We Must Vote For Stability

We must vote for stability Hiranmay Karlekar As the Lok Sabha election campaign unfolded, one was struck by the declining standard of the exchanges and the complete lack of scruples and honesty on the part of several leaders. All poll campaigns have their share of mud-slinging. The last presidential poll in the United States was no exception. That, however does not justify what is happening here, particularly when it is on perhaps an unprecedented scale. Appeals to caste and communal sentiments, aimed at using hate as a mobilising factor, are rampant; as is slander. A number of factors are responsible for this — the rise of leaders viewing politics as an instrument of self-aggrandisement, criminalisation of politics, the abdication of its social responsibility by the white-collar middle class and so on. Several leaders have made no secret either of their prime ministerial ambition or of their plan to get as many seats as possible to be able to jockey for the Prime Minister’s office after the polls. This is to decry not ambition but the variety of it which is untrammeled by ethics and can wreak havoc in the political ring. In the present instance, it has among other things, undermined the alliances forged before the elections. Allegations, flying brazenly in the face of facts, are being hurled at parties and leaders who are even now formally allies. Everything is in the melting pot. Who will become Prime Minister will, according to some of the aspirants to the office, depend on the new alignments emerging after the election. In other words, it will depend on horse-trading and promises of the license to plunder. This is a frightening prospect. India is being buffeted by the shockwaves unleashed by a global economic crisis that has been described as the worst since the Great Depression of the last century. This is bound to aggravate the social unrest and the insurrectionary and terrorist violence that affect large tracts of the country, which is in the midst of what WW Rostow called the “revolution of rising expectations” decades ago. Frustrated expectations breed discontent, and discontent, alienation and unrest. And this is happening at a time when India faces a serious threat from global Islamist terrorism, of which Pakistan has emerged as the epicentre, and which is set to become much more serious. The proxy war through cross-border terrorism which Pakistan has been waging against this country, over decades, may lead to a conventional war should Islamabad seek to combine the escalation of tension along its borders with India and resort, with the help of an internal fifth column, to terror strikes as serious as the one on Mumbai to avoid cracking down on the Taliban and Al Qaeda operating out of its North-West Frontier Province and Federally Administered Tribal Areas. If the immediate situation warrants concern, the long-term prospects are daunting, with the Karzai regime in Kabul struggling to hold its own against resurgent Taliban and Al Qaeda functioning under the umbrella of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate. Besides, as the new US military strategy against Al Qaeda and the Taliban seems set to repeat mistakes of the old, the entire region form Central Asia and Afghanistan to Pakistan may become a jihadi cauldron. Add to this a Bangladesh where Sheikh Hasina is waging a courageous struggle against Islamist terrorists seeking to overthrow her and Talibanise the country by force, Sri Lanka still in the midst of a civil war and Nepal with its tense

calm,

and

the

picture

of

India’s

dangerous

neighbourhood

is

complete.

It can be disastrous at this stage to have a patchwork-quilt coalition Government at the Centre, stitched together after the election and manned by several prime ministerial aspirants. The struggle for the spoils of office and manoeuvres to oust the incumbent and become Prime Minister will make for chronic instability which, along with vote-bank politics, will detract from efforts to ensure national security. Equally, a Prime Minister constantly looking over his shoulder is unlikely to be able to pay to matters of economic revival and internal security the attention both deserve. The question is: What is to be done? To begin with, one should vote for stability. The two coalition Governments the country saw between 1999 and 2009 — I am not counting the one during 1998-99 — could hold together because both had at their core a major national party. For the National Democratic Alliance, which was in power until 2004, it was the Bharatiya Janata Party. In the case of the United Progressive Alliance, which has been in office since 2004, it was the Indian National Congress. Neither alliance gave a Government that was without blemish. But good, bad, indifferent, call it what one will, each held the country together, kept it on the path to growth and prevented the national security situation from getting out of hand. Any coalition Government at the Centre that is stable and delivers must have a major national party as an anchor. Equally important will be a long-term effort to end the politics of fragmentation that has led the country to its present pass. For this one needs political agendas that blend a firm commitment to the country’s unity and integrity with a caring concern for its rich diversity and the disadvantaged sectors. The plural ‘agendas’ has been used deliberately because there will be differences in approach, emphasis and ideology in a country as large and diverse as India. The core concerns, however, must be the ones mentioned above. Finally, who will draw up and implement such agendas? The Congress and the BJP have a major responsibility. Should they fail, the civil society must step in. While the civil society itself is divided, a hopeful sign is the interest taken by youngsters, outside the ambit of political parties, in matters of national concern. It is, however, not enough to send emails and SMSes, and appear before television. One must seriously study the country’s political history and familiarise oneself with its problems. Thus equipped, one must go for political action, for which one has either to join an existing political party and work from within, or seek to build up pressure groups. This will mean hard work. But then there are no short cuts when a country’s future is concerned.