Posted by: John Elliott | July 20, 2014

Modi and Jaitley have yet to make their mark

The current disillusionment with India’s new government is not surprising given the images built up in the past by prime minister Narendra Modi and finance minister Arun Jaitley. Modi, a powerful regional politician, blasted his way to power in a presidential style campaign with the theme that he alone could save India from its declining economic record and international image. Jaitley, a highly rated lawyer, spent years getting increasingly angry on television programmes and elsewhere as he barked and bit his way into the Congress-led coalition’s failings as if he knew what ought to have been done.

.

.

Inevitably, neither man (pictured left) has lived up to the implicit promises of their self-confident performances before and during the general election campaign.

Jaitley produced a drab Budget speech on July 10 that one leading commentator, Swaminathan Aiyar, dubbed (referring to the last finance minister) a “Chidambaram budget with saffron lipstick”. I thought that a bit unfair on Paliannapen Chidambaram, who did manage to put some vision and inspiration into his speeches, even if he wasn’t able to deliver the visions afterwards.

Despite taking a firm line on government administration issues where he is trying to introduce efficiency, Modi has yet to display the sure touch on policy that his reputation indicated. Indeed, it looks as if he had underestimated the difficult if not impossible task of transferring his Gujarat chief minister style to the far more complex national and international arena of New Delhi. It is of course far too early to make sweeping judgements, but so far he has failed to deliver on his Obama-style “Yes we can” message, to which he added “Yes we will do” last August.

I’ve been out of India since just before Budget Day and these views are culled from people I have met and talked to in Washington DC as the budget was being delivered, and in the UK, as well as reading the India news and comment. In the policy think tanks around Washington’s Dupont Circle, analysts thought the Budget good in parts, but were understandably disappointed that Jaitley did not take a clear stand on subsidies and against a damaging policy of retrospective corporate taxation pursued by the last government (initially over a Vodafone take-over deal and then affecting other companies).

In the UK, there is uncertainty about how new the Modi approach will turn out, while prime minister David Cameron is busy fawning on the leadership of both China and India. To placate Beijing, he is failing to honour pledges he has given in the past to defend democratic development in Hong Kong, which is now under attack from Beijing, and he has this past week gained publicity by promoting an Indian-origin declared right-wing Modi supporter as a Treasury minister.

I’ve been asked more about the treatment of women, rape and the caste system than I have about economic performance. “Can Mr Modi change that?” people want to know, referring to the non-economic subjects – including the use of child and slave labour in brickfields that BBC correspondent Humphrey Hawksley has been publicising on television.

Of course Modi can’t change everything, though the ten-year time frame that he has said he needs as prime minister should lead to a revamping of India’s police forces and legal system, plus education, so that police and judges do their jobs on time and education weans people away from the worst excesses of the caste system and persecution of the poor.

‘A lot of red ink’

To return to the budget, Chaitanya Kalbag, a former senior Reuters editor, neatly summarised the lack of new thinking when he wrote a few days ago: “So far, Modi and Jaitley have meekly accepted a string of programmes and targets set by the [previous Congress-led] United Progressive Alliance government.  If India was a failing corporation, the new CEO and CFO seem to be content to inherit a balance sheet smudged by a lot of red ink.  We hoped for big-bang reforms.  Instead, subsidies continue apace.  The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme sails on, leaks and all.  The new government says it is committed to food security – there is no attempt to trim the swingeing UPA pledge to give two-thirds of our population cheap rice and wheat. Jaitley has ‘accepted’ the challenge set by his predecessor of an almost impossible fiscal deficit target of 4.1 per cent of GDP this year”.

Swapan Dasgupta, a self-declared staunch Modi admirer, has similarly questioned Jaitley’s decision not to ditch the last government’s over-optimistic figures on the economy, writing: “There are things that just don’t add up. Jaitley may have preserved the honour of his Finance Ministry by not rubbishing the entire past, but what sort of signal has it sent to the bureaucracy that will oversee the big changes Modi contemplates? Continuity has its pitfalls and the most obvious one is that the Modi dispensation is in serious danger of being led by the nose by a bureaucracy that is most at ease with perpetuating the status quo through control. Certainly the main body of the Budget speech conveyed the unmistakable impression of having been penned by someone who was completely impervious to its political rationale and made the seamless transition from UPA to NDA.”

Dasgupta seemed to be suggesting that Jaitley had accepted the views of his finance ministry bureaucrats’ and said that Modi’s efforts to motivate and directly drive senior bureaucrats, Gujarat-style, would not work until “babudom grasps the reality of political change”. At present, he says, “there is no indication of such a realisation”, and the Indian bureaucracy still thinks the achche din [good days] has been never-ending”.

.

.

On the positive side Jaitley did indicate a new focus on economic growth, with the prospect of urgently needed agricultural and taxation reforms.

The few details he announced included an increase in foreign direct investment limits in defence equipment manufacturing and insurance companies from 26% to 49%, and a boost for government spending on highways. He also repeated an announcement made more than once by the last government that FDI in insurance companies, which needs parliamentary approval (unlike defence and other areas), would be raised from 26% to 49%.

Analysts in Washington were disappointed that the defence figure had not been raised to 51% because that would have allowed US and other companies such as Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon to have a majority share in India-based companies.

The 49% limit was welcomed by most Indian’s private sector defence manufacturers because they understandably want to have a chance to develop Indian capability if the defence industry is at last to be opened to private sector involvement.

Meanwhile, Modi seems to be more willing to be tougher and more abrasive on the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Hindu nationalist interests and causes than on economic policy and sorting out the way that India is run.

In Budget week, he appointed Amit Shah (above), his controversially tough and apparently ruthless political henchman as president of the BJP, despite an on-going criminal investigation into Shah’s alleged involvement in Gujarat police killings and phone tapping. Shah has been close to Modi since they were both teenagers in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which lays down doctrine and played a large part in the recent election campaign by providing thousands of volunteers.

There have also been moves to have a new look at India’s history and rewrite education books, as the last BJP-led government did in the early 2000s, along with other initiatives aimed at adjusting India’s approach to culture so that it fits with Hindu nationalist views.

It’s easier of course to do these things than it is to reform the way that India and its economy is run. The government however won its overwhelming general election victory because people want economic and other changes, not because they are devoted fans or followers of the BJP’s long-term nationalist ambitions.

This article on is AsiaSentinel.com - http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/india-modi-jaitley-slow-off-mark/

In a society ridden with crony capitalism and crony politics, businessmen and politicians inevitably try to stop people writing books that reveal their goings-on. But there is a limit to how much disruption they can achieve

This has has been shown by the recent publication of three books that uncover many of the secrets of the showy but shadowy Sahara Group run by the idiosyncratic and reclusive Subrata Roy (now in jail), the intrigues, spats and influencing of Reliance companies, run by the Ambani brothers, over natural gas pricing, and the fixes and fudges of Air India, especially when Praful Patel, a suave and wealthy Maharashtra politician, was aviation minister in the last government.

