(My lead Editorial in India Legal Fortnightly)
NATIONAL
POLITICS/Letter from the editor/neo-saffronism
IS MODI WEAKENING?
What exactly is Modi’s
idea of India and how, exactly, has post electoral Modi-ism been shaping India’s political scenario? The
fashionable criticism of the new prime minister is that he is an addicted
foreign junketeer traipsing from capital to capital and from one NRI audience
to another in search of foreign approbation while domestically he has laid
nothing more than one big , fat egg. They ask: What’s he done?
This column is by no
means a year-after report card on Modi but an attempt to understand, through my
own evaluation of the man, where he seems to be headed in the context of the
mood of the nation. That the country is on a tight leash and short fuse, given
the Congress catastrophe, the regional parties flop, and the Aam Aadmi
roller-coaster, is a given. That its people will no longer suffer fools gladly
or, like lemmings join a religious or
ideological mass movement, in a headlong rush to destruction is also scripted
quite clearly.
And herein lies a lesson for Modi’s opponents
on the Right as well as the Left not to exult in haste in the celebration of
the end of the Modi honeymoon. It is far from over. Before answering what he’s
done, let me tell you what he’s not done.
He has NOT: cleaned up the Ganga; restored 8 percent GDP growth;
introduced judicial reform; ended the rape and subjugation of women; rebuilt
our cities or renewed urban India; accelerated farm production; introduced
meaningful tax reform; introduced disinvestment plans; revamped Air India; cut
down the bureaucracy; shut down terrorist camps in Pakistan.
On the DONE side: He has delivered on a platter
to his party the most handsome victory it has ever enjoyed; shattered the
Gandhi dynasty; replaced the creaky old guard with new faces; defied the RSS
strongmen in Gujarat as well as nationally; trounced the Shiv Sena ( which was secretly
backed by the RSS) in Maharashtra, and the traditional alliances in Haryana;
consolidated his administrative hold on more parts of India than ever before;
anointed himself maximum leader of SAARC without alienating Nepal, Bhutan,
Bangladesh and Sri Lanka; made the Chinese leadership sit up and pay attention
to a new India; sent out a message of modernity at BRICS; encouraged a beefing
up of business confidence by attracting $50 billion in less than three months
from Japan, China, and the US; tightened the screws on the bureaucracy; and
focused world attention as never before on India by getting Obama, the
president of the most powerful country in the world, to agree to come as chief
guest on Republic Day.
For the first time since India became
independent the world press will flock to India to cover Bharat’s Republic Day
parade. No mean achievement. But in my mind, Modi’s greatest achievement so
far, has been in picking up the broom and beginning to sweep India. Sure, it
was a symbolic gesture and one Modi broom does not a clean India make. But
you’ve got to start somewhere. You’ve got to send a message- something that
Nehru should have treated on par with inaugurating the Bhakra dam.
The important thing here is that Prime Minister
Modi, in his first year, practicing the art of the possible, has given
direction. His message has been one of hope rather than blame letting or
ideology. There is nothing unclear or opaque in whatever he has done.
His critics come from two directions: The Left
(including Rahul Gandhi’s Congress which has reinvented Socialism) and the
Lohiaites who pretend to stand for the oppressed masses (as against Modi who
supports the super-rich) and want Modi to pay for the sins of Gujarat 2002; and
the Right – the RSS swadeshi-wallahs and virulent Hindutva fanatics who preach
love jihad and ghar waapasi
(reconversion to the Hindu fold), and Ram Mandir rebuilding, and Ram-zaada versus Haraamzada hard right Hindu politics; declare all Indians the
children of Ram or, as Sushma Swaraj
decrees, making the Bhagwad Gita a “national book”. How many of them have even
read a word of the Upanishadas or the ancient shastras?
Both these groups want Modi to fail in order to
make a place for themselves: The Congress and various samajwadii groups because
they have been wiped out by a Modi-created wave that ushered in a strong
central government at the expense of family-led regional, castetist parties;
and the hard Right whose slogans and ideological lines Modi (once their pet child)
refused to espouse throughout his election campaign.
