John Samuel
One has to make a distinction between the policy narrative and political discourse that emerge from the potential civil nuclear deal between Indian and the USA. While the nuanced policy narrative is more about the potential energy security and a new legitimation of India by the rich and powerful actors of this rather unilateral world, political discourse will be more about "sovereignty' of India as a country.
Politics is more about perceptions and less about the nuanced policy analysis or its implications. Electoral politics in India is less shaped by the promises about potential long term policy gains, but more about the political discourses and compulsions of today. The political perceptions are often shaped by strategic media spin, powerful images, signs, symbols and pre-emptive rhetoric.
While the policy wonks of the UPA and the foreign policy experts who push for the nuclear deal are much more focused on the policy gains in the international arena and potential energy security in the log run, the Left and BJP are in the process of shaping the political rhetoric and discourse around the "autonomy' and "sovereignty of India as a nation of a billion people.
From the perspective of Electoral positioning, UPA is making a strategic mistake – about the timing and positioning of the Nuclear Deal as a primary electoral issue. Whether Congress party wants it or not, this will end up as a key election issue. The balance sheet of UPA in the last four years got enough achievements to go to the elections with political positioning as a government that is politically committed to the aam admi. The recent food and oil price and the consequent inflation may pose some challenges. However, the UPA and Congress party did not even manage to sell their gains among the people across India. UPA has introduced some of the most progressive legislations and policy initiatives in the recent times: National Rural Employment Guarantee, Right to Information, more investment for Education, a law against Domestic Violence, a law to protect the rights of Forest dwellers over their land and clear steps to support farmers and agriculture. Instead of developing a whole political discourse and electoral strategy that would help to increase the "legitimation" of the UPA with the voting aam admi, Manmohan Sing seems to have taken Nuclear Deal as the last assertion before he vacates the space. It is as if the Nuclear Deal has become a prestige issue for the PM and few foreign policy wonks in the Ministry of External Affairs. While this new assertion of the Prime Minster and few others in the government will give a good grading in the “International Community” and the foreign press from the US and Europe, it may not bring electoral dividends in the forthcoming election. In fact, it may neutralize the potential electoral gains that could have been made of the relatively progressive pro-poor policies of the government. A hug from George Bush may not form the best poster for the next election.
The issue of Nuclear Deal may be perceived different by the ‘shining India" segment and the "Bharat" of the majority of Indians. The problem is that "shining India" brigade of the upward mobile class will read and discuss the English newspaper and indulge in "patriotic" discussions in cocktail parties. But this class hardly goes to cast their votes and can easily shift their allegiances to anyone who is in power. These parasites of power do not care much about the colure of the incumbent ant in the south block. As long as their "shining" interests are taken care of, they are less bothered about a communal riot "here or there" or few suicides of farmers "once in a while". This shining Indian class gets carried away by a "praising piece" in the Newsweek or the Time. The more educated among would feel really great if the Economist says a few good words about the country. Those who are in power in Delhi often get carried away by this ever visible, ever enthusiastic urban upward mobile class of India and their press. When Pramad Mahajan and his company in the NDA government got carried away by the pat of the Shining India, they faced the music in the ballot box.
The largely self-serving shining India class is generally pro-anything that gives them better money, better opportunities, better image and also the "patriotic" shining elsewhere. They are proud of their high flying kids working in the investment banks or the IT sector in Silicon Valley or Transnational Corporations in the richer part of the world. They feel very happy when the few privileged in London, New York or Washington say that India is an emerging “super’ power. They get carried away by the flat world of Thomas Friedman or the list of the Indian billionaires in the Forbes Magazine. They are happy that Bush patted Manmohan Sing in Hokkaido. They also get impressed by the photo opportunities of our PM with G8 leaders, a BBC report on how the Nuclear Deal will help India to get in to the club of nuclear nations and give access to best of nuclear technology to solve our energy deficiency. Shining India class is impatient to make India look smart, powerful and something like an imitation of Europe.