Roy took legal action that delayed publication of the book, by Jaico of Mumbai, about him and his Sahara company for several months, while the Ambanis have been complaining and threatening noisily but have not yet taken firm action to have the privately-published book about them and India’s “gas wars” banned. Patel got the Air India book withdrawn by Bloomsbury India, but the author is now publishing it himself.

Such disputes are good for sales – the Sahara book has gone into a reprint after an initial run of 15,000 copies, while Gas Wars has sold 4,000 hard and paperbacks. The (semi) joke doing the rounds is that the Ambanis are trying to obliterate the book buying up all the copies, but it’s not possible to do that to e-books of which 1,000 have been sold.

Sahara’s mysteries

Subrata Roy, the founder of the secretive but publicity conscious Sahara India Parivar group took out a Rs200 crore ($32m) injunction last December that delayed publication of Sahara: The Untold Story by Tamal Bandyopadhyay, an editor of the Mint business newspaper.

.

.

Roy was jailed four months ago on an (unconnected) contempt of court case, and seems to have decided that he was fighting for his survival on too many fronts. He agreed last month that the book should be published, along with a curiously worded disclaimer, which appears on both the cover flap and the first two pages, saying that it “is based on a particular notion, wrong perceptions supported by limited and skewed information. Hence, it does not reflect the true and complete picture”.

Roy is an extraordinary character, apparently employing 600,000 agents to draw savings from millions of the poor for a myriad of financial schemes. He penalises them mercilessly when they fall short on payments and dodges regulators who try to investigate. He invests in massive real estate dreams (claiming a 36,000 acre land bank) and has created and sold a loss-making airline.

He has owned and lost a cricket team, was till recently the official sponsor of the Indian cricket team, and has a share in a Formula One racing team (he invested to help the financially ailing Vijay Mallya of Kingfisher fame).

He owns two hotels abroad, including the famous though faded Grosvenor House on London’s Park Lane, a couple of minutes walk from Mayfair’s Grosvenor Square and nearby streets favoured as fashionable addresses by India’s wealthy. He bought the hotel in 2010 for £470m mysteriously sourced funds.

Roy lives and works in a closely guarded gated compound called Sahara Shaher that contains replicas of world famous buildings and covers an incredible 270 acres in the centre of Lucknow, the capital city of Uttar Pradesh where his political power has been based. He mixes with film stars and powerful politicians of varying shades of respectability, many of whom, it is widely rumoured, invest their money anonymously in his schemes.

Yet oddly the rich and powerful, who ostentatiously partied with him for years, have not managed to rescue him from exasperated and humiliated Supreme Court judges and financial regulators who have eventually trapped him and put him in jail over an alleged Rs24,000 crore ($4bn) bond scam.

For years, regulators have been trying to tie down where his money really comes from – is he caring for the poor or cheating them, or is he mainly laundering money for the rich?

In his book, Bandyopadhyay writes: “Roy, the guardian angel of the group, whose feet are touched by everybody in the Parivar, is an entrepreneur who wants to reach out to a million lives, and who feels claustrophobic in regulations. So, the clash with the regulators is inevitable. But when one regulator slams the door, Roy opens another. This play has been on since 1978 when Sahara was set up”.

Bandyopadhyay asks whether the “poor people actually keep their money with him or are they a front for others?” At the Delhi book launch, he wondered whether “investors really do exist” since none had complained about their treatment, yet Roy had claimed he had repaid 147m investors, which if true amounted to an astonishing “one in nine of all Indians”.

The Ambanis’ Gas Wars

Gas Wars – Crony Capitalism and the Ambanis by Paranjoy Guha Thakurta (below), a prominent business and economics journalist, and two colleagues, was published privately by Thakurta in April and is now for sale on the internet as well as in bookshops. The launch event in Delhi became an occasion for wide-ranging attacks on crony capitalism.

.

.

Reliance Industries (RIL), run by Mukesh Ambani, India’s richest man knew about the book but, says Thakurta, had not tried to stop him publishing it.

However it quickly threatened to sue for Rs100cr (about $16m), serving legal notices alleging defamation on the authors, the book distributors (including Amazon and Flipkart), plus some reviewers and, according to Thakurta, even a young woman who forwarded electronic invitations for the launch event.

That may seem draconian but it is mild compared with what Reliance Industries did in 1998 under Mukesh’s father, Dhirubhai Ambani, when it forced Harper Collins India to withdraw publication of a book, called The Polyester Prince that had been separately published in Australia. The ban pushed the price of hard copies on the net up to more than ten times the original sale price (even now $200-300 and £200-300 is quoted on Amazon.com and co.uk sites), but it was reissued four years ago by Roli Books of Delhi, slightly amended and the family stayed silent. (read the story here).

Thakurta’s book must therefore be regarded by the Ambanis as more threatening than the reissued Prince. It explores RIL’s natural gas finds at the KG-D6 oil and gas field in India’s Krishna-Godavari Basin and a very public row over delivery prices to a power project run by Mukesh’s younger brother Anil’s separate company. It quotes how the India’s Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) alleged the petroleum ministry “designed contracts and tailored rules” to favour RIL, which was thus able to recoup “excessive capital expenditure” and reduce payments to the government.

There are two detailed scoops in the book, which reveal details not previously published involving two of the main players. One is a long interview with Subir Raha, a former chairman of ONGC, India’s leading public sector gas exploration company, and Mani Shankar Aiyar, a Congress politician renowned for his “clean” reputation who was for a time the petroleum minister. Aiyar and another minister were removed from the petroleum ministry because, it was widely reported at the time, they had not been toeing the Reliance line. The anti-corruption Aam Aadmi Party also attacked Reliance and Ambani last year and started court cases.

Reliance of course denies all the allegations and last week launched on the internet a 56-page presentation and promotional video – a Flame of Truth eBook titled “India Has Never Been Here Before – Facts You Didn’t Know About KG-D6”.

The Ambani family has good connections in all political parties. Thakurta’s book tells the story of how it managed the environment (a neat and often used euphemism) with the Congress-led government of the last ten years. Mukesh is known to be a keen supporter of Narendra Modi, the new Bharatiya Janata Party prime minister, and they both come from Gujarat, but he must now be wondering how to manage with a prime minister who might not be as willing as Congress to appear to be favouring one company – however true or not that may have been.

The government last week adjourned for three months a decision on doubling natural gas prices that would inevitably benefit RIL. Commenting on this at a recent Mumbai Press Club meeting on the book, Aiyar wondered why Modi had kept responsibility for the petroleum ministry and therefore oil pricing, and is reported to have added: “Since we have only one company in the private sector, the ministry of oil pricing has effectively become the ‘ministry of Reliance affairs.”

Praful Patel and Air India

The Descent of Air India, by Jitender Bhargava, a former executive director and pr chief of the airline, was published last October. Patel said it contained “baseless allegations” about him and in November his lawyers brought a criminal defamation case in the Mumbai courts against Bloomsbury India and Bhargava. In January, Bloomsbury apologised, withdrew the book from sale, and agreed to destroy its remaining stocks, though Bhargava is selling ebooks on the internet and plans to publish a hard copy himself soon.

