Backpage

RARELY in recent memory has an address from the ramparts of the Red Fort received such affirmation, for the moment, at least, silencing critics, many of whom grudgingly admitted to being pleasantly surprised. Even Shiv Visvanathan, arguably one of Modi’s more trenchant critics, called it ‘a perfect performance, crafted in ease, delivered with confidence.’

These warm words are only in part an expression of relief about the departure from the deadpan, somnambulant style of his predecessor, who rarely looked up from his prepared text and invariably failed to connect with his audience. Modi spoke extempore, drawing on examples from daily life, in language more reminiscent of everyday conversation. The decision to dispense with the use of the bullet proof barrier, further helped establish direct rapport with those present.

As important as oratorical abilities, sartorial style and presence – all of which the prime minister is known for – is the need for content. And here, Narendra Modi sprung a surprise. Not only was there no note of triumphalism, widely expected following a resounding electoral victory, there was no reference to any of the pet concerns routinely dredged up by votaries of Hindu nationalism – Ram Mandir, Uniform Civil Code, Article 370, even the expected denunciation to terrorism from across the border. Positioning himself as a ‘pradhan sevak’ rather than a ‘pradhan mantri’, Narendra Modi struck a conciliatory and politically inclusive note, gracefully acknowledging the contribution of all previous regimes at both the Centre and the states. Equally, he stressed the need for everyone – politicians, administrators and civil society – to come together in national interest if the country is to realize its potential.

The focus on everyday issues and concerns – the need for building toilets and improving public swachata, combating the declining sex ratio and the increasing violence on women, eliminating farmer suicides, the need for re-skilling youth to enhance their employability, to list a few – rather than announce a range of grand schemes, came across as