Allow me add my two bits to the noise surrounding The Accidental Prime Minister by Sanjaya Baru.

In the first instance, mea culpa. I was among those who re-tweeted and endorsed Sudheendra Kulkarni's view the timing of Baru's book was opportunistic. I guess this was egged on by excerpts of the book that appeared in various media, which amplified the majoritarian view Manmohan Singh a "puppet" in the hands of Congress President Sonia Gandhi. In hindsight, I ought not to have because I hadn't read the book then.

That out of the way, I must confess once I got into it, I couldn't stop reading. Breakneck pace, an insider's view, the machinations that conspire to run the country from the PMO, all of it from the ringside. As I flipped through it, I was convinced this isn't a hatchet job as has been alleged. For that matter, I fail to understand what is it being called "controversial" for. There is nothing controversial in it.

For most parts, the narrative is sympathetic to Dr Manmohan Singh. Baru speaks with fondness of his former boss. The portrait he paints is that of a gentle man with a mind of his own, a degree of shrewdness not publicly associated with him, and a strong vision for the future, particularly in his first term as PM.

That explains the time, effort and energies he deployed into foreign policy, getting the nuclear deal through, in spite of opposition both from within his party and coalition partners, and trying to get onboard reluctant allies. Pranab Mukherjee, LK Advani and Prakash Karat, come across as particularly vicious. AK Antony doesn't come out as the saint he is made out to be either.

As a "Bombay" journalist, what got my attention is how my counterparts, the "Delhi" journalists, operate. The great divide between both of these cities extend into the profession as well, with both viewing each other condescendingly. I've been part of some drunken conversations around this theme at both the Bombay and Delhi Press Clubs. Some vignettes from the book on journalists and their role appear on Scroll.in.  

It also reinforces my belief journalists are "tools" in both cities. Without healthy doses of skepticism, now unfortunately missing from my fraternity, most can be deployed in any which way a smart dispensation chooses. Reminds me of this famous line from Jaane bhi do Yaaron: Thoda khao, thoda phenko. It roughly suggests, eat a bit, and throw a few crumbs to the dogs. To my mind, that is pretty much how the political and business classes have come to view journalists in either cities. Having heard first hand from friends in PR business banter on how effortlessly the media can be manipulated, I don't blame them for that. But I digress.

Coming back to the point, much has been written since the book launched of how Dr Singh was an ineffectual PM. Having read the book, Baru hasn't said that in as many words. His account is of the time spent at the PMO during the UPA's first tenure. Around this, Baru is unequivocal, the PM did a bloody good job. His personality came in the way of him claiming credit for it.

Questions around the PM's effectiveness and the legacy he will leave behind are raised only in the epilogue and pertain to UPA's second term in office. Baru doesn't have answers, because he wasn't privy to what transpired. He can only speculate, and he is honest admitting he is speculating.

On the relationship between Sonia Gandhi and the PM, some much needed perspective falls into place. The fact that the position of the Party President and the PM are different isn't something that has been articulated clearly by the mainstream media. Former PMs could see conflicts arise out of not having the party under their thumb and bulldozed their way into merging the roles. Manmohan Singh didn't.  He believed his work would do the job for him. Clearly, it didn't, in a snake pit that is the Parliament. The insinuation here is the price he is paying now is a function of that mistake.

Why did he not do it? Was it loyalty to the "first family"? Was it is lack of political smarts? Was it because he had run out of steam? Or was it simply because he is a fatalist?  Some glimpses are on offer. For instance, his smiling in approval on understanding the significance of Que Sera Sera (what has to happen will happen). The loneliness Sonia Gandhi felt after Rajiv Gandhi's assassination and the vacuum Dr Singh filled in as a father figure to her as been conveniently ignored in excerpts published until now. What is left to conjecture is whether she abandoned him to favor the eventual coronation of Rahul Gandhi as prime minister in waiting.

There is enough in the book to suggest some other time, some other place, Dr Manmohan Singh may have been placed on a pedestal. As he tells the author, posterity will be kinder to him than contemporary commentators.

Personally, my impressions of the PM are that of a fine man. This book reinforces my view, and offers me insights into all of the variables that conspired against him. I think it a pity his term ends not in a blaze of glory, but an awful trail of smoke and dust.