BackIndia’s gridlock needs a visionary leader
Not since it gained independence has India needed a visionary at the helm more than it does now; so think hard before you vote
Premium
Given the fluid nature of circumstances, both globally and domestically, it would be almost foolhardy to crystal-gaze into what awaits India in 2014. At the same time, though, there may be a less speculative way to gain insights into next year: how India deals with its inheritance.
Not just the economy, in which low inflation and accelerating growth of recent years have switched places. This is probably nearing the end of its cycle with the economy bottoming out and inflation peaking after the massive squeeze in demand initiated by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) through interest rate hikes.
More worrying, from the point of view of an incoming regime, is the logjam that the country has witnessed between the haves and the have-nots—breaking this gridlock is a necessary condition for the Indian economy to regain its momentum. While the haves define policy change, the politically empowered have-nots can stall its implementation.
Both anecdotally and empirically—captured so well in the jobless growth phenomenon of the first decade of the new millennium and growing inequality—it is a fact that few have gained from India’s remarkable economic turnaround over the last three decades. Yes, materially, people are better off than before; unfortunately, it is nowhere a match for their aspirations—which took flight along with the country’s economic growth trajectory.
No matter where we look—whether it be about targeting of subsidies, mining for precious resources, people-centric urbanization, developing new infrastructure like roads/highways (more recently the Navi Mumbai airport project, or setting up of the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu)—there is an unresolved face-off. And this gulf is only widening. More often than not, these disputes are now ending up in courts and the judiciary is forced to be the referee.
This is a less than optimal situation because differences of such nature mirror the political pulls and pressures in society and hence, should ideally be resolved by elected politicians. So far, politicians have struggled to come up with a template to resolve such vexing face-offs where there can never be a winner. Whether it be environment versus development, paying subsidies in cash or in kind, tariffs for electricity or water, there is no black and white answer. This is because there are far more stakeholders in the economy today than ever before, with varying degrees of economic capacity (or the lack of it).
So any solution is bound to have its set of losers and gainers, especially since the degree of benefits/losses are variegated. The political economy of this face-off is what politicians have not been able to comprehend, leave alone resolve. Understandable: the phenomenon is unprecedented and most Indian politicians in positions of influence (and the bureaucrats who advise them) cut their teeth in an entirely different era. At the least, it makes them uneasy. This is because those losing out, like we saw in the face-off between fishermen from the villages adjoining the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in South Tamil Nadu and the authorities, can quickly lean on the explosive power of religion—in this case, the local church.
Similarly, there are others who will fall back on equally powerful denominations like caste to fend off pressures. Not only does the debate assume polemic overtones in such situations, it turns acerbic—precluding dialogue and more often than not leading to violent confrontation.
It is far easier for politicians, most of whom have lost touch with the grassroots, to restrict the debate to a paradigm that has long outlived its time.
So when the proportion of the poor in the country drops to a historic low of 22%, no politician is willing to acknowledge it. The opposition, because it will be extending credit to the establishment, and the government, because it believes the political message of fighting for the poor is difficult to let go. The consequences are obvious: growing disconnect between organized politics and society. The reckless manner in which the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance has undermined institutions over the last 10 years has only exacerbated the problem.
The resulting vacuum is waiting to be exploited—something that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) did so spectacularly in the just-concluded elections to the Delhi state assembly. However, since they emerged as a reaction to the existing politics of status quo, the dialogue is combative—which will only worsen the gridlock in the country.
Obviously, the solution has to be a halfway house. Any incoming regime will have to undertake confidence-building measures and bridge the credibility deficit. This is easier said than done. The temptation to resort to business-as-usual would be difficult to resist.
Which is what makes the 2014 general election so significant.
The country is on a cusp. Not since it gained independence has the country needed a visionary—who will have the political courage to attempt out-of-the-box solutions to end this deadlock—at the helm more than it does now. It will not be about strong or weak leadership, secular or communal leaders. Instead, it will be the ability to throw up a person who has the vision to redefine the “grammar of governance" in sync with contemporary India. So think hard before you vote this summer.
This is the sixth in a series of essays in which Mint’s editors take stock of 2013 and look at what the new year holds for India. To read the other essays, go to www.livemint.com.
Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed – it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!
