Foreign Secretary's
office, but never left without a kind word or gesture towards me. She
inspired awe as well as respect whenever I met her.
I shall never forget a meeting between Ambassador Muthamma and Mr.
Jagat Mehta at the Shiphol Airport in Amsterdam. We were not expecting
the ambassador to come to the airport when we transited because of the
strained relationship between them, but Ambassador Muthamma was not
one to fail in courtesies. But the atmosphere was far from relaxed and
I found myself caught in a clash of the titans. Both of them talked to
me rather than to each other and there was nothing I could contribute
to the conversation. Ambassador Muthamma was visibly rattled at the
end of the conversation, but she did not forget to take me to the duty
free shop and get some chocolates for me before we boarded the
aircraft. She did not tell me not to share it with the Foreign
Secretary.
My first ever meeting with Ambassador Muthamma was in strange
circumstances. I had just moved into a room in the External Affairs
Hostel as an IFS probationer and was generally feeling out of place in
a strange environment. I was woken up from sleep in the middle of the
night by a knock at the door and I was bewildered to see a lady in a
night gown outside my room. Before I could suspect anything else, she
introduced herself as the Joint Secretary (Americas). That was a time
when we used to believe that Joint Secretaries were giants in the
bureaucracy and I was astonished that one of them had come to visit me
at such an hour. She then said she had come up because my movements in
the room were disturbing her in her room just below mine.This was even
more surprising as I thought I was fast asleep at the time. I
hurriedly promised her to stay quiet as an argument was inappropriate
and she left. She came to me the next day at the restaurant and
explained to me that even the slightest noises would disturb her sleep
and that she was moving to the top floor of the building to avoid
hearing noises from above her room. But I learned later that she had
no peace even there because she happened to be above the room of a
colleague who partied his nights away with gay abandon. She eventually
moved out of the hostel for peace and quiet.
I shall not go into the Foreign Secretary's letter on women officers
and the court case filed by Ambassador Muthamma against the delay in
her promotion to Grade I as these have been documented elsewhere.
Suffice it to say that in both these cases, Mr. Mehta was more sinned
against than sinning. Ambassador Muthamma was aware of this fact and,
therefore, did not have any personal animosity towards Mr.Mehta.
I do not know whether a story in circulation of unrequited love about
Ambassador Muthamma was apocryphal or not. But I knew for certain that
within her tough exterior, there was a kind and sensitive heart.
Ambassador Muthamma will be remembered as much for her intellectual
abilities as for her grit, determination and absolute fearlessness. As
a pioneer, she faced many adversities in life and in the IFS itself,
but remained steadfast in her faith in gender equality and rule of
law. Consequently, she appeared aggressive in her ways and very few
knew that she was also a very sensitive and friendly human being.
I did not work with Ambassador Muthamma, but I had a few glimpses of
her in my early years in the service. These were mostly during my
stint as the Special Assistant to Foreign Secretary Jagat Mehta, with
whom she had a complex relationship. What struck me most about her was
that, unlike some others in the service, she did not allow her
problems with the Foreign Secretary to colour her attitude towards me
as a young officer. She would rant and rave about Mr. Mehta as she
stopped at my perch in the corridor leading to the Foreign Secretary's
office, but never left without a kind word or gesture towards me. She
inspired awe as well as respect whenever I met her.
I shall never forget a meeting between Ambassador Muthamma and Mr.
Jagat Mehta at the Shiphol Airport in Amsterdam. We were not expecting
the ambassador to come to the airport when we transited because of the
strained relationship between them, but Ambassador Muthamma was not
one to fail in courtesies. But the atmosphere was far from relaxed and
I found myself caught in a clash of the titans. Both of them talked to
me rather than to each other and there was nothing I could contribute
to the conversation. Ambassador Muthamma was visibly rattled at the
end of the conversation, but she did not forget to take me to the duty
free shop and get some chocolates for me before we boarded the
aircraft. She did not tell me not to share it with the Foreign
Secretary.
