There is widespread consensus that farm distress, rampant unemployment, rising inequality and Agnipath scheme are the overarching issues that dominate the narrative of the Haryana Assembly elections. Political observers, on-ground reports, and commentators have said that these issues will also crowd out the conventional caste calculations in the state. Even though this assertion is a bit far-fetched when you closely examine the list of the candidates of various political parties, nonetheless, there is tremendous anti-incumbency on the ground against the BJP.
A deeper look at the factors affecting the Haryana elections, however, reveal that not just rural issues, urban neglect and poor infrastructure issues would also determine the outcome. This is important, because much of the media space has been consumed in covering spill over issues from the Lok Sabha elections in the rural paradigm.
The Congress won 46 Assembly segments in the Lok Sabha elections, but 44 segments were also won by the BJP. The Congress swept rural Haryana, but the BJP retained its conventional urban foothold in more than 20 urban and semi-urban seats including Gurugram, Faridabad, Karnal, Hisar, Sonepat and Badshahpur segments, while the Congress made an impressive comeback in Rohtak, Sirsa and Kurukshetra. In the ongoing Haryana elections, the Congress should take respite from the fact that BJP won 79 out of 90 Assembly segments in 2019 Lok Sabha elections, but few months down the line, reduced its tally to just 40 seats, and was forced to form an alliance government in the state, due to massive anti-incumbency.
This anti-incumbency has only peaked now in 2024. One of the understated reasons is widespread urban degradation in Haryana, lack of infrastructure, rising inequality, inflation, shutting down industries, low growth and investment, and unprecedented unemployment even in rural centres.
A microcosm of what is wrong in Haryana’s degrading urban landscape is Gurugram — the famed millennial city, where the per capita income of the city’s residents can easily be contrasted with the atrociously sliding public amenities in the city. Water logging has become a permanent fixture in the city, cave-like potholes is a menace on its roads and unpicked garbage remains strewn at street corners. Power cuts in posh Gurugram colonies and apartment are largely unnoticed because of the elite population, but in builder floors where most of the lower middle class resides, 3-4 hours of power cuts have become a routine. Water scarcity is all pervasive during the summer months, and Gurugram water tanker mafia indulges in rent seeking through surge pricing, making it impossible to adhere to BJP’s promise of “Ease of Living”! It is ironic that in 2022, the then CM claimed that Gurugram wasn’t included in the smart city list because they aimed to develop it into the “smartest city”!
Failed promises on the infrastructure front have hurt, the once vibrant state’s economy. After 10 years of economic surge under the Congress, the aspirations for “Number 1 Haryana” – a political slogan coined by the party, remained sky high, only to be disappointed by the BJP’s apathy in the last decade. There is an underlying sentiment that Haryana could have grown at a much faster speed, given its proximity to Delhi-NCR.
In the last 10 years, the BJP government in Haryana has failed to establish a single power plant. In 2024, the state faced a massive electricity shortage of over 1000 MW. Instead of planning ahead, the government is now buying power from the exchange at a very high rate of Rs 10 per unit, compared to the usual rate of Rs 2 to Rs 8 per unit for consumers. BJP had promised that the metro rail line from Gurugram would be extended to Bahadurgarh and Sonepat but even after a decade, there has been virtually no progress. The promised elevated rail corridor has failed to take off in Rohtak, while the work for the new railway lines connecting Jind-Hansi and Yamunanagar-Karnal has not commenced. The Delhi-Sonepat-Panipat Rapid Rail Transit System (RRTS) have not been sanctioned, while Haryana Orbital Rail Corridor connecting Palwal to Sonepat is moving at a slow pace. BJP also promised an international airport in Hisar, but apart from the runway inauguration, other projects of the airport are pending. Out of the top 100 polluted cities in India, 15 belong to Haryana. These examples are just the tip of the iceberg, of how the BJP has failed the state’s infrastructure development, even though they had a ‘double-engine government’!
Critics might point out that Haryana’s economy is still thriving, but the reality is between 2004-05 to 2013-14, the average annual growth (GSDP) of the state at constant prices was 8.5 per cent and dropped to 6.8 per cent between 2011-12 to 2022-23. Correspondingly, the per capita income of the state increased by 251.4 per cent during Congress regime, while the same dropped to 179.7 per cent during BJP rule.
Indeed, rural issues form the meta-narrative in Haryana, but urban degradation should not be overlooked. Psephologists are predicting a landslide victory for the Congress party in Haryana, but this majority cannot be achieved if urban Haryana continues its convention of being committed to the BJP. For both the parties, it is a battle to snatch away the traditional voter pie from either side – be it caste calculations or the rural-urban political divide.
The proposal of ‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE), approved recently by the Union Cabinet raises important questions on the encroachment on India’s federal polity. There is a reason why our Constitution makers had enlisted some separate powers to the states under the seventh schedule. ONOE virtually disregards these powers, proposes the hegemony of the Union, destroys the gains made in our evolving federalism over recent decades and brazenly violates Article 1 of the Constitution which states “India, that is, Bharat, is a Union of States”. It also disenfranchises our local self-government structure, formed by the 73rd and 74th Amendments, at its adolescent stage, reverses the limited gains made and snatches their voice.
The Constitution of India adopted a unique model of ‘federalism’, often referred to as ‘centralised federalism’ has uniquely evolved over the past seven decades, deepening democracy. Initially, India had a two-tier government, but since the 90s, a three-tier system has been in place, incorporating local self-government through Urban Local Bodies and Panchayats. The report on ONOE presses on the need for synchronization of all elections – State, Municipal, and Panchayats with the Lok Sabha elections. The suggested two-phase approach involves simultaneous elections for the House of People and State Legislative Assemblies, followed by Municipalities and Panchayats elections within 100 days. This is a disaster in making for India’s Federalism, which has been strengthened over the years.
According to the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), simultaneous elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha have resulted in similar voting patterns, with major parties polling almost identical proportions of votes in 24 out of 31 instances since 1989. This suggests that the dominant national party at the Union level has an advantage in state elections as well. This highlights the potential influence of national parties on state-level elections when held concurrently with Lok Sabha elections.
Apart from these, there are two fresh reasons, based on the published HLC report, which points out that the federal spirit of our democratic process would be eclipsed.
First, it has a risk of making the State and local elections irrelevant, for national issues will tend to crowd out regional and local issues. Important issues in Assembly Elections gain national focus, through relentless media coverage, which gives the requisite perspective to people residing in other non-election-going states, about important regional issues, which may be similar to the issues in their own states. For instance, it is widely analysed that the Maratha agitation in Maharashtra for reservation is similar to the Patidar agitation for the same in Gujarat, and vice versa. Another instance is the Mhadei river conflict between Goa and Karnataka, which is played out in both states to varying degrees during state elections. Imagine, if these local issues are pushed to the periphery, by the high-decibel national issues, due to ONOE – who will lose out? The states.
And what would be the nature of discourse for the Municipal and Panchayat elections, if they are held simultaneously? No one will even speak about garbage disposal, pot-hole free roads or clean water! ONOE shall eventually also subsume the special Constitutional provisions of Autonomous Hill Development Councils/Development Councils in the Himalayan region states and the Northeast. This would be a travesty of decentralization.
Instead of putting the onus on the Prime Minister and the Union Council of Ministers who have started this new convention of vigorously campaigning in the state elections, thereby voluntarily losing time in developmental decision-making, the ONOE proposal sought to penalize the state government, regional parties and smaller local parties for they will be overshadowed by the high voltage national campaign.
Second, the HLC report proposes that in case a government is dissolved before completing its full term, a mid-term election should be held to establish a new government that will only serve for the remainder of the original term, not a full five-year term. This would often apply to states, which implies that the state will have to suffer the consequences simply because the Union wants a synchronized election. Moreover, it defeats the primary argument by the supporters of ONOE, that there would be lesser elections. We have witnessed in the recent past how the ruling party in the Union has used the lure of power, money, and threats of central investigative agencies to form their governments through the backdoor by dividing parties, particularly regional parties. Instead of reforming the Anti-Defection Law, of 1985, the ruling party is hell-bent on creating more such avenues to usurp power from a regional party, so that there is no mid-term election for a shorter period of term, in the state.
It is high time that our polity understands the depth and gravity of the ONOE proposal and rejects it to save the voice of India’s unique federal matrix.
Rachit Seth is the founder of ‘Policy Briefcase’. The views expressed are personal. He tweets at @rachitseth.
The July 23 Budget speech will be a litmus test on whether the BJP will change its policy at the Centre as well or will it take the requisite road to reform and fiscal consolidation
The diminished political capital of the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP), after the Lok Sabha elections has forced it to tone down its rhetoric on the ‘freebie culture’ aka revdi, as infamously christened by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Will the forthcoming Union Budget 2024-2025 reflect that policy change, just like it was visible in the recent announcements by its coalition government in Maharashtra, or will the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government resist the temptation to splurge? Will it bite the welfare bullet, or will the government at the Centre open the floodgates to keep its allies — the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and the Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)) — happy?
Both 2024 and 2025 are crucial election years. There are four Assembly elections in 2024 — Maharashtra, Haryana, Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir, and all are critical for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Then there are elections in Bihar and Delhi,in which the BJP fancies its chances to have a serious claim to power.
The Lok Sabha election results have forced the BJP to adopt an attitude towards welfare spending which is more akin to that of the Congress. Given that the five NYAY-25 guarantee agenda of the Congress gained some traction among certain sections like the youth, farmers, and women, the BJP-ruled states have unveiled a series of welfare measures aimed at wooing the voters ahead of the crucial Assembly polls.
The Maharashtra government announced a monthly allowance of ₹1,500 for women and three free cooking gas cylinders for poor households, among other benefits. Madhya Pradesh introduced a Budget that promises increased spending on agriculture, free hearse services for poor families, and increased funding for cow sheds. Similarly, Rajasthan’s BJP government increased the annual PM-KISAN disbursement to ₹8,000, benefiting nearly 7 million farmers. Haryana’s BJP government announced free bus rides for the poor, plots for backward communities, and special recruitment drives. This is in direct contravention to Modi’s repeated opposition to the ‘Revdi’ culture!
The July 23 Budget speech will be a litmus test on whether the BJP will change its policy at the Centre as well or will it take the requisite road to reform and fiscal consolidation.A snapshot of the spending on central schemes pegs spending that could be termed as ‘revdi’ at ₹5.8 lakh-crore or 12% of the total spending. This includes — ₹2 lakh-crore on food subsidy and free food grains transfer to 800 million beneficiaries, ₹ 60,000 crore on PM Kisan Samman Nidhi, ₹1,64,000 crore on fertiliser subsidy, and ₹ 75,021 crore on the newly announced PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana, among other smaller schemes such as LED bulb distribution, income support scheme to farmers through cash transfers, and LPG subsidy (reduced price of domestic LPG cylinder few months before the elections).
The fact remains that the June 4 results were a resounding rebuke to the BJP policies which deepened economic inequality. It was a clear rejection of the manner of governance that sought to centralise, control, bulldoze, and even impinge upon the ethos of the Constitution.
Economics and politics cannot be seen in isolation. When the Congress promised ‘guarantees’ such as cash assistance, free LPG cylinders, and free bus rides for women ahead during the Karnataka elections, Modi said, “A country cannot be run like this…revdi culture is essentially eating away the resources of future generations. The BJP thinks for the next 25 years and doesn’t take shortcuts.”
Even before the Karnataka elections got over, in March, the Congress announced Rs 1,500 cash transfer for poor women in Madhya Pradesh. Following this the BJP government in the state also announced the same in June. But since the BJP was in power, its Ladli Behna Yojana could be implemented, which resulted in the BJP retaining power in the state, and the scheme being credited for its return. Similarly, in the Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan elections, the BJP was for forced to announce LPG cylinders for Rs 500, and financial assistance to married women and landless agricultural labourers. Now the announcements in Maharashtra and Haryana, and the adoption of this ‘Congress model’ have dented Modi’s claims of not taking shortcuts.
