The sudden ascent of stocky, 62
year old Narendra Modi as a serious contender for the
nation’s leadership has taken people by surprise. The
general election is still a year away but the average, open minded, middle-of-
the-road Indian wonders how to think about the polarizing chief minister of
Gujarat. Either you love him or hate him, which is precisely why one must not
react with a knee-jerk but try and go beyond the shallow surface of a flawed
but remarkable human being.
India today is discontented and troubled as a result of corruption scandals, high inflation, declining
growth, and a government in denial. Sick of the drift and paralysis, people
desperately seek a strong leader, and insistently ask if Narendra Modi might be
the one. Clearly, he has proven the ability to build a vibrant economy and
usher in corrupt free governance. Could he be India’s best chance to ungum the
bureaucracy, tackle corruption and restore the economy to health? But Modi also
has a clear downside: he is dictatorial with communal tendencies. Should one risk India’s
precious secular and collaborative traditions for the sake of good governance
and prosperity? It is a dreadful moral dilemma between equally important
values--a classic dharma-sankat.
No Indian
leader in recent times has spoken with such passion about ‘governance’ and
‘development’. His talk of ‘less government and more governance’ resonates with
the aspiring young middle class. He has changed the language of politics with words like outcomes, accountability, and unbureaucratic service delivery. Visit a municipal office, he says, and you will
only see clerks; but an urbanizing nation needs technical people to solve
sanitation, transport and infrastructure problems; so, he hired engineer
interns and gave them an opportunity to solve municipal problems in Gujarat. Implementation is his obsession
and he compares two canals of equal
size--the Sujalam Sufalam Yojana, which he
completed in two years while the old Sardar Sarovar canal from Nehru's days is
still incomplete.
Every country must protect its environment, he argues, but none stops
750 industrial projects and delays them for years. By covering Gujarat’s canals with solar panels, he is conserving
water and has made Gujarat a model of
solar power.
India’s schools face a serious problem of
quality, and the Right to Education Act refuses to measure outcomes; so, he plans to
make Gujarat’s schools accountable through continuous, quality testing. He inspires young
people, saying ‘IT + IT = IT’ (Indian
Talent + Information Technology = India’s Tomorrow.) Not since Jawaharlal Nehru has a politician given people such a sense of possibilities. They see in Modi an underdog, a David challenging
the Goliath of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty.
But every temptation has a price. Modi is considered
anti-Muslim and many cannot forgive him for the events in Gujarat in 2002. He
may not have actively connived in the violence, they say, but why doesn’t he show remorse? After all, it happened under
his watch, and he is responsible. By polarizing the country, people fear he
might alienate India's Muslims and this might enhance the risk of domestic terror. The temptation
to vote for prosperity and good
governance must
be tempered by the imperative to keep the
nation united
and secular.
Those who dismiss
the middle class’ impact on elections forget that a new generation of voters
has joined the middle class after 1991, and it is in a rage over violence against women and children and longs for
a leader who
is tough against crime. But
it also
does not want an Indira Gandhi who
will subvert the institutions of democracy. Modi is not likeable--Rahul Gandhi is
far more affable--but people today seek an effective, not a
friendly leader. India's
dilemma is that Modi is the most likely candidate to provide corrupt
free governance and restore the economy to high growth, create masses of jobs
and lift millions into the middle class. But his communal past is a threat. In the end, each voter
will have to choose in 2014 between several imperfect candidates and make a
trade-off. Those who think corrupt free governance and prosperity are more
important will vote for Modi. Those who worry about communal harmony and
domestic security, will not vote for him. It is an unhappy
but unambiguous choice.