.

.

Patel, who is presumably no longer wielding so much power and patronage at the centre of politics following after the recent general election, does not seem to have tried to stop Bhargava’s sales.

Patel was aviation minister from 2004 to 2010 and then heavy industries minister. His time dealing with aviation was especially controversial because of deals for airport projects and for aircraft purchases and other happenings at Air India, the national carrier, whose finances and viability were declining while well-connected private sector airlines (and airports) bloomed. I once described him on my blog as the “Government’s top Teflon Man”.

Bhargava writes about what he describes euphemistically as Patel’s political interference “on acquisition or leasing of aircraft, purchase of merchandise, appointments, giving out free air tickets and upgrades, and on promotions, transfers, and postings of employees”. These decisions were taken, he says, “without any thought for the airline’s future”. For whatever reason, foreign airlines were given far greater access to India’s airports than was justified by customer demand, which damaged Air India’s ability to generate revenues.

The story isn’t over yet. There has been a case in Canadian courts alleging bribes were paid to Indian officials on a biometric identification system. Bhargava’s book gives details, adding Patel’s denials, but the courts, which were impressed by evidence of money trails, have now convicted a Canadian company official for paying bribes. That has led to calls in India for fresh official investigations into the Biometrics case and other allegations in Bhargava’s book. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on that later this month, unless the CBI files an FIR (first investigation report) against Patel first.

All the people in these stories are accustomed to wielding power and patronage at the centre of government. But a new era has begun and none of them can be sure how things will develop with a prime minister whose general election mandate included cleaning up corruption.

Narendra Modi yesterday made his first major speech in English since becoming prime minister – a day after I pointed out on this blog, and in a Times of India column, that he spoke it fluently in a 2001 television debate, and wondered why he rarely does so now. He was addressing scientists after the successful launch of five foreign satellites on an Indian launch vehicle in  Andhra Pradesh.

I’m not suggesting any direct link. Narendra Modi’s reason for speaking English yesterday was almost certainly that the event took place in a part of southern India where Telugu is the regjonal language.

Modi English teleprompter - June 30 '14

 

That he did so, however, was significant because it was a very public tacit acceptance by the prime minister that English is the common language that binds India together  - people totalling nearly 60% of the population list languages other than Hindi as their mother tongue.

Many will of course also speak Hindi, but many do not, and Modi’s government caused an uproar at the end of May, just after it had been elected, when the Home Ministry asked government departments to use Hindi on social media platforms.

That suited the Hindu nationalist dreams of Rajnath Singh, the home minister, who comes from the Hindi-speaking state of Uttar Pradesh, but it infuriated leading regional politicians, especially from southern India, who Modi needs as allies. The government quickly backtracked and said it was only referring to Hindi states and was not excluding English.

Modi’s speech was fluent, helped by a teleprompter (above), and the flow was more relaxed than when he read a speech at his Vibrant Gujarat conference in January last year. It will now be interesting to see whether he speaks in Hindi or English (maybe a mix of both as he did yesterday) at international events such as the United Nations later this year.

His speech attracted some criticism from journalists. Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, who has written a book on Modi, described it in The Economic Times this morning as a “most laboured effort in public speaking”, with Modi “groping for words the moment he begins speaking in English”. That is neither fair nor accurate, though Modi did speak more slowly than he does in Hindi and his eyes were often focussed on the teleprompters

The Times of India got it right, reporting that the speech “confirmed that he is quite comfortable with English when he wants to use the language and his preference to speak in Hindi, even during bilaterals with foreign leaders, is deliberate”.

That surely is main point – India’s new prime minister is most comfortable, personally and politically in Hindi (and his home state’s Gujarati), but is fluent in English.

Posted by: John Elliott | June 29, 2014

The challenge of Mr Modi

I am running below a piece that I wrote in 2002 for a column in India’s Business Standard newspaper, where I suggested that Narendra Modi had the makings of India’s next big leader – and spoke good English. This links with my post today on this blog (click here) and a Times of India article today.

Bystander column July 26 2002

The challenge of Mr Modi

 By John Elliott

I was away in London during April and missed the horrific detail of a lot of Gujarat’s riots and killings. But when I got back and read the newspapers, it seemed to me that – like it or not – India had, in Narendra Modi, a new potential national leader. Unlike most politicians, the Gujarat chief minister was arguing passionately for what he believed in, not for some short-term personal gain far removed from policy, but out of conviction. He was a strong public speaker and was standing his ground and presenting his case with rare confidence and élan – and, whether one liked it or not, he had a commanding presence (some call it ego). To a bystander, he looked like a logical heir for L.K.Advani.

Friends and contacts told me I was wrong. How could a man who had presided over such ghastly bloody carnage ever win popular respect and a wide following? Weren’t Gujarat’s people tiring of the violence and wasn’t he in fact already finished, just waiting to be edged out of his job? The BJP, I was told, could not survive as a national party of government if he became one of its top leaders because it would be shunned by coalition partners. So Mr Modi had no future and, I was assured, was likely to be sent away to some remote corner of the RSS offices in Nagpur.

I visited Gujarat at the end of May and there I heard the same sort of message. Mr Modi, I was told, was being cold-shouldered by ministers in the state government, was lying low, and would soon to be out of office and the political limelight. One of the state’s senior ministers who, according to newspaper reports, had been responsible for leading some of the savage attacks, even came to my hotel room to tell me that he had been maligned and was innocent – and that Mr Modi was an egocentric self-publicist who had used the Godhra aftermath to build his personal political platform but was now isolated and about to go.

Modi BigFight Sept '01I have only met Mr Modi once – before he went to Gujarat as chief minister – when we shouted at each other (as, it seems, one is expected to do) on Star TV’s Big Fight programme. He wouldn’t stop bellowing out his single-minded message in decibels that the sound system fortunately muted for television viewers, and I was trying to ask a question – all of which got lost in a fade-out for adverts. At the end of the programme, we laughed and he asked if he’d spoken enough in English (regrettably I do not speak Hindi) for me to know what he was on about. He hadn’t, but that didn’t matter because it was obvious anyway – strident Hinduvta and, in the context of the programme’s subject, anti-Muslim rhetoric. I came away with the impression of a driven and (sometimes) charming politician – a potent mixture for a political leader.

Now Mr Modi has made his pitch by calling on Gujarat’s electorate to endorse his management of the state during the carnage and return him to power. He has dared the Election Commission to let him have early polls in Gujarat so that he can cash in on his (widely deplored) leadership – and pre-empt a Congress revival under its new state chief, Shankersinh Vaghela, who combines both local roots and inside knowledge of how the BJP works. This is a politically understandable move, but it is also a gamble for a man whose potential as a national leader would probably be dashed if he loses.

Significantly Mr Modi has been backed by Mr Advani who, speaking in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday, even praised his performance as chief minister during the riots. The BJP is arguing that democratic elections will clear the air and enable the state to move on with a newly elected assembly. But that ignores the risk that early polls will stir up simmering communal tensions at a time when there are still unresolved issues – such as who set fire to the train in Godhra that killed 58 Hindu pilgrims and started the violence. In addition, at least 12,000 Muslims who lost their homes are still in refugee camps and thousands of others have not returned home. That itself would lead to potential unrest as well as denying many of the people a vote.