For the Union Budget, Modi will try to project that his government, albeit now a coalition, is following ‘business as usual’; that it is reform-oriented and works on fiscal prudence.
The only window of opportunity for large-scale spending would be the augmented dividends of ₹2.11 lakh-crore provided by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). But the demands for special status and targeted packages by the TDP and the JD(U), along with the electoral pressure to provide aid to farmers, may puncture BJP’s economic conservatism.
The fact is, no government in India, can indulge in ignoring welfare programmes enshrined in the Constitution, as part of the Direct Principles of State Policy. The BJP has started a course correction in following the path of welfarism as seen in several BJP-ruled states. The Union Budget will show if the party has adopted the same stance at the national level.
Do the schemes proposed in the Budget pass the litmus test of sound policymaking, beneficial for both the private sector and our youth?
Apprenticeship and skill training, not mere internships, can solve part of the job crisis staring India. We require a generation of workforce with a particular usable skill set for the private sector to boost value addition. We have too many students in degree programmes that do not lead to marketable skills that can be useful for any business.
The Union Budget 2024-2025 proposes five ’employment-linked incentive’ schemes for the private sector, aiming to create 4.1 crore jobs. The reality, however, is that most of these schemes are internship programmes, which even on paper look like exploratory experiences enhancing academic learning, rather than any long-term apprenticeship, which is on-the-job training, resulting in higher skills, better pay and long-term economic security. These piecemeal interventions may not benefit the private sector, including manufacturing and services.
Do the schemes proposed in the Budget pass the litmus test of sound policymaking, beneficial for both the private sector and our youth? Take, for instance, the scheme ‘for providing internship opportunities in 500 top companies to 1 crore youth in 5 years’. The Budget Speech reads that “an internship allowance of Rs 5,000 per month along with a one-time assistance of Rs 6,000 will be provided. Companies will be expected to bear the training cost and 10 per cent of the internship cost from their CSR funds”.
As of FY2023, India’s top BSE 500 companies employ about 67.4 lakh people. The Budget proposes 1 crore interns to be absorbed in these companies in five years. That implies that each company is supposed to hire 4,000 interns per year, which turns out that each company will have a total of 13,480 original employees and 4,000 interns on average. Assuming that before the volunteering for the scheme, the company had some interns as well, the total number of interns in the company would be about 25 per cent of its strength. This is a huge number of interns. Do the companies have the absorption capacity for such a large number, especially when recent data tells us that companies are now averse to taking up interns for odd jobs?
In 2024, according to a Deloitte report, while pre-placement offers saw an annual drop of 26 per cent. Complementing it, campus hiring budgets saw a 33 per cent drop in the past year. This means, the private sector prefers employees with a definite skill set and is not looking for interns or freshers.
India’s seven largest employers, comprising TCS, Infosys, Wipro, HCL Tech, Coal India, State Bank of India, and HDFC Bank, in FY2024, collectively, increased their workforce by a modest 45,000, indicating a relatively slow hiring pace.t’s unlikely that they would consider hiring interns when they are simultaneously laying off experienced employees. Why would the private sector use a centralised government portal, and engage with the State, to hire low-skilled interns? Additionally, the paperwork and compliance of the subsidy payments are also daunting to many. There are three solutions to this problem. First, the long-term solution is to unleash the set of impending reforms in labour, agriculture, finance, manufacturing and green sectors, and restructure State power to foster an environment that encourages private investment in India, unlocking boundless growth opportunities.
Second, implement innovative apprenticeship programmes. To encourage more youth in skill and vocational training, conditional cash transfers in the form of redeemable vouchers are an idea. The government can reimburse anybody who develops a certain skill certified by a relevant assessment agency. This has been rather successfully implemented in Kenya. It is transparent, stops leakages, and encourages meritocracy. It is important to underline that even though 78 per cent of India’s 15,000 ITI’s are owned and managed by the private sector, their seat utilisation rate is just 43 per cent, lower than the government’s 57 per cent.
The third option is for the State to consider, given it is ready to dole out a combined expenditure of Rs 2 lakh-crore for interns and freshers. The current outlay for employee compensation is 12 per cent of the total spending and there are about 49.18 lakh Union government employees, which means that the government spends approximately 11 lakh per annum on each employee. For a government that has been unable to create a conducive environment to increase private investment, and thereby value-added employment, it can easily fill about 18 lakh permanent government jobs with the proposed outlay of Rs 2 lakh-crore.
It is important to note that there are 10 lakh vacancies in the Union government. So, by spending Rs 2 lakh-crore, in five years, 18 lakh government jobs can be created, which includes reserved categories like the SCs, STs, OBCs, and EWS. Where there is a will, there is a way.
Modi government is hell-bent to adopt protectionism, trade barriers, Licence Raj, import substitution and inward-looking policies, all in the name of promoting manufacturing.
The Modi government’s midnight decision to introduce a Licence for the import of laptops, tablets, personal computers, and servers will not only revive ‘Licence Raj’, but it is also a tacit admission that the PLI Scheme has failed to deliver. It is also an assault on a large number of lower and middle-income consumers, including students, who had taken to digital learning, especially in the post-pandemic era. Digital India will suffer.
First things first. India needs a vibrant manufacturing sector to thrive. Since 2014, the output of India’s manufacturing sector has dipped from 15% to 13%. Although India stands at sixth position in the global ranking of countries in the manufacturing sector, yet its market share is just 3% of the total manufacturing, while China’s share is about 28%. Even though India’s services sector is its growth engine, in the post-pandemic era, it is imperative for India to fire all its engines of growth. Therefore, manufacturing, agriculture and urbanization cannot be ignored and must be emphasized too.
However, the question is what is the mechanism to spur the manufacturing sector? Is it protectionism, or it is creating a holistic environment which enables private entities to set up manufacturing units? Access to land, better regulatory clearances, easy compliances, reducing red tape, transparent practices which forgo rent-seeking, access to technology and emphasis on greener and cleaner energy infrastructure could be some of the vital factors to encourage this sector. India does not have a dearth of labour – both skilled and semi-skilled, and a large number of people would be given better opportunities through manufacturing.
Surprisingly, the Modi government is doing the opposite. It has a two-pronged strategy of crony capitalism and protectionism. No Indian will oppose ‘Aatmnirbhar Bharat’ or ‘Make in India’ – but there is a wide wedge between these high voltage campaigns propagated by the present government and the actual implementation.
The biggest example of this approach is the apparent failure of the PLI scheme (introduced in 2020) which is targeted at a motley group of 14 sectors, mostly big industries, chosen without any clear criteria, which provides subsidies to finished goods in India. The chosen sectors are big-ticket, large industries that have the potential to crowd out MSMEs. They create lesser jobs than MSMEs.
Former RBI Governor demonstrated in a recent paper that the PLI Scheme does not add to the manufacturing output. Giving an example of mobile phone exports and imports, Rajan’s paper reflected on how PLI Scheme is only subsidizing the assembling of mobile phones in India, but not the elements used to make it – semiconductors, PCBA, displays, Li-ion batteries, battery chargers, and cameras.
Is the PLI Scheme a panacea for Indian manufacturing and the creation of jobs? Despite the government’s over-the-top claims, the PLI scheme does not seem to garner the desired results. The PLI scheme provides a subsidy ranging from 4% to 6% on the value of the additional production the investing firms generate. Till March 2023, 733 applications were approved in 14 sectors with an expected investment of Rs 3.65 lakh crore. However, the actual investment of just Rs 62,500 crore has been realized till March 2023. This is just a measly 1.7% of the expected investment under the scheme. It is important to note that the government’s incentive outlay in the form of subsidies and tax incentives is Rs. 1.97 lakh crore for the scheme, which is almost 1% of the GDP.
In June 2023, the Modi government notified the PLI scheme for IT hardware 2.0 after it was held up for more than two years. The government had to initially scrap the scheme in 2021 after it received no bids from global giants, who had issues with the investment requirements of the scheme. The reason for the introduction of Licences for the import of laptops, tablets, personal computers and servers is that big manufacturing companies like Apple, Samsung, Acer etc. did not show any interest in setting up manufacturing units here in India, using the PLI scheme.
The Modi government’s trade policy is another problem. It is inward-looking and is based on pre-liberalisation import controls. According to the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Tariff Profile 2022, India has one of the highest average tariffs of 18.3% in the Asia-Pacific region.
Successive governments in the past two decades have been following a consistent policy of reducing import duty, but the Modi government in a calibrated departure has changed the policy on its head by hiking tariffs in well over 500 major item categories since 2016. Shockingly, between 2016 and 2022, more than 3,000 tariff increases by the present government have affected 70% of India’s imports.
High import duties for India also mean a loss of exports by making them uncompetitive. A large portion of India’s exports is contingent on its imports. The long-term impact of introducing trade barriers is inefficiency in domestic manufacturing and lower quality of goods production.
India has been negotiating several bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTA) since 2004. In fact, under Dr Manmohan Singh India signed 11 Trade Agreements, but under the Modi government, they have only progressed on trade agreements with Saudi Arabia, U.K and Australia – which are still a work in progress. In 2019, the present government did not enter the multilateral Asian free trade agreement – Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
Protectionism, trade barriers, Licence Raj, import substitution and inward-looking policies have way passed their expiry date. The present government’s departure from a well-established post-liberalisation policy may well be following the post-pandemic global trend, but the sting in the tail is that these polices were started by them well before the pandemic stuck.
Not only it is detrimental to the Panchayati Raj system, the argument that it would lead to better governance rings hollow.
Inches and inches of column space have been utilized in newspaper opinion pages on the ongoing debate about ‘One Nation, One Election’. Simultaneous elections to the Union, States, and Local Bodies shall demolish not only federalism but also the very functioning of our Panchayats and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). It will end whatever basic autonomy and power they possess currently.
‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE) is not only a direct assault on federalism, which is a part of the basic structure (better term is framework!) of the Constitution, but also an instrument to squeeze out the little authority provided to our Panchayats and elected members of the Urban Local Bodies.
The terms and reference of the recent committee formed by the Union Government on ONOE explicitly state that it must “examine and make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections to the House of the People (Lok Sabha), State Legislative Assemblies, Municipalities and Panchayats”.
The last two tiers – Municipalities and Panchayats have been conveniently erased in the present public discourse, even though they may be the key to understanding why simultaneous elections would be detrimental to Parliamentary Democracy.
India elects 543 Lok Sabha members, more than 4100 MLAs, the MLAs also elect around 245 Rajya Sabha members. More importantly, we elect 89,194 representatives to urban wards and 31.89 lakh elected panchayat representatives spread across three tiers of the Panchayat system – Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad. MPs and MLAs together elect the President of India too.
With ONOE in place, the limited three-tier system, which India has painstakingly developed at the grassroots, would be in jeopardy. A huge number of representatives in this system serve the interests of the people they get elected from, in a highly localized manner. Infact, there is a view in political parlance that Gram Sabha members have more power than MLAs. Take an urban example, for instance, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi has a garbage disposal or parking space as a core issue in its election. People vote for that. But if ONOE takes place, national or state issues will be overarching and the discourse about parking or garbage disposal shall get crowded out.
Similarly, there is enough empirical evidence that Indians vote differently in Assembly Elections and Lok Sabha elections. This is primarily because the issues at the State level are regional and more local – road, water, housing, electricity, law and order, health and education; than the issues at the national level – economy, national security, foreign policy, trade et al. What ONOE aims to do is to encroach on the regional, state-level, localized discourse during an election campaign and consume the voter with these mega issues, thus leaving very little ground for community-level issues to hold water.
