Hat Tricky: Ab Ki Baar Coalition Sarkar

 

While Prime Minister Modi, set an ambitious slogan for the NDA of “Ab Ki Baar 400 Paar” with the BJP targeted to win 370 seats on its own, he has to remain content with a number of around 240, against 303 seats won in 2019. Aided by his pre-poll allies adding around 50 seats more, the NDA reaches a figure of around 292, higher than the milestone of 272 needed to form a government. BJP on its own won higher no of seats than the opposition INDIA (Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance) block at 234 with the Indian National Congress – its largest constituent – winning 99 seats – a resurgence, though, from the 52 seats that in won on 2019. The mandate for the BJP is thus clear is to form a coalition govt.

73year old Modi shall, thus, stake claim to power at the centre for the 3^rd time equalling the record of the first Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. While he had set a figure of 75 years for retirement, in 2014, to edge away elderly statesmen within his party, the same rule may not apply to him. In fact, Home Minister, Amit Shah, has said that the BJP shall be led by Modi in the 2029 elections too.

The spirited fight by Akhilesh Yadav, with 37 seats, in UP & Mamta Banerjee, with 29 seats, in West Bengal changed the contours of the elections. The SP & TMC thus emerged as the 3^rd & 4^th largest parties. That the DMK would do well, in Tamil Nadu, against a fractured opposition was always on the cards & the results did not disappoint. On the other hand, the Central belt of India, from Gujarat in the West to Odisha in the East with states like MP & Chhattisgarh in between, blessed the BJP with nearly a clean sweep accounting for 84 of the 87 seats – 33% of its total no. of 240.

Intriguingly, nearly all pollsters got the exit poll nos. wrong, denting their credibility. The huge swing in the stock markets post the release of exit polls & the slump on 4^th June post the release of electoral results, trapping amateur retail investors in the bargain, shall keep the rumour mills churning.

BJP Strategy:

The figure of 370 was deliberately chosen as a “message” to enthuse the cadre “messenger’ & remind the electorate about the abrogation of Article 370 in J&K, to buttress the BJP’s National Security credentials. The consecration of the Ram Temple at Ayodhya, in Jan 2024, was specifically timed for the General Elections. Unfortunately, for the BJP, Balakot, in 2019, appears to have created a stronger impact on voting as compared to the 2 aforementioned issues that formed the bedrock of the BJP campaign. Mid-course correction & a pivot did not help either.

Modi, now, would have to lean on the clutches of at least 2 of his allies – the TDP with 16 seats & JD(U) with 12 seats. Both Chandra Babu Naidu of the TDP & Nitish Kumar of the JD (U) have a history of allying themselves with the opposition earlier & hence cannot be trusted to give unconditional support.  Both of them are experienced politicians, who had asked for “special Status” for AP & Bihar earlier & are capable of extracting their pound of flesh. “Special status”, though, is unlikely to be conceded as fiscal incentives to a particular state could make investments in the neighbouring ones unattractive. Now that the BJP has won Odisha, “special status” to either Bihar or AP would strictly be a “no go”. Ministerial berths & financial packages may be the barter on offer.

Leading a minority government, is a fresh experience for Modi, habituated as he always was in leading majority governments, for 12 years, as the Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat (2002-14) & 10 years as PM (since 2014). He will now be forced either to transform himself, into Atal Bihari Vajpayee avatar, to lead a coalition govt., or nudge the break up of some opposition parties, luring them via the crumbs of office or threatening them via the Damocles sword of the Govt. - agencies like the ED, CBI etc. It will be interesting to see which path he pursues, especially after the electoral reverses he suffered in Maharashtra, as a consequence of the salami slicing of the Shiv Sena & the NCP. Every leader is interested in leaving behind a favourable legacy & Modi, especially in his 3^rd term, would be more so.  

The Main Takeaways from the elections:

·         Without internal contradictions between the Central & State level leaders in UP – perhaps, related to succession planning in the post Modi era – clashes between Thakurs vs Rest of BJP support base within the State & the absence of RSS cadre on the ground, the BJP would have won 30 seats more in the state, helping it cross the 272figure mark on its own. The Double Engine Sarkar of charismatic leaders Modi & Yogi, supported by a well-received Ration scheme, lost out to the “constitution under threat” propaganda of the opposition – that appears to have attracted more Dalits into the fold who feared the loss of Reservation Benefits - & the badly received “Agniveer” scheme, that entails absorption of only 25% of the inductees, into the Armed Forces, after 4 years.  BJP President JP Nadda’s controversial statement that the BJP can do without the RSS, would continue to haunt them & a reconciliation could be attempted to prevent recurrence of a similar demoralising results.

·         That the BJP lost Faizabad - that houses the temple town of Ayodhya - despite the emotive Ram Temple issue – highlights the success of the new found caste calculus of the SP of fielding a Dalit leader in a non-reserved constituency. Similarly, the loss of Smriti Irani from Amethi to KL Sharma of the Congress.

·         The salami slicing of Maharashtra Parties – Shiv Sena & NCP – appears to be have been rejected by the electorate with Uddhav Thackery & Sharad Pawar faring better than Eknath Shinde & Ajit Pawar. Hopefully, this shall impose some moral rationality on the BJP going forward.

·         While the rise in voting percentage, in Jammu & Kashmir, from ~25%, since 1989, to > 50% is welcome, the election, from Baramulla, of Engineer Rashid – arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention ) Act & lodged in Delhi’s  Tihar jail -  could raise challenges as do the victory from Khadoor Sahib, of Amritpal Singh – Head of the Pro Khalistan Waris Punjab De, locked up at Dibrugarh, Assam, under the National Security Act & Sarabjit Singh Khalsa, Beant Singh’s son from Faridkot (Reserved) constituency, Punjab. Beant Singh was the Sikh bodyguard who assassinated Indira Gandhi in 1984. An electoral victory may not hasten their release from prison though.

 

Expectation on Way Forward:

·         The Prime Minister’s victory speech emphasizing on the necessity of “attacking corruption” indicating the likely replication of Xi Jinping’s playbook, in China, to strengthen his position further.

·         The angst of the electorate in the Hindi heartland on the “Agniveer” scheme could force the govt to rework on the scheme although, in all honesty, it was a sane attempt at rationalizing Defence expenditure & reducing the average age of the frontline soldiers.

·         The 2.1 Lakh crores dividend from the RBI, higher by 1.25 Lakh crores (~0.4%) of GDP, announced has the potential to reduce the fiscal deficit from 5.6% to 5.2% close to the 5.1% announced in the interim budget. Hopefully, the govt. continues with its fiscal glide path & capex drive rather than be driven astray by the electoral results & allies demands.

 

Conclusion

It is to the credit of the Indian electorate that they have strengthened the hands of the opposition – a necessity for a vibrant Democracy. Eternal vigilance is the price of Democracy with an activist civil society, media & the Judiciary too acting as a watchdog.

At the same time, by restricting the Congress to 99 MPs & the INDIA alliance to 234, the electorate has expressed no confidence in them in leading the govt. By reducing the BJP to 240, albeit higher than the INDIA alliance’s 234, but less than the magic fig. of 272, the message, clearly, is a directive to run an inclusive govt. based on the principle of consensus. While an attempt to break the opposition ranks & parties to sail beyond the 272, is always an enticing, though morally reprehensible alternative, the saner preferable option would be to converge on a Common Minimum Program, revitalize the moribund Parliamentary Standing Committee System to arrive at consensus-based decision making. In the days ahead, it will be interesting to see how each of the Parties draws on these lessons & strategize their way forward.

Takeaways from the 2022 Indian State Elections

 The results of the 5 Indian state elections, announced on 10^th March, gave a 4:1 verdict in favour of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) versus the opposition. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) won Punjab while the BJP emerged as the single largest party in the remaining 4 states– Uttar Pradesh (UP), Uttarakhand (UK), Goa & Manipur. Not surprisingly, Prime Minister (PM) Modi, perhaps, as part of a psychological warfare, to demoralize the opposition, averred, in his victory speech that the UP state election victory, of 2022, is predictive of BJPs national Parliamentary election victory in 2024 just as the state election victory in 2017 heralded a BJP win, in 2019; obviously, he is not unaware that a week is a long time in politics.

Meanwhile, Raghav Chadda, Punjab Co-Incharge, announced AAP to be the “natural & national” replacement of the Indian National Congress (INC) leading Digvijay Singh, of the Congress, to cheekily tweet  that “AAP would win in only those states that the BJP has no stakes”.  With AAP making inroads into BJP ruled states like Goa & Gujarat & with an impressive performance in the Surat & Ahmedabad Municipal Elections, INC’s jab lacks punch.