Understandably, the risk of such violence – and human rights violations in Kashmir as well as Gujarat – is causing concern abroad, especially in the US and UK where politicians have to reflect the views of their increasingly significant Indian communities. India will therefore be watched closely in the coming month, especially if it appears that the timing of elections in Gujarat supports the motives of politicians like Mr Modi, whose stance strikes horror in the minds of people across the world. The question that will be asked is whether this election will produce a new potential national leader – and whether that will indicate the future of the BJP and of India.

end

In September 2001, I met Narendra Modi on a Big Fight tv programme just after the 9/11 terror attacks in the US. I was struck by his powerful presence, his conviction, and even some tolerance when he talked about “my Muslim friends” and urged them to denounce terrorism. He even showed a sense of humour after the programme had finished.

The following July, five months after the Godhra riots that sullied his reputation, I wrote a column in the Business Standard suggesting that “India had in Narendra Modi a new potential national leader”, whose rise could “indicate the future of the BJP and of India”. I am running that 2002 column – The Challenge of Mr Modi –  as a separate post on this blog today (click here to access it).

Below is a column that appears in today’s edition of The Times of India and tells the story and context of that 2001 Big Fight tv programme. (The headline picks up the title of an internationally successful 2012 Bollywood comedy about an Indian house-wife who learns English to cope with a family wedding in the US – the reverse, in a way, of what Modi is doing by hiding his English!)

A little English Vinglish, and some humour

Prime minister Narendra Modi is much more fluent in English than most people assume. He rarely speaks the language in public or in private meetings, and seems to be encouraging his cabinet to make Hindi the language of ministerial discourse. “He’s not comfortable in English unless he is making a prepared speech”, his supporters often say.

Modi BigFight Sept '01Yet 12 years ago, three days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, he was adlibbing confidently and powerfully in English for a recording (right) of what was then Star TV’s Big Fight television programme during a sensitive and often-heated debate on the question “is Islam the now driving force of terrorism”.

He was also not averse to being shouted at, even by a foreign journalist, as I discovered asking questions alongside Rajdeep Sardesai, the anchor (now viewable on YouTube here)

Modi presented his arguments in a powerful and passionate but reasoned way, and the event triggered a line of thought that here was a man with all the potential needed to become India’s next big leader. At the time, he was a Bharatiya Janata Party national secretary, but was sent back to his home state of Gujarat three weeks later to be chief minister. The Godhra riots happened the following February, putting him out of most people’s reckoning as an acceptable chief minister, let alone a national politician.

There was a lot of shouting in the television studio. “He wouldn’t stop bellowing out his single-minded message in decibels that the sound system fortunately muted for television viewers, and I was trying to ask a question – all of which got lost in a fade-out for adverts,” I wrote in a column a few months after the show. “At the end of the programme, we laughed and he asked if he’d spoken enough in English (regrettably I do not speak Hindi) for me to know what he was on about”. He hadn’t because his opening remarks were all in Hindi and he only broke into rather fluent but rather heavily accented English later. He gave the impression of a driven and (sometimes) charming politician – a potent mixture for the political leader that he duly became.

He acknowledged in his opening remarks that Islam had “many good aspects” but said, accusingly, that “when one community says that my community is different from yours, it is higher than yours, and that until you take refuge in mine you cannot get Moksha [liberation or salvation], you cannot get Allah, you cannot get Jesus – then conflict starts”. Hinduism taught Ekam Sat, Viprah Bodha Badhanti (truth is one, says God in different ways), and there would be no conflict if it was accepted that “all religions are the same”. But, he added, “when one says your religion is hopeless and mine is better, then hatred starts, and later when that hatred gets linked into society, terror starts”. Since the 14th century, Islam had aimed to “put its flag in the whole world and the situation today is the result of that”.

That led to a noisy clash with Dr Rafiq Zakaria, an elderly Islamic scholar and Congress politician, who tried to tone down the inference to Islamic terrorism and argued that the religion’s texts contained the language of peace. G Parthasarathy, a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan, had suggested that terrorists came from Islamic countries in a “crescent of crisis” stretching from Pakistan to Algeria. Eventually Modi called on his “Muslim friends” – a noteworthy phrase – to “understand that terrorism has damaged Islam like anything,” and that they needed to “come out against the terrorist”.

Modi openg speech VibGuj Jan '13Modi’s performance then and later seemed to suggest a new potential national leader, irrespective of whether or not one accepted his message.

Unlike most politicians, he argued passionately and powerfully for what he believed in, not for some short-term personal gain far removed from policy, but out of conviction. He was a strong public speaker and was standing his ground, presenting his case with rare confidence and élan. Whether one liked it or not, he had a commanding presence. To a bystander, he looked like a logical heir for L K Advani.

That was not a popular view. How could a man who had presided over the Godhra carnage ever win popular respect and a wide following, people asked? Weren’t Guajarati’s tiring of the violence and wasn’t Modi already finished, just waiting to be edged out of his job in imminent assembly elections? The BJP, people said, could not survive as a national party of government if he became one of its top leaders because it would be shunned by coalition partners. So he had no future and was likely to be sent away to some remote corner of the RSS offices in Nagpur.

Modi won the assembly election and has not looked back – and his English sounded more polished in a long speech that he delivered (above) at the start of his Vibrant Gujarat conference in January last year (on YouTube here)

The question now is whether the potential national leader of the early 2000s can manage the complexities of governing India. Public acceptance of English, more mention of “Muslim friends”, plus laughter – all evident at Star TV in 2001 – might help.

Posted by: John Elliott | June 16, 2014

Would Nehru do to Congress what Murthy’s done to Infosys?

The end of ‘Buggins turn’ at Infosys is an end-of- dynasty lesson for Congress 

If Jawaharlal Nehru could suddenly reappear and be injected into the top of the Congress leadership with a mandate to rebuild the demoralised party, would he echo, in a political sense, the words of Narayana Murthy, one of the founders of Infosys that the iconic IT company had “diluted its focus on meritocracy and accountability during the last decade”.

Surely he would, given the disastrous leadership of the country provided by his family! So would Nehru then end Congress’s dynastic line of succession that began with him, in the same way that Murthy has terminated the Infosys founders’ ‘Buggins turn’ system of succession as chief executive officers of what was once the best known of India’s IT businesses?

N Murthy Infosys 33rd agmMurthy (left), who was the company’s first chairman and ceo, was brought back  a year ago from retirement as executive chairman to halt a slide in the company’s fortunes. He said, at the company’s agm last Saturday, that moves he was initiating would bring in “a new culture of innovation…and the best talent” and would identify “hidden jewels in the company” and “niche areas…where we believe opportunities for the future exist”.

He had already announced that he was stepping down from his temporary role and that an outsider was being brought in to run the company. Vishal Sikka, previously with the US-based SAP software company, would become ceo and managing director in August.