There is a reason why political parties prepare State-level manifestos. Those manifestos will now be overshadowed by national-level narratives. If the candidates in Assembly Elections, even if they belong to national parties, want to raise important provincial issues or sub-regional issues, then the national parties would continue to force their ‘nationwide’ uniform agenda down their throats. This is not in the spirit of cooperative federalism or ‘Team India’, which is being propagated by the current regime.
Let it be very clear, the Union holds the states together. No one is saying that national issues are of lesser importance; the issue here is that economic, social, and political issues of states are equally important, for they are the ones who implement most programs and schemes of the Union.
Supporters of ONOE primarily point out that the mechanism enables the government to concentrate on governance once the elections are over. This is a superficial argument. In a situation, where the voters would hardly know about the localized issues at Panchayat or State level, and would only be forced to form an opinion on national issues, would there be an informed debate on how to solve those local issues? Will they be able to vote on local issues? Once there is no opinion, there wouldn’t be any accountability for implementation. In a vibrant, albeit chaotic Democracy, such as ours, there are ways and means to create debates on local and state issues. If these issues do not get prominence, then whatever leeway the supporters of ONOE imagine, in the case of governance, is hollow.
Voters are the biggest stakeholders in any election. If the voters do not discuss issues, if representatives do not get prominence in highlighting those issues, there wouldn’t be any informed decision-making while casting the vote. Then, one should forget about any accountability from the incumbent at the implementation stage too. ONOE, therefore, wants to subsume Democracy at the local level with a broad stroke of uniformity.
Cynics might point out that in India, local elections are hardly issue-based, especially for Panchayats and ULBs. They are mostly dependent on caste combinations, muscle, and money power, or the influence of the ruling party in the State. Let us concede that argument for a moment. Yes, our weakest political unit still remains the Panchayats and ULBs in terms of devolution of power, but that is a function of electoral reforms. ONOE is not the solution to overcome that.
But what about the States? Over the years, India’s federal system has become more decentralised and stronger. There was a time when two-thirds of India’s districts did not even have a proper administration. In the last 25 years, that has considerable changed. Post Liberalisation, there has been a remarkable change in how we govern our states, because now we have more funds, and states now have more to do in terms of welfare-oriented governance. If the devolution of power has taken place from Union to the States, then certainly it can take place, although gradually, from States to the grassroots bodies.
Likewise, recent elections have also seen, caste-based social cleavages being broken because of aspirational politics. A Yadav may or may not vote for a Yadav, and a Kurmi may or may not vote for a party that traditionally represents Kurmis. If that can change, without a uniform, all-encompassing solution like ONOE, then certainly, Indian Democracy is doing something right.
Representative governance has been the soul of Indian Democracy. Mahatma Gandhi spoke about village-level republics which are self-sustainable. Our indigenous experience with the representative government started in the republic (Gad Rajya) of Lichhavi, Kapilvastu, Pava, Kushinara, Ramagrama, Sunsamagiri, Piphali, Suputa, Mithila and Kollanga in the 6th Century BC and continued up till 400 AD in various parts of the country. The Sabhas, Samitis and Ganapati of these republics were the modern-day Parliament, Cabinet and the Prime Minister respectively. It was not some monolithic, singular-power system. It provided a considerable level of autonomy for development activities at the grassroots.
Sadly, ‘One Nation, One Election’ seeks to dismantle this multiple, but cohesive power structure. We should not let it happen.
This piece was first published on News 18 dot com here on September 25, 2020.
What can be done to assuage the fear of farmers with regards to the farm bills? Policymakers and columnists have reflected on the undemocratic manner in which the two farm bills were passed in the Rajya Sabha, but very few have reflected on what is the way forward if these farm bills are implemented.
As argued in an earlier column here by me, there is no doubt that the agricultural sector needs to be freed in the true sense. We need, not just the removal of ‘Price & Trade Control’ wherein farmers can trade freely in an open market but also removal of ‘Capital Control’ in the form of restrictive ownership, lease and tenancy laws and doing away with the ‘Input Control’ by de-regulating the prices of fertilisers, seeds, subsidy on water and power. All this could have done had the country’s economy was not reeling under the triple assaults of – demonetisation, flawed GST (yes there is GST on many farm equipment and allied parts), and the current COVID-19 pandemic. Right now, the need of the hour is to provide direct income transfer to as many small and marginal farmers as possible.
Critics may argue that better agricultural growth in the first quarter indicates that the sector was not hit by the pandemic, and the angst of the farmers is simply misplaced. They are wrong. First, the growth was driven largely by a bumper Rabi harvest and strong procurement by the government for food grain distribution, but there was hardly any increase in farm incomes. April was the month when the lockdown was partially lifted, but despite muted harvest festivals, farm labourers and farmers alike did not return to their fields. Just to refresh the memory, videos on social media of farmers dumping produce, unable to sell their produce had also emerged around that time. Second, it is being pointed out that the institutional infrastructure was already being build during this phase before the farm reforms ordinances were promulgated in June. This is wrong, there was absolutely no stakeholder consultation with farm bodies or leaders for these reforms. Rather it was conveniently assumed by the government, that since the reforms have been in the policy debate space since decades now, it does not require a fresh stakeholder consultation.
Now that the government has bit the bullet and put a Parliamentary stamp (through a voice vote, of course!) to these bills, there is an urgent need to win the confidence of the primary stakeholder – the farmer. A slew of measures can be adopted before implementation.
Even as policy practitioners in the field, strongly believe that India needs to do away with MSP, it cannot be removed. Perhaps, the low hanging fruit here is to provide a guarantee for the MSP. The government has done lip-service to that, leading to farmer’s protesting. A ruling dispensation which promised Cost +50% MSP to the farmers and opposed the same in the Supreme Court has very little credibility left. In the hearts and minds of farmers, especially belonging to Haryana, Punjab, Western Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh – a statutory guarantee of MSP through robust regulations is a need of the hour. If the government can regulate the price of essential medicines through a body, what stops it to ensure MSP.
The answer to the issue of MSP may be again two-pronged. A macro-institutional structure needs to be formed on a priority basis. If the policy-makers are serious to hammer out a solution in a limited period, then it is proposed that an ‘Implementing Agency’ in the form of an Agriculture Reforms Council – Consisting of Agriculture & Finance Ministers of all states on the lines of the GST Council should be established at the earliest. This would reduce the time for a solution to take effect.
The second solution is part of history.
In 2012, the Union Cabinet cleared The Forward Contracts (Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2010, which permitted and regulated a financial instrument which enables buyers and sellers of commodities to effectively manage risk from price fluctuations and opened the door for the introduction of new intangible products like options in the commodities futures market. Unfortunately, the bill lapsed in the Parliament.
A Market for Futures (Forward) Trading of Agricultural Commodities needs to be developed. This would enable the procurement of excess production by both government and private sector alike. It will transform the MSP regime from a ‘committed liability’ of the government to its ‘contingent liabilities’.
This shifts the risk of the government to the more capable commodity markets. Under this regime, the government procures the strategic requirement at MSP and the purchases above this strategic requirement can be conducted by selling ‘put options’ to the farmers. If the prices of the commodity fall below MSP (reflecting strike price in commodity options), farmers or option buyers will sell their produce to government procuring agencies such as FCI at MSP only. But if the market price is above the MSP, farmers will choose to sell directly in the open market and the only loss will be the premium paid by the farmers which can be subsidized by the Government through Direct Benefits Transfers.
India can deal with Chinese expansionism with the Himalayan region only by expeditious infrastructure development at its frontier areas. India has been able to establish political governance at the grassroots level through Hill Development Councils, Panchayats, and a host of ‘packages’ in these areas. But, there is a sense of deep neglect on the implementation front, especially in the context of physical infrastructure needs. A revival of the esteemed Indian Frontier Administrative Service (IFAS) – an experiment done in the 1950-60s will bridge the governance gap in these remote far-flung areas.
The best public policy interventions work on pilot and feedback loops. In this case, we have had a pilot in the IFAS and some key learnings from it. A renewed, reoriented and restructured IFAS dedicated to the Himalayan frontier states in India is the need of the hour. The first step of a good foreign policy measure is to start domestically. And this is what this piece elucidates.
The Indian Frontier Administrative Service (IFAS), a separate cadre created in 1954 to administer the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA i.e., present-day Arunachal Pradesh and at that time, a part of Assam) was the military-governance mechanism mooted by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. It emphasised more on the socio-economic development of the various tribes in the protected region but did not focus on strategic border development. Some historical accounts attribute this deficiency in the said policy to Verrier Elwin, an anthropologist who was appointed as the advisor to the government of Assam. But this may not be entirely true.
A cursory review of the list of IFAS cadre suggests that most members were either distinguished army officers or belonged to the Indian Foreign Service, the Indian Administrative Service, and the Indian Police Service, rotating between these postings.
NEFA was placed in a special category administered by the Ministry of External Affairs (and post 1965, by Ministry of Home Affairs) through an ‘IFAS’ Secretariat at Shillong, consisting of advisors for finance, tribal and legal affairs. The IFAS cadre mainly functioned as Political Officers (and thereafter as Deputy Commissioners) in charge of a frontier district vested with the powers of a District Magistrate and were the ultimate authority in their district to examine and implement development schemes. All top bureaucratic posts in other North Eastern States like Manipur were also filled by IFAS officers. An interesting Parliamentary answer between Manipur’s stalwart politician, Rishang Keishing and the then Deputy External Affairs Minister alludes to local tribals being preferred in filling the IFAS posts.
One of the most illustrious officers of IFAS was Major Ralengnao (Bob) Khathing. Under whose leadership, two platoons of Assam Rifles took possession of Tawang in February 1951, establishing Indian administrative control in the Bum La area along McMahon Line. This heroic act was enacted without shedding blood, even as China forced Tibet to sign a Seventeen Point Agreement in May 1951 and officially annexe it.
In 1968, the special cadre of IFAS was merged within the Indian Administrative Service. In the present context, the Indian Government can draw many lessons from the IFAS experiment, especially when China has officially transgressed the LAC as many as 2264 times since 2015 and India-China faced a 73-day standoff on Doklam in 2017.
First, for the NEFA tribals, IFAS had a simple policy laid down by Nehru. He avoided the two extremes – “one was to treat them as anthropological specimens for study and the other was to allow them to be engulfed by the masses of Indian humanity”. The could act as a Magna Carta for the newly restructured IFAS too. Since 2019, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh are now both Union Territories. They are crucial frontier border areas with Pakistan and China, it is imperative that IFAS should be resurrected and expanded for their administration and infrastructural development.
Second, Chief Ministers of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram have made calls for a revival of the IFAS, but their plea is more to provide a state-specific cadre than a larger administrative force implementing developmental programmes in the Himalayan region. A set of highly specialised officers, superior in merit and in strategic thinking, would entail that the development of Himalayan frontier regions remain at par with the rest of the country.
Third, presently the Border Roads Organisation (BRO), albeit mainly an infrastructure special purpose vehicle, backed by the army, is used for building strategic roads in the frontier areas. It is not a secret that towns, hamlets and villages in border areas are neglected and often complain of virtually no administration. The political mechanism of Hill Development Councils which was fructified in Leh & Ladakh (and later replicated in North-Eastern states) have become bastions of local political empowerment, but lack robust administrative capacity. They are often marred with leakages and want of strategic planning. Massive packages have been announced, in the name of development by all governments, but they hardly reach the last border village.
Fourth, given that the present government is widening the scope of lateral entries in civil services provides enough ground for ‘specialized’ inclusion in the civil services.
Many would argue that replacing the existing IAS driven cadre stationed in these districts with a rehashed version of the same – The IFAS, would hardly solve any purpose. They are wrong. Looking at the merit, superiority and the military background which the erstwhile IFAS cadre possessed, and their accounts of solid administrative delivery in the difficult terrains, punctures that argument.
National security is closely linked with strategic development, and it is a hope that policymakers realise that.