My first ever meeting with Ambassador Muthamma was in strange
circumstances. I had just moved into a room in the External Affairs
Hostel as an IFS probationer and was generally feeling out of place in
a strange environment. I was woken up from sleep in the middle of the
night by a knock at the door and I was bewildered to see a lady in a
night gown outside my room. Before I could suspect anything else, she
introduced herself as the Joint Secretary (Americas). That was a time
when we used to believe that Joint Secretaries were giants in the
bureaucracy and I was astonished that one of them had come to visit me
at such an hour. She then said she had come up because my movements in
the room were disturbing her in her room just below mine.This was even
more surprising as I thought I was fast asleep at the time. I
hurriedly promised her to stay quiet as an argument was inappropriate
and she left. She came to me the next day at the restaurant and
explained to me that even the slightest noises would disturb her sleep
and that she was moving to the top floor of the building to avoid
hearing noises from above her room. But I learned later that she had
no peace even there because she happened to be above the room of a
colleague who partied his nights away with gay abandon. She eventually
moved out of the hostel for peace and quiet.
I shall not go into the Foreign Secretary's letter on women officers
and the court case filed by Ambassador Muthamma against the delay in
her promotion to Grade I as these have been documented elsewhere.
Suffice it to say that in both these cases, Mr. Mehta was more sinned
against than sinning. Ambassador Muthamma was aware of this fact and,
therefore, did not have any personal animosity towards Mr.Mehta.
I do not know whether a story in circulation of unrequited love about
Ambassador Muthamma was apocryphal or not. But I knew for certain that
within her tough exterior, there was a kind and sensitive heart.
Ambassador Muthamma
Ambassador Muthamma will be remembered as much for her intellectual
abilities as for her grit, determination and absolute fearlessness. As
a pioneer, she faced many adversities in life and in the IFS itself,
but remained steadfast in her faith in gender equality and rule of
law. Consequently, she appeared aggressive in her ways and very few
knew that she was also a very sensitive and friendly human being.
I did not work with Ambassador Muthamma, but I had a few glimpses of
her in my early years in the service. These were mostly during my
stint as the Special Assistant to Foreign Secretary Jagat Mehta, with
whom she had a complex relationship. What struck me most about her was
that, unlike some others in the service, she did not allow her
problems with the Foreign Secretary to colour her attitude towards me
as a young officer. She would rant and rave about Mr. Mehta as she
stopped at my perch in the corridor leading to the Foreign Secretary's
office, but never left without a kind word or gesture towards me. She
inspired awe as well as respect whenever I met her.
I shall never forget a meeting between Ambassador Muthamma and Mr.
Jagat Mehta at the Shiphol Airport in Amsterdam. We were not expecting
the ambassador to come to the airport when we transited because of the
strained relationship between them, but Ambassador Muthamma was not
one to fail in courtesies. But the atmosphere was far from relaxed and
I found myself caught in a clash of the titans. Both of them talked to
me rather than to each other and there was nothing I could contribute
to the conversation. Ambassador Muthamma was visibly rattled at the
end of the conversation, but she did not forget to take me to the duty
free shop and get some chocolates for me before we boarded the
aircraft. She did not tell me not to share it with the Foreign
Secretary.
My first ever meeting with Ambassador Muthamma was in strange
circumstances. I had just moved into a room in the External Affairs
Hostel as an IFS probationer and was generally feeling out of place in
a strange environment. I was woken up from sleep in the middle of the
night by a knock at the door and I was bewildered to see a lady in a
night gown outside my room. Before I could suspect anything else, she
introduced herself as the Joint Secretary (Americas). That was a time
when we used to believe that Joint Secretaries were giants in the
bureaucracy and I was astonished that one of them had come to visit me
at such an hour. She then said she had come up because my movements in
the room were disturbing her in her room just below mine.This was even
more surprising as I thought I was fast asleep at the time. I
hurriedly promised her to stay quiet as an argument was inappropriate
and she left. She came to me the next day at the restaurant and
explained to me that even the slightest noises would disturb her sleep
and that she was moving to the top floor of the building to avoid
hearing noises from above her room. But I learned later that she had
no peace even there because she happened to be above the room of a
colleague who partied his nights away with gay abandon. She eventually
moved out of the hostel for peace and quiet.