That is exactly what the Congress Party needs, having collapsed from being India’s leading iconic political party to the level of a regional party like Tamil Nadu’s AIADMK

Nehru’s possible adaptation of Murthy’s aims would be to end his great-grandchildren’s family succession to the Congress leadership. He would bring in someone fresh from outside the dynasty and its circle of hangers-on to revive the party, and would introduce a new culture of policy development and execution, while identifying further bright potential leaders and looking for new areas of society where Congress could be effective.

Family companies rarely succeed after the first two or maybe three generations and Infosys, with its pattern of passing the chairman and ceo jobs successively to the original founders, has failed as four have held the job.

One can argue about when the Congress dynastic prime ministers failed. Many commentators blame Nehru’s daughter Indira Gandhi for beginning India’s current decline, while there is no doubt that the current heir, Sonia Gandhi, Indira’s daughter in law, and her son Rahul have been more focussed on sustaining the dynasty than governing India well.

Infosys was founded in 1981 by seven engineers with starting capital of just $250 –the market cap is now around $31bn with sales of $8.25bn in more than 30 countries. That is a massive success story by any measure, but the succession system at the top did not produce the right entrepreneurial drive and focus.

I wrote on this blog seven years ago about whether Infosys was “really a family company, controlled not by blood relations but by the bonding of five of its seven founders who still worked there, owned 16.5% of its stock, and taking turns running the show”.

Growing old together

I chatted for the blog to Nandan Nilekani, who was then graduating family-style. He was handing the chief executive officer’s job over to S. Gopalakrishnan, the chief operating officer, whose job was going to S.D.Shibulal, now (and until August) the ceo. Nilekani was becoming executive chairman alongside Murthy, who had moved aside to be the non-executive chairman and chief mentor. Murthy later moved out, as did Nilekani (first to head the last government’s UID electronic identity scheme, and then to stand – unsuccessfully – as a Congress Party candidate in the recent general election).

I asked Nilekani how they all managed to get on so well – or were there fights that their personal and public relations skills managed to bury? “No,” he said laughing, “we all have the same values…. we are all from the same simple middle class backgrounds…. and we have enormous bonding”, adding: “The important thing as an entrepreneur is to choose partners you can grow old with.”

Well, the growing older together has finally ended with them all around the age of 60 or older. Infosys should benefit and now have a more motivated staff without the buggins’ turn glass ceiling over their heads. Staff turnover has been high – nearly 20% of the 160,000-plus employees left in the past year

Commenting on Sikka’s appointment last week, the Financial TimesLex column, known for its pithy judgements, wrote, “As soon as he takes his seat, Mr Sikka needs to present an explicit plan for how the company’s resources will be used. In the short run, investors need clarity. Once Mr Sikka provides this, he can turn to transformation.”

And that is what Congress needs – clarity about its basic beliefs and policies for modern aspirational India.

Rahul Gandhi has been trying the transformation by introducing disastrous primaries for parliamentary candidates and other changes, without spelling out with clarity how the party would tackle India’s problems.

He does not of course have clarity about himself, let alone about how he might run things – so he should read the speech Murthy made last Friday – it’s here http://www.infosys.com/investors/news-events/annual-general-meeting/2014/Documents/NRN-AGM-2014-speech.pdf

Posted by: John Elliott | June 9, 2014

Narendra Modi now has to start delivering what India needs

Narendra Modi hasn’t put a foot wrong since he won a resounding victory in India’s general election on May 16, and was then sworn in as prime minister two weeks ago.  He invited South Asian (and Mauritius) leaders to the swearing in and had meetings with them all. Today he has met the visiting foreign minister of China and he is planning by September to visit Bhutan (a friendly buffer state with China), Japan (a major partner and potential investor) and the US (a potentially significant partner).

He will also be attending various multi-lateral assemblies so that, by the autumn, the man who was regarded in many parts of the world as an anti-Muslim tyrant will be rehabilitated as a strong but approachable prime minister who holds the promise of turning around India’s fortunes and putting it back on the path to become the significant world power that he believes it can and should be.

Prime minister Narendra Modi (left) and President Pranab Mukherjee (centre) walk to parliament today

Prime minister Narendra Modi (left) and President Pranab Mukherjee (centre) walk to parliament today, led by the new Lok Sabha Speaker, Sumitra Mahajan – photo The Hindu

Now Modi has to do all the things at home that will make that happen.

The moves so far have been the easy part, as was an address to mark the opening of parliament delivered today by president Pranab Mukherjee in flat tones that mirrored (constitutionally as well as in style) how Queen Elizabeth reads out the British government’s dreams at the annual Opening of Parliament.

Mukherjee recited Modi’s ambitious aims and intentions to a combined session of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. More will emerge in finance minister Arun Jaitley’s Budget speech at the beginning of next month.

Then it is all down to implementation. This is what the prime minister is reputed to be good at, and it is what he has been elected to do.

Implementation

India’s problems of inequality, poor performance and slowing rates of growth do not stem from a lack of new policies or new laws, but from a failure of both central and state governments to implement measures ranging from infrastructure projects and curbing corruption to providing adequate education and job opportunities for the young. In a country as large and diverse as India, that is a far from easy thing to do, and Modi now needs to adapt the political management skills he successfully honed over 12 years as Gujarat chief minister to a hugely larger canvas – with his promise that Mukherjee echoed today of “minimal government, maximum governance”.

That was one of many slogans in today’s speech. It talked about reviving “Brand India” and riding on “strengths of 5T’s: Tradition, Talent, Tourism, Trade and Technology” and  “three Ds of Democracy, Demography and Demand”. It covered economic subjects such as urgently tackling high food prices, and attracting foreign investment in areas that will create jobs (not a criteria till now). Manufacturing initiatives included long-delayed reforms to defence equipment procurement, with a greater role for the Indian private sector and relaxed foreign investment limits. Education is to be boosted at all levels and by 2022 “every family will have a pucca house, water & electricity” – a somewhat unachievable aim targeted to celebrate 75 years of independence.

On more sensitive social subjects, the speech talked about “zero tolerance” (a phrase which usually means the opposite in Indian government parlance) towards “extremism, riots and crime”. Also in this section was a pledge, which is important given the risk of BJP activists stirring communal unrest, that “a national plan will be chalked out in consultation with the state governments to effectively curb incidents of communal violence”. The speech also talked constructively about developing “co-operative federalism” so that Delhi and the states work together.

Focal point

Modi has made it clear that he intends to become the focal point of government activity and has encouraged secretaries (the top civil service level) to report problems and blockages direct to him, and to take their own initiatives. That may not go down well with ministers who, as politicians, want the prestige and powers of patronage that usually go with their jobs.

This will test of Modi’s skill at managing the interplay of ministers and bureaucrats who will not be so obedient as his team in Gujarat §in the coming months and years. He has staffed his prime minister’s office with experienced officials and those he trusts from Gujarat, but he also has relatively inexperienced ministers occupying several important posts.