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)
Free our farmers. They can help us absorb the impact on COVID- 19. Freeing here means remove the bottlenecks in their supply chain. Yes. The same ‘supply chain’ which the Prime Minister mentioned 9 times in his speech on 12th May. Following it, Finance Minister announced the creation of ‘Rs 1 lakh crore Agri-Infrastructure Fund for farm-gate infrastructure’ and a ‘legal framework’ to amend the Essential Commodities Act and APMC Act. On paper, these are bold steps in the right direction, but in the context of the pandemic, this shall do nothing to alleviate the immediate pain of the farmers.
The present government’s record in reviving the agriculture sector does not instill any confidence. India’s Average Agricultural GDP growth in the period 2004–5 to 2013–14 is 4%. This has plunged to 2.9% from 2014–15 to 2018–19.
Agriculture is the largest private sector but the Government has not let it unshackle its true potential due to enormous controls. This tendency to control agriculture stems through two historical reasons. First, until the Green Revolution made us self-sufficient in grains, India was dependent on foodgrain hand-outs by developed countries. Our farmers battle all kinds of challenges, including drought and monsoon and show a record increase in the food grain production, each year. For cereals, the Minimum Support Price (MSP) is a committed liability of the government to assure the farmers of a remunerative and stable price environment in the “increasing of agricultural production and productivity”.
Second, Remunerative prices to farmers in the political economy of India became an important issue after the 1960s as big farmers became an important political interest group. Farmers used this newfound political power as a tool to seek higher and more stable farm prices through government intervention which made India the second largest food producer in the world. Thus, shedding years of ignominy which India suffered through foodgrain import. Record food production is a matter of pride for us because it comes with a piece of historical baggage. It is the first item which is reflected by the government in any agriculture report.
From the farm to the dinner table, the government virtually controls every aspect of the agriculture sector. There is ‘Capital Control’ in the form of restrictive ownership, lease and tenancy laws. It is virtually impossible for a farmer to sell or rent her land to private people. There is ‘Input Control’ in the form of government regulating the prices of fertilizers, seeds, subsidy on water and power. The GST on farm equipment and allied parts is also a kind of control. Then, there is ‘Price and Trade Control’. The Essential Commodities Act regulates the price of farm produce. The APMC Act facilitates on a broken market system which is monopolistic and rent-seeking, with high commissions, especially for perishables. There are massive trade barriers which impede free trade of India’s farmers with the rest of the world.
Many experts and policymakers who are grounded to the cause of farmers do believe that the opening up of Indian agriculture needs to be gradual and incremental. After all, the sector affects the economic well-being of half the Indian population and provides access to affordable and nutritious food for all Indians. There is a need for a much-balanced approach than just some one-time magic pill of deregulation.
Finance Minister’s announcements are neither sound incremental policy measures to free the farmers nor any reforms by stealth. They are just lip-service, wrapped into a ‘package’ — meant for headlines management.
Several reasons. Agriculture is a State subject. At most the Union can make a ‘Model Law’ for states to adopt. But it is up to the states to adopt it. The Union did this when it passed the ‘Liberalizing Land Lease Markets and implementation of Model Agricultural land Lease Act, 2016’. Very few states, even from the ruling party adopted it. So the measure of removing ‘Capital Control’ was not successful.
Marketing of Agricultural commodities is again a State subject. While announcing that the “Centre will frame a law for adequate choices to a farmer to sell produce at attractive price” and remove the “barriers of free interstate trade”, the Finance Minister failed to emphasize that this will be at best, only a model law for states to adopt. Just like the Land Lease Act.
A second option for the Union would be to take refuge in the ‘Concurrent List’ items which has trade of ‘food stuffs’, ‘raw cotton’, ‘raw jute’ and ‘cattle fodder’ listed in it. For that yet another law needs to be passed using article 301 of the Constitution.
Finance Minister announced that a “facilitative legal framework will be created to enable farmers for engaging with processors, aggregators, large retailers, exporters etc.” On paper, very good. But it is a broad policy announcement with no details, roadmap or institutional framework.
Amidst the pandemic, the Parliament or its Standing Committees are not functioning even through video conference. There is no legislative oversight. No bill has been put forth for public consultation. Bringing ordinances will not serve any purpose here. The government should bring in the entire legal framework in the Monsoon Session of the Parliament. This would not be enough without consulting the states. A knee jerk, policy push without an institutional framework would only end up like the flawed GST regime.
Partial removal of ‘Price & Trade Control’ is only a half-baked measure. An entire architecture of deregulating agriculture needs to be created, with the simultaneous removal of ‘Input Control’ and ‘Capital Control’. This needs huge planning and institutional setup. The e-NAM mandis brought by this government failed because of a lack of planning on the logistical side.
In the COVID-19 crisis, when the economy has become more inward-looking and our farmers need money in their hands for input costs, freeing them partially without adequate support would be a travesty. It is best to first provide them with monetary support and then to usher in these reforms, after creating an institutional framework.
This piece was published on Wion News with a different headline.
Delhi burnt and almost all our policymakers failed us. ‘Rajadharma’ is the construct often abused in modern Indian polity. The notion of Rajadharma in the ancient Indian political traditions, as a normative yardstick to evaluate governance, has always been all-pervasive and cherished. Mahabharata speaks of Rajadharma. Kautilya’s Arthashastra — India’s best known secular treatise on how a state and a ruler should be, separates law and religion by explicating Rajadharma.
We, the people of India should not be surprised when our elected representatives, in most cases, desert us and work against our interests by relinquishing their responsibilities. The hard truth is that they are driven by their interests. Some would be surprised by this theory, but whoever has the slightest iota of how Government’s interests work, knows that its only interest lies — in holding on to power.
This soulless version of a coercive state disturbs us all in the society. State is supposed to protect us and uphold the social contract, which we as a society have forged with it. When the state tends to break that social contract, the relationship between the state and the society is strained. Society becomes vulnerable, but the state persists. Many would accuse that this is unnecessarily complicating and theorizing. Therefore this needs to be clearly explained.
Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson in their book about ‘States, Society and the Fate of Liberty’ (The Narrow Corridor), have brilliantly argued that “…for liberty to emerge and flourish, both state and society must be strong. A strong state is needed to control violence, enforce laws, and provide public services that are critical for a life in which people are empowered to make and pursue their choices. A strong mobilized society is needed to control and unshackle the strong state… without society’s vigilance; constitutions and its guarantees are not worth much more than the parchment they are written on”.
The state and the society are embattled into a day to day struggle to compete and to cooperate. Repression and despotism by states result in this ‘narrow corridor’ to liberty, where society struggles. Riots are not new to India. Political parties and vested organisations have time and again unleashed riots as a tool to attain political interests. Societies, especially the poor and the vulnerable have suffered indescribable pain and trauma at the hands of the state. But the lamp of ‘liberty’ in India’s ‘narrow corridor’– the persistent struggle between society and the state has always managed to burn. It can be flickered, but it has not been extinguished.
The cost of the violence unleashed over the society is enormous and immeasurable. The trauma of dividing a society is impossible to overcome. State dithers and Institutions collapse. State is undeterred and policymakers across the spectrum fail to control it with checks and balances. In this strained scenario, the society needs to take control of the social contract. In the information age, where nothing remains hidden and even deep fakes can easily be exposed. Society needs to show the ‘mirror of truth’ — Rajadharma to the state. This can be done if the society is aware and can enquire.
Kautilya considers anvikshiki (the science of enquiry) as the central tool (“lamp”) for generating valid knowledge and judging ethical behaviour. For Kautilya, anvikshiki is the benchmark for ethical behaviour and it leads to Rajadharma. Arthashastra usually refers to Rajadharma as the ‘dharma of the king’ and not to dharma as a religion. Rajadharma is essentially ‘prescriptions of righteousness applicable to a ruler’.
This implies that the ruler ought to bear the responsibility of upholding dharma (law) in the society, thereby the dharma of the king (Rajadharma). The duty of the king is not only to observe dharma in person but also ensuring its observation by others. Rajadharma, therefore, is an all-encompassing construct for the ethical evaluation of the performance of the state and the government.
In modern times, for a strong society, awareness (or anvikshiki) is the prerequisite to make governments accountable for Rajadharma. In an increasingly inner looking society where superficial information becomes the basis of discord, the need to adopt Kautilya’s ‘science of enquiry’ (anvikshiki) is felt more than ever. Unless, the society becomes vigilant enough to make the state accountable and follow its Rajadharma, the state and its vested interests would prevail, while the society would continue to be strangulated in the ‘narrow corridor’, vying for every inch of liberty and freedom.
Thus, what is happening in Delhi is not only a stark failure of Rajadharma, but also, to a large extent, the failure of society as we, the people of India have somewhere forgotten to practice the ‘science of enquiry’ — the raison d’état of our traditions and strategic culture.
Rachit Seth is a student of Public Policy at the Takshashila Institute, Bangalore and can be found on Twitter at @rachitseth
(Views expressed by the author are strictly personal in nature)
For
me, Congress is synonymous with Indian Nationalism. Sadly, that perception has
been changed for many people now.
Beyond the venting out of anger, the directionless cacophony and a distressed feeling of dejection, the Congress loss in the 2019 elections needs a clinical post mortem. I am only focusing on one reason for the defeat, and perhaps the most important one.
The
BJP’s sinister campaign successfully defamed and damaged the Congress party’s nationalistic
image.
In 2014, BJP successfully branded Congress party as the ‘Mother of Corruption’ and in 2019, BJP successfully branded Congress party as ‘Anti National’.(sic)
The branding stuck because of Congress’ own inactions and some terrible mistakes. In 2014, the Congress could not battle the perception of scams that had engulfed the UPA. When the scams did not stick in the Modi era, BJP devised a new strategy to denigrate the Congress party. But unlike the scams, where a judicial process cleared the Congress of its ‘scam taint’; here there was no legal recourse which was left for the Congress.
As a member of the communication department, I was privy to the post Pulwama narrative. From day one, we had suggested that Congress President should question the massive intelligence failure, the absence of air transportation to the slain CRPF personnel, and PM Modi’s ‘Jungle Safari’ in Corbett, even as the attack was on. But people with more powers around Rahul Gandhi, lethargically vetoed this narrative. We suggested that Congress President should question inaction by Modi Govt and accuse it of compromising National interests.
As
a staunch supporter of Congress President, Rahul Gandhi, I want to set the
record straight. Rahul Gandhi was on board with our suggested strategy. He even
approved the draft statement and also a demand to provide paramilitary forces
with a status of ‘Shaheed’, after they make the supreme sacrifice for the
nation.
But
I do not know why he was made to wait, with a counter argument. Surely a man,
who forcefully and emphatically spearheaded a National Security issue like
Doklam and the National Interest issue like Rafale, should not have waited, had
some influential people not advised him to do so. Next day after Pulwama terror
attack, Rahul Gandhi did address a Press Conference, but did not speak a word
against the Government. It was a somber moment for the country, and we also did
not want to play politics on that.
But
our idea for the next few days was still valid and would have provided the
Congress party to enter the National Security debate to corner the Modi Govt.
Our
statement was once again sent on 21st February for a press
conference by the Congress President. Again some people with vested interests
and left leanings prevailed on the same.
Since
the Congress President could not address a press conference, on 21st
or 22nd due to the successful meddling of those who were opposed to
this idea– It was decided that spokespersons would raise the same and Congress
President would back it up with his tweets. We precisely did that. Local
channels & newspapers of Uttarakhand, along with some trusted Congress
sources provided us with the imagery of Modi enjoying the boat ride and Jungle
safari in Corbett. Facts also emerge that he did not speak a word on Pulwama,
when he addressed a public rally in Rudrapur via telephone.
