Archive for December, 2011

2011: Anna Domini

December 27th, 2011

http://im.rediff.com/uim/news/sai.jpgIn
1911, when Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was perfecting his Passive Resistance
movement in South Africa against the apartheid regime, which he later
successively deployed against the British colonial power in India as Satyagraha,
little could he have imagined that 100 years later, an old man wearing his
trademark topi would employ the very
same tactic against the party he forged into an instrument of Indian
independence.

 

Was
it then, and is it now, merely a case of cometh the hour, cometh the man? Was
the situation ripe, in 1911 and 2011, for the emergence of a symbol of
resistance against an effete government, which both Gandhi and Hazare seized?

 

In
Gandhi’s case, we have the advantage of hindsight stretching over 100 years. In
Hazare’s it’s but a mere year.

 

And
what a year it has been!

 

No
moment in history is a standalone; events are but a cascade, each running into
the other, impelling and influencing the flow. It could hit a plateau and peter
out, or continue its frolic till the very end.

 

The
events of 2011 were influenced by last year’s misrule, and as the present one
comes to a close there is no sign of the torrent slowing down. Lessons that
ought to have been learnt were ignored, actions that should have been taken
were swept aside, making one wonder at times if there was a government at all
in place. All it had was a prime minister who doesn’t enjoy his party’s
confidence; a party president who has no views on anything; an heir apparent
who doesn’t enjoy the title.

 

If
that was the United Progressive Alliance, which in 2011 showed little evidence
of being either united or progressive and at times even behaved like a
misalliance, the Opposition’s lot was no better. That the public’s trust and
faith in the government were whittling had been evident for a while. Normally
this should have been manna from heaven for the Opposition, but so badly was it
caught napping that into this vacant space marched Anna Hazare and his merry
men and one woman.

 

If
you really think about it, Dr Manmohan Singh’s government has done more for
transparency than any other government before it. And if you think about it deeply,
you will also realise that this government has the rare distinction of having
at least one honest person in it.

 

But
what happens very often is that the forces of change, the forces of
expectations that get unleashed push the bar so high that the very agents of change
are often consumed by it, as Mikhail Gorbachev would testify. This force is the
wind behind the Jasmine Revolution/Arab Spring that is toppling regimes in its
wake.

 

If
Tunisia to Libya showed that there was no such thing as a
little democracy, it was either all or nothing, India’s own experience in 2011 shows
that even democracy, which warts and all remains the best form of governance in
all of human history, has its shortcomings.

 

In
many ways, UPA the sequel is different from its first avatar in 2004. When it
went to the people for a re-election on the plank of the aam aadmi and transparency and asked for freedom from the Left’s
tyranny, it had the MGNREGS and the RTI as showpieces to back its claim. The
people believed in its claims, and 2009 came about.

 

Alas,
since that summer two years ago, there has been little evidence of either the aam aadmi or transparency in the
government’s thought and deed. On the contrary, the RTI has been seen to be a
double-edged sword that can equally be wielded against its creator; and the aam aadmi has been buried in homilies in
the face of a raging inflation. And corruption only completed the tragedy.

 

That
the people were angry was known, but the government didn’t take it seriously
enough.

 

That
the people were hungry was also known, but the government couldn’t care less,
or at least that was the attitude shown by its arrogant ministers.

 

The
results from the West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Bihar
elections should have sounded a warning but it was lost in the babel that is
the UPA. In the first two states the people threw out an entrenched
maladministration, while in the third performance and sincerity were resoundingly
rewarded.

 

What,
me worry? That must have been the UPA’s motto as it saw its principle
opposition, the Bharatiya Janata Party, go through its myriad convulsions over
the question of who will be the next prime minister – the party not only behaving
that the UPA’s days were over but also like it had already won an election slated
for 2014.

 

The
first sign of civil disobedience came in the form of a saffron-clad yoga guru.
As the televangelist yogi’s hunger strike gathered crowds, the government
initially seemed to prefer kid gloves before revealing its iron fist. That it
could get away with the use of brute force in the wee hours against a peaceful
crowd, in which one protestor was even killed, should have emboldened the
administration when Anna Hazare stepped up to the plate.

 

Hazare,
after all, doesn’t even have a base to speak of even in his home state of Maharashtra (as evidenced by the recent elections to
local bodies, in which his target Sharad Pawar’s Nationalist Congress Party
came up trumps).

 

However,
six months later, it is the UPA that is on its knees before an old man who,
like Gandhi, is not a politician.

 

Will
the Lokpal, that Hazare and his India Against Corruption colleagues like Arvind
Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan and Kiran Bedi have been demanding of the UPA,
change things for the better?

 

The
jury is out and probably will never return on that one. But one doesn’t need to
be an Einstein to see that creating a new superset of bureaucracy is not the
best way to eliminate corruption by the existing bureaucracy, that there is no
dearth of laws outlawing misdemeanour in India, what has been lacking is the
will to implement them.

 

The
source of the mass anger against the government, and all politicians, is not over
the presence or absence of a Lokpal, but against a callous government that has
forgotten the people who voted it to power. You can pull out rabbits like FDI
in retail and Food Security Act from the hat, but that still won’t make you a
magician. What this government lacks is magic, which is different from sleight
of hand which has been in abundant evidence.

 

As Annus Horribilis ends with a whimper, the
tantalising question is: In its 100th anniversary as the capital of
colonial India, will Delhi become the
graveyard of yet another dynasty?