In an attempt to reduce corruption, Modi has issued instructions to ministers not to employ relatives in their offices, to beware of lobbyists and not to take favours. He has set up an inquiry into billions of dollars stored illicitly abroad, though that will probably turn out to be little more than an act of symbolism designed to meet a popular demand for the dollars to be brought back to India.

But he not only has to manage these positive aspects of his government. As today’s speech tacitly acknowledged, he also has to control those in the BJP and its allied Hindu nationalist organisations who want to pursue divisive policies. These include abolishing Article 370 in the constitution that gives the state of Jammu and Kashmir special rights, which has already caused a major political row, and also other measures affecting the special status of Muslims as a minority.

Not since the days of Rajiv Gandhi in 1984, and Jawaharlal Nehru four decades earlier, has so much hope been vested in the leadership of a prime minister. Modi’s test begins now.

 

Posted by: John Elliott | June 4, 2014

This should be the end of Rahul as the next Congress leader

It’s never wise to write off dynasties, but if ever a political family deserved to fade away, it is the Nehru Gandhi dynasty which two days ago appointed Mallikarjun Kharge, 71, a little known and relatively inexperienced and elderly member of parliament, to lead the Congress Party in the Lok Sabha because neither Sonia nor Rahul Gandhi are willing to take the post.

Rahul, along with his far-from-well mother, led the Congress to a shattering and personally humiliating general election defeat last month when the party won only 44 Lok Sabha seats, 162 less than in the outgoing parliament. This was the Congress’s worst-ever result. It was even below the minimum figure of 54 (10% of the total) needed under India’s constitution to be recognised as the official opposition it reduced Congress to the level of regional parties – the AIADMK from Tamil Nadu won 37 seats and the Trinamool Congress from West Bengal won 34.

Sonia and Rahul arrive for Narendra Modi's swearing in - Rediff photo

Sonia and Rahul arrive for Narendra Modi’s swearing in – Rediff photo

Since that defeat, there have been many criticisms of the family’s leadership, especially of Rahul’s autocratic style and that of his advisers led by the aloof Kanishka Singh, the son of a former foreign secretary, and including Jairam Ramesh, a self-confident and controversially outspoken though effective minister in the last government.

One senior party member suggested that Rahul’s experiments in democratising the choice of election candidates backfired, mainly because primary elections were manipulated by people with money who habitually bribe voters.

Both mother and son offered to resign as the party’s president and vice-president, but that was inevitably rejected by the party’s top working committee. In an attempt to stem a subsequent revolt, two critics who were too outspoken in their personal criticisms of Rahul were instantly suspended from party membership.

Loyalists then called for either Sonia or Rahul to become the official opposition leader in the Lok Sabha. Since Sonia is probably not well enough for the task and has always preferred to be visible but mostly silent in parliament, Rahul should, it could be logically argued, have taken the post since he was the party’s assumed (but undeclared) prime ministerial candidate in the election.

But there are snags. For years, he has regularly vanished from public view, often on unexplained trips abroad, and has shown no sign of having the stamina to sit day by day on the parliamentary front bench, or the leadership qualities to be effective if he was there. Given his lack of experience in parliament (he has only made two or three speeches in ten years as an MP), he would have also probably found it hard to win the respect and support of the AIADMK and the other opposition parties that Congress needs as allies in opposing the new BJP government.

How then, one might ask, if he could not or would not lead the opposition, could Rahul have become prime minister, if Congress had won – or would he and Sonia have appointed someone else in the same way that Sonia appointed Manmohan Singh in 2004? Perhaps he expected to be dynastically parachuted into the prime minister’s office so that he could preside from there, and in parliament, with the born-to-rule attitude that this shy and retiring man often displays.

Mallikarjun Kharge - photo The HIndu

Mallikarjun Kharge – photo The HIndu

Be that as it may, having decided that they would not lead in the Lok Sabha, it was surely the Gandhis’ duty to nominate a parliamentary leader who would command respect and provide robust opposition to Narendra Modi, the new prime minister.

There were at least two veteran experienced and able candidates available – Kamal Nath, 67, who has held many ministerial posts and is famed for his connections in India and abroad, and Veerappa Moily, 74, a former Karnataka state chief minister who held various senior posts in the last government. The ambitious Nath would have been opposed by many other Congress leaders, and is thought not to be trusted by Sonia, but it is unclear why Moily was not picked.

The most adventurous choice would have been Jyotiraditya Scindia, 43, a bright committed politician from a former royal maharajah’s family in Madhya Pradesh and the son of the late Madhavrao Scindia who was a leading Congress politician of Sonia’s generation. Jyotiraditya has won four elections as an MP and was a minister in the last government, but he has a fatal flaw – the Gandhis would not dare pick him because he would have immediately been seen, and might have become, an alternative leader challenging Rahul’s dynastic supremacy.

Kharge was presumably chosen because he has no further political ambitions, having briefly been railways minister in the last government. He made no secret of his obedience to the leadership. “I will seek the guidance of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on what can be done and how to go about it. They will tell me,” he told journalists when asked how and what he intended to do.

This illustrates how political dynasties, and especially the Gandhis, fail their parties and the country by preferring to promote safe loyalists and not the best available people. It is difficult to see how Kharge, whose political career has mostly been spent in his home state of Karnataka, will gain respect in parliament, just as loyalists appointed to important ministries such as defence and home affairs in the last government failed to perform.

Sonia and Rahul Gandhi accept responsibiilty for the Congress defeat

Sonia and Rahul Gandhi accept responsibiilty for the Congress defeat

Rahul, who is 44 later this month, has been seen little since he stood with his mother on May 16, the day the results were results, smiling oddly (right) as she acknowledged defeat. People wondered – and tweeted – why he had such a grin on his (unusually) clean shaven face.

Was it relief that he would not have to decide whether to accept the prime ministership, to which he knew he was ill suited? More unkind tweets suggested he was looking forward to a five-year holiday and many vanishing trips abroad.

Three days earlier, he had horrified even well-wishers by failing to attend a farewell dinner thrown by Manmohan Singh, the retiring prime minister, (though he did attend Modi’s prime ministerial swearing in on May 26 – photo above – with the beard back again!). His absence from the dinner sparked gossip about why he was suddenly unable to attend such an important event just a few minutes drive from his Delhi home. New avenues of gossip developed when the Congress Party announced that he was making a quick but unexplained trip abroad, having apologised to Manmohan Singh for his absence two days earlier. Why in that case, people wondered, had it not been announced before the dinner – or was he not abroad at all?

Rahul’s personal failings have led to repeated calls in recent weeks for Priyanka, his 42-year old sister, to become active in national politics instead of confining her activities to Sonia’s and Rahul’s Uttar Pradesh constituencies. She mirrors, it is often said, the style of her grandmother Indira Gandhi, and she has far more charisma and is far more approachable than Rahul.