Since
the left leaning lieutenants of the party, delayed a direct attack on the Modi
Govt on the sensitive and core issue of National Security, party’s narrative
suffered a jolt. Still, all was not lost, because Modi Govt or PMO did not deny
the Corbett pictures tweeted by Rahul Gandhi. They could not deny the timings
and the fact that a Cabinet Committee of Security meet did not happen on the
very day of the Pulwama attack. They had no answers to the questions raised by
Congress party spokespersons on massive intelligence failure.
Since
the party has very less political capital, several financial constraints and a
pliable media working day and night to run it down, press conferences addressed
by Rahul Gandhi only get maximum coverage, rest are rarely covered.
Hence,
Rahul Gandhi speaking on 21st February or before would have made a
difference in cornering Modi on Pulwama. But then…
The
Balakot air strike took place on wee hours of 26th February. We
solidly stood beside the Government. Officially, we did not make any
questionable statements.
But
then, when opposition leaders started questioning- Mamata Banerjee, Mehbooba
Mufti, Omar Abdullah et all. Some non-spokespersons, but prominent leaders of
the party, did question the Balakot airstrike and the capture of Wing Commander
Abhinandan. Officially, the party made its view clear- we demanded immediate
release of Wing Commander Abhinandan and came down heavily on Pakistan.
But
damage was done. Mr. Sam Pitroda’s statements later exacerbated the negative
perception against us. His opinions on 26/11 and Balakot were completely out of
turn and damaged our narrative beyond repair.
***
Then
came the Congress manifesto.
Which
political party writes in its manifesto, that they would reduce the Army troops
in a border, sensitive and strategically important, terror prone state like
Jammu & Kashmir?
It
reads: “Congress promises to review the
deployment of armed forces, move more troops to the border to stop infiltration
completely, reduce the presence of
the Army and CAPFs in the Kashmir Valley, and entrust more
responsibility to the J&K police for maintaining law and order.” (Page
40, Point No 3)
Which
political party talks about watering down sedition laws and weakening a law
which grants special powers to its Army (AFSPA) in
sensitive insurgency prone areas?
Since
manifesto was a collective effort by the party, not a single leader can or
should be blamed. But rumblings inside the party against these provisions
gained ground, and rightly so.
We
tried very hard to douse the fire, but damage was done, especially in the Hindi
media.
***
Indira
Gandhi is my inspiration. She is my idol and she is everything for me. She is
the reason, I support the Congress party. She is the reason crores still
support the Congress party. The present Congress party’s method to cede the
Nationalism space has shaken my faith.
I
believe that Rahul Gandhi is the only person that can rebuild that faith and
take that space. Whether the Rafale Scam or the Doklam issue got us a single
vote or not – is a debatable issue. But both were staunchly and solidly
espoused by Rahul Gandhi only. Both are National Security issues. In March
2018, Congress party in its Plenary too, had expressed concern on the cuts in
defence spending. Dr. Manmohan Singh had strongly raised that, and all the
press releases of the Congress party have raised the issue of National Security
compromise by this government.
But
we have been branded as villains.
This
left leaning lobby should be thrown out of the Congress. Then only we can save
the real Congress. These are the same people who took Rahul Gandhi to JNU when
‘Tukde-Tukde gang’ labelled was pasted on us!
Nobody
can question the commitment of the Congress party to Indian Nationalism. There
is not a single instance in India’s history, pre or post-independence, nor a
single place in India where a Congress party worker has not shed his/her blood
in protecting the integrity of the nation.
Unlike
those forces, in powers today who were opposed to the Freedom Movement, opposed
the Indian tricolor and even refused to hoist the Indian National Flag for 52
years after independence, Congress party has fought for the country and its
nationhood for last 134 years.
Congress
party has suffered the ugly venom of terrorism and extremism, yet has never
shied away from making the supreme sacrifice. Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and
Rajiv Gandhi laid down their lives for the country and fought against
extremists and terrorists. Nation has
also not forgotten the sacrifice of Sardar Beant Singh, Nand Kumar Patel, Vidya
Charan Shukla, Mahendra Karma and hundreds of others, who stoically fought
against terrorism and laid down their lives.
BJP Government has miserably failed on each account and the Indian electorate is feeling the punch now. Disclaimer: This essay may look like a myriad mix of issues put together to make a larger point. Yes it is, because if we look through the dirty dingy kaleidoscope of Modi Govt’s failures; where each failure reflects on the other ; we come across the real tyranny and treachery of the Modi regime. We are seeing at multiple issues boxed into one fascist regime- A regime where a fringe party has become mainstream but has not shed its core divisive emotive agendas. At the cost of being long, this essay reflects that deep-seated treachery which every Indian is feeling at the hands of Narendra Modi and sometimes is unable to articulate. A deep sense of betrayal has engulfed the people of India. A million mutinies are taking place in the hearts and minds of the people. Everyday a new socio-political issue bothers them and for a moment and enrages a feeling of utter disappointment. That is the moment of truth. Some try to brush that aside by imagining the alternative, which they feel would be inferior. Some try to find silver linings of religion in the dark clouds of despair and want to cling to that line to justify their choice. Some have just learnt to take all this in stride and have given up altogether. Some have manifested their mutinies by active political and societal participation and have borne the brunt of the backlash from the state. Some have just remained silent for the quinquennial ritual of democracy to arrive and shall only react through the ballot to reply in kind to the tyranny of the present dispensation. Yes, we all are feeling a churning within; but we all are guided by our very own paths to reciprocate to this deep sense of betrayal which the Narendra Modi Government has forced India to. The world’s largest democracy’s present fascist regime is jailing people in public life on concocted charges of building an ‘anti-fascist front’ and justifying it by linking a Dalit-Maratha self-engineered tension to a Naxal plot. On top of it, it uses the perceived excesses of the previous regime as a convenient alibi to justify its sins. Fighting Naxalism is not a sin. But targeting individuals in the name of fighting Naxalism is a sin. Naxalism is the biggest internal security threat which India is facing since the last couple of decades. It is a roadblock to development in one third of our districts. It can be prevented by various methods. Force is only one of them. Engagement is always a better option. Inducements and leverages are a third. Development and confidence building is the best option. Sometimes all of them have to work together in tandem to wipe it out. Congress has done it in the past in many states- Andhra Pradesh & Maharashtra. Also, No other party has borne the brunt of Naxalism, as does the Congress. Its entire Chhattisgarh top brass was wiped out few years ago. If you a have political will and support of the locals, you can wipe it off. Targeting NGO’s, activists, writers et al, only reveals a mindset of a fascist impotent regime that lacks the statecraft, the democratic principles and the roadmap to tackle this serious and sensitive issue. Moreover, Dalits and Marathas have been peacefully living together in Maharashtra since ages and Dalits have been observing the Bhima Koregaon anniversary peacefully since decades. The cheapest form of appeasement politics laced with religious fundamentalism has been employed by the BJP to ‘divide and conquer’ these castes in Maharashtra. They are employing the same tactic in Haryana (Jats vs Non-Jats) and Uttar Pradesh (Brahmins vs Rajputs). Emotive issues are the flavour of the political climate in India. In faraway Assam, an exercise which was supposed to accomplish a solemn accord- ‘Assam Accord’ was surreptitiously used by the BJP for ulterior political motives. Thanks to the people of Assam, the state by itself did not slip into communal chaos, even as the BJP used its full media might in Delhi to whip up passions. What was supposed to be a Citizen vs Illegal migrant issue was turned into a Hindu vs Muslim issue and was used by the ruling Govt to target the minorities of Assam. It is an undeniable fact that even though Assam there are fissures between Assamese people and Bengali (or Hindi) speaking people, those tensions have been limited to a language/cultural issues. People of Assam did not have a Hindu-Muslim issue, to put it bluntly. But exploiting societal fissures to win votes lies at the core of BJP’s ideology. So, BJP- the double headed snake was precisely vying for that blood. ‘Double headed’ because contrary to the tall claims of BJP President maliciously pinning the blame on the Congress for ‘encouraging the stay of illegal Bangladeshis’ (sic); Facts show that between 2005 to 2013, Congress-UPA deported 49 times more illegal Bangladeshis to Bangladesh, than Modi Govt. For the record, Congress-UPA deported 88,792 illegal Bangladeshi migrants, while Modi Govt (till 2017) deported only 1822 of them. Moreover, Indian citizenship, according to India’s Constitution is provided by the ‘birth’ and not merely by ‘ancestral lineage’ as is being espoused by the BJP- so the question of having an NRC to weed out Indian citizens by birth with foreign lineage, across the country does not arise. Execution of NRC was shoddy and the blame for its mal-implementation lies squarely with the BJP. Talking about nonperformance, two large of constituencies of the Indian electorate are particularly displeased and distressed by the present regime – Youth and Farmers. Lofty promises of creating 2 Cr jobs every year made by Narendra Modi has yielded no results. In the age of the millennials, the PM is telling us we don’t have data to measure how many jobs India created. It is not as if that the data was not collected in the previous regimes. Labour Bureau Survey is the most authentic government data on jobs. But Modi Govt. has failed to release the same for Oct-Dec 2017. Modi’s tall jargon and unscientific methods to somehow count and claim the number of jobs infact act a rubbing salts on the wounds of an already disappointed youth. EPFO, MUDRA loans and even anecdotal evidence is being sighted by the BJP to fool the people of India. EPFO data cannot be a measure of job creation because according to statutory requirements, when an organization has 20 or more employees it comes under EPFO’s ambit. So, if a firm has 19 employees and it adds one more to its payroll, then all 20 will have to be registered under EPFO. This gives a false picture that 20 jobs were created instead of just one. As explained by many economists – one MUDRA loan cannot be counted as one Job, because the average size of MUDRA loans disbursed just Rs 47,268. In this paltry amount, no sustainable job can be created. Not even a proper Pakora stall or a Paan shop can be opened in this amount of money! Millennials are also being continuously monitored by this regime. The Orwellian maxim of ‘Big Brother is Watching You’ is ubiquitously on display under this government. In the garb of AADHAAR leakages, ‘Social Media Communication Hub’ and accessing sensitive data through NaMo App- the Modi Govt is truly working like the ‘Ministry of Truth’ that violates and curbs our Right to Privacy. Additionally, youth are being told ‘what to wear’, what to eat’, what to watch’ and ‘what to do’. Banning of Art and Censorship has reached monstrous proportions. Couple all this with numerous agitations and conspiratorial campus unrest that have taken place in virtually every University of India, has further vitiated the space for dissent and has led to suppression and oppression of India’s youth. ‘Beti Bachao’ has only been relegated to sloganeering and advertisements. Only 5 paisa is being spend on a girl child- Yes- That is the budget of Modi Govt, this year, on ‘Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao’. We have seen how many horrific and gruesome incidents have taken place in home shelters in BJP ruled states and how BJP men were involved in Naliya, Kathua and Unnao. Farmers are definitely very angry. They were promised ‘Cost +50%’ as MSP. They are still being promised smooth supply chain from ‘beej’ to ‘bazaar’– But nothing has been delivered to them. On top of that, for the first time in history, Agriculture is being taxed through the GST. Modi Govt attempted to disguise the MSP announcement of 4th July, 2018 as an ‘Electoral Lollipop’ for credit seeking and duping the farmers. But that also was too little too late. For example- MSP of Paddy according to Cost +50% should be Rs 2340 per quintal, but Modi Govt has only provided Rs 1750 per quintal i.e Rs 590 per quintal less than Modi Govt’s promise. Similarly, the MSP of Jowar according to Cost +50% should be Rs 3275 per quintal, but Modi Govt has only provided Rs 2430 per quintal i.e Rs 845 per quintal less than Modi Govt’s promise and the MSP of Moong according to Cost +50% should be Rs 9241 per quintal, but Modi Govt has only provided Rs 6975 per quintal i.e Rs 2266 per quintal less than Modi Govt’s promise. The biggest disservice that the BJP could have done to this country is to completely decimate its economic foundations. There is no exaggeration in this assertion. The foundations of India’s economy were embedded in its thousands of small and medium businesses and the unorganized sector. Both received a severe blow because of the mindless decision of Demonetisation. No matter how many idiotic reasons the Modi Govt presents and no matter how many goalposts it change- fact is that Demonetisation virtually demolished the structures of a thriving economy and couldn’t achieve any of its stated purposes. Even this freshly propped goalpost of increasing the tax base is a white lie. There are two important facts that cut through this fog. First, the direct taxes grew by 151% over UPA I tenure and by 68% during UPA II tenure, but have only grown by 43% so far during the Modi Government’s tenure. Second, had the BJP matched the UPA II growth rates in direct tax collections for last four years, direct tax collection would have crossed more than 10.5 lakh crore. But they failed at it miserably and still take pride in achieving net collection of around 9.5 lakh crore. All the other goalposts to enact Demonetisation have been successfully demolished in the past. A flawed implementation of the GST, unending midnight knocking at the doors of small-medium businesses which is called ‘Tax Terrorism’ in economic parlance further assaulted the economy. Bank Loot Scams have become a norm and NPA’s are soaring by the day. The escape of Vijay Mallya, Lalit Modi, Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi, Jatin Mehta and many others could not have happened without the active connivance of the Modi Government. Banking sector is in peril and people have lost faith in Banks. Investment is low and exports are plunging. Rupee is trading at its historic worse and Modi Govt has earned 11 Lakh Cr in taxes in the past four years alone due to central taxes on Petrol and Diesel. There is no respite from Price Rise and Current Account Deficit is rising. Forget 100 SMART Cities, no tangible investment in infrastructure is taking place and Stalled Projects are rising by the month. This is how the BJP is banishing our economy. Economy might be dead. But emotive issues are left. That is the opium for BJP’s survival. If those people who look at the previously stated ‘silver lining’ of ‘religion’ in this dark cloud- open their eyes and minds. India would be a better place in 2019.