Chadda, prematurely, added that given an opportunity, Kejriwal shall be seen in a “bigger role of Prime Minister”. AAP is in power in the 2 states of Delhi (7 Lok Sabha seats) & Punjab (13 Lok Sabha seats), a total of 20 only of which it might secure around 10 seats, in 2024, while parties like the Samajwadi Party (SP) in UP or AITC (All India Trinamool Congress) in Bengal, could win more than 20, making a pitch for PM difficult. Devi Gowda becoming PM, in 1996, with the support of a small no. of MPs from Karnataka, is more of an exception rather than the rule. Not surprisingly, the Chief Ministers (CM) Mamata Banerjee (Bengal) & KCR  (Telangana), nursing Prime Ministerial ambitions, did not even send the customary congratulatory wishes on AAP’s Punjab win; neither did other CMs Stalin (Tamil Nadu TN), Uddhav Thackery  (Maharashtra) & Hemant Soren  (Jharkhand) - who are more aligned with the congress - laying bare the mask of opposition unity; the BJP must be smiling.

The Election highlights:

(1)The electorally significant state of UP with 80 Lok sabha seats, was retained by the BJP, albeit with a reduced majority from 312 to 255 seats, in a 403 member house, heralding a record 2^nd consecutive term for the same party since 1985; its allies added to the nos.  The 16 point gap between the BJP (48%) vs. SP (32%) among women voters – as per the Axis – My India exit poll - attributed to the efficient delivery of welfare, including ration & maintenance of law & order, better than its predecessor, might have tilted the scales decisively, overriding the negative sentiment against the party due to the heavy loss of lives during Covid.  Some pundits’ predicted the emergence of Yogi Adityanath – aka “Bulldozer Baba” – as the natural successor to Modi, but the narrative was quickly squelched by BJP leaders like Amit Malviya – head of the IT cell & Central Minister Jitendra Singh, with the reasoning that in the BJP’s hierarchy, it is Modi on rungs 1-10 & any other leader comes only thereafter indicating that the Modi - Yogi fault lines remain unbridged. There are other contenders like Amit Shah for succession. Worth remembering that History is replete with instances where an identified successor does not make it or a ‘compromise candidate”- like Lal Bahadur Sastry, the first "accidental Prime Minister" - emerges to save the party.

Reverting to the elections, the UP contest was reduced to a bipolar one between BJP (vote share of 41.3%, 255 seats) & SP (32.1% with 111 seats) consequent to the decimation of the Bahujan Samaj party (BSP), reduced to 1 seat with 12.88% vote share against their normal 20%. The slow withering of Jatav Mayawati’s hold over the non-Jatav Dalit votes, shifting towards the BJP, because of their concerted efforts, especially, to draw in the Pasis, appears to be displaying a successful trend line. Muslims consolidated behind SP to make their vote count. 

(2)AAP secured a thumping victory in Punjab winning 92 of the 117 seats with a 42% vote share against INC (23%) & Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD  18.4%). The defeat of bigwigs like the incumbent Chief Minister Charanjit Channi (lost both the seats he contested), Congress State Chief Navjot Sidhu & the Badals (SAD) indicates that the people of the state have given the “Delhi Party” a chance to replicate its impressive work on healthcare & education in the neighbouring state. If successful, it can mount a challenge, against the BJP, in the neighbourhood – Himachal Pradesh & Uttarakhand too – beleaguering the already declining INC.

However, AAP could face a challenge in implementing its promises, in Punjab, considering the less than healthy state of the state exchequer. Owning nearly the entire ”smog ecosystem” – as some tweeple cheekily commented – AAP cannot now blame “others” for stubble burning & enhanced smog & pollution thereof in Delhi especially during the winter months.

It will be interesting to see how Bhagwant Mann – touted the next CM – without administrative experience performs. Kejriwal, shifting to Punjab as CM, leaving his deputy Manish Sisodia to take over Delhi could have been administratively a better bet, but AAP decision must have been predicated on the logic that such an attempt in 2017 cost them the state election – apart from the accusation of sleeping with the secessionists - & taking cognisance of the fact that Punjab never had a non Sikh CM in its entire history. Kejriwal shall, however, remain a super CM – with a potential for tussle with Mann – a former stand-up comic accused of suffering from a serious alcoholic problem by the opposition.

Congress’ attempts at self destruction were on full display in Punjab; instead of contesting elections under Capt. Amrinder Singh - despite some MLA’s opposing him as his nationalistic credentials & anti farm laws stance strengthened the party - & replacing him after the elections, INC humiliated Singh leading to his tie up with the BJP; placing a Dalit leader Channi as CM, invited Navjot Sidhu’s ire leading to a self-goal of chaos which helped the AAP secure a stupendous victory.

(3)BJP winning Manipur was predicted as any North Eastern states – dependent on central aid - have generally sided with the party in power at the centre. BJP secured 32 seats in a 60 member house & it is likely continuance of incumbent CM – Biren singh assures of stability in a sensitive border state.

Once dominant parties like the National People’s party & The Naga People’s front become junior partners.

(4)The Congress had a chance to win in Uttarakhand & Goa – especially the former which has witnessed a regime change every 5 years. The BJP govt. with 3 CMs over the last 5 years, suffered question marks on governance but still won with 47 seats (vote share 44.3%) against 19 (37.9%)of the congress; the low vote share difference between the parties indicates that INC would have won the elections if only there was lesser infighting & Harish Rawat was given a greater say & tasked to stay in his home state rather than fire fight in Punjab. While the BJP’s incumbent CM Pushkar Dhami lost the election – a signal the party would not have missed - the well-oiled party election machinery helped it win convincingly.

The Congress won 17 seats against BJP’s 13 in Goa, last time, in 2017 but was beaten by the BJP in cobbling together a majority in the 40 member house. With the count at 20 now (33.31% vote share) against Congress’s 11 seats (Vote share  23.46%), the BJP is poised to form the govt. – 3^rd time in succession. AAP opened its account with 2 seats (6.77% vote share) while Mamata’s All India Trinamool Congress (AITC ) - wrecking the Congress’ chances by poaching its MLAs & securing 5.21% of the vote without securing any seats.  Revolutionary Goans Party which secured the 3rd highest vote share, but 1 seat only, is the party to watch out for; it is modelled on Balasaheb Thackery's Shiv Sena & their fight for the rights of locals against migrants. 

The Takeaways:

(a)The victory of regional parties AITC in Bengal or DMK in TN, in the 2021 state elections indicates the effectiveness of sub nationalism (aka Regionalism) & regional identity as an effective weapon in taking on BJP’s nationalism. SP & RLD still standing, & giving a tough fight to the BJP despite eventual loss, in UP & Bihar respectively, indicates the continuing strength of the MY (Muslim - Yadav) combination in the cow belt. Muslims could desert the JD (U) & BSP in Bihar & UP & their consolidation behind a party – RJD & SP respectively – would lead to counter polarization behind another – mostly helping the BJP.

(b)Despite electorate angst, the obituary of “dynasty politics” is vastly exaggerated as most of the parties suffer from the malaise; the only difference is whether it is a case of 2^nd generation or 5^th generation dynast. C Voter’s Yashwant Deshmukh, rightly, avers that Non dynastic parties like the Asom Gana Parishad, in Assam, or the BSP, in UP, are fading & a similar fate awaits JD(U) in Bihar after the death of its leader Nitish Kumar while dynastic ones like YSRCP, TRS, SS, DMK etc. are  growing.

(c)Deshmukh adds that Political pundits are quick to arrive at erroneous conclusions describing BJP’s loss to regional satraps Mamata Banerjee in Bengal & Stalin in TN, in 2021, as a sign of “Vulnerability” & swing towards describing the current win, in 2022, as a sign of its “invincibility”. The truth is that the PM continues to tower over his rivals in terms of his popularity – which even his detractors concede.

(d)The electorate gives a boost to the BJP in the national elections even if they display nuance while voting for regional parties like the BJD in Odisha, in state elections.

(e)Apparatchiks believed that Priyanka Gandhi is the Congress party’s brahmastra ; all she could do was secure a 2.33% vote share in UP – much lower than earlier elections.  The truth is that the  congress has been on a terminal decline, in UP after losing the state elections in 1989, while Rajiv Gandhi was still alive, while the family’s spin doctors hconveniently dumped the blame on PV Narsimha Rao & his ill handling of the Babri Masjid demolition, in 1992. While her political acumen was always overrated, one can’t blame her for lacking in hard work, in UP, attempting to win over women voters by offering them 40% of the seats. But with very little of the organization left with leaders like Jitin Prasada, RPN Singh etc. joining the BJP, like Rita Bahuguna Joshi earlier, she could have done little.