Like him however, she sometimes displays the family’s dynastic airs and behaves on visits to villages as a patron rather than someone desperate for votes. There have been calls for her to replace Rahul, but it seems more likely that she might be projected along with him as (together below) the ideal team to carry the party into the next general election.

priyanka rahul gamndhi amethiLogically, Rahul’s political career (if one can call it that) should now be over because he has led his party into defeats not only in this general election but two earlier state assembly polls. He has also refused to acknowledger whether he is a prime ministerial candidate and his attempts to reform the party have failed.

But this is dynastic politics that do not follow such logic and the Gandhi family is essential for the survival of the Congress Party, which could break up in to rival factions without the Gandhi glue. The desperation with which even leading politicians view the family’s survival was demonstrated by Salman Khurshid, who till recently was the foreign minister and earlier had other top posts. He has been quoted opposing independent criticisms of the Gandhi family, saying: “You cannot introspect about your leadership. The leader must help you introspect.”

With such loyalty, Rahul is probably safe, for now at least, with Sonia and Priyanka protecting him. But unless the family finds a way to reassert itself, this could be the beginning of the decline of the dynasty – and the beneficiary of all this of course is Narendra Modi who faces a rudderless and divided opposition as he starts the ten years that he wants to govern India. His supporters will welcome that, but others will say the family has again let the country down in order to protect its dynastic survival.

This article is on http://www.asiasentinel.com

 

Arun Jaitley is Finance Minister, Rajnath Singh at Home, Sushma Swaraj for Foreign Affairs – see full official list issued May27 at bottom of this article

 Fifty years after the death of Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s greatest post-independence leader, the country today has a new charismatic prime minister whose strong and forceful nature has led to comparisons with Vladimir Putin and Margaret Thatcher.

photo 2-1Narendra Modi, who has this evening been been  sworn in at a ceremony attended by over 4,000 people in the vast forecourt of Rastrapati Bhavan, the presidential palace, can also seen as an almost Nehru-like figure who is expected by a vast proportion of the population to usher in a new era of a success for a nation that has failed in recent years to live up to its potential.

That is a dramatic change and challenge for a man who was pilloried for years for his association with Gujarat’s anti-Muslim riots in 2002 when he was chief minister, and was condemned as a divisive politician.

He has however already shown an ability to usher in a new era by inviting the leaders of the six surrounding South Asian countries to attend the swearing in ceremony. They have all come, including Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan who has welcomed a “new page” in the two countries’ relations.

Modi is also attempting to streamline the government with his cabinet appointments. He is planning the creation of new umbrella ministries covering what he calls clusters for areas of transport and energy, though that the details of that plan are only beginning to emerge.

Within minutes of being sworn in, his new website was launched with Modi asking for co-operation in scripting “a glorious future for India” - http://pmindia.nic.in

Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley

Narendra Modi, Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley

The latest indications of members in the 23-member cabinet include:

Arun Jaitley, a top lawyer and the commerce minister in the last (1998-2004) Bharatiya Janata Party government, is the finance minister. He is also the minister for corporate affairs, which has been bracketed with finance before. Surprisingly, he is also the minister for defence though that may be a temporary arrangement.

Rajnath Singh, the BJP president and a chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, is home minister, and is believed to have been named as number two in the cabinet.

Sushma Swaraj, the BJP’s leader in the Lok Sabha, is the external affairs minister. She was a leading opponent of Modi’s rise to be prime minister, so this shows he is prepared to embrace opponents.

Nitin Gadkari, a former BJP president, is minister for road transport, highways and shipping (which have been merged before).

Other Cabinet appointments include Ravi Shankar Prasad as minister for law and telecoms (which were both held by the same minister for part of the last government) and information technology.

Smriti Irani, who heavily reduced Rahul Gandhi’s majority at Amethi in the general election and holds on to her existing Rajya Sabha seat, becomes human resources development minister. At 38, she looks like being the youngest cabinet member.

Maneka Gandhi, widow of Sanjay Gandhi and sister in law of Sonia Gandhi who has been estranged from the family for 30 years, becomes minister for women and child development.

photo 3-1Also being sworn in today are ten ministers of state who will have independent charge of their ministries, and eleven more who will report to cabinet ministers.

Further appointments are expected in about a month’s time. Some of those named today are first time MPs who will be reporting direct to the prime minister. The full list of those sworn in is here.

The sensitive post of environment has been given to Prakash Javadekar as minister of state with independent charge. He said this evening that he belongs to an international group trying to balance the often conflicting claims of environmental protection and economic growth. He has been the BJP’s spokesman and is also to be information and broadcasting minister of state and of parliamentary affairs.

Many of the ministers have substantial political experience, but the appointments are not especially notable in terms of potential effectiveness, apart from Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj. Though having no economic background apart from being a commerce minister earlier, he can be expected to take measures that will reform tax and other procedure and improve India’s image as an investment destination. He is also likely to drive urgently needed changes in defence procurement and manufacturing, which have been largely ignored by the outgoing government for most of the past ten years.

Many of the other appointments would not be specially impressive if it were not for the fact that Modi has a reputation as a strong leader and administrator, who personally ensures that ministers and top bureaucrats deliver on policy implementation. Results are therefore expected to stem more from his personal drive and attention to implementation than has happened with prime ministers in the past.

It is his determination to reform the way that India runs its economy and development that has led to comparisons with Margaret Thatcher, who knew exactly what she wanted to achieve and transformed the British economy 30 years ago.

The comparison with Putin stems from early fears – encouraged by his detractors – that Modi would be an autocrat whose tough policies would have little care for the interests of minorities and neighbouring countries. His totally unexpected invitation to the South Asian prime ministers to be in Delhi this evening confounds that comparison, at least for now. Tomorrow he will have meetings planned to last about half an hour with each of the visitors. Though this will not provide time for much substantive discussion, it will mean that he has established personal contact which will ease relations in the future.

The Congress Party is carping that his invitation to Sharif is a reversal of the BJP’s relentless criticism of the last government’s overtures to Pakistan at a time when cross-border infiltration of militants and terrorists is continuing. But Sharif is coming as part of the South Asian group and future contacts will depend on whether Pakistan takes tough measures.

The comparison with Nehru is partly based on the fact that India has not had such a strong and charismatic prime minister committed to building a successful nation since Nehru. Indira Gandhi pursued her own power-seeking agendas. Her son, Rajiv Gandhi, had great potential but was not in power long enough to develop. Atal Bihari Vajpayee was a great prime minister and statesman, but without Modi’s reforming zeal, while Manmohan Singh was hemmed in by Sonia Gandhi whose primary agenda was the survival of the Gandhi dynasty.

Modi’s challenge now is to run the cabinet and other ministers who he has appointed today so that he builds the strong nation he has promised with Thatcher-like effectiveness and does not become diverted by the BJP’s Hindu hardliners into Putin-like nationalism.