A farmer heads through the frozen waterways near the floating produce market on Dal Lake in Srinagar, the main city of India’s Jammu and Kashmir stat
The BJP has used the precarious security situation in Jammu and Kashmir sadly, as a ‘milchcow’ to milk and polish it’s so called ‘nationalistic image’ for the rest of the country. This has been Modi Government’s biggest disservice to the nation.
Former RAW chief, A. S.Dulat in a fascinating book- “The Spy Chronicles: RAW, ISI and the Illusion of Peace”; which he has co-authored with former director-general of the ISI, AsadDurrani makes a very significant remark on the situation in Jammu & Kashmir. He writes, ‘Empathy is the key to understanding Kashmir… there can be no peace or forward movement in Kashmir, so long as we keep relating it to elections elsewhere in the country…’
This is exactly what the BJP, freshly divorced from its alliance with the PDP is not understanding. Jammu and Kashmir cannot be a template to win votes in the rest of the country. BJP, being the national party had the onus of preserving pro India democracy in the state. BJP, being the party ruling at the Centre had the prime responsibility to uphold National Security in the state. BJP, being the big brother in the alliance had the responsibility to ensure that the alliance government functions according to the wishes of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Unfortunately, on all these accounts, the BJP has miserably failed the people of the state.
Instead the BJP plunged the state of Jammu and Kashmir to the deep dark edge of an abyss, from where it will be very difficult to return. This is the first time that BJP attained such a larger political role to play directly in the Kashmir policy, but neither it has been able to convince its own core constituents and supporters of hyper nationalism, nor it has been able to support political commentators of the state.
A seemingly small development in Kashmir can precipitate into grave socio-political repercussions. Be it the Amarnath shrine land controversy of 2008 or be it the stone pelting unrest of 2010. Be it the killing of terrorist Burhan Wani in the same period, two years ago or the merciless assassination of ‘Rising Kashmir’s editor, Shujaat Bukhari, just last month- a small spark can lit a blaze in Kashmir. In an environment where Pakistan sponsored terrorism thrives, separatists are waiting for an opportunity to fuel tensions and young people are increasingly getting alienated and picking up stones; these sparks provide a fertile opportunity for anti- India sentiments to flourish. Rank political opportunism and the sheer lust of power of the BJP-PDP exacerbated the situation in the past few years.
Endangering National Security
16 Major Terror Attacks have taken place on our Security Installations that include CRPF Camps, Army Camps, Air Force Station and Military Stations- Pampore, Uri, Pathankot, Gurdaspur, Amarnath, Yatra attack, Sunjwan Camp attack where scores of our precious lives have lost. Nevertheless, Modi Government, diametrically opposite to its ‘nationalistic image’ foolishly invited Pakistan based rogue ISI to investigate the Pathankot attack. To the surprise of many of their own core supporters, BJP President, Amit Shah, in a speech made on March 30, 2016 in Kolkata said that “Pakistan has made serious efforts in the Pathankot terror probe” Since May 26, 2014, during Modi Government- In the last 49 months, 386 Jawans have been martyred and 246 civilians have died in Jammu and Kashmir alone. During last 49 months of Congress Govt, 139 Jawans martyred & 78 Civilians killed.(Source: South Asian Terrorism Portal)
Facts are sacrosanct and they cannot be tempered with. Therefore, the BJP then tried hard to build a narrative that, due to Central Government’s ‘muscular’ J & K policy, more militants are being killed. Facts then belied that claim too. Under PDP-Congress (2003-08): 4,970 militants were killed by security forces • Under NC-Congress (2009-14): 925 militants were killed • PDP-BJP (2015-18): 591 militants were killed (Source: South Asian Terrorism Portal) The belated announcement of ‘conditional ceasefire’, which was a historical failure during the NDA-1, also did not rescue the situation.
Creating disquiet at the border
In past 49 months, there have been 3000 Ceasefire Violations’ by Pakistan at LoC & IB as compared to 563 Ceasefire Violations during last 49 months of Congress Government. Cross Border Infiltration from across Pak has largely remained intact under the Modi regime. (Source: Ministry of Home Affairs)
Atmosphere of fear and radicalization amongst the youth of the state
The public lynching of DSP AyubPandith and the Kathua rape already shook the conscience of the nation. The recent horrific killing of editor Shujaat Bukhari, in the heart of the Press Enclave in Srinagar and the abduction and subsequent killing of Army Jawan, Aurangzeb and now a police constable are events which reflected intelligence failures and high handedness on part of both the centre and the state governments.
Schools were burnt; youths were forced out of work, and radicalization become rampant with stone pelting becoming almost like a profession. Alarming increase in stone pelting incidents has deteriorated the situation.
Hobnobbing with terrorist elements and separatists
On December, 14, 2016 – The PDP-BJP coalition government announced compensation for slain HizbulMujahideen terrorist Burhan Wani’s elder brother, who was killed by the security forces in 2013. Rs 4 lakh compensation and a government job from the state, was announced which created a huge controversy, thereby again proving that BJP is anything but ‘nationalistic’.
For the first time ever, we have witnessed ISI Flags in J&K. Utter hypocrisy of the BJP in engaging with the Hurriyat reminds us of the Vajpayee- Advani era where the PM did engage with the Hurriyat. It is important to note that in Manmohan Singh never met the Hurriyat, except once in 2005, which was a continuation of the process started by the previous NDA government. Dealing with separatists like MasaratAlam who was released and AsiyaAndrabiwho was displayed as the ‘poster girl’ of ‘BetiBachao’ campaign further fractured BJP’s plank of nationalism.
Being asleep at the wheel, as development suffered
Contrary to the claims by BJP President, Amit Shah, less than 25% of the much hyped Rs 80,000 Cr package announced by the PM, was utilized by the BJP-PDP Govt. Rampant corruption in flood relief and development schemes, coupled with inaction has marred the tenue of the BJP-PDP Government in which they were equal partners. Tourism has dropped exponentially.
Betraying the trust of people of Jammu, Kashmir &Ladakh by making false promises
People of Jammu were promised AIIMS, IIM’s and medical colleges, which have not taken off. BJP-PDP government did nothing for resettlement of Kashmiri Pandits. On the other hand Congress-UPA built more 5242 flats in Jammu for Kashmiri Pandits alloted.1,024 such flats at Muthi, Purkhoo&Nagrota already been allotted since 2008. Not to forget that, people of Ladakh were betrayed by promising a UT Status and Hill Councils, but nothing materialized.
Jammu and Kashmir had benefitted for years from the relative peace and normalcy resulting from focused and sustained attention from the then Congress- UPA Government, that had ensured development of infrastructure, promotion of tourism , generation of employment and above all creation of mutual trust. On the contrary, the BJP has shunned it and ran away to embolden it’s deteriorating ‘nationalistic image’ for the rest of the country.
Being a national party, it was the BJP’s responsibility to engage and build a trust with the people of Jammu and Kashmir and establish a roadmap for societal inclusion and development of all its three regions. But it completely failed which was evident by the lowest ever voter turnout of 7% in the Srinagar (Lok Sabha) by-poll. It is extremely painful thatthe Election Commission of India was forced to cancel a Lok Sabha by-poll (Anantnag) as Modi Government refused to deploy extra troops for ensuring free & fair elections.
(Rachit Seth is part of the Communications Department of the Congress party. He can be contacted on Twitter @rachitseth .Views expressed here are personal in nature)
Lengthy Disclaimer: The purpose of this piece is not to either justify the Emergency or to defend it. The purpose is not to attack its ‘purpose’. The purpose is placing the facts leading to the Emergency in the right context. The purpose is to tell the young students of Indian politics that we have to see the background in which such a measure was taken. Certain events in history have wide-ranging repercussions, but as time goes, we also need to move on instead of earning cheap political brownie points which the BJP-RSS are indulging into.
I do not want any acknowledgment for this piece, even from my Liberal friends, because I know nobody, including me, can justify the excesses of the Emergency. I only attempt to bring in some unread facts in the public domain. For this, I have taken the liberty to refer many books on the same topic written by people who were actually in the midst of it. All the views expressed by me here are my personal views and does not reflect the views of any political organization.
Fourty-three long years shall complete, since the declaration of Emergency in India. For those like me who are born in the late 80’s- Emergency had very little importance because we were born, after the death of India’s greatest Prime Minister (in my opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs) was assassinated. Being a student of Indian politics, I often have had debates (both online and offline) on the Emergency. Majority of the arguments against it, either come from the people who have a diametrically opposite ideology and political philosophy than mine, the rest come from people who have not dug deeper into the reasons of imposition of Emergency and are only indoctrinated by superficial trappings. Infact many of my Congress contemporaries too; are more often than not uncomfortable in delving or discussing about Emergency.
We are in 2018 now. But every year, the BJP devoid of any core developmental issues tries to reignite a malicious politically driven propaganda by panning Emergency and raking up a discourse, in which it gets significant support from the most liberal section of the media as well. I would not blame the media- because they were one of the casualties of the Emergency.
Yes, for the Congress party too- Excesses of Emergency were definitely a chapter for which it has publically apologized and which it does not want to touch at all. When provoked, every June; by the BJP – the Congress has little to offer except its reiteration that it had already apologized and that Indira Gandhi herself had accepted that it was a mistake, following it up by calling General Elections in 1977, where she faced the wrath of the electorate. They also remind the narrative creators that- Indira Gandhi later came back with a thumping majority, after the Janata party- Janasangh Government collapsed under its own contradictions and people again reposed faith in Indira Gandhi.
There are a lot of deeper factors and some immediate factors which led Indira Gandhi Government to take such a drastic step. Before coming to that, let me also make it clear that Invocation of Emergency is a Constitutional provision which is explicitly covered in Article 352 of the Indian Constitution. So, one may have their reasons to oppose the Emergency and its excesses- but it has Constitution validity.
So how the Emergency did came about? There are layers and layers of factors.