This common agenda
will succeed only to the extent that Modi will be deflected from his administrative and political goals of
modernizing the economy and creating jobs and loosening the nationally enervating ministerial and bureaucratic stranglehold
over entrepreneurial energy and human rights. Modi’s political acumen will be
tested by whether he wastes his energies
in firefighting these elements or preserves it to pursue the larger vision for
which he was elected and whose implementation will be his ultimate vindication
as a Gen Next Leader.
Is he weakening? Some
of his intellectual supporters think so. The inimitable sociologist-economist
Surjit Bhalla says: “Are (HRD Minister) Smiti Irani’s (decreeing compulsory
Sanskrit in schools) and Swaraj’s national book interrelated with the Hindutva
elements? If so, wasn’t Modi’s appeal meant to transcend such narrow
non-national fundamentalist agendas? How will Sanskrit and the national book
help provide education and/or create jobs for the poor?”
Bhalla adds that while
the PM seems to grasp what is required, the same cannot be said for the members
of his party, or the bureaucracy. Modi seems to have been captured by the
bureaucracy which is unfortunate and entirely unnecessary. Nor should he be
beholden to the narrow agendas of Hindutva or the RSS, says Bhalla.
Our own writers
elsewhere in this magazine in a section sub-headed “new-saffronism”, also dwell
at length on this issue. But there is a silver lining. Veteran journalist
Farzand Ahmed who spent the last fortnight in Ayodhya writes that the
majoritarian celebrations planned by VHP and other Hindutva activists to
celebrate December 6 to commemorate the demolition of the Babri Masjid failed
to evoke any response in Ayodhya and the town continued its life peacefully and
harmoniously.
Herein lies a lesson
for Modi. No matter what the ground level noise, no matter how much the media
and political provocation for him to get involved in the petty ground level
noises from the Left and Right, he must, as the nation’s Prime Minister, rise above them, stick solidly to the Rule of
Law, and keep marching ahead with his agenda of eliminating corruption, crony
capitalism, joblessness. His pursuit of his dream of a fast-modernizing India,
upward mobility, speedy delivery of justice, the pursuit of world excellence in
technology was what made him stand apart from the crowd – including his own
party – and helped put 2002 behind him during the last election. He can never
afford to forget that.
Nonetheless, writers
like Pankaj Mishra still believe that Modi represents Hindu revanchist and
supremacist ideas which are quintessentially anti-West: He wrote recently in
the New York Times:
“Narendra Modi, India’s new prime minister and main ideologue of the
Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, is stoking old Hindu rage-and-shame
over what he calls more than a thousand years of slavery under Muslim and
British rule. Earlier this month, while India and Pakistan were engaging in
their heaviest fighting in over a decade, Mr. Modi claimed that the ‘enemy’ was now ‘screaming.’
“Since
Mr. Naipaul defined it, the apocalyptic Indian imagination has been enriched by
the exploits of Hindu nationalists, such as the destruction in 1992 of the
16th-century Babri Masjid mosque, and the nuclear tests of 1998. Celebrating
the tests in speeches in the late 1990s, including one entitled Ek Aur
Mahabharata’ (One More Mahabharata), the then head of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh (the National Volunteers Association, or R.S.S), the parent outfit of
Hindu nationalists, claimed that Hindus, a ‘heroic, intelligent race,had so far
lacked proper weapons but were sure to prevail in the forthcoming showdown with
demonic anti-Hindus, a broad category that includes Americans (who apparently
best exemplify the worldwide ‘rise of inhumanity’).”
Pankaj Mishra overstates his case. He is a
master of hyperbole and tautology. Naipaul is a gifted, poetic writer but
guilty as hell about his non-Indianness despite his being of Indian origin.