The article above is on www.AsiaSentinel.com

__________________________________________

MAY 27: OFFICIAL LIST OF CABINET MINISTERS BELOW

(FOR ALL APPOINTMENTS CLICK HERE )

Rajnath Singh - Home Minister
Arun Jaitley - Finance, Corporate Affairs and Defence
Sushma Swaraj - Ministry of External Affairs
Venkaiah Naidu - Urban Development, Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Parliamentary Affairs
Nitin Jairam Gadkari - Road Transport and Highways, Shipping
DV Sadananda Gowda - Railways
Uma Bharti - Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation
Najma A. Heptulla - Minority Affairs
Gopinathrao Munde - Rural Development, Panchayati Raj, Drinking Water and Sanitation
Ramvilas Paswan - Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution
Kalraj Mishra - Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises
Maneka Sanjay Gandhi - Women and Child Development
Ananthkumar - Chemicals and Fertilizers
Ravi Shankar Prasad - Communications and Information Technology, Law and Justice
Ashok Gajapathi Raju Pusapati - Civil Aviation
Shri Anant Geete - Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises
Harsimrat Kaur Badal - Food Processing Industries
Narendra Singh Tomar - Mines, Steel, Labour and Employment
Jual Oram - Tribal Affairs
Radha Mohan Singh - Agriculture
Thaawar Chand Gehlot - Social Justice and Empowerment
Smriti Zubin Irani - Human Resource Development
Harsh Vardhan - Health and Family Welfare

Narendra Modi has five years till the next general election to show that he can get India moving but NaMo, as the Indian media call him, has said over the weekend that he needs ten years to transform the country – which he cloud well get if progress goes relatively well in the first period.

He will be elected parliamentary leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party today and will then meet President Pranab Mukherjee to stake his irrefutable claim to form India’s new government. He will be sworn in on Monday when senior cabinet appointments will probably be announced.

The prospect of ten-years of Modi rule strikes fear among many people who are afraid that, alongside building up economic growth and development, that would give him and his supporters time to entrench Hindu nationalist policies in various ways, destroying India’s traditional secular base that caters for minorities such as Muslims and Christians.

Modi trustModi has tried to deal with that fear by making statements about inclusiveness. “To run the country we need to take everyone with us, all together and I seek your blessings to succeed in this endeavour,” he said at one of his massive triumphal celebration rallies. “Brothers, sisters, you have faith in me and I have faith in you…. The people of this country have given their verdict. This verdict says we have to make the dreams of 1.25bn people come true. I must work hard,”

The key here, as I wrote last Friday, is that his huge majority means that he cannot just work for BJP interests but will have to make building the economy his primary aim. The BJP’s success is the result of massive support from voters – especially the young – who want India to get moving and who regard their elders’ fears of Hindu chauvinism and violence as something that can be put aside.

The BJP alone without its allies won 282 seats, ten more than the 272 needed for a simple majority in the Lok Sabha. This is the first time that a party has won a majority without needing a coalition since Rajiv Gandhi’s Congress victory in 1984.

It has been widely assumed that coalitions involving smaller and regional parties would be inevitable in India for years to come because Congress has been losing its national role for over 20 years and the BJP did not have any chance of building countrywide appeal. Modi has reversed that trend and has made the BJP a party with national reach for the first time. In north India, he has notably defeated caste-based parties in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, and has spread the BJP’s appeal in the south

Modi consults on his Cabinet 

While the Congress Party’s top working committee was yesterday shielding Sonia and Rahul Gandhi from blame for its devastating defeat, and rejected their notional offers of resignation, Modi was meeting his top leaders and allies to try to work out who to appoint to his cabinet.

He is expected to try to rationalise the functioning of government by setting up two new umbrella ministries for energy and infrastructure that would take in smaller currently  unco-ordinated ministries. This may also be done in other areas. This might take sometime to organise, and there are suggestions that only a small cabinet will be announced first.

He has a difficult job balancing various interests. Ideally he would like to appoint ministers who can deliver on his promises to ramp up the economy, revive investment, and speed up infrastructure construction. Top bureaucrats responding to the leadership of Modi’s Prime Minister’s Office can do some of that work, but effective ministers are also important.

He has to take into account the ambitions of the right wing of the Sangh Parivar, the umbrella organisation for which the BJP is the political arm. Here the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which Modi has belonged to since he was a teenager, is the key organisation. It lays down doctrine and, having played a large part in the election campaign by providing thousands of volunteers, will expect to have a role in the government.

Arun ShourieArun Jaitley, a prominent politician and lawyer who has been the leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha (upper house), is being widely tipped to be foreign minister, though till yesterday he was expected to be finance minister. He is close to Modi but his stock has fallen because, in an attempt to build a political base, he stood for election in the Punjab city of Amritsar and was heavily defeated by the Congress candidate, Capt Amarindar Singh, a former Punjab chief minister and member of the old Patiala maharajah family. Jaitley remains a Rajya Sabha member so can take a ministerial job despite the defeat.

Arun Shourie (above), a former campaigning newspaper editor who was disinvestment and telecoms minister in the last BJP government, has also been mentioned for the finance job – Mumbai’s businessmen have been saying he is likely to be the finance minister for several weeks. He is favoured by Modi. Other possibilities are the defence ministry, which needs a strong reformist cabinet minister, or commerce and industry.

Rajnath Singh, who has been instrumental in paving the way for Modi’s ascendancy since he became BJP president in January last year, could be a candidate for a top cabinet post though reports suggest that he will remain party president and maybe become home minister later. If he does become home minister, his earlier experience as chief minister of Uttar Pradesh would be useful because he has experience of how states work, which could help him persuade them to co-operate in security and other issues.

Sushma Swaraj, who has been leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha, would have been sure to get a top post if she had not opposed Modi becoming the party’s prime ministerial candidate – a role she had hoped for herself. It will be a test of Modi’s willingness to embrace opponents as well as friends to see what job she gets.

Amit ShahNitin Gadkari, a Maharashtra politician and businessman who was BJP president from 2010, is also in line for a key job, possibly on infrastructure, which he handled earlier in his home state. He resigned from the party president’s post in January 2013 after the anti-corruption Aam Aadmi Party made allegations of illicit deals concerning his Purti group of agricultural and power businesses.

Modi also needs to find a spot for Amit Shah (left), a tough political ally in Gujarat who managed the highly successful election campaign for him in Uttar Pradesh. He might become minister in the prime minister’s office so he could make sure Modi’s plans are implemented.

Finally Modi has somehow to accommodate L.K.Advani, the party’s top veteran leader, who had hoped to become prime minister even though he is 86. Also Murli Manohar Joshi, another veteran leader. One possibility mooted in the media is that Advani would become the speaker of the Lok Sabha.

One key post to watch will be whether an RSS activist is made the Human Resources Development Minister and thus be able to organise rewriting of textbooks and infiltration of university organisations. Some reports suggest Shushma Swaraj might be given this ministry.

These appointments are important because Modi needs to ensure that the quality and strength of his first cabinet, and the ministerial organisation, support his claim that he can cut through India’s problems and boost economic growth, and tackle other issues such as high inflation.

My new book IMPLOSION: India’s Tryst with Reality, is on sale in India and other South Asian bookshops. E-books and hard covers are on Amazon.in, .com, and .co.uk.  For India delivery, also Flipkart  http://bit.ly/1ghRWnA     

The article above is on www.AsiaSentinel.com

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,125 other followers

%d bloggers like this: