In all
the discussions about the rise of Narendra Modi, we never seem to consider the
most obvious explanation. There is an iron law in global politics: when things
are going well, people don’t worry too much about leadership. They want
non-controversial politicians who stay out of their way and let them get on
with their lives without needless conflict.
Crisis is the testing time for leadership,
therefore when things go wrong, people look for the opposite. They want visible
leadership. They prefer their politicians to be totally in control because in
those times they need a leader and not a politician and there rise a statesman.
They like somebody who is not scared of conflict. They want to be inspired; they
are really looking for reassurance. They want a leader who knows the way out of
the crisis.
History
is replete with examples of this phenomenon. The best one is Winston Churchill.
For most of his career, he was reviled as a dangerous demagogue, an egomaniac,
a man in search of conflict, an arrogant leader who brooked no dissent and
whose views were imperialist and racist. (He called Mahatma Gandhi a
‘half-naked fakir’.)
But when
World War II broke out, the same people who had once cast him out called on
Churchill to lead the country. All the qualities that had once seemed so
objectionable — the arrogance, the demagoguery, and his conviction that only he
understood the way ahead — now seemed inspirational. And no wonder he lived
upto it. When Luftwaffe was bombarding London and war was on British territory
it was Churchil only who could keep the moral of people high through his
inspirational and patriotic speeches. When many in United Kingdom were thinking
of capitulation it was Churchil who kept Britain going and in the end they
emerged victorious.
There are
so many other examples — Charles De Gaulle, Margaret Thatcher, etc — that the
Americans have a slang term for the phenomenon. In good times, people want to
be Mummy-ed. But in bad times, they want Daddy to show them the way.
It does
not require a massive leap of imagination to see how this phenomenon has
manifested itself in India. The UPA took office in good times, when most
Indians were not only better off than before but also believed that things
would keep getting better. BJP led NDA gave them economy in such a good
condition. Although NDA lost the election fought on “India shining” slogan but
feel good could be felt all over the country.
In that
era, we were happy to be Mummy-ed. And the mild-mannered Manmohan Singh, with
his technocratic skills, looked like the perfect prime minister. Five years
later, when things were still good and results of mis-governance were not out,
India re-elected the UPA with a larger margin.
It is
significant that Narendra Modi was around in 2004 when the UPA took office. He
was already chief minister of Gujarat but was regarded as a fringe figure. When
the UPA won re-election in 2009, Modi had become the BJP’s most powerful chief
minister.
His
opponents still could paint a picture of him as just a regional strongman, and as
a politician who was divisive and hoped to keep him away from Delhi easily.
So, why
is it that Modi’s fortunes have been so completely transformed? Why is he now a
putative prime minister? And why is Manmohan Singh the most unpopular prime
minister in recent memory?
It isn’t
as though Modi has changed. He is still working silent magic of exemplary
performance in Gujarat. Industry has started to run towards Gujarat. His opponents
still brand him as arrogant and polarising with some success.
The
difference is that times have changed. The economy has tanked. Nobody
believes that we will be better off in the years ahead — not as long as this
government is in office, anyway.
Law and
order has spun out of control. The government cannot control prices. And
corruption scandal after corruption scandal rocks the government.
History
tells us that in times of crisis, people need inspirational leadership. And
yet, this government has provided no evidence that it knows how to lead. Never
in Indian history have top leaders been so remote and so uncommunicative.
Rarely has a prime minister seemed less in control. At a time when India needs
to feel that he knows the way out of this mess, he is himself ducking for
cover.
Instead,
it is Modi who has seized the opportunity and filled the gap, whole nation is
looking towards him. For some people he has already become a demigod. In a
country where caste and class plays an important role, Modi has appeal spanning
across social divide. While the UPA’s leaders cower, he goes from rally to
rally. He talks of solutions in the form of the Gujarat model. He gives
interviews. He blogs. He tweets. He provides sound-bites. And in his
demagoguery lies the hope that many insecure Indians are looking for.
It is not
as though some sections in media have stopped harping on the events of 2002,
ignoring any other riot in the country (1984 Sikh riots and more than
15 large scale communal riots only in Gujarat, under different congress chief
ministers, and Maliyana, Bhagalpur, Assam, Neili etc). It is
just that at a time when a crisis-ridden India is being run by an invisible
prime minister, many Indians will take visible leadership they can find and
Modi today stands out in their eyes, he raises their hopes.
The UPA
has spent too long ignoring the rise of Narendra Modi. It has failed to
successfully demolish his well entranched claims on behalf of the Gujarat
model. It makes the mistake of believing that painting Modi as polarising
figure will keep people from voting for him.
The only
hope for the UPA is to demonstrate that there is life beyond Manmohan Singh and
his Cabinet and coterie of yesterday’s men. It must push a younger generation
forward and suggest that it can provide strong, imaginative and visible
leadership. But as far as anybody can see no such thing is forthcoming from UPA
which rules with most aged and outdated cabinet in Indian history.
Its
leaders can no longer afford to parachute in and out of the issues. There must
be sustained engagement in political discourse and there must be evidence of
bold decision-making.
Otherwise,
in urban India at least, Modi is fast becoming the man of the future; not he
has a lot of connections or he uses the famed caste equation but because the
UPA has forgotten how to govern and how to lead and he has impeccable record of
governance. And nature abhors a vacuum.
To fill
this vacuum there is Modi, who is a leader par excellence, a great statesman, a
self made man, impeccable personal integrity, an ascetic who has devoted his
life to the country. Even Wiki
Leaks cables, a third party cold, neutral observation of Foreign Diplomat about
Modi is, "Modi's office is unlike any other politician in India, there are
no party workers or hanger ons allowed".
Such is
the man in whom masses in India has set their hopes.
PS: This inspired by Vir Sanghvi's article in Hindustan Times with the same title. Many lines are taken as it is from Sanghvi's article. Following is the link to his article-
