THE run-up to the 15th general elections has already set into motion a hectic realignment of political alliances, dependent primarily upon the perceptions (and manoeuvrings) of these parties to be part of an alliance that in their assessment is most likely to form the next government. While such opportunism will remain a relevant factor, important considerations of the secularism-communalism divide too will influence the shifts in political alliances.

Another significant element of these political considerations might be the compulsions for some parties to remain in present alliances in order to continue with their state governments (for example, Janata Dal United cannot afford to leave the NDA unless it is prepared to forsake the government in Bihar which exists with BJP’s support; likewise the DMK vis-à-vis the Congress in Tamil Nadu).

Further, the perceptions of the parties are, naturally, based upon their understanding of the ground level realities. These, as always, include existing economic conditions, social identities and the consequent social engineering that specific parties would like to engage in and associate with, and their ideological positions. Amongst all these manifestations of the present-day realities, however, one that may prove decisive, is the current demographic composition of India. Fifty four per cent of our population is, according to the 2001 Census, below the age of 25 years. The aspirations and perceptions of our young will, necessarily, determine the shifts in political alliances as well as the choice of candidates.

Under these circumstances, any discussion on the shifts in Indian politics will, therefore, be preoccupied with analyzing the immediate, natural because realpolitik is concerned with the immediate. It is, however, necessary to also consider the factors impacting upon this immediate. These relate to the very nature of our society, the evolution of modern India and the establishment of a modern polity, its maturation over the last six decades and, finally, the present conjuncture upon which all this impacts.

 

In this context it is useful to remember the three visions of independent India that emerged in the 1920s because the battle between them continues to influence, in significant ways, Indian politics today. The first envisioned the future of independent India as a secular democratic republic. The second, the Left vision, looked upon the future of India as not merely political freedom from British colonialism, but the conversion of political independence into the economic emancipation of our people, that is, the establishment of socialism.

Standing apart was a distinctly antagonistic vision that imagined the future of India in terms of the religious denomination of its people. This tendency had a twin expression – the Muslim League seeking an Islamic state and the RSS advocating a Hindu rashtra. The eventual bloody partition of the country claiming the lives of millions and displacing crores of people was the result of such a vision. While the plight of Pakistan is evident for all to see, equally invidious are the efforts of the RSS to seek the conversion of the secular democratic modern Indian republic into a rabidly intolerant fascistic ‘Hindu Rashtra’.

The Congress’ choice of a secular democratic parliamentary system was thus neither accidental nor born out of any steadfast commitment to libertarian values. If at all, it emerged from the practical recognition of the rich diversity of the Indian society and its social plurality. The Nehruvian concept of ‘unity in diversity’ drew on an understanding that the unity of our country can only be sustained by strengthening the bonds of commonality that run through this diversity and not by imposing any uniformity upon this diversity. Further, that any imposition – religious, linguistic, cultural – is bound to set in motion centrifugal forces of disruption and anarchy, undermining India’s unity and, hence, jeopardizing its independence.

On the eve of independence, Nehru, in the Discovery of India, invokes an evocative imagery to describe the evolution of modern India as ‘an ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed and, yet, no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.’

 

It is, therefore, a given that in such a crucible of civilizational interactions, various social, linguistic and religious groupings coexist. As the modern polity evolves, it is only natural that each of these distinct, yet coexisting, groups seek to protect, safeguard and, at times, assert their identities. Modern India chose parliamentary democracy as the political expression of the people’s will and the exercise of the people’s sovereignty. Naturally, therefore, this democratic structure was the main catalyst for the socio-economic development of the country.

Alongside development the aspirations of diverse sectional interests also found reflection in the polity. The emergence of ‘identity politics’ or of regional political parties is, therefore, not unnatural. Nor is the consequent shifting nature of political alliances. Far from a regression of Indian democracy, it reflects the maturation of Indian democracy wherein its social diversity and plurality is finally finding expression in its polity. Hence, the end of single party rule paving the way for coalition governments, both at the Centre and in many states, is merely an expression of such a maturation of Indian democracy. Undoubtedly, as in every process of maturation, there are positive and negative elements. This is a fact of India’s contemporary political life.

