India ‘Modi’fied

Statecraft

HAPPYMON JACOB

India has unequivocally voted Narendra Modi to be the county’s 14th Prime Minister with his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, securing a simple majority on its own, something that no political party managed to achieve in the last 30 years. Change was clearly coming, and it was even necessary, one way or another. Defeat of the Congress party is indicative of the maturity of Indian democracy, but the rise of the BJP takes the nation towards an uncertain future. The ruling congress party took us for granted and believed that our discomfort with communal politics was sufficient to defend against the Modi wave. More pertinently, it would be completely off the mark to even think that Modi’s victory shows that the people of India have voted in favour of Hindu Chauvinism. It might suit the Sangh Parivar to think so but they would be fundamentally mistaken in doing so. People have voted for change, development and coherent policies and Modi just happened to reap the benefit this vote. 

Even as I so dearly wanted the people of India to teach the Congress party a few lessons in humility, accountability and more importantly democracy, I am personally not elated by a Modi victory. But then democratic politics is about dealing with what you have, even though you might try and alter it. In a democracy, we do not have the choice of refusing to accept the people’s verdict. The only choice we have is to endavour to ensure that the new regime abides by the principles of democracy, secularism and equality, and that it does not take the country towards a future where we will be collectively worse off. 

What are some of the potential implications of Modi’s victory for the country?  Let me start with a positive note. One of the essential characteristics of power acquired through democratic means is that it tends to smoothen the ideological and sectarian rough edges of the power-holder and hence the Modi government might potentially realize the need to follow a more inclusive policy than a divisive one. Engaging in divisive politics could distract them from delivering on the promises made all these years primarily that of economic growth and development. So even though they may have come to power through the use of hate mongering, once in power it would be prudent for them to shun its use.

More importantly, whatever may be the personal likes and dislikes of Modi and the political persuasions of the Sangh Parivar, the fact remains that neither of them can simply wish away the reality that India is a multi-cultural, multi-religious and multi-national country and the diversity and differences are far too many to be done away with, unless of course they are prepared to vanish millions of people! 
On the question of BJP’s foreign policy, I have always held that India’s foreign policy, under normal circumstances, is only likely to be more coherent and purposeful under a rightwing government. A BJP-led government is more likely to pursue an economic agenda in its international relations and as a result one might even see improvements in Sino-Indian relations. But the real test would come when Modi sarkar will have to deal with crisis situations, especially with Pakistan. 

The real concern though is that of the past, of what happened to the thousands of hapless Muslims in Gujarat, of how in Modi’s Gujarat Muslims often feel as second class citizens. Can we forgive and forget this past and move on? Perhaps not. It is this burden of the past that will haunt the future of Mr. Modi, his government and us as a nation. And it is this past that should make us more vigilant and watchful so that we make sure that this country is not taken towards more communal disharmony in the name of growth and development. Indeed, we have a responsibility in doing so. We can either resign to our comfort zones blaming the electoral outcome and do nothing about it, or get out of our comforting ‘blame zones’ and keep up the vigil. 

While the BJP’s good showing in the elections preempts any potential use of excuses for misgovernance, such a free hand could also be used to fundamentally transform the country’s institutions and its national mindset. We did see the slow but steady penetration of right wing politics into the country’s institutions and political culture during the Vajpayee regime despite the fact that Vajpayee was a better, moderate statesman, and it was a coalition government. Institutions of higher learning and school curriculums were being affected and new university departments were being set up to further the rightwing agenda of the Sangh. If this happened under those far more constraining conditions, this will be a certainty under the less constraining conditions in which Modi Sarkar would be functioning. 

In short, it would not be out of place to say that Modi’s victory may not be bad news for India’s foreign policy ‘under normal circumstances’, but his assumption to power may not be great news for the country’s domestic politics, communal relations, subaltern assertions, and empowerment of its minorities. But then, in the life of a nation, its domestic politics clearly takes precedence over its foreign relations.

(Source: Greater Kashmir, May 18, 2014. URL: http://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/2014/May/18/india-modi-fied-11.asp)