But it is important for UPA to remember that this very same class was more pro-BJP in the last election and the shining India class did not bring Congress to power 2004. The Congress Party went after the "aam admi' and got a better endorsement and the road to power in the last election.
Some people may say that electoral politics in India is often shaped by the cast/community vote banks, local issues and few nationally relevant political positioning. There are often very broad political discourse and positioning that shape the choice of the crucial number of fence sitting voters in India. In fact often it is the five to seven percent shift of relatively more informed voters that make the big difference in the electoral arithmetic. And this five to seven percent voters are often shaped by the macro-discourse- whether it is Ram-Janmahoomi, Babri masjid, Shining India or Aam admi. This seven percent of shifting voters will increasingly play a more important role in the Indian politics. But this seven percent of voters do not include the "shining India”. They may be from the upper end of the "Bharat"- relatively educated, news reading/watching lower and middle-middle class of India -spread in and around small towns and villages across India. These voting classes, unlike the Shining India class, tend to get persuaded by political discourse and rhetoric rather than the nuanced policy implications of the Nuclear Deal.
.
However the upper end of the Bharat may think that Bush is more of a bully and America is not a country to be trusted. India's internal sense of izzat is more important and they would rather take it seriously if they feel that our "sovereignty" is mortgaged in to the powerful camp, through the Nuclear Deal. They are not bothered about IAEA Board of Governors or a lead story in the Time magazine. This class also may feel that the track record of all those countries that got in to the US Camp is less inspiring. Wherever the US got space, they made a political mess- in Pakistan, in Philippines, and in the Middle East. Today most of the people in Pakistan are anti-Musharaf because he is seen as the man of the US. So there is a general mistrust and apathy towards the US (across the developing world) particularly after the imposed war on Iraq and the nightmare it created in Iraq and across the world. So it will be a political mistake if Manmohan Sing and UPA are perceived as the lackey of the US, though UPA may claim that they want nuclear deal in the large interest of the country.
The interesting thing is that both the Right and the Left in India will make use of more political and patriotic rhetoric of "sovereignty", without bothering to get in to a nuanced policy debate or implications of the Nuclear Deal. Anyone who understands electoral politics will know that the nuanced policy discussions and editorial pieces in the English News Papers will only impress the Shining India class of around three percent of the people of India and the voting Bharat get impressed more by the political discourse and rhetoric.
The left will try and play a bit of double game here. They may claim the ownership of all pro-poor aam admi policies of the UPA, and blame congress for everything else, including for mortgaging the "sovereignty" of India to the imperialist Bush. Though the Left may claim the primary agency for all the progressive legislations and policies, the real credit for such policies legitimately belong to the government and UPA. The Left will try to give a rather self-righteous patriotic, pro-poor political spin, making strategic use of the nuclear deal. They also know that a large section of the Bharat and Muslims may be more impressed by their anti-Bush and anti-US positioning. They are least bothered about the Shining India or their English Newspapers. But this positioning of the Left will eventually made in to a double spin by the BJP and its allies to reap a better benefits in the electoral market place. This is because of the fact the track record of the Left governments in Kerala and West Bengal may neutralize their advantage over political discourse. Because, the local issues and quality of governance in West Bengal and Kerala may overwhelm the patriotic and pro-poor political positioning in the next election. So at the end of the day, the Left will end with less number of seats in the Parliament and BJP and their allies will laugh their way to Parliament.
There can indeed be debates about the real policy impact of the civil nuclear deal with the US. While the shining India may applaud it as the “arrival of India”- with the endorsement of the western powers, the large number of Bharat voters may not see the merits of policy gains in the long run. As John Maynard Keynes once said, in the long run everyone is dead and gone. Politics and electoral politics are about the issues of today and not necessarily about the potential foreign policy impact after ten yeas.
No comments:
Post a Comment