Modi’s Action Deficits

The Delhi poll-quake produced an outcome almost everybody in the political firmament, including many within the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, it seems, craved for—the crashing of the Narendra Modi juggernaut. It has highlighted the shortfalls in Modi’s nine-month rule encapsulated in the opposition’s jibe that he is “All talk, no action”. Paperless cabinet meetings, ministers staying late in office, civil servants turning up in time for work do not, apparently, constitute the social and economic revolution the people expected. Arvind Kejriwal, in the event, has emerged, remarkably, as the rival the prime minister will be judged against.

Modi’s achievements to date amount, in substance, to an easy camaraderie with world leaders and exhortations to the people. In contrast, the 49 days of Kejriwal’s first tenure as chief minister had such impact it carried his Aam Aadmi Party to an overwhelming victory in the capital and, the day after the declaration of the poll results, for instant changes—government tankers appeared in water-starved parts of the capital, touts disappeared from the regional transport offices, and bribe-demanding police turned into paragons of propriety. While Modi’s “corruption-free India” remained a slogan, Kejriwal’s campaign motivated the citizens to use mobile telephony to trap wrongdoers, and become the agent of change they desired.

The irony is that as a former chaiwallah who made it to the top on his own, Modi has a better story to tell, but has failed so far to parlay it into policies that encourage and reward personal initiative and individual effort, reduce the profile of the government as employer of the first and last resort, and to embark schemes to grow jobs by growing the economy. Over the months the people found that Modi did not trim government waste, or reconfigure the system, or rectify its ways of doing business with the people, or ramp up the abysmal-quality services it delivered, or devise policies to encourage and incentivise private enterprise, or initiate training schemes to upskill the potential industrial workforce needed for the country’s industry to be at the cutting edge, or facilitate a take-off by the manufacturing sector by putting teeth into his “Make in India” policy, or attract the fabled foreign investment to get trillion dollars worth of infrastructure and connectivity projects going. More disheartening still, pronouncements aside, labour and judicial reforms, like their economic counterpart, have stayed stuck in the political and administrative quagmire.

By way of relief, Modi sought visibility on the international stage where “success” can be gleaned by managing the pomp and attendant pageantry and playing to the delirious non-resident Indian crowds from New York to Sydney. The trouble is the law of diminishing returns kicks in fast. While the occasional international summit and Madison Garden-do is fine, too many foreign jaunts and diplomatic jamborees quickly pall, giving the impression of a democratic leader seeking escape or diversion from his failures on the domestic front.

Problematically, Kejriwal has scored in the areas Modi appears deficient. The AAP supremo did what he promised—improve, even if slightly, the everyday life of the majority—the underclass surviving in miserable slums and shanty towns by ordering cut-rate electricity and water for it. Populist programmes cannot be long sustained because the policy of “robbing Peter to pay Paul” is guaranteed ultimately to alienate both but, in the interim, he can coast. Relying on his “brains trust”, Kejriwal has been inventive—like asking the Centre to allot Delhi a coal block as a captive source of energy for thermal power plants in the capital region. He has less in common with the lowliest in the land than does Modi but compensates with the kind of empathy, humility, and ability to connect with the common folk the PM seems unable to match. And, bad optics—the supposedly expensive suit he donned in his session with Barack Obama—hasn’t helped.

The Left liberals comprising the bulk of the country’s media, intelligentsia, and political parties, who have benefited from the quasi-socialist nanny state, see Modi’s failure as rooted in a faulty ideology symbolised by the carryings-on of the Hindu fringe. The miniscule minority forming the more responsible liberal Right in the country, among whom this analyst counts himself, on the other hand, is a frustrated lot. With the government identified by Modi as the mother of most ills afflicting the state and society, he was expected to slash government, rid the system of the careerist civil servant-dominated decision making, redefine the national interest along hard nationalist lines, and shape policies accordingly. Instead, Modi empowered the bureaucrats.

Meanwhile in the policy-making field, too, Kejriwal has taken the lead, appointing domain experts to advise him on innovative solutions and policy options. Other than in the economic field where outside experts have been installed in the NITI Aayog and as advisers, they are conspicuously absent in most of the rest of the Modi government. Thus, the technical ministries at the Centre continue to be run by generalist civil servants, foreign policy by the prime minister’s instincts (which has resulted in inadequate attention paid to neighbours—Iran, Myanmar, Pakistan, compounded by ill-thought out actions, such as the nuclear compromise with Obama, in violation of an Act of Parliament, that could make the indigenous nuclear energy programme extinct), and defence is constrained by the limited imagination of external affairs. Judged broadly, the current policies generally seem unchanged from Manmohan Singh’s days which, perhaps, explains the popular disillusionment with Modi.

For Modi to pull things back, which he can do in the remaining four odd years in office, it will require him to return to Deen Dayal Upadhyaya’s nationalist ideology and the BJP’s root social self-help principles. He will also have to bank on conservative strategists from outside, who helped Atal Bihari Vajpayee chart an expansive national security policy and set India on the great power course, to fill his strategic policies with meaningful content. Without the right intellectual heft and expertise in the Prime Minister’s Office and in government, Modi may end up winging it on his own without taking the country or even himself very far.