I. Disobedience of law in India has always been given a political colour, and rightly so. Since the Independence was won by Gandhian means of Non-cooperation, Civil Disobedience and Satyagraha. And we can still see hues and shades of it all across India even now. Dissent in a Democracy is one of the most powerful tools to keep it intact. But various organizations have time and again taken the law in their own hand to serve their narrow vested interests and disobeyed and disregarded the state, thereby trampling upon its powers and enfeebling it. Before 1947, the protagonists of the National Movement were fighting a Foreign Power. Weakening the state by unlawful means was at the core of their struggle; this was perfectly legitimate because a foreign power is ruling you for 200 years. But post-Independence, these tactics of blackmailing the state by hartals, strikes and even armed rebellion was still regarded as perfectly legitimate, particularly by those who want to usurp power through unconstitutional means. The opposition in the 70’s was determined to usurp power and when it tasted its first success in dislodging a Constitutionally elected Government in Gujarat- they had smelt blood and were hell-bent to replicate that modus operandi throughout the country. Economic distress and Inflation of the people, ravaged by successive wars also played a significant amount of part, as also some big mistakes by the Congress party in the state that further precipitated the situation.
II. In 1972 India faced an extreme drought. In Gujarat, the situation became worse, followed by a poor kharif crop, thereby resulting in sharp increase in prices of the staple wheat, jowar, bajra and essential commodities. Sensing an opportunity for political gains by exploiting genuine hardship, opposition parties particularly the Congress (o) and Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), CPI(M), SP cynically organized ‘Nav Nirman Samiti’ of students. In December 1973, students of L D College of Engineering in Ahmedabad went on a strike to protest against a hike in school fees and mess charges. A month later, students of Gujarat University erupted in protest, demanding the dismissal of the state Government. How can student organizations demand dismissal of an elected state Government having a majority of 140 out of 168, is beyond imagination! They cannot do it without political patronage.
As the disturbances continued unabated, the Government led by Chimanbhai Patel (who had corruption charges against him too) resigned and President’s rule was imposed on 9 February 1974, but Assembly was not dissolved.
Now Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) got into the picture, by visiting Ahmedabad two days after the imposition of President’s rule. He complimented the students and actively encouraged them to continue the stir, leading to atleast 95 deaths in the coming days and 933 innocent people getting injured, besides loss of public property. The motive was to create anarchy and disturb the wheels of law by taking law into their own hands. Opposition parties were determined to get the house dissolved, especially because they were miserably thrashed in the state elections in UP and Odisha in February. They needed to retrieve lost ground in Gujarat, where they felt their electoral chances were better.
Later, Morarji Desai undertook an indefinite fast, starting from 11 March, thereby forcing the Centre to dissolve the Assembly on March 15.
III. With the success of the ‘Nav Nirman Movement’, the opposition had tasted blood. It became a symbol for similar agitations across India in several states. Nobody shed a tear for the demise of rule of law and the ‘murder of democracy’ by usurping power through unconstitutional means. And JP was particularly enthused by these happenings. Never a realist, always a believer in grand gestures of life, ‘the underground revolutionary’, JP gave a call of ‘Sampurna Kranti’ in Bihar.
Such a call by any other leader would have easily been dismissed in the Indian political realm. But since JP had this moral, almost Gandhian aura of not accepting Pandit Nehru’s offer for a Cabinet post, after Independence, his call for ‘Total Revolution’ provided a degree of moral credibility resulting in coming together of ideologically opposite political entities like the Left, Right and the Socialists because they found this quick method to usurp power, through this short cut, a much better one. Using extra-Constitutional advocacy, they sought to replicate ‘Nav Nirman Movement’ though- student bodies, Sangharsh Samitis of Dalits and Adivasis and particularly the labour unions.
IV. In Bihar, when the elected Government almost acceded to the students’ demands, the opposition still pressed for newer demands and dissolution of Assembly. Well sequenced calls of bandhs were organized unleashing widespread violence and disruption. Notwithstanding the violence associated with the bandh, JP gave a call for a gherao of the Assembly and residence of MLA’s, leading himself a procession to the secretariat. But Government did not relent. JP called a conference of opposition parties and by December, Jantata Sarkars and Janata Adalats in villages as organs of parallel governance.
In fact, On 26 January 1975, rival Republic Day celebrations were held at different places in Bihar. Would any democratically elected Government allow that, is a question which can be left open to the ‘Constitutionalists’ who oppose the basic principle of Emergency!
Inaugurating an all –India youth conference at Allahabad in June 1974, he said ‘though he himself would not take part in any armed rebellion, he would not restrain revolutionaries from to the gun’ (Times of India | 22 June, 1974). He also said, ‘he had never taken up arms against the state, nor did he want violence, but if the people wanted it from him, he would do that at an appropriate time’ (UNI report | 31 August 1974) It is apparent that, JP had very little faith in gradual reforms which were taking place under the Indira Gandhi Government. We can infer that policies like Green Revolution which made India self-sufficient in food grains, or the Nationalization of Banks- which increased India’s Saving Rate from 12% (1969) to 20% of the GDP (1980) did not cut much ice with the opposition whose one point agenda was ‘Indira Hatao’!
The PMO made attempts to form a consensus with JP. But JP did not respond, nor did he spell out any concrete manner how he would battle against rising prices or eliminate corruption. He took no note of Government’s package which later brought down inflation.
V. Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who was an accomplished Parliamentarian, wrote in a paper which he read at the Bharatiya Jana Sangh’s Conference in Hyderabad in September 1974. – “The established leadership has been using Parliamentary method only as a cover for protecting their evil designs. (sic). The response cannot be confined to the Parliamentary level. … This was has to be fought in the streets… and in all sensitive power centres of the establishment’
Thus the opposition was fighting the battle to attain power only on ‘rhetoric’ and slogans like ‘communitarian society’ and ‘party less democracy’ with no vision or alternative policy roadmap for the future.
VI. Another event which defined the precipitation of Emergency was the Railway Strikes of 1973-74. Apart from the All India Railwaymen’s Federation (AIRF) affiliated to the Socialist Party and the National Federation of Indian Railwaymen (NFIR) dominated by the Congress- around 200 big/small separate unions of different categories of railway personnel had cropped up through the efforts of CPI, CPM and the Jan Sangh. The competition of influence was intense. The Government in one such strike surrendered to All India Loco Running Association in August 1973, which gave an impetus to fresh demands from Sangh-Left backed Unions as they tasted their first success.
Peter Alvares, the moderate leader of the AIRF was replaced by George Fernandes in 1973. Before taking over the leadership, George Fernandes (India’s future Defence Minister) declared openly that ‘he could organize a strike that would bring down the Indira Gandhi Government at any time by paralyzing railway transport to a dead stop’.
In a speech meant to mobilize railway men for strike he said
“Realize the strength which you possess. Seven days strike of the Indian Railways- every thermal station of the country would close down. A ten day strike of the Indian Railways- every steel mill in India would close down and the industries of the country would come to a halt for the next 12 months. If once the steel mill furnace is switched off- it takes nine months to refire. A fifteen day strike in Indian Railways- the country would starve” (The Hindu | 30 March 1974)
The opposition’s main aim was to wreck the economy and paralyse the administration. This is why they pitched their demands so high and displayed little interest in negotiation of their demands.
It was clear to the Government that the strike was politically motivated and was planned to paralyze the country. With its back to the wall, the Government had to defend the state and assert its right to govern. Indira Gandhi’s Government came down heavily on the protesters. Thousands of employees were arrested and their families were driven out of their quarters.
VII. There were other important factors for the proclamation of the Emergency. There were some external factors too. The US showered praise on JP and his role in fighting the Indira Gandhi Government in 1974. The Nixon administration wanted to punish her defiance to the US in 1971 and for conducting India’s first Nuclear Test later. The hectic activity of Peter Burleigh, a US consular officer who was constantly in touch with the agitators was proof of the meddling of foreign powers. Intelligence reports of how Nixon’s administration wanted to overthrow Bangabandhu Mujib’s Government in Bangladesh added to more suspicion.
In an interview with journalist Jonathan Dimbleby in 1978, when Gandhi was asked the precise nature of the danger to Indian security that drove her to declare a state of emergency, she promptly replied, “it was obvious, isn’t it? The whole subcontinent had been destabilized.”
VIII. The disqualification of Indira Gandhi in the Rae Bareli election through the High Court Judgement of June 12, 1975 came as last straw and precipitated the Emergency. On June 24, the Supreme Court put a conditional stay on the High Court order: Gandhi could attend Parliament, but would not be allowed to vote unless the court pronounced on her appeal.
IX. The opposition wasted no time in mounting a full-fledged campaign against Indira Gandhi Government. They planned demonstrations outside PM’s residence, gherao of industrialists and businessmen supporting the Prime Minister, gate meetings outside mills, lunch-hour meetings of Central Government employees etc.
Jan Morcha- a motley group of 10 parties, with Morarjee Desai as Chairman was formed. In a rally in Ramlila Grounds, he asked the army, the police and the Government servants not to obey orders and challenged the Government to try him of treason. He even said encouraged the military to plan a coup and gherao the PM’s residence.
X. A day after the Supreme Court judgment, an ordinance was drafted declaring a state of internal emergency and the President signed on it immediately. In her letter to the President requesting the declaration of Emergency, Gandhi wrote, “Information has reached us that indicate imminent danger to the security of India.”
Early next morning, Indira Gandhi announced the declaration of National Emergency.
It is no secret that they were fears of a military coup to overturn a democratically elected Government in India had forced the PM to take this extreme step which, technically was Constitutionally valid.
It is no secret that the opposition called upon the military, police and government employees to flout “illegal” orders. They urged students to walk out of classes, taxpayers to refuse to pay taxes and factory workers to strike. They also advocated that the Information Minister should be barricaded for allowing All-India Radio to “lie” for the Prime Minister.
There are many excesses during the Emergency which nobody is condoning. Some were real, some were highly exaggerated. Similar conditions or even worse conditions were created during the Morarjee Desai Government too. But then it did not have a legal, Constitutional and Parliamentary sanction of the Emergency.
Coming back to 2018, Forty-three long years have passed since Emergency was declared. UPA Chairperson, Sonia Gandhi in an interview already said that her mother-in-law, Indira Gandhi had regretted it. Congress party has apologized for it, time and again.
But we do not know, why the BJP, is hell bent to invoke it every year. Is it because the present Modi Government has nothing to show?
India has moved on, but the BJP is stuck with the Emergency.
Next summers, India will see a New Government at the Centre. It will either chose a monolithic single party Government and reelect an idea that destroys its civilizational values and Constitution or it will elect a motley group of regional parties led by a National party with conflicting ideologies and aspirations that may not be able to provide a masochistic, authoritarian and theocratic leadership but will definitely provide a way out of the conundrum that India is being pushed into. It is a difficult choice for the voter.
The first time voter which is mesmerized and easily won over by the use of ‘soft power’, aggressive propaganda, emotive ideas and tall promises hasn’t really witnessed past coalition Governments in India, and will have an inherent tendency to go for a ‘Single Party rule’. On the other hand, mature voters who understand what ‘Freedom’ in its true sense means for a country like India may opt for the ‘coalition’.
Personally, I am all for a strong single National party leadership at the Centre, but in the present circumstances, that option is closed for liberals like me because, I do not want my country to disintegrate through bigotry, hatred and narrow mindedness. A lesser known fact that we tend to forget is that coalition Governments have delivered in the past. We tend to forget that the coalition Government under Dr Manmohan Singh lifted 14 crore people out of poverty and provided the best growth rate ever possible in modern India. We also tend to forget that, it was a minority Government of P V Narasimha Rao that banished the past practices of ‘License Raj’ and undertook the biggest economic reforms that India witnessed in the past century. Yes, some coalition Governments have failed too, but those were the 70’s.
