Medha's Mistake

"Dr Manmohan Singh is a clean, decent, competent leader! For God’ssake give him a chance!" How often have we heard this? But his government doesnot deliver. It cannot deliver. Not the world’s best leader can deliver unlesssupported by an adequate political instrument. The tattered coalitiongovernments pulling in different directions that have governed India for decadeswould frustrate performance of any leader. What India needs above all is apolitical instrument. It did have a political instrument once upon a time. Ithas none today. What went wrong?

In late 19th century the British created the Indian National Congress todevelop "a safety valve for great and growing forces". Even after educatedIndians took over leadership of the Congress, they functioned with disciplineand procedure associated with the best of British tradition. That is why theCongress has lasted despite enormous decline. The problem for India arose afterIndependence.

Pandit Nehru was independent India’s first Prime Minister. Steeped inBritish culture, he was endowed with a liberal instinct. He was deeply committedto democratic norms. In the early years of independence he was Prime Minister,Congress president and most popular mass leader rolled into one. The Congressruled the centre as well as all the states. He could have become a dictator ifhe wanted to. He didn’t need to. His word was law. Yet he respected chiefministers and delegated responsibility. He did this because he was at heart ademocrat.

It was easy for Nehru to slip into a flawed view of our Constitution. Hetried to make India’s political system synonymous with Britain’s Westminstermodel. That view became a false mantra for succeeding generations. ConsequentlyIndia’s federalism all but vanished. As long as a democrat like Nehru and asingle disciplined party like Congress ruled the nation, things appeareddeceptively fine. That is why perhaps the government never felt the need toestablish the Inter-State Council intended by the Constitution to deal with allmatters pertaining to centre-state and intra-state issues. But while politicalattitudes remained stuck in the Nehruvian groove, the nation’s federalcharacter relentlessly asserted itself. Linguistic states and assertion of casteidentities were an inevitable outcome of the democratic process.

But why didn’t any new credible national party emerge? The reason wasabdication of responsibility by the class of Indians normally expected toprovide leadership. This too was a legacy of history. Post-Independence leadersof Congress, communist and socialist parties had all-India vision. Due toprolonged one party rule, they gradually fell by the wayside. Quick-fix leaderspropelled by caste, community and language replaced them. The educated middleclass, basking in the comforting shadow of the Nehru dynasty, was content toleave dirty politics to quick-fix leaders while itself it pursued career andprofit. Therefore both the federal democratic spirit and a national visiongradually disappeared from India’s politics. Today, a score of squabblingparties led by tin-pot dictators govern both the centre and the states. In suchconditions, what can any single leader accomplish?

However, the first faint stirrings of change are now perceptible. Buffeted bycrime, corruption, cover-ups and collapse of administration, the middle class isslowly waking up. Citizens are joining protest. Some are even entering politics.In Tamil Nadu, young computer savvy citizens have floated a party and enteredthe electoral fray. They want to change India’s political culture. It matterslittle if they all lose their deposits. The actor Vijay Kanth has floated hisown party which will contest all seats in the state.

Celebrities are intervening in social causes. Some time back a host ofBollywood stars took to the streets against administrative neglect in Mumbai.Aamir Khan joined the Narmada and Bhopal gas tragedy protestors. Earlier, actorRoshan Seth took to the streets to put the Delhi administration on thedefensive. Cynics made snide remarks. All this was for cheap publicity, theysaid. The comments of the celebrities were naïve, they said. But celebritiesdon’t need publicity through political or social causes. And the depth orotherwise of their political understanding is irrelevant. What matters is, theyare concerned. And their concern reflects the sense of growing alarm and disgustin most of India’s urban class. Which is all to the good. Let them getinvolved. The rest might follow.

There are of course many NGOs and social activists who have devoted years toworking on the ground. Despite their best intentions they are missing the woodfor the trees. After all their labour and toil to highlight legitimategrievances what do they achieve? They end up seeking redressal from a bunch ofcorrupt and unresponsive politicians. Don’t they understand that socialactivism has become irrelevant in a society governed by a class that is socorrupt, criminal and callous that it needs nothing less than a culturalrevolution? If Naxalites are succeeding, there is good reason for it. Alas, thededication that NGOs or Naxalites display in social activism or self-defeatingviolence is wasted. Deployed in electoral politics it would change theface of India.

Recently India’s leading social activist Medha Patkar ended, after twentydays, a fast unto death in protest against inadequate rehabilitation of victimsdisplaced by the Sardar Sarovar Dam. Asked if pressure tactics like anindefinite fast should be used to influence decisions, she said all democraticchannels had been exhausted. "Gandhi showed this path to gain freedom," shesaid. But Gandhi operated under foreign rule when democratic options wereunavailable. He chose non-violence in place of violence. Medha Patkar is wrongto assert that all democratic channels had been exhausted. The most obviouschannel has not even been attempted. Namely, to organize a new political party,electorally defeat the corrupt leaders, and assume power to redress grievances.But that is a daunting task. It requires a different kind of courage. PerhapsMedha Patkar and others will summon such courage? She did say she would launch anew campaign to propagate not "a Narmada Bachao Andolan but a Desh BachaoAndolan".

All strength to those prepared to address India’s real problem - the lackof a suitable political instrument. To create one, they need a sensible agenda,democratic procedure for running their organisation, communication skills tospread their message, and organisational effort to mobilize voters. Similarskills are required of entrepreneurs establishing big corporations. In this,many succeed spectacularly. But they seek profit. Are there no Indians who seekpower for changing India and making it a just society? Medha Patkar and othersare mistaken if they think that in today’s India they can deliver justicewithout acquiring power.

Rajinder Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com