Dr Singh: What next?

December 8th, 2011


http://im.rediff.com/uim/news/sai.jpgWhen governments feel the ground shifting under their feet, they resort to diversionary tactics. Dr Manmohan Singh’s government is faced with a groundswell against it – and not all of it is online. In fact, the vituperation against it online – which has forced Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal to advocate curbs on it – is but a reflection of the popular disenchantment with the United Progressive Alliance II.


 


Which, if you go back to the heady days of May-June 2009, needn’t have come to this sorry pass. Why did it, is a question the presiding triumvirate in the establishment can best answer; hacks like me can at best read the portents and offer opinions.


 


If Verdict 2004 was a surprise one, so was Choice 2004. Dr Singh, pulled out of relative obscurity and promoted to the top job in the country not for any stellar administrative quality but solely for his unflinching loyalty to the Family, had every reason to be beholden for the same.


 


But Verdict 2009 was different. Was the Congress’s and UPA’s improved showing in the hustings solely due to the Family’s charisma, or did the administration provided and policies pursued by the prime minister – no doubt with a nod from his political boss – play a role in the victory?


 


When you win unexpectedly for the first time, you can be magnanimous in sharing the credit. But a re-election is a different affair; the first could be the result of a negative vote against the existing regime. The second is a clear endorsement and a positive vote. Which is why the Indian voter has been so miserly about voting in the incumbent, because there is so little around him for him to be positive about.


 


The crisis in the UPA II goes back to its inception, Verdict 2009. And it will end only when this issue – whose victory was it, the party’s or the government’s? — is settled. Tied to this question is the prime ministership of India.


 


In a democracy there will always be friction between the government and the ruling party and the bosses are expected to paper over the differences, smoothe things out. When Indira Gandhi fashioned her own version of the Congress party from the one that led to India’s freedom, she saw the faultline for what it was: a potential earthquake. Her solution was undemocratic, a mirror image of herself as she had become: retain both the prime ministership and party presidency.


 


If she who grew up in the lap of the Founding Fathers that lived and breathed democracy could shrink the tradition to personal hagiography, it hasn’t been a difficult transformation for her followers.


 


Sonia Gandhi’s Congress party is caught in this dilemma. It believes that she who led the party to electoral triumph should also be the prime minister. If not, one of her children.


 


Sensing disquiet over her ascension to the top job, she has chosen to rule by proxy. But the crisis for the Congress party is that neither does her son Rahul, who has been leading a party revival campaign, show any inclination to replace the incumbent prime minister.


 


In effect, how this percolates down to the rank and file is that there is a disconnect between the party’s programmes and the government’s, because they are led by two different people.


 


In effect, how this percolates down to the public is that there is a governance paralysis, manifesting itself in different ways – from inability to control inflation to drift in economy to indecisiveness on policy matters to unwillingness to curb corruption.


 


Popular disenchantment from all this could still have been kept under check but for humongous corruption which, if not in truth then at least in public perception has left hardly anyone untouched in the Union Cabinet. Corollary flowing from this: Of what use is an honest prime minister who cannot do anything about his corrupt ministers?


 


Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is not a political animal – which is why he does not fight the Lok Sabha elections.


 


Unfortunately for him, the prime ministership of India is a political job. Political issues need political solutions, not administrative solutions which are Dr Singh’s KRA.


 


And, it seems under UPA II, political solutions are not the Congress party bosses’ forte either.


 


The popular disenchantment against UPA II, which denied it its customary honeymoon period with the voters, could have been better and easily handled but wasn’t. Drowned in their own smugness about winning a re-election, and beguiled by the disarray in its principal opposition the Bharatiya Janata Party, both the Congress party and the government slept, unaware of the ground shifting under their feet.


 


It’s happened before in this ancient land.


 


The British didn’t take the challenge of a ‘half-naked fakir’ seriously till it was too late.


 


The politically astute Indira Gandhi, blinded by maternal love, saw in the Jayaprakash Narayan whirlwind a benign summer breeze.


 


And Anna Hazare, whose worldview extends to all of a remote village in Maharashtra that not many Indians have even heard of, is poised to do the same to UPA II. Interestingly, none of the three saw/see a political role for themselves.


 


Faced with a challenge to their existence, one would expect the government and party to act as one. But the disconnect between the two shows no sign of ending.


 


The government thinks it can deflect the challenge by diversionary tactics. So you have a political hot potato decision like foreign direct investment in retail trade taken when Parliament is in session, a decision which may benefit the government but not the party which stayed put in the barracks during the battle over it.


 


As the FDI in retail trade showed, the government finds not just the Opposition ranged against it, not just its own party – but also its allies.


 


Dr Manmohan Singh is thus besieged on all sides.


 


His biggest misstep has been on FDI in retail. To break the perception that his government was paralysed, he chose an explosive issue – just as he did in his first term with the India-United States nuclear deal. As then, he expected to come out guns blazing in Parliament once again.


 


Unfortunately for him, the script didn’t play out that way. If he was a Bollywood buff – which he isn’t – he would know that sequels work only in films, not in life – and certainly not in politics.


 


Retreat 2011 has finally settled the question over Verdict 2011. If there are doubts still lingering in the mind of the prime minister, he should make way for someone more in tune with his party boss.


 

If not, he should get down to real governance. He can start by having the numerous clowns in his court shut up.

2011  |  A Rediff.com India Ltd. Site.