I shall not go into the Foreign Secretary's letter on women officers
and the court case filed by Ambassador Muthamma against the delay in
her promotion to Grade I as these have been documented elsewhere.
Suffice it to say that in both these cases, Mr. Mehta was more sinned
against than sinning. Ambassador Muthamma was aware of this fact and,
therefore, did not have any personal animosity towards Mr.Mehta.
I do not know whether a story in circulation of unrequited love about
Ambassador Muthamma was apocryphal or not. But I knew for certain that
within her tough exterior, there was a kind and sensitive heart.
Ambassador Muthamma will be remembered as much for her intellectual
abilities as for her grit, determination and absolute fearlessness. As
a pioneer, she faced many adversities in life and in the IFS itself,
but remained steadfast in her faith in gender equality and rule of
law. Consequently, she appeared aggressive in her ways and very few
knew that she was also a very sensitive and friendly human being.
I did not work with Ambassador Muthamma, but I had a few glimpses of
her in my early years in the service. These were mostly during my
stint as the Special Assistant to Foreign Secretary Jagat Mehta, with
whom she had a complex relationship. What struck me most about her was
that, unlike some others in the service, she did not allow her
problems with the Foreign Secretary to colour her attitude towards me
as a young officer. She would rant and rave about Mr. Mehta as she
stopped at my perch in the corridor leading to the Foreign Secretary's
office, but never left without a kind word or gesture towards me. She
inspired awe as well as respect whenever I met her.
I shall never forget a meeting between Ambassador Muthamma and Mr.
Jagat Mehta at the Shiphol Airport in Amsterdam. We were not expecting
the ambassador to come to the airport when we transited because of the
strained relationship between them, but Ambassador Muthamma was not
one to fail in courtesies. But the atmosphere was far from relaxed and
I found myself caught in a clash of the titans. Both of them talked to
me rather than to each other and there was nothing I could contribute
to the conversation. Ambassador Muthamma was visibly rattled at the
end of the conversation, but she did not forget to take me to the duty
free shop and get some chocolates for me before we boarded the
aircraft. She did not tell me not to share it with the Foreign
Secretary.
My first ever meeting with Ambassador Muthamma was in strange
circumstances. I had just moved into a room in the External Affairs
Hostel as an IFS probationer and was generally feeling out of place in
a strange environment. I was woken up from sleep in the middle of the
night by a knock at the door and I was bewildered to see a lady in a
night gown outside my room. Before I could suspect anything else, she
introduced herself as the Joint Secretary (Americas). That was a time
when we used to believe that Joint Secretaries were giants in the
bureaucracy and I was astonished that one of them had come to visit me
at such an hour. She then said she had come up because my movements in
the room were disturbing her in her room just below mine.This was even
more surprising as I thought I was fast asleep at the time. I
hurriedly promised her to stay quiet as an argument was inappropriate
and she left. She came to me the next day at the restaurant and
explained to me that even the slightest noises would disturb her sleep
and that she was moving to the top floor of the building to avoid
hearing noises from above her room. But I learned later that she had
no peace even there because she happened to be above the room of a
colleague who partied his nights away with gay abandon. She eventually
moved out of the hostel for peace and quiet.
I shall not go into the Foreign Secretary's letter on women officers
and the court case filed by Ambassador Muthamma against the delay in
her promotion to Grade I as these have been documented elsewhere.
Suffice it to say that in both these cases, Mr. Mehta was more sinned
against than sinning. Ambassador Muthamma was aware of this fact and,
therefore, did not have any personal animosity towards Mr.Mehta.
I do not know whether a story in circulation of unrequited love about
Ambassador Muthamma was apocryphal or not. But I knew for certain that
within her tough exterior, there was a kind and sensitive heart.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
