Modi, Naidu, Nitish - Can the Triple Engine Sarkar Work?
It is time to celebrate democracy. It is time to feel proud that our democratic governance is resilient and has matured greatly.
The people have spoken, and the parties and leaders need to introspect and internalize the hard lessons from the elections. It is a great satisfaction that except in West Bengal, by and large elections were free, fair and sans any major incidents of violence.
Here are eight lessons from the results of India 2024. Each of the learning points needs to be dispassionately and objectively comprehended because in our ability to learn from the election outcome lies the seeds of sustainable political and democratic governance.
Firstly, this election has been a story of the triumph of moderation over muscularity. It is very loud and clear that the people are looking for empathy, accommodation, mutual respect and collective agenda-setting rather than authoritative, top-down and majoritarian discourses.
Secondly, attempting a presidential style of governance in a diverse and complex federal democracy is unnatural and not in sync with the public aspirations. The parliamentary system, though slow and rancorous, provides scope for debates, discussions and consensus building. Whether Mrs. G or Modi, attempts to be autocratic and narcissistic in the parliamentary framework evoked public rejection. Modi has been fortunate that the popular wrath stopped short of decimation.
Thirdly, after a decade of single-party dominance, we are returning to the coalition model of governance. I believe coalition is the natural model for India. Policy making needs 360-degree feedback and in a single-party model with a supreme leader commanding sweeping loyalty, debates and deliberations take a back seat.
Fourthly, we are likely to have a Common Minimum Program Agenda for governance which would put down the boundaries of policy making. We can reasonably expect controversial laws like CAA, Common Civil Code and other items of potential divisiveness to be put on the back burner. This augurs well and would reduce the scope for social aggressiveness and alienation among marginalized sections. Alienation of the major minority community in India has been a significant fault line under Modi's governance. Sadly, the government response was more negation and indifference.
Fifthly, the new coalition model would result in better representation of Muslims in national governance, because some of the key partners of the alliance would nominate Muslim MPs as Ministers. The drought of minority representation in ministries is bound to end.
Sixthly, a coalition setup would invariably mean that consensus-building and openness on policies would return to democratic governance. There would be delays and roadblocks to reforms. But the positive side is there would hopefully be more ownership and wider agreement on economic and social policies.
Seventhly, some of the governance points that have eluded centre stage would no longer be held back, however contentious they are. One such action point is the caste consensus at the national level. This is a necessity as policies on jobs, financial inclusion and governance participation must factor in the social imbalances in representation that linger after 75 years of independence.
Eighthly, populism and welfarism would become part of the core governance agenda. There would be more poverty alleviation programs and economic empowerment policies. These would involve higher public spending and would strain developmental expenses. As a corollary, we need to enhance private capital investment in infrastructure building. FDIs through the PPP model in infra and utilities would become a necessity if we are to balance welfare spending and infrastructure building.
There will be many more fallouts of the unexpected and drastic fall in the BJP’s seats in the Parliament. More than anything else, there are serious differences in the ideologies and leadership styles of the coalition partners. The key partners would be assertive and demanding. Whether Modi, long used to have his way in governance would be able to adapt to the demands of managing contradictions in the coalition structure and narratives is a million-dollar question.
My own assessment is that over two-plus years into governance, the contradictions and differences among partners might force a rather acrimonious divorce and as a result, we may have a period of prolonged uncertainty and tentativeness in governance. It may lead to the next general election being called much earlier than the deadline of 2029.
Comentarios