(f)The obituary of the Congress is premature as it won 20% of the popular vote during the last 2 parliamentary elections. However, the insipid leadership of the Gandhi clan & the mockery of one Gandhi “acting” as Party chief while another is the de facto chief - despite publicly claiming his disinterest in the role - is disconcerting. Shunning paranoia & announcing organization elections to allow local leadership, with a mass base, to emerge, to take on the BJP on the streets, rather than encouraging factionism, to protect self, would be the right road to resurrection & redemption.

Conclusion:

The less than agreeable performance of the BJP governments reflected in changing of CMs in Uttarakhand or the covid mismanagement in UP - with bodies floating in the Ganga - could have been better exploited by the opposition. The BJP’s well-oiled election machinery – including its last mile connectivity via booth incharges & panna pramukhs - & the narrative of vaccine self-sufficiency along with the success of the “operation Ganga” – of evacuating Indians from strife torn Ukraine – though seems to have trumped.

The obituary of the congress is a hyperbole but the ineffectiveness of its leadership in drumming up the right narrative or keeping its flock together is definitely indicative of a malaise which has now come to bite; a slow corrosion is inevitable.

Regional leaders like Arvind Kejriwal with a reputation for governance would continue to win the state elections & slowly take over the space vacated by the Congress. That the centre is proposing the merger of the 3 Delhi Municipal corporations – currently held by the BJP - is indicative of fear of an impending electoral loss.  AAP was now secured a thumping victory in Punjab (92 of 117 seats), opened its mark in Goa (2 of the 40 seats) & secured a 3.5 % vote share in Uttarakhand indicating the weakening of the Congress, a situation ripe for exploitation for savvy regional leaders.  Earlier it has won 27 of the 120 seats in the Surat Municipal elections with 28.58% vote largely with the support of Patidars - the traditional core base of the BJP indicating that they are cutting both ways.

The BJP is vulnerable & not invincible but the work ethic of the PM which has percolated down the ranks & file & its well-oiled election machinery & last mile connect – booth incharges & Panna Pramukhs - makes it a winner. The BJP is reported to have studied the Communists cadre building designs in detail & launched its own successful version; to be a winner other parties should study the BJP’s model & create own - with an alternative narrative as a differentiator as the electorate might not like a “me too”. Till such time the BJP’s juggernaut shall chug along.

Why did Prime Minister Modi meet the Jammu & Kashmir Leaders?

The timing of the meeting between 14 Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) Leaders of 8 political parties & Prime Minister Modi, on 24^th June’21, for around 3 hours, was intriguing. That only “Mainstream” parties – who fought elections under the Indian constitution, but maintained their local relevance by demanding greater autonomy - were invited & included 4 former Chief Ministers & 4 deputy Chief Ministers, leads one to conclude that it was an attempt to restart an electoral process; keeping out the “separatist” Hurriyat Conference – formed in 1993, with its factions either supporting independence or merger with Pakistan - was not surprising, as the govt. had even cancelled talks with Pak, in 2014, on finding them engaging with this organization.  With “secession” out of question, Hurriyat becomes a pariah, but what are the objectives served by meeting the “Mainstream” parties still demanding autonomy via restitution of Article 370 & 35 A?

The BJP leadership must have been cognizant of the likelihood of criticism of such a rapprochement as a meek “walk back” especially when Home Minister, Amit Shah, in Nov’20, had panned the “Gupkar Gang” for acting “against our National interest” & in Feb’21 slammed the “3 families who have ruled in J&K for years”. Neither the BJP’s nationalistic support base nor the citizens of Kashmir – who did not protest significantly when these leaders were imprisoned, post the reading down of Article 370, on 5^th Aug 2019 – would be enthused either.

That raises the question: why did the govt. initiate such a move? Why now? Possible reasons follow:

(1)To Manage the after effects of US withdrawal from Afghanistan (Af)– The US force withdrawal, from Afghanistan, was initially planned to be completed by 11^th Sept – to coincide with the 20^th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks -  but is being accelerated -  a Vietnam redux. The proud Afghans have given a bloody nose to the British during the 3 Anglo-Afghan wars during the 18^th & 19^th centuries, the USSR during 1979-89 & the US  during 2001-20.

The Taliban, meanwhile, have captured a large swathe of Af, nudging out the state forces, rendering meaningless  their power sharing talks currently underway with the ruling govt. As per the UN Secretary General’s special envoy to Af,  Deborah Lyons “Most districts that have been taken surround provincial capitals, suggesting that the Taliban are positioning themselves to try & take these capitals, once foreign forces are completely withdraw”.  It is, therefore, likely that they would usurp power, nudging aside the Ashraf Ghani govt. – which India recognizes as the only legitimate stakeholder in the war ravaged country. The Indian institutional memory of IC 814 hijacking, in Dec 1999, to Kandahar, during the period Taliban ruled Af (1996-2001), & exchange of  terrorists that included Masood Azhar, still rankles & the possibility of battle hardened Taliban fighters being diverted to Kashmir is a challenge to Indian policy wonks. It appears, therefore, that the govt. is working on a 2 pronged approach.

(a)Open up negotiations with the Taliban: Qatar’s special envoy for counter terrorism & conflict resolution, Mustlaq bin Majed al-Qahtani alluded to the “quiet visit by Indian officials to speak to the Taliban”; was he referring to Foreign Minister S Jaishankar’s 2 transit visit to Doha, Qatar, on June 9^th & 15^th during his trips to Kuwait & Kenya?  Pakistan’s national Security Advisor Moeed Yusuf confirmed the same when he told Dawn News that India ‘having the Taliban killed daily & keep giving funds for operations against them & today they have reached there to have talks”.

It is likely that the talks did not go as planned, courtesy Pak’s pressure on the Taliban, since India denied the meeting while Yusuf derisively said “you should also ask what response they got from the Taliban”.  The most feared component of the Taliban – the Haqqani Network – is arraigned against India & it is likely that Pak could deploy its assets - Lashkar –e Tayabba (LeT) &  Jaish –e – Mohammed (JeM) against India  & that, perhaps, explains Indian diplomatic efforts to keep Pak in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) “grey list” to check its covert ambitions.

Indian position in Af has weakened during the last few years; it has closed 2 of its 4 consulates in Af - Jalalabad & Herat in April 2020 – ostensibly due to covid & has no plans of opening them soon. The Jalalabad consulate was attacked in 2013 & 2016 & Pak has been pushing for its closure for quite some time. Having provided financial assistance of $1.5 billion – constructing their Parliament building, Salma dam, Electrical Transmission line to Kabul, Agriculture University at Kandahar, Zaranj-Delaram road, upgrading telephone exchanges, schools, Hospitals tube wells etc. – India might be keen to use the economic carrot to keep the Taliban at bay, a strategy that might work unless Pak’s iron brother China nudges India out, courtesy its economic heft.

(b)Humour the Kashmir Leaders: New Delhi appears to be moving on an alternate track as a back-up plan to the aforementioned strategy.  While the “separatist” Hurriyat leaders are still under house arrest, leaders of “mainstream” parties have been invited for the meeting to create a wedge between the two. The govt. has promised elections & statehood at an “appropriate time” post completion of the delimitation exercise.

The Delimitation commission was constituted in Mar 2020, under Justice Ranjana Desai but the Kashmiri leaders boycotted it with the argument that attendance shall render infructuous their currently subjudice demand for restoration of Article 370 & 35 A. The centre appears keen though  to use statehood as a leverage to force acceptance of Article 370 abrogation, as evident from  Modi’s 24^th June Tweet: “ Delimitation has to happen at a quick pace so that polls can happen & J&K gets an elected govt.” If some of the leaders express support for the delimitation exercise – with a view to seek  power or under coercion – it could create fissures in the “People alliance for Gupkar Declaration“ (PAGD) an umbrella organization that houses the National Conference (NC), People’s Democratic Party (PDP), People’s Conference (PC) Awami national Conference (ANC), CPI(M), J&K People’s Movement.

Post Modi’s meeting, the Delimitation commission, announced its visit to the Union Territory (UT), from July 6-9^th in what appears to be clearly a coordinated action plan. Minister of State, Home Affairs, Kishen Reddy met former MPs & civil society members from Kargil & Ladakh, later completing the cycle of engagement with other relevant stakeholders.