 

With democracy emerging as both an arena and a catalyst for development, the significance of the Left’s agenda has had a direct bearing on the evolution of the Indian polity. The series of peasant upsurges during the final years of our freedom struggle, including the armed insurrection in Telangana, foregrounded the agenda of land reforms, a question which continues to retain its significance, c.f. the growing resistance against land acquisition for Special Economic Zones, large projects and so on. The public sector arose, again, as a direct impact of the Left and its socialist vision. It is a different matter that it eventually served the interests of private capitalist development by providing the required infrastructure which only the state could develop in the early days of our republic.

It is the pursuit of a developmental agenda through democracy that had, for a considerable period of time, relegated the communal vision to the sidelines in Indian politics. However, the growing aspirations of the people – initially insufficiently met and subsequently turning into imposition of greater miseries – provided an opportunity for the resurrection of a communal vision. Simultaneously, the efforts of the reactionary forces who had lost their privileges of the past to stage a political comeback created/deepened fissures in the Congress following its successive defeats in state assembly elections in the 1960s. The eventual split in the Congress and, once again, the use of the Left’s agenda to acquire a progressive halo – the nationalization of banks, abolition of privy purses, among others – all went a long way in the making of Indira Gandhi.

The imposition of internal emergency by Indira Gandhi and the wide spectrum of opposition that it generated resoundingly confirmed the fact that democracy, as a concept initially posited by Nehru and the freedom movement as the unifying force against the divisive diversity in our society, was here to stay. The restoration of democracy with the revocation of Emergency and the defeat of Indira Gandhi set in motion a new churning in the Indian polity whose reverberations continue to impact current politics.

 

The communal vision, having acquired certain respectability for being a part (though most of the times reluctantly) of the anti-Emergency movement, soon began to exploit the growing discontent amongst the people to further its divisive political agenda. What began as a trail of communal riots, rath yatras and the destruction of the Babri Masjid during the decades of the eighties and nineties, soon saw the emergence of a BJP-led coalition at the Centre.

Simultaneously, coalitional politics that had earlier remained subdued, came to assume a centrality in Indian politics in the 1990s. In fact, looking back to the era of single party rule at the Centre, one may well conclude that the Congress party was itself a grand coalition. With economic development and for reasons discussed earlier, sectional interests asserted themselves leading to various exits from the Congress to form different parties. The Janata Party that replaced the Congress at the Centre after the defeat of the Emergency too was a coalition that included the RSS. It is often forgotten that the Jan Sangh component of the Janata Party had nearly 100 Members in Parliament in 1977. The hype of the propaganda that from two MPs in 1980 they rose to lead the government at the Centre conceals the fact that from nearly 100 MPs in 1977, they came down to two.

 

There were other processes at work impacting politics. As the developmental cake started to shrink, the demand for a rightful share by the socially oppressed groups in our society grew sharper, leading to the emergence of the slogan of social justice, resulting eventually in the implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations. Through the decades of the eighties and nineties, Mandal vs. Kamandal became a dominant contention in political polarization. Simultaneously, there was a growing assertion by regional political parties, many of whom were based on narrow social groupings, leading to a major shift in political coalitions.

The social engineering that sustained the Congress in power for many decades in North India – a combination of upper caste Hindus with dalits and Muslims – has today been replaced in India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, by a similar social grouping, but now under the leadership of the dalits and not the Hindu upper castes. In neighbouring Bihar, the slogan of social justice has continuously brought into power governments championing the cause (though not necessarily the interests) of the OBCs.

There was also a growth of political expressions based on regional aspirations. Though at times this gave rise to demands for redrawing state boundaries, in the face of realpolitik many of these regional parties displayed a proclivity towards political opportunism in order to survive and advance their political aspirations. Thus, when the experiment of forming a non-Congress secular government and preventing the BJP from assuming power collapsed in 1996, many of these regional parties joined the BJP-led NDA to continue in government. Clearly, the distinction between secularism and communalism was being blurred for ‘sharing the spoils of office’.

However, even as this churning was taking place in Indian politics, the issue of development, i.e., the economic conditions of the people, remained relevant and dominant. The growth of casino capitalism under the aegis of liberalization, privatization and globalization (LPG) helped to create virtually two distinct and different Indias – the ‘shining’ and the ‘suffering’.