These types have an exaggerated sense of identity with the mother country that
often turns into raging hatred and bitterness. To quote Naipaul on world
affairs is fine but to quote him on India and Indianness as being the Gospel is
like quoting a Dixie fundamentalist preacherman on the Tohra or Talmud. His
"Wounded Civilization" was no big shakes-- it talked about the Ugly
Indian, but so what? There was no depth to it. His "House for Mr
Biswas," and "The Return of Eva Peron" were masterpieces but had
very little to do with socio-political commentary on India.
Ironically, the country Modi really admires most is the US (don’t
forget who is coming for Republic Day !) because he is a fanatical believer in
US style upward mobility, entrepreneurship, and individual achievement. He also
considers America to be a religious nation. He admires America's inventiveness,
IT skills, scientific temper and businesslike approach to the world. He holds
out American post- and pre-Depression rags-to-riches-and-fame stories as
examples of his own life. He harbors no bitterness towards the US for denying
him a visa following the 2002 Gujarat riots when he was chief minister. Most
Gujaratis (Modi is a diehard Gujarati) are naturally inclined to be
pro-America. The Gujaratis who live in India as well as the huge Gujarati
diaspora in the West and the USA are the most powerful pro-American lobby to
influence the Indian government. They are wealthy. They are influential and they
drive the Indo-US commercial-business relationship. The Ambani family (India's
Rockefeller oil barons with the largest oil and telecom interests in the world)
are Gujaratis and pro-Modi and pro-US. The Ambani brothers graduated from
Wharton and have little time for the RSS khaki-shorts culture.
Modi himself traveled
extensively in the US in the 1990's imbibing and learning from the small
business ethics, efficiency and work culture of the Americans and he watched
with admiration how his fellow Gujaratis who had settled in the US as
businessmen and monopolized the motel industry had thrived.
Yes, Modi is
undoubtedly a diehard nationalist driven
by a messianic conviction in the power
of Hinduism to inspire the kind of nationalism that will drive Indians towards
greater nation-building and take pride in a new work ethic. In that sense he is
puritanical with a Calvinist zeal. But I doubt that he will succumb to or
become beholden to the exaggerated versions of Hindu nationalism to which
Mishra alludes. That kind of retrograde nationalism exists only in small
pockets in India and has no influence over most Indians. Modi may pay lip
service to it but he will neither practice it in his foreign policy nor adopt
it as his ideology.
All you have to do is
to watch the tapes of his four-day US visit. Twenty thousand Indians, a huge number of them Gujaratis, were
waving American and Indian flags and singing both national anthems. Did Modi's
lapping that up reflect even a hint of anti-Americanism? His appearance with a rock
group at New York’s Central Park the previous day, where he spoke admiringly of
the US and US youth and ended his speech with "May the Force Be With
You" hardly shows him as an America-phobe! In fact, Modi is more in tune
with the American ethos than with that of any other country. But he will not
follow American policies blindly because he is a strong nationalist with an
overwhelming electoral majority, and will doggedly pursue India's international
interests. If retrograde Hindu nationalism stands in the way of what Modi
considers to be rapid economic development, smaller and better governance, more
trade and exchanges with America, he will pursue the latter course.

Modi
is a strong opponent of traditions such as indifference to hygiene, fatalism,
caste restriction, which have been obstacles in India's march towards greater efficiency
and productivity. It is for this reason he admires China’s Deng as an innovator
and is not paranoid about Chinese
investment in India’s infrastructure. His nationalistic role model is post-war
Japan, fiercely devoted to nation-building, clinging to many traditions, addicted
to technology and innovative management.
He
would be courting national disaster and historical condemnation if he were to
allow anything similar to the Gujarat communal riots happen again in India
during his term. The test of his leadership as a non-nonsense pragmatist will lie in his political dexterity in
sidelining the forces – including retrograde “Hinduism” – which interfere with his larger development vision.
The alternative is to fester in the opprobrium of 2002.

No comments:
Post a Comment