(2)Signal to Indian Critics abroad a resumption of a democratic process in J&K – The Acting US Assistant secretary of State for South & Central Asia, Dean Thomson, in a Congressional hearing, in June, remarked “Kashmir is one area where we have urged them (India) to return to normalcy as quickly as possible, including we have seen some steps taken: the release of prisoners, the restoration of 4G access. There are other electoral steps we would like them to take & that we have encouraged them to do & will continue to do so”

Parsing the statement leads one to conclude US pressure having forced the Indian hand. The US has helped India face a belligerent China across the northern border with diplomatic, Intelligence & surveillance information & India is thus constrained to respond favourably to nudges elsewhere.  

The drone attacks in Jammu, on June 27^th would give the govt. a reason to delay the process though.

The Politics of Delimitation:

As per the 1995 delimitation exercise, Kashmir has 111 assembly seats (Kashmir – 46, Jammu – 37 & Ladakh – 4 & Pakistan occupied Kashmir 24). Since Ladakh is now a separate Union Territory (UT),  J&K is left with 107 seats, which has been increased to 114 seats, as per the J&K reorganization Act, 2019, that has incidentally abolished the upper house – the legislative council.

There is a need to correct some historical wrongs in J&K. 7 seats in Jammu were reserved for the Scheduled castes (SCs) but Scheduled Tribes (STs) are yet to receive the benefit. The 1991 census was not conducted in J&K because of militancy & therefore the delimitation was based on the 1981 census. A decade later, census exercise was conducted in J&K, along with the rest of India; but while delimitation was conducted in the rest of India, during 2002-08, as per the 2001 census, J&K did not follow suit. Since the Central govt. passed a law in 2001 freezing the Lok-Sabha seats till 2026, the J&K state govt., in 2002, under the state constitution, froze delimitation of the state assembly constituencies till 2026. These shall be corrected under the new delimitation exercise.

The Ranjana Kumar led Delimitation commission when set up in Mar 2020, had a remit to redraw electoral constituencies of Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh  & Manipur too apart from J&K but has been granted a 1 year extension for J&K alone indicating that elections, in J&K, are unlikely anytime soon. The recent Assam elections were conducted without delimitation & the Kashmir leaders have legitimately demanded on why the same logic cannot apply to their state.

The new state assembly shall have 114 seats with a likely higher representation to Jammu. As per the 2011 census Hindus account for 28% & Muslims 68% of the 1.25 crore population of J&K but with  Hindus a majority only in 4 of the 20 districts. Thus without demographic changes, gerrymandering, weightage to area & development indices rather than population alone, the BJP’s aim of having a Hindu Chief Minister, in the only Indian Muslim dominated state, is unlikely to happen. As a first step, the domicile rules were changed in Mar 2020 to facilitate granting rights to Hindus refugees from Pak – denied by the precious the govt.

There have been demands to grant land to retired armed force personnel to settle in the borders – to enforce demographic change & serve national security – but no central govt. has pushed the case, fearing creation of local angst & International pressure; the BJP’s support base in Jammu too has been demanding restriction of ownership on land & jobs to local residents only. Ladakh too has been demanding protection under the 6^th Schedule of the constitution that grants tribals’ autonomy. While there has been a precedence of forced demographic changes implemented in neighbouring POK & in China’s Xinjiang provinces, implementing the same in a democracy is a challenge. The govt. in negotiation with mainstream parties means that demographic changes shall be a slow burn.

The Inevitability of dialogue

The govt. facing covid & economy management challenges has a delicate job of explaining to its base the reasons for engaging with the J&K leaders, lambasted for being “anti-national” not very long ago. Apni party, largely viewed as centre backed, has not done very well in District Development Council polls, held in Dec 2020 unlike the PAGD alliance. The initial promise of the party, the J&K People’s Movement, launched by the 2009 IAS topper, Shah Faesal, has fizzled out with the founder asking, in 2020, to be relieved of organizational responsibilities. While the BJP did well in Jammu the “Gupkar alliance” held sway in Kashmir. Terror holding agency in the valley & elected representatives being killed apart from International pressure to restart electoral process in the vale might have forced the govt. hand on negotiation.

There appears to be a realization in the J&K political parties too that they have no option but to come to the dialogue table. Omar Abdullah, in an India Today interview, conceded that “It is pointless to ask this govt. to restore Article 370 ….. as they are the architects of taking it away. The fight for restoration of Article 370 & to win back, what was snatched from us, on 5^th Aug 2019, shall take place in the Supreme Court”. People Conference Chief Sajjad Lone lamented that the so called Liberal parties in India “could not convince their countrymen when the Aug 5^th changes took place. We should take whatever this govt. gives us” & “when there is a liberal govt. let us see what they do for us….. if they come to power in 2024, 2029 or 2034”. That he mentioned dates extending up to 2034 indicates that the Kashmiri leaders are not sure if the BJP shall lose elections in 2024. He also believes that “Kashmiris have shunned dialogue in the past & paid heavily”& sitting back & not engaging with the centre would put the state populace at the mercy of bureaucrats.  

P Chidambaram, in an interview, few years back, suggested a compact that grants Kashmir autonomy that harks back to the pre 1953 status, in line with the Dilip Padgaonkar committee recommendations of Oct 2011; it is unlikely that the Congress could ever support such a position fearful of losing whatever is left of its already diminished presence in the Lok Sabha.  Any party, with an agenda on reinstatement of Article 370, would be committing political hara-kiri as public sentiment across the country is against the same. Perhaps that is what Sajjad Lone meant when he said that the “two extremes of liberalism & illiberalism in Indian politics, are unfortunately coinciding”.

Conclusion:

The Modi -J&K leaders meet is in response to the Geopolitical changes of US force withdrawal from Afghanistan & the likely Taliban ascent to power & the likelihood of the Pakistan-Taliban combine to disturb the fragile peace in the Kashmir valley. The BJP govt., perhaps, took this initiative as its reach out to the Taliban did not yield the expected dividends, with Pak playing spoilsport. The less than good performance of the Apni Party, in the recently concluded District Development Council elections & IAS topper Shah Faesal relinquishing organizational responsibility, in 2020, of the newly formed J&K People Movement – meant to inject fresh blood into the vale’s politics – could have forced a rapprochement with the “Gupkar Gang”

While Joe Biden, of the Democratic Party, in power in the US,  has nudged the Indian govt. on initiating democratic process, in J&K, it is unlikely that they would do more to antagonize its Quad ally India, firm as they are in setting their sights on China, challenging a unipolar world order.

Against this background it is prudent to interpret the current move by the govt., as nothing more than mere optics to manage international pressure, couched under catchy slogans of reducing “Dilli ki doori” & “Dil ki doori”. The Delimitation commission tenure has been extended by a year which means that elections are at least a year away; meanwhile the govt. can accelerate development programs in the valley in a bid to gain more support among the populace.

No Confidence Motion: The beginning of the 2019 Parliamentary Election Campaign

The BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party), surprisingly, scuttled the No Confidence Motion, initiated by the TDP (Telugu Desam Party), during the last legislative session, despite enjoying a majority but allowed it this session for a debate & won it, resoundingly 325: 126. Only the BJD(Biju Janata Dal) walked off – in a bid to keep the party equidistant from both the Congress & the BJP, its principal rivals in the state of Odisha & did not support the TDP’s motion since Odisha has disputes with neighbouring Andhra. The Shiv Sena voted against the govt. – perhaps, as a negotiating tactic to secure a good share of Parliamentary & assembly seats; the AIADMK (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) voting for the govt. makes de facto their entry into the NDA (National Democratic Alliance) fold. The battle lines are clearly taking concrete shape.

The TDP left the NDA ostensibly on the issue of denial of Special Category status, despite agreeing to financial compensation earlier, since it was slighted by the BJP looking to hobnob with YSRCP (Yuvajana Shramika Rythu Congress Party) & aiming to become a predominant Kapu led party – against a Reddy led YSRCP & a Kamma led TDP - & hence had kicked up a Kamma, Venkiah Naidu as the VP & make a Kapu, Kanna Lakshiminarayana as the Party President in AP.  The TDP would have been happy had the BJP played second fiddle in the state & helped the state in quicker implementation of the state bifurcation promises.

Rahul Gandhi (RaGa) – was keen to assert his relevance – as a viable opposition face to take on Modi & his speech – attacking the PM & not the BJP - was effective as was his self- depreciating use of the word ”Pappu”, “Jumla strike” – to account for unfulfilled bombastic promises  & slogan of “Daro Mat” to instill courage in the opposition ranks living in constant fear of the might of the state in the form of” caged parrots” being unleashed by the PM. Calling himself a “Shiv Bhakt” he attempted to fortify his Hindu roots & by not mentioning “Muslims” kept his speech safe from being tarred with the “minority appeasement” tag; earlier he met Muslim intellectuals & not the Maulvis to keep the party in the company of “Soft Hindutva & Liberal Muslims”.  The party though appears still unclear in terms of the ideological line to adopt. Hugging the PM, though, was a masterstroke to evoke eyeballs – a necessity in age of social media  – but his wink was juvenile; maturity demands that he should learn from the BJP leaders – who dislike Modi – but kept their emotions under check even during the debate.