 

It is this LPG that, in fact, brought the issue of anti-incumbency in every subsequent election and, therefore, in Indian politics to the fore with the sole exception of the CPI(M)-led Left Front government in West Bengal. This was primarily because the pursuit of such policies meant squeezing the people at the bottom while the top bloated with super profits. Given a chance, the people rejected such parties in consecutive elections. Let us not forget how the BJP-led NDA’s ‘India Shining’ campaign was rejected by the people in the 2004 general elections. This too will continue to impact on current political realignments.

The UPA government was critically supported by the Left for more than four years on the basis of a Common Minimum Programme (CMP) with the express purpose of providing a secular government and isolating communal forces. In this it succeeded in shifting the discourse in the country away from communal divisions and towards a developmental agenda. Under the Left’s pressure, many policy initiatives like the rural employment guarantee scheme, the right of the tribals to forests, the right to information, waiver of loans to distressed farmers and so on, came on the national agenda. Unfortunately, this did not completely reverse the continuation of the LPG direction of the economy which has resulted in the widening gulf between two Indias – shining and suffering.

In addition, the insistence of the UPA to establish a strategic relationship with US imperialism in violation of the CMP, forced the Left to withdraw support, setting into motion new political equations. The UPA survived by seeking the support of the Samajwadi Party. This was accompanied by a gross display of political immorality of ‘horse-trading’. This political shift has now brought to the fore three possible coalitions on the national scene ahead of the 15th general elections. One, led by the Congress, the other by the BJP and the third by those who believe in the need for a political alternative, advanced by the Left, to the Congress and its pro-imperialist, anti-people policies which, at the same time, will firmly combat the communal forces.

 

In the current conjuncture, with the impact of the global economic recession, the issue of development and the issues concerning the day-to-day existence of the people are bound to find a central place in the various political agendas. At the same time, the communal combination, particularly the BJP, in its desperation to marginalize the economic and social issues, is seeking to up the ante by resurrecting hardcore communal concerns. It even unsuccessfully tried to communalize the country’s fight against terrorism, refusing to learn from the recent assembly elections where issues of development dominated.

More importantly, at the ground level, there is an India that is changing. As noted earlier, 54 per cent of our population today is below the age of 25. The global recession is severely impacting upon the realization of their aspirations over and above the refusal of the Indian ruling classes to provide this youth with the required wherewithal for future security. If only they can be provided with adequate education, health and employment, then nothing can stop the emergence of a new India.

 

There are certain subterranean shifts in the perceptions of different sections of our youth. These, naturally, will influence the perception of the elder voters as well. So far, these seem to have escaped the radar of major political parties and formations. For instance, across the country, youth in small towns insist on receiving TV channels like Discovery, National Geographic, History and so on before confirming a connection with the local cable operator. Irrespective of their levels of formal education, the urge to acquire knowledge and information is, indeed, very heartening for India’s future.

This thirst for knowledge is, obviously, accompanied by a desire to change the existing realities for the better. Similarly, reports of rising fashion consciousness reflected in the spurt in the growth of beauty parlours in muffusil India, indicates the growing desire of the young to ‘make it’. More important is their confidence (growing or declining is important to map) about being able to do it.

At the upper end of the spectrum, the fact that a few students from elite business institutes like IIM Ahmedabad have chosen to intern with CPI(M) shows a refreshing shift in their consciousness to be socially relevant. In fact, this group has prepared a model plan where such students can interact with Members of Parliament in preparing plans to utilize the MP Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) most efficiently in their constituencies.

Many of them are conscious that currently under ten per cent of our eligible youth enter institutes of higher education. This, however, is apparently sufficient to ensure that India produces trained and skilled manpower larger than the numbers emerging out of higher education/technical education institutions in all European Union countries put together. Imagine if we can raise this low percentage – Indian minds may well shape the emerging global knowledge economy!

 

In addition to such aspirations which fail to appear on the radar of political parties are other sectional subterranean aspirations. The Sachar Committee report has roused the desire amongst the Muslim youth, who overwhelmingly seek partnership in mainstream progress, to improve their lot. How such aspirations will be addressed, leave alone met, will define their political affiliation.