Those political commentators who create this false equivalence between Indira Gandhi and present day Narendra Modi are living in a fool’s paradise. The Indira Gandhi Government was 11 years old, when due to a variety of socio-political movements the most flawed coalition of India – Janata Party led by Morarji Desai was installed and it crumbled with its own contradictions. On the contrary, Narendra Modi is only a 4 year Prime Minister. His series of self-goals like Demonetisation and Flawed GST, along with widespread mal-governance, cronyism, covered with a sugary outer shell of thousands of crores of propaganda cannot be compared to sound economic and historic measures of Indira Gandhi like the Nationalization of Banks, Ending Privy Purses or the 1971 War.
The object of this piece was not to make any comparisons between the two, but this has to be strongly underlined and stated. They are simply incomparable.
During the Plenary Session of the Indian National Congress, its political resolution mentions a very important dimension that might change the face of Indian politics in 2019.
“Congress will adopt a pragmatic approach for co-operation with all like-minded Parties and evolve a common workable program to defeat the BJP-RSS in the 2019 elections”
The Karnataka elections happened just after the Congress’ 84th Plenary Session. And the Congress did show a great ‘pragmatic approach’ and immense flexibility to work with ‘like-minded’ JD(S).
The recent bye-poll results are a copy book illustration of the ‘pragmatic approach’ adopted by the Congress party under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi. Wherever the Congress needed to step back and provide a larger role to the regional ‘like-minded’parties- it conveniently did. Wherever the Congress thought, it should pitch in- it surely did! Politics is all about pragmatism and no better than the Congress party knows this.
In the same Plenary Session, Congress President Rahul Gandhi, elaborated about the relationship between the People of India and the Congress party. He said-
“India expects much more from the Congress because it holds us, the Congress party on higher standard than any other organisation…”
Yes, the Congress party is extremely mindful of the fact that people of India will not let our Constitution be sacrificed at the mercy of the RSS-BJP. If the Congress does not use each and every tool left to its disposal to save the ideas, ideals and institutions that our forefathers so painstakingly built and nurtured, it will be failing in its Constitutional duty. Congress will fail the people of India, if it does not give an equal fight to the divisive forces of RSS-BJP. It will fail India, if it does not bring in the ‘like -minded’ regional parties on board to ensure that the coalition provides maximum damage to the theocracy of the BJP. It will fail if it does not provide an alternative agenda of Governance and Development which is Liberal, Progressive and Inclusive. It will fail if lets India plunge into the darkness of economic mismanagement. It will fail India if it does not protect its Farmers from distress, its Weaker Sections from persecution and it’s Working Class from exploitation.
Kairana can be a template- but it is mainly an electoral template. Panning Narendra Modi cannot be idea. Congress cannot be accused of “Modi Vs All” and ‘Anti-Modi- plank’ alone cannot be an idea that should attract the voters. There has to be a positive idea.
Congress is the only force which can also provide an ideological template- A definitive narrative.
Flashback 2004: The UPA and the Left Parties had a ‘Common Minimum Programme’ which was almost entirely implemented from 2004-09. Congress needs to provide a common ideological template to this coalition. The coalition should have something to ‘propagate’. Leaders don’t win elections—the battle of ideas is what matters
So what are the broad ideas which the coalition can find a common ground on and built its campaign around?
Let me attempt some broad ones-
1. Preserving social harmony and fighting fundamentalism of all hues and shades. 2. Economic growth – creating jobs- realistic, doable, workable ideas for job creation. 3. Implementation of the Swaminathan Committee for Farmers in letter and in spirit so that they get their fare prices and farm distress is alleviated. 4. Education and Healthcare policy reforms- it’s a fairly non-controversial, non-debatable subject and can easily be implemented. The BJP in the past 4 years, has failed our Education system. 5. Women Empowerment- political, economic, social & legal. Tangible solutions to enhance gender equality. 6. Protecting Institutions 7. Providing space to regional aspirations within the Indian Union. More say of states in economic policy making. 8. Judicial Reforms – reducing the pendency of the cases. 9. Welfare of the Weaker Sections- SC, ST, OBC and Minorities. o Relaunching the Sub Plans that the BJP abolished. o Strengthening the SC-SC Act. o Enhancing scholarships and welfare measures. 10. Fast tracking Modernisation of Our Defence Forces- the BJP has totally neglected our External and Internal Security. 11. Transparency- RTI to be strengthened, Lokpal, Whistleblowers Bill. 12. Protecting Our Environment. Saving our rivers, coastal areas, wildlife, air and forests.
These are the 12 suggestive broad ideas that should be the Magna Carta of the coalition. There can be several more additions, but this can be a start. These are all non-controversial ideas and there cannot be any point of contention amongst the regional parties on these 12 ideas.
Now it is the Congress and the coalition to decide.
India’s politics has truly changed under Narendra Modi’s BJP. The deepening roots of Democracy are being uprooted and are being smeared with a pesticide of superficiality.
As the dust settles on the Karnataka Elections and the dramatic turns of events thereafter, I wondered ‘What is it in the BJP’s narrative, which makes them win? The Congress party might have clinched the Karnataka cliffhanger, but there are deeper questions which need to be answered. Since, I am student of Communication; the ‘Narrative’ part of it made me introspect. ‘Messaging’- is the key and how has the BJP been able to convince people through it?
The answer lies in a short personal story.
I may not come from a political family or lineage, but whenever we had any dining table conversations on current affairs and politics, my elders always made a point that never believe anything unless you apply your own mind, especially when you have certain doubts about it. Like all educated middle class homes, we were also taught to question and debate.
At our joint family bungalow in Kanpur, near the driveway, my great grandfather had built a temple with small marble idols; six of them- A Shivalinga in black stone, placed in a square-shaped recessed space, which could facilitate the ‘Jal Abhishek’ on Lord Shiva; whose drain internally reached to a ‘KeleKa Ped’ (Banana Tree); Marble idols of – Lord Ganesha, Goddess Parvati, Lord Kartikeya, Lord Hanuman & Nandi.
Nobody can forget that day of 21st September, 1995, when the stone idols of Lord Ganesha started ‘drinking’ milk out of the spoon. 23 years ago, I was in Class fourth, coming back from school, I still remember it very clearly, I saw a long queue at our driveway; of people coming from outside with milk packets and glasses to offer milk to the idols in our temple and I could not believe my eyes. Lord Ganesha was sipping in the milk, I was told.
Since childhood, my grandmother inculcated this habit in us to take care of the idols, I used to clean up the temple, remove the dried flowers and leaves, daily wash it, ‘make them wear their clothes’ and even lay the idols to rest by placing a small blanket on them, in winters. I used to love it this daily ritual. Also, I developed a special bond with the Bhagwan. Praying to the God and carrying out the rituals were not binding on me and nobody ever forced to do it. Also, I made it a point to celebrate all festivals of all religions- Be it decorating the Christmas tree and having a joint family fete with games and goodies to celebrating Eid with delicacies gifted by our neighbours- Khan Sa’ab’s family; or be it national occasions such as Gandhi Jayanti or even paying tribute to MunshiPrem Chand on his Birth Anniversary. Believe it or not, I made it a point to celebrate everything.
Coming back to ‘Ganesha idol drinking milk- mass hysteria’, on that very same day, I saw on news, scientists attributing this phenomenon to capillary action and presenting detail theories of how this happened. I was satisfied by the explanation and many years later, I found out that this predominantly urban hysteria was created by the RSS. It was their first successful attempt on mass rumuor mongering.
The present day socio-political landscape of India is now much more advanced than this lone experiment. The mediums have changed, but the modus operandi remains the same. A ‘Whats App University’ has successfully (sic) been created, photoshop images, using social media, concocted videos, fake news, using even mass media to plant wrong stories- everything trick is being used.
Thousands of factories of lies are being now opened daily to spread rumuors and advance the RSS-BJP agenda. The success of the ‘Ganesha drinking milk’ experiment have made them to scale up their agenda, a zillion more times, using sophisticated means and technology to spread lies. However, one common thread still forms the basis of this propaganda machinery- Emotive Issues.
Each and every propaganda has to be ‘Emotion driven- Nationalistic emotion, Religious Emotion, Political Emotion, Societal Emotion….’ It has to touch one simple emotive chord and your message is through. It does not matter, how non-scientific, irrational, superficial, bigoted, communal, false, fake, denigrate d or divisive your ‘emotional theme’ is. It has to just bring out a ‘Call for action’ in favour of the BJP-RSS. That is it!
Narendra Modi’s politics is precisely based on this- Emotive issues. Issues that the BJP espouses do not have any deeper effect tangible effect in our lives, but our highly emotive in nature and are completely superficial and shallow in nature. Sample some of these gems(sic), only used in Karnataka are:-
“Congress politicians (Rahul Gandhi) should learn patriotism through the Mudhol dog (hounds) of Karnataka”; “Jawaharlal Nehru and V K Krishna Menon mistreated General Thimayya, after the 1948 war with Pakistan”; “ Congress party insulted Field Marshal Cariappa”; “When Shaheed Bhagat Singh, BatukeshwarDutt, Veer Savarkar, greats like them were jailed fighting for the country’s independence, did any Congress leader go to meet them?” Referring to a popular vector graphic made by a young artist from Kerala, PM Modi said “The Congress’ ecosystem doesn’t even tolerate the magnificent art of Karan Acharya whose Hanuman captured the imagination of the entire country. Unable to digest its success, the Congress tried miring it in a controversy. There is no iota of democracy in the minds of Congress members”; “For 15 minutes, without taking a paper in your hand, can you please talk about the achievements of your government in Karnataka. You can speak in any language as you please- English, Hindi or your Mother tongue( Italian)”
All these are full of vitriol, no real substance and are plain distortion of history. But Modi’s admirers’ love it. Many political commentators shower praises on Modi and call these as ‘intimidating’, ‘high voltage’, ‘passionate’ and what not. But the simple fact remains that Narendra Modi’s ‘messaging’ is purely based on the RSS brand of rumour mongering and spreading lies- camouflaged in an ‘emotive theme’.
BJP has made India’s political discourse utterly shallow and superbly superficial. If we carefully check the number of debates that happen on our television channels, most happen on emotive issues – Hindu-Muslim, India-Pakistan, Caste division, Communal Conundrums and so on. A deliberate design to feed India’s young minds into such superficial trappings is being fostered by the RSS-BJP.
Since attention spans are less, knowledge is trigger driven, books are becoming increasingly redundant and there is no sense of history left- this phenomenon is now at its peak. ‘Headlines Management’ is the key and ‘Spins’ attributed to ‘Sources’ fill up the news-cycle! Who cares about issues of women safety, when you have ‘Triple Talaq Bill’ as the greatest BJP achievement to showcase? *
No wonder, in a letter dated 7th December, 1947- India’s First Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru wrote this about the RSS to his Chief Ministers:-
“Some provincial governments have taken against periodicals for promoting hatred between communities. Probably the newspapers of the R.S.S. are more to blame in this matter than any other newspapers or periodicals outside Pakistan. It is amazing how they carry on this communal propaganda in its extremist form”
“I have some knowledge of the way the Nazi Movement developed in Germany. It attracted by its superficial trappings and strict discipline considerable number of lower middle class young men and women who are normally not too intelligent and for whom life appeared to offer little to attract them. And so they drifted towards the Nazi party because its policy and programme, such as they were, were simple, negative and did not require an active effort of the mind. The Nazi party brought Germany to ruin and I have little doubt that if these tendencies are allowed to spread and increase in India, they would do enormous injury to India. No doubt India would survive. But she would be grievously wounded and would take a long time to recover.”
Unfortunately, Pandit Nehru’s prophecy about ‘Superficial Trappings’ is soon coming true in BJP ruled India!
*Aside: Do you know that No BJP Government has ever brought a single reformative bill when it comes to Women Safety or Rights, ever? All Women Reforms Laws in this country are brought by the Congress! But no one cares about that!
RECENT COMMENTS