Modi- the master orator was off colour during the debate; he seeks attentive audiences that allow him play up on drama & rhetoric; when faced with disruption he has a habit of running through with his speech denying  him the opportunity to land an effective jab at his opponents sometimes even with liberal doss of caustic humour. He did mention the achievements of his governments in great detail though but stretched himself on explaining his Achilles heel - the job scenario. Expect more research reports or articles glorifying the job scenario to emerge as we enter into the final stages of the electoral arena.

By turning the tables on RaGa  on the issue of “not looking into the eyes” – by pointing out the fate meted out to the likes of Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Subhash Bose, Charan Singh, Deve Gowda, IK Gujral, Sharad Pawar & Pranab Mukherjee – by the first family, vintage Modi, punched where it hurts & also tried to open up channels of communication with some opposition parties for alliances if not to reduce the index of opposition unity.

All in all the no confidence motion was merely a curtain raiser to the impending assembly elections in Rajasthan, MP, Chhattisgarh & Mizoram – expected by the year end either in conjunction or sequenced by the Parliamentary elections. The BJP won the confidence vote but the opposition won their confidence; with mojo back the contest turns interesting.

Modi Sarkar@4 Years

Chastened by the Karnataka verdict but not subdued, Prime Minister, Narendra Modi led the BJP’s 4^th anniversary celebration at Odisha – a state they have already made deep in-roads & armed with promising plans to make substantial gains in the 2019 Parliamentary elections in a bid to compensate for losses elsewhere.  Modi – not only the chief mascot of the party but also its de-facto propaganda in chief - yet again listed the achievements of his govt. in superlative terms only to be snubbed by his rival Rahul Gandhi who awarded him an “F” grade in governance – “agriculture, foreign policy, fuel prices & job creation” & an “A+” in “slogan creation & self- promotion”. Obviously, the actual achievements of the govt. lie in between the two extreme assessments.

Achievements Modi can be Proud off

Swatch Bharat: Modi launched the Swatch Bharat mission immediately on ascending to power, perhaps, influenced by Mahatma Gandhi’s campaign during the freedom struggle. Building of 7.25 crore toilets in villages & schools supported by TVC‘s helmed by influencers – Anushka Sharma & Amitabh Bachchan – to drive behavioural changes, to encourage usage of toilets, in the masses - has the potential to enhance health parameters & enrolment of more girl-children into schools, many of who discontinue education, post puberty, for want of privacy provided by toilets.

Ujala & Ujwala Scheme: Modi sarkar has driven savings in electricity costs by encouraging mass distribution of 90 crore LED bulbs (30 crore by govt. & 60 crore by pvt. sector) under the “Ujala” scheme; likewise, by setting a target of 175 GW of renewable energy by 2022, they have driven solar costs down to Rs 2.46/- per unit; at some point these cost savings should get transferred to the hoi polloi vide a cut in electricity tariffs which is still due.  Similarly, the “Give It Up” campaign - that encouraged people to give up the benefits of subsidized gas cylinders - was followed by delivering 3.8 crore free LPG connections to BPL(Below Poverty Line) families  in rural, thereby delivering twin benefits: Eliminating rich recipients & hence saving on subsidy; & encouraging the poor to shift to a cleaner fuel, thereby, enhancing the health of the womenfolk  who otherwise spent most of the time near smoke emitting chulas inviting heart, lung & eye ailments. These moves enhance environmental protection too & hence highly applauded. The low refill rate of cylinders, though, appears a concern since BPL families perhaps, still find it unaffordable. The govt., meanwhile, has announced plans to increase the BPL LPG connections target from 5 crores to 8 crores.

Achievements Modi can be Partially Proud off /should share credit with his predecessors

Universal Insurance: Attempts to make India an insured society by a contributory funding scheme of Rs 12/- paid by the insuree for an accident insurance of 2 lakhs has benefitted 13.25 crore people & Rs 330/- for a life insurance of 2 lakhs has aided 5.22 crore families; the Atal Pension Yojana for the sexagenarians has benefitted over 1 crore unorganized sector workers & hence welcome.

However, launching “Ayushman Bharat” aka “Modicare” in its last year, that too with a budget of about 2000 crores only, for providing a 5 lakh health cover for 10 crore families (50 cr population) is too little too late. Some of the states like AP, Telangana & Tamil Nadu are already running health schemes & the cost of such schemes is higher than the centre’s budget proposal, leading many to question if this is another “Chunavi Jumla”.

It is pertinent to note that the agriculture insurance scheme has a payout of about Rs 20,000 crores annually (Rs 20,478 cr in 2016-17) to the insurance companies even while payment to farmers is about Rs 5,000 crores (5,650 crores in 2016-17) leading to supernormal profits for the intermediaries.  Hopefully, Modicare delivers a better model.

Foreign Policy: India joined the MTCR (Missile technology Control regime), in 2016 , Wassenaar Arrangement, dealing with conventional arms & dual use goods & technologies, in 2017, & Australia Group, dealing with Chemical & Biological weapons, in 2018  even while NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group) proved elusive largely because of China's intransigence in seeking Indian parity with its iron brother- Pakistan.  Likewise, Indian soft power of Yoga has been expanded worldwide when the UN, in 2016, declared 21^st June as the World Yoga day. Similarly, hard power has been expanded vide LEMOA which secures Indian Military access to US bases in Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean & Gaum in the Pacific; likewise agreements with France give access to her military bases in Djibouti & Reunion Islands near Madagascar; similar agreements have been inked with Singapore & potentially Indonesia for greater access east of Andamans. Furthermore, India will build its own base at Seychelles & Mauritius amidst pending plans for one more at Oman to access the Persian Gulf - all wise attempts to enhance India’s maritime reach & naval power.

However, India’s “Neighbourhood First” diplomacy is crumbling. Chinese stooge, KP Oli of the Communist Party of Nepal, has secured a landslide majority – fanning nationalism & anti-India sentiment courtesy the Indian blockade of Nepal, in 2015, to force a constitutional change for incorporating the aspirations of the Madhesis. Maldives continues to cock a snook at India & the Sri Lankan govt. is not as friendly as it once was when it came to power, in 2014. Bhutan has refused to be part of the BBIN (Bangladesh- Bhutan-India-Nepal) transport corridor ostensibly to prevent greater vehicular movement in the kingdom that could imperial her ecology. Support to Myanmar on the Rohingya issue & summersault soon thereafter to assuage the sentiments of Bangladesh has ruffled feathers in both the nations leaving India poorer.

Economy: The macros under this govt. look impressive & Modi never loses an opportunity to highlight that India moved away from the despicable tag of the “Fragile Five” economies, of 2013, to become the fastest growing large economy, in the world, & the investor darling during his regime, leading to the highest FDI of $60 billion against $36 billion per annum during the UPA regime. Surprisingly, a jobless growth scenario despite large FDI leads one to wonder if existing capacities are being bought by foreign players without creation of new ones.

The government’s lists the passage of the GST bill as a great achievement without acknowledging its own opposition to the bill, when on the other side on the aisle, as the reason for the delay; the congress should get the credit for initiating the bill & the BJP for passing it.

The government’s renegotiation of the Mauritius & the Singapore tax treaties is laudable for it has foreclosed loopholes even while the previous UPA govt. had dragged its feet.  To handle the “twin balance sheet” problem – companies with stressed balance sheets unable to repay debt thereby impacting the balance sheets of the creditor banks - & the consequent rise in NPA’s - the government passed the IBC (Insolvency & Bankruptcy code) which is truly transformational; the only regret is that insolvency professionals if appointed in the government's 2^nd year of its term would have cleaned the banking system by now.

BJP spokespersons, unfortunately, have a knack of being economical with facts. Indian GDP growth rate, during 2013-14, is 4.7% as per old series & 6.6% as per the new series & is likely to touch 6.6% again in 2017-18 post a peak of 8% achieved midway in 2015-16. Party spokespersons touting growth increase from 4.7% of 2013-14 to 7.2% in Q3 2017-18 is akin to comparing apples & oranges - an intellectually dishonest strategy for propaganda gains. Growth thus has improved but not as massively as claimed & demonetization has effected growth negatively.