Likewise, the recent controversy over the issue of reservations for OBCs between the judiciary and the executive, with the pro-active support of the Knowledge Commission against reservations (allegedly because this would result in devaluing ‘merit’) has, naturally, raised the bar of social justice perceptions. Similarly, the rising aspirations amongst the dalits and tribals are accompanied by a growing resentment about not receiving even the prevailing legal benefits.

The rural youth are suffering from a double whammy with deepening agrarian distress and their elders committing suicides. Agricultural GDP, in the third quarter of 2008-2009, has sharply declined by (-) 2.4 per cent. This is bound to have an impact on electoral choices. Obviously, an alternative policy trajectory to that pursued by the BJP-led NDA and Congress-led UPA will resonate with these sections.

 

How all these aspirations find expression in electoral preferences is going to significantly impact the outcome. Notwithstanding many other differences, there is similarity between the Congress and BJP as far as economic policy is concerned. There is cognizance of the fact that due to the Left’s opposition, many neo-liberal economic reforms were stalled, partially protecting our economy from being completely devastated by the current global recession. A closer analysis of the recent assembly elections shows the search for an alter- native.

In all these states, the non-Congress non-BJP parties polled a significant percentage of votes. In Madhya Pradesh, while the BJP formed the government with 37.8 per cent votes, the others polled 21.6 per cent of the vote. In Rajasthan, while the Congress formed the government with 36.8 per cent of the vote, the others claimed 29 per cent of the votes. In Delhi, while the Congress formed the government with 40.5 per cent, the others polled 23 per cent. In Chhattisgarh, while the BJP formed the government with 40.6 per cent, the others polled 20.6 per cent. In Mizoram as well, the share of the others was 30.1 per cent while the Congress formed the government with 38.9 per cent votes.

The political message is thus clear. The people see little difference between the policies pursued by the BJP and Congress in redressing the issue of their livelihood. It is clear that if a political alternative based on sound alternative policies is forged, people’s acceptance can be mustered at the hustings.

 

At the subterranean level as well, one discerns a search for a political alternative, further buttressed by the need for an alternative policy direction to meet the devastation created global recession. Unless increased public investment can create employment in a big way and place purchasing power amongst the people to fuel economic growth, these growing aspirations may well turn into increasing frustration. So far the UPA government appears more preoccupied with beautifying corporate balance sheets through bailout packages than in substantially increasing public investment. The BJP’s policy approach is, indeed, no different from that of the Congress. How this will impact in the elections will become clear as they draw close.

These are the issues which will decide the emerging alignments and equations in Indian politics. The need is for an alternative policy trajectory that contains and weakens communal forces; follows economic policies where people come before profits, and advances policies which protect and strengthen our economic and political sovereignty while pursuing an independent foreign policy, defining a place of pride for India in the world.

The importance of alliances in the formation of governments needs to be recollected, particularly in the light of our earlier discussion on coalitional governments. The CSDS studies on coalitional governments since 1996 show that a third of the electorate rejected such governments then. This figure came down to 17 per cent in 2004. In the 2004 elections, both the Congress and BJP lost 1.6 per cent of vote share each, the former getting 26.7 per cent and the latter 22.2 per cent. Yet, BJP’s tally of seats dropped from 182 in 1999 to 138 while Congress increased its strength from 114 to 145.

The secret to such a disproportionate outcome (according to Alistair Mcmillan, CERI) lies in the logic of alliances. In 1999, the BJP’s allies in NDA garnered 118 seats while these numbers fell to only 51 in 2004. On the contrary, Congress allies in the UPA contributed 74 seats apart from the outside support of 61 Left MPs. It is perfectly possible, this time around, for a non-Congress, anti-communal forces combine to garner enough support for an alternative.

 

It is likely that in such moments of deep economic crisis, the battle between the three visions that we spoke of is bound to intensify. Simultaneously, both the regional parties and those based on social identities will be forced to choose, not only on the basis of their political survival but on what they offer to the people vis-à-vis the crisis situation and thus which formation they shall associate with. There will be many twists and turns as we come closer to the 15th general elections, the final picture unfolding only post-elections. Nevertheless, it is clear that the likelihood of a better secular democratic modern India lies in a political alternative that is able to decisively shift the policy direction of the country on the lines stated above.