[Published in the New Indian Express, February 20, 2015, at http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/Modis-Action-Deficits/2015/02/20/article2676686.ece

About Bharat Karnad

Senior Fellow in National Security Studies at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, he was Member of the (1st) National Security Advisory Board and the Nuclear Doctrine-drafting Group, and author, among other books of, 'Nuclear Weapons and Indian Security: The Realist Foundations of Strategy', 'India's Nuclear Policy' and most recently, 'Why India is Not a Great Power (Yet)'. Educated at the University of California (undergrad and grad), he was Visiting Scholar at Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania, the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies, and Henry L. Stimson Center, Washington, DC.
This entry was posted in Asian geopolitics, Defence Industry, domestic politics, Geopolitics, Great Power imperatives, Indian democracy, Indian ecobomic situation, indian policy -- Israel, Iran and West Asia, Indian Politics, Internal Security, Iran and West Asia, nuclear industry, Nuclear Policy & Strategy, nuclear power, society, South Asia, South East Asia, Strategic Relations with the US & West, United States, US.. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Modi’s Action Deficits

  1. satyaki says:

    Bharat Sir,

    Isn’t the rise of the AAP a worrying trend for those concerned about national strategic interests ? The party is infested with leftists and activists with an NGO background. Many of these elements are opposed to India possessing nuclear weapons. For instance, Admiral Ramdas is the head of the AAP internal lokpal. Another AAP MLA in Delhi has been a member of Greenpeace and Amnesty international.

    What happens if, God forbid, the AAP rises to power at the centre ? Unilateral nuclear disarmament/ halt to further development of the nuclear/missile deterrent ? Could the AAP be sponsored by the usual foreign suspects in order to pull out India’s nuclear teeth through political action ?

  2. Yes, Ramdas’ proximity to Kejriwal is a worry. But AAP is unlikely to vault to the centre anytime soon. Even so, it is best to be mindful of just what such people are up to.

  3. Excellent article . I totally agree that we need to rethink the issue of generalist civil servants. According to my opinion, IAS cadre should be disbanded. We need to think afresh the Indian administrative system from union to state governments. Unfortunately we don’t have quality state public service commissions. For example, the work district collector is doing can also be done by state public service commission officers. In order to that we need quality universities to train our state public service officers. There is hype created around IAS work that even a state public service officer can do. Coming to union govt, we need to cut the hierarchies to 2 or 3 levels with quality experts and professionals in the ministries like home, finance, commerce, foreign ministries. But I have a question: Do we have trade experts in our commerce ministry? NITI ayog is one more joke by Modi government. In NITI ayog objectives, it is mentioned that it will work as a think tank for the union and 29 state govts. If NITI ayog is thinking about state govts, then why is the IAS officer cadre attached to state govts? Is it not advising the state govts? Who is stopping state Chief ministers to have experts int heir ministries to think about the state issues and development? And, who in the Indian govt is thinking proactively about the trade issues?

  4. Shaurya says:

    Yes, this maybe a simple way of looking at it but as soon as Arun Shourie was not considered for a key CCS type ministry, I sensed that Modi’s “rooted” senses and a lack of his own vision, lack of any deep study, lack of experience in national affairs will culminate in an inability to make “fundamental” changes in the administration of the country. So, he will tweak but lacks the intellectual confidence (As a govt) to make fundamental changes happen. E.g: If the Modi govt would announce changes in just one area, i.e: of a way to devolve real power to the third tier of governance, along with financial powers, it would have swept the ground from the feet of Kejriwal. (even if Delhi being a state govt is not directly affected by it).

    As a parting shot, Modi needs to stop thinking that he is the CM of India. Having said that, if his methods work without undertaking fundamental reforms, then all power to him. At least we have someone who wants to do better for India and is willing to try his own ways, even if we have doubts in the ways. Let us see.

  5. Shaurya says:

    Bharat ji: Kudos to you to hold up to the the national interest – as you see them and not bending to partisan ideological or political winds. It takes courage to do so and hats off to you for it.

  6. ~!@#$%^&*()_+ says:

    Wow quite a lot of english and only 3 points by the author and the commentators rooting for the author:
    1) government tankers appeared in water-starved parts of the capital – Allow me to jog your memory. You probably forgot that the first tankers when they landed up in Sangam Vihar, an irate lady slapped an AAP MLA of 49 day sarkar. That lady actually started the slapping go happy that ensued. Coincidently this time the first reports of water flowing like rivers came in from Sangam Vihar too. Wonder why the correspondent went there.

    2) touts disappeared from the regional transport offices, and – This has been routine even in the Dhiela Dixit sarkar and even before that. Happens ever few months and then the touts are all back. BTW I got my licence from Shiekh Sarai RTA without any bribe during Sushma Sarkar.

    3) bribe-demanding police turned into paragons of propriety – Duh! Delhi police during 49 day wonder was under the Congress govt. What else did you expect?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s