Indeed, fiscal deficit of the centre has reduced by 1% from 4.5% in 2014 to 3.5% in 2016-17; states add an additional deficit of 3% leading to a combined national deficit of around 7.5% in 2013-14. Courtesy the “Uday” scheme on power sector reform – that entails state takeover of debt from the state power companies books - state fiscal deficit has upped to about 4%; thus the combined fiscal deficit of the centre & the states continues to hover around 7.5% as in 2014. 1% of GDP is about 1.7 lakh crores; pertinent to note that Centre made 1.35 lakh crores as excise in oil in 2013-14 which increased to 3.22 lakh crores in 2016-17 – an increase of 1.87 lakh crores. Thus the entire drop of 1% in fiscal deficit is funded not by cutting flab or increasing efficiency but merely by denying the common man the benefit of an unexpected drop in international oil prices which is akin to lazy governance. Oil prices are rising now & if domestic oil prices are increased, it would spur inflation & consumer angst while keeping prices stable would entail increase in fiscal deficit unless other tax avenues are suitably explored; clearly, the reduction in fiscal deficit was a result of an unexpected windfall due to a non-recurrable favourable international event & the Modi govt. had nothing to do with it & should not claim credit.

The govt. did keep inflation rate under 5% during its tenure unlike the UPA whose inflation record trended at around 9%; this was achieved by the favourable dip in international commodity prices – on which the Modi govt. had no hold - & by an anaemic increase in MSP (Minimum Support Prices) to farmers; if they do implement the Cost+50% pricing for farmers as promised in the last budget, inflation shall shoot up.

Electrification of Villages: India has 6.49 lakh villages & Modi claimed, in 2014, that it is the inefficiency of the Congress govt. that 18500 villages continue to remain in the dark. Flip the argument & you find that in 70 years about 6.3 lakh villages were electrified at an average of 9000 villages per annum & if the Modi govt. had run at the same pace the remaining villages would have been electrified in about 2years while it actually took about 4 years. Surely, these villages are in remote locations & the delay can be forgiven but running down opponents for the sole sake of propaganda cannot be condoned.

Achievements Modi should be Concerned about

Vigilantism: The hacking of Akhlaq in UP, Pehlu Khan in Haryana & the Hindu Yuva Vahini imposing morality codes in UP, creates a unease & societal schisms which could fuel violence & give space to vested organizations under the guise of “Gau Rakshaks” to become rent seekers. The govt. has till date treated these groups with kids' gloves which could be exploited by organizations like ISIS, Al-Qaeda & inimical foreign powers.

Key Institutions under Attack: Positions like the Lok Pal remain unfilled even after 4 years of the regime – a repeat of what happened in Gujarat when Modi was CM. Likewise, the govt. sought applications for 2 CIC (Chief Information Commissioners) positions in Sept’16 & has not filled the positions even as 2 more CICs have since retired & 3 more of a total of 11 are set to retire in 2018; clearly, these are attempts to weaken the RTI (Right to Information) act which has otherwise helped in enhanced transparency.

The Judge Loya case alludes to the possibility of the Judiciary under duress as buttressed by the 4 senior most judges of the Supreme Court who revolted against the Chief Justice on the issue of "fixing of the roster" - an euphemism for constituting benches favourable to the govt. - & called for an unprecedented press meet. Likewise, the trolling of journalists like Ravish Kumar & sharing of the morphed nude images of Rana Ayub is indicative of a fascist tendency of emasculating press freedom.

Even the decorum of Parliamentary proceedings has been severely compromised. Recently, in Mar’18, the vote of no confidence on the govt. was not debated ostensibly on the ground that the AIADMK & TDP members were protesting in the well of the house; 27 no confidence motions have been raised since independence & none suffered the ignominy of a non-debate. The reduction in the no of days the legislature is in session is another recent malady that denies people's representative the chance to raise an issue of public interest on the floor of the house. These are ominous portends for parliamentary democracy pleading for redressal.

Defence: India saw 4 defence Ministers in 4 years – Jaitley, Parrikar, Jaitley again & finally Nirmala which needless to say effected policy direction. Despite attempts to shift towards a G2G (Govt. to Govt.) contracts to outflank corruption allegations & accelerate procurement, the govt. has failed in its resolve to accelerate the modernization of the forces. Meanwhile, the Rafale deal is cast in a corruption cloud & debate on the same in parliament is stalled; while the UPA negotiated the aircraft at a per unit cost of Rs 526 crores with Transfer of Technology (TOT), the NDA govt. has closed the deal at Rs 1670 crore apiece – without TOT. The BJP claims advanced avionics as reason for the increased fare which is not backed by facts; in-fact the govt. has paid much higher than Rafale’s other clients -Egypt & Qatar.  Another intriguing question: Why are most defence contracts going to one Indian Industrial group whose financial position is precarious?

Surprisingly, Defence spend has dipped to 1.58% of GDP in 2017-18, the lowest since 1962 even as the Army Chief boasts that India is ready for a “two & a  half front” war which is a fallacy since his deputy, the Vice Chief told a Parliamentary Panel that only 8% of capital equipment is state of art & 68% vintage. Are we being fed rhetoric alone?

While “surgical strikes” on Pak, in 2016, as a response to the attack on an army camp at Uri, is touted as a sign of resolute policy, that it has not enforced deterrence  indicates otherwise; Pak continues to stoke violence in the vale.  Rhetoric can manage passions on the Indian mainland but continued adversarial acts by the enemy is reflective of lack of Indian “capacity” to inflict disproportionate pain which needs to be remedied.

Jobs - Pakoda economics: The Modi govt. rode to power on the promise of creating 2 crore jobs yearly & the assurance came a whimper with 8 core industries data available showing about 4.16 lakh new jobs in 2016-17. Modi famously, during a TV interview, cited pakoda sellers as new jobs created only to be ridiculed. Instead of accepting job losses – 14000 in L&T, 4500 in HDFC, 90000 in Telecom, 56000 in IT etc. apart from the jobless growth scenario, the govt. has meandered from showcasing “Mudra” to “Start-up India” to now claim the EPFO data growth by 31 lakhs in 6 months – Sept 17 to Feb 18 – as reflective of new jobs created. This is unlikely to pass muster since formalization of informal jobs post demonetization has forced many firms to register with the EPFO; former Finance Minister, Yashwant Sinha, avers that a firm with 19 employees would be in the informal sector & addition of 1 more employee pushes the company into the formal sector & all the 20 employees into formal sector employment records even while the actual addition is only 1 employee.

The PM claims that Rs 6 lakh crores was issued to 12 crore people under the “Mudra” scheme for self- employment to be countered by the Congress which claims that for 91% of the beneficiaries the average ticket size of loan was a mere Rs 23000/- - a mere tokenism that has failed to create jobs. 

 The “Start-up India” scheme was launched with a corpus of Rs 10,000 crores but only 90.6 crores has been disbursed till date indicating its failure; “Skill India” mission was discontinued after training 41.3 lakh people since the placement rate is at an abysmal 15% (6.15lakhs); the Minister for Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Rajiv Prasad Rudy, would not have lost his job, in 2017, if his performance was seen as exemplary by the leadership.

Clearly, the govt. record on job creation is pathetic but is hell bent on inflating its achievements.

Economic Fugitives: UPA 2 was thrown out of power for what was seen as a monumental corrupt edifice & the Modi govt. was expected to chart a new course.  However, the fleeing of economic offenders like Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi etc. sends across a dubious signal that the new govt. is no different & no action taken on the Panama papers, Paradise papers, Liechtenstein & HSBC account holders strengthens the assessment.

Conclusion:

Modi, definitely has the potential to be a transformational leader although his actions indicate incrementalism in a bid to sustain power. He should legitimately take credit for schemes like – Swatch Bharat, Ujwala, Ujala & the insurance scheme - but must learn to share credit with his predecessors for the JAM (Jan Dhan-Aadhar-Mobile) & the GST; after all Aadhar was launched in 2009 by the UPA & the telecom revolution was initiated, in 1995, by the Congress govt. to which the Vajpayee govt. added momentum vide the CPP (Calling Party Pays Regime) in 2003. JAM trilogy led to savings vide the DBT( Direct benefits transfer scheme) which incidentally was initiated by UPA II.  On issues like vigilantism & the troll army, the BJP should rethink just as they should on stratospheric propaganda to prevent the the recurrence of the consequence of the “Shining India” campaign of 2004.

Is “One Nation One Poll” In India Desirable?

The BJP govt. is going to complete 4 years in power, in May 2018, & there is a wager on whether joint elections to the National Parliament & State Assembly elections is round the corner, especially, when Prime Minister, Modi, has strongly argued for the cause in various forums & the Election Commission has announced its logistical readiness for conducting simultaneous elections by, Sept 2018, contingent though on the govt. making legal amendments to the law. However, critics scoff at such a move because of its “impracticality” – since it needs a consensus to be evolved followed by a Constitutional amendments to article 83, 85, 172 & 174 supported by a 2/3^rd majority - as much as its “undesirability” - since such action helps, disproportionately, a party with a national footprint vis a vis a regional party & hence detrimental to Federalism. Will the argument of cost reduction, governance dislocation & loss of time of party workers convince the Supreme Court that amendments so passed do not violate the “basic structure” of the constitution – a mandatory requirement post the Kesavananda Bharti Judgment of 1973?

In Support of the Move

Narendra Modi has faced criticism for being constantly on an “election mode”; perhaps, to counter the charge & emerge as a statesman, he made a persuasive argument that India had simultaneous elections till 1967 & citizenry have displayed maturity in electing different parties, if need be, at the Centre & the States then & can be expected to display the same maturity in future too.  He also argued for a single electoral roll from Panchayat to Parliament to reduce the work load on the teachers involved, ceaselessly, on electoral roll up gradation.  He proposed local body elections - both Urban & Rural - within a month of the simultaneous elections to the Centre & States to wind up the election season & settle into the serious job of governance.

The costs of Parliament elections in 2009 was 1000 -1100 crores (1483 crores as per EC), in 2009, & has increased to 4000 crores (3426 crores as per EC), in 2014, he averred & sought out joint elections as a solution to reduce costs & hence black money; reduce federal friction due to “war of words”- vitriol & rhetoric - between the political executive doubling up as a party representative & their opposition; & to prevent announcement of populist promises that are economically unfeasible. Simultaneous elections, incidentally, is budgeted to cost Rs 4500 crores – leading to substantial savings.

He also referred to the redeployment of the security forces during elections effecting the strategic security objectives of the country & deployment of senior officials of a neutral state in the electoral state disrupting governance in their parent state. He also highlighted India having about 10 lakh polling booths & the govt. deploying about 11 personnel per booth – largely govt. employees & teachers - dislocating human resources from their original functions & hence delivery.

Others have opined that governance comes to a standstill when the moral code of conduct comes into effect - from the time the poll bugle is sounded till the elections are completed. If elections are announced in UP, national governments are expected to refrain from launching schemes in the rest of the country too for ubiquitous media allows message transmission across porous regions; needless to add that some governments have taken advantage of this loophole to serve themselves with an electoral advantage & hence the need for joint elections to serve a level playing field. Former CEC SY Quraishi has suggested that if the Home Ministry could provide more paramilitary forces, the election season could be crashed to a month from the current 2 – 2.5 months cycle. Likewise, during the period the moral code of conduct is in vogue only launch of new schemes is disallowed & existing schemes can be pursued, nullifying the adulterated argument that governance comes to a standstill.

Simultaneous elections could help deepen democratic processes; migrant workers cannot make multiple visits back home to vote for the local bodies, state & national elections but if all of them are held together, they could do with oe visit  to participate in the festival of electoral democracy, perhaps, leading to a voting % increase.

The strongest argument in favour of the motion is that the law commission of 1999, in fact, suggested simultaneous elections & a parliamentary standing committee having studied the recommendation submitted its report, in 2015, to which the Election Commission too has added its viewpoint.

Against the Move

A staggered election – across the state & centre  - even if its costs about 10000 crores over a 5 year period (Rs 2000 crores per annum) is not as large as it is made out to be for a country with a national annual budget of about 25 lakh crores; the cost argument thus might not pass muster.

This move could propel the dominance of one party at the expense of diversity & inclusion. As per IDFC Institute Report 2016, in 16 simultaneous elections held between 1999 - 2014, the winner was from the same party in 77% of the cases; the metric has inched up from 68% in 1999 to 86% in 2014 which buttresses Prashant Bhushan’s view that the “absurd proposition” of simultaneous election is being pushed by the BJP since they believe that Modi’s perception as the strongest leader at the centre would be carried forward to the state elections too in the event of joint elections. The Parliamentary standing committee too in its report submitted, in 2015, has conceded that voting once every 5 years could deplete political accountability, marginalize regional parties & reduce voters ability to differentiate between local & national issues.

Nalini Singh telecast a program in the 1990s on how local strongmen subvert democracy & how country-made weapons are widely & easily available, a situation that has not changed much even today. It is prudent to therefore argue that if elections are spread out, then the concentrated deployment of security forces in the electoral areas, thus achieved, could help in the conduct of free & fair elections unlike a thinly spread out force in the case of simultaneous elections.

Are we barking the Wrong Tree?

India had 4215 members of the Vidhan Sabha & 543 members of the Lok Sabha, in 2014, for an electorate of 81 crores; thus an MLA represents a 2 lakh electorate & an MP 15 lakhs.  Generally, 30% of the eligible voters do not exercise their franchisee & a victor targets 50% of the rest of 1.4 lakhs i.e. 70,000 voters. As per The Hindu Business line article dated 6/4/2009, about 70% of the candidates expenditure is on liquor & cash & 10% each on vehicles, publicity & miscellaneous. The recent RK Nagar by poll in Tamil Nadu was countermanded since it was rumoured that about Rs 4000 was paid per voter as a bribe. Assuming a conservative expenditure of Rs 1000 per voter, a candidate has to expend about 7 crores per assembly constituency & assuming 3 serious candidates per constituency the spent is approximately 21 crores. Thus a total of about 1 lakh crores is spend by all candidates across the parliamentary & assembly seats in an election cycle; isn’t it surprising that instead of making an attempt to reduce this expenditure of 1 lakh crore – which, arguably, is black money – interested parties are barking the wrong tree by claiming that the EC would reduce its expenses to only 4500 crores in conducting simultaneous elections? Should the target not be to reduce the election expenditure of candidates & parties?

Today there is a cap on the candidate’s spending but none on the party spent; a party can & does spend multiple times the candidates spent. This loophole that gives substantial advantages to political parties at the expense of independent candidates needs to be plugged by

1(a)Spent for a Lok Sabha constituency - 70 lakhs (say) - should include both the candidate’s spent & the party spent

1(b)Parties & candidates should be mandated to put their expenses, booth wise, in the public domain to be audited not only by the EC but by a vigilant opposition & civil society with recourse to the courts & judgements within 1 year to create a self- fulfilling prophecy of auto correction.

(2)Donations to political parties should be put into the public domain even if it is 1 paise & not Rs 2000/- & above as is the current practice.

(4)Political Parties have not subjected themselves to the RTI act despite a CIC’s June 2013 ruling that defined political parties as “public authorities” under rule 2(h) of the Act. Parties could opt to remain opaque with regard to their internal deliberations but should subject themselves to RTI with regard to their income & expenditure.

Increase in Opacity

The BJP govt. vide Finance bill 2017 amended the Company  Act 2013 that barred companies from donating more than 7.5 % of the average profits of the company of the past 3 year & mandated disclosure of the beneficiary in their P&L Accounts. This is a regressive move since it rewards corporates with anonymity & limitless political funding that could encourage quid pro quo. Likewise, individuals or firms are now allowed to buy electoral bonds from the authorized banks vide cheque or electronic payments – which does help regulate undisclosed money – but giving it to political parties without revealing the beneficiary makes the reform legally opaque. Greater transparency is the need of the hour.

To circumvent an adverse Delhi High Court ruling of 28^th Mar 2014, on receipt of funding from foreign sources, by the BJP & the Congress, from Vedanta, in violation of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 1976, the law was amended, retrospectively, in Finance Bill 2018. This encourages a feeling that political parties do not believe that the law of the land applies to them & collude to protect their interests.

Surely, if lawmakers are genuinely interested in electoral reforms, they should reduce opacity in political funding in a bid to dampen the influence of perverse money power before attempting the next reform of simultaneous elections.

Some unanswered questions

(1)If simultaneous elections are held & one of the 30 states or 5 union territories has a fractured verdict in the assembly & falls midway (say after 2 years), would

(a)Fresh elections be held & the new assembly so constituted remain in power only for the remaining part of the term as recommended by the EC?

(b)Would it remain under President’s rule for the entire 3 year period which gives untrammelled power to the centre? or

(c )The assembly is forced to cobble together an alternative by placing a “confidence” motion alongside a “no confidence motion” as suggested by the EC. Would this lead to the formation of “coercive alliances” bereft of ideological or program cohesion or encourage a whip driven tyranny as a consequence of the 10^th schedule?

(2)What happens if a member dies or is disqualified midterm due to the anti-defection law or vide corruption charges proved?

(3)Between 2014 - 2018 the BJP has won most of the assembly elections. In the case of simultaneous elections would the BJP dissolve all the state assemblies where they have recently won or seek to extend their tenures coterminous with the end of the next parliamentary term (2024 say) even as they curtain the tenures of the remaining states? A Parliamentary standing committee has recommended some assembly elections to be held along with the Parliamentary elections & the rest of the states in the mid-term of parliament.

(4) J&K has a 6 year term for the assembly unlike the rest of the Indian state assemblies & Parliament that have a 5 year term; even if simultaneous elections are agreed to, how do you conflate the J&K term issue that needs an amendment to be passed by the J&K state assembly/constituent assembly. Would the J&K issue boil over if their term is sought to be reduced to 5 years?

Conclusion

Former chief election commissioner SY Quraishi has addressed both the pros & the cons of the issue at hand & called the move “desirable but not feasible” since it is fraught with constitutional issues & administrative problems. In support of simultaneous elections he said that if we are in the election mode all the time we are we are in the corruption mode all the time. Since communalism, casteism, divisive & hate politics happens during the elections to be forgotten later, simultaneous elections could lead to the desirable consequence of 4.5 years of undisturbed peace. Against the move he opined that local issues are different from national issues & joint-elections could conflate the same. Likewise it is untrue he attests that people hate elections; in fact they love them since that is the only occasion politicians visit them & elections - if  not spread out - could possibly deny electorate the opportunity to see the face to the representative for the next 4.5 years. He cited an interesting slogan he overheard : “Jab jab election aata hai, tab tab gareeb ke pet me pulav aata hai”.

Indian democracy during the era of simultaneous elections till 1967 experienced the dominance of one party – the Congress - & replication of the same process could see the emergence of another – the BJP - & that perhaps explains the latter’s eagerness to pursue the measure. Today, the electorate votes at least thrice in a 5 year period for the Parliament, State & local body polls ensuring answerability & accountability; if simultaneous elections are held, will the political class hibernate only to emerge after 5 years?

Surely, having single electoral rolls from Panchayat to Parliament as suggested by the PM is a kosher argument & aadhar could be employed to make such logistics simpler; however, purging Indian democracy of money power should precede any attempts at holding simultaneous elections.

Run up towards The 2019 Parliamentary elections

A week, they say, is a long time in politics. Journalists - who were gushing at the unstoppable Modi-Shah juggernaut, post the BJP govt. formation in the North Eastern states of Tripura, Nagaland & Meghalaya – are now convinced of BJP’s vincibility, in 2019 – post the SP win in the UP by elections – with BSP support -  & the exit of the TDP from the NDA on the issue of denial of “special category status”.  Lack of rigour in analysis & swinging like trapeze artists & changing positions with each event does the profession no good.

Let us step back & analyse the current political landscape

(1)The BJP that won 282 seats in 2014, now has its nos. reduced to 276, post losing 6 of the 10 seats - it held earlier - that went to the by polls later- Ratlam (MP to INC in 2015), Gurdaspur (Punjab to INC in 2017), Alwar & Ajmer (Raj to INC in 2018), Phulpur & Gorakhpur (UP to SP in 2018) indicating the onset of anti-incumbency.

Takeaway: The GOP, the INC, has its footprint sequentially reduced from the days of Indira Gandhi & is now shrunk to fighting the BJP directly in 14 of the 29 states only: Western India(Gujarat), Central India(MP & Chhattisgarh), North Western India(Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan), Northern India(Uttarakhand & HP) & South (Karnataka, Telangana) & North East (Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh)while it is still a formidable force along with allies in 4 states: North(J&K with the NC), West(Maharashtra with the NCP; Goa), South (Kerala as UDF). The regional parties dominate the remaining landscape - largely in the South & East - prompting TMC’s Derek-o-Brein to comment that the BJP should be stopped by the regional parties in their areas of dominance while the INC does in its backyard, to propel India back into a liberal, inclusive coalition era.

 (2)BJP  ruled 6 states in 2014 – Gujarat, Rajasthan, MP, Chhattisgarh, Goa, & Punjab (in alliance with SAD; between 2014 to 2019, it lost Punjab but retained Gujarat in a cliff-hanger & Goa vide a coalition despite the verdict being anti-BJP.  It added 14 new states – HP, Haryana, Uttarakhand, UP, Jharkhand, Assam & runs govt. coalition governments in  Maharashtra(with Shiv Sena), J&K (with PDP), Bihar(with JDU), Tripura(with IPFT), Meghalaya(NPP), Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Nagaland riding as much on Amit Shah's poll strategy as much as on anti-incumbency against existing state governments.

Takeaway: The BJP gained massively in 2014 & beyond due to anti –incumbency against the INC & Regional parties; going forward, ruling as it does 19 of the 29 states, would it too not be at the receiving end of the same trend in both in the impending Parliamentary & Assembly elections?

(3)The State BJP CMs of the newly acquired states are generally seen as lacking in administrative acumen & might not be in a position to regain power the next time. The anti- incumbency vectors are corruption, lack of employment opportunities, & price rise. The Modi govt. which retained the sheen of being corruption free is now weighed down by the patina of the corruption in the Rafale deal, Nirav Modi's PNB scam, Jay Amit Shah’s sudden riches etc.; likewise, the govt. has not been able to show an appreciable increase in employment opportunities & the PMs allusion to “Pakoda sellers” as new jobs has ruffled feathers. Inflation was been kept in check vide an unexpected bonanza of an oil price drop & a public policy decision to go for a minor rise in MSP; however, the latter decision has led to rural angst & rise in farmer suicides; the farmer march in Maharashtra is a consequence of the same malady.  The usual suspects are thus now rising in unison.

Takeaway: There are issues to corner the Modi govt. if the opposition can weave the right narrative taking advantage of the emerging situation. With Nitish co-opted, Chidambaram entangled in legal mess & Rahul suffering from the “pappu jibes” & Mamata & Mayawati unable to acquire the leadership of the opposition mantle it will a case of “distributed leadership” fighting the BJP’s electoral machine which in a way is good for the opposition since a direct fight between an opposition leader & Modi would make the contest “Presidential” – a situation NaMo shall savour.

(4)While the TDP had existed the coalition & initiated a no confidence motion against the govt. the BJP could win this round but is precariously placed since Uddhav Thackeray of the  Shiv Sena has already announced that they would contest the 2019 elections without the BJP, Naresh Gujral of the SAD has opined that the single party rule is off in 2019 & the BJP should therefore consult its allies more while the JD(U) in Bihar is sulking for want of special category status & more representation at the centre.

Takeaway: The NDA is in a mess & in a bid to dominate from the "Panchayat to Parliament" the BJP is in no mood to apply the balm.

Against this background we could reasonably make the following predictions for the next parliamentary elections

(a)The BJP would suffer from anti-incumbency & is unlikely to repeat its 2014 performance:  Gujarat (26/26), Rajasthan (25/25), Haryana (7/10), Madhya Pradesh (27/29), Chhattisgarh (10/11), Maharashtra (23/48); it would lose about 50 seats in these states. A neck & neck fight between the INC & the BJP is thus predicted in 2019 with each party winning about 140 seats.

(b)In UP, a SP-BSP-INC combination with a vote share close to 50% could potentially sweep the polls; however since arithmetic might not translate into chemistry, the coalition is predicted to win 60 seats, unless a Ram Janmabhoomi agitation, perhaps, post an adverse judgement, in Oct 2018, in the Supreme Court, is likely to create polarization catapulting the BJP to about 55 seats – similar to the no. it earned in the 1990’s. That would push the BJP to about 175 seats - still about 100 seats short of a majority.

(c)Despite leaders like KCR wanting to lead the third front, it appears more a strategy to sweep polls in their home state i.e. do what Modi did in Gujarat, or Jaya in TN or Mamata in WB, in 2014 – thereby becoming a  kingmaker rather than a king, in 2019.

(d)Allies view the BJP leadership as arrogant, non-consulting & intent on playing a zero sum game; this makes acquiring new friends / allies pre or post poll difficult for the BJP.

Conclusion

With Ram Janmabhoomi agitation/building a temple likely to spur “polarization” & a skirmish in the Pak border or Indian intervention in Maldives to ratchet up “nationalism” a possibility, it is feasible for the BJP to emerge as the single largest party but due to lack of friends/allies, it would be forced to cede power to the INC to form the govt. with the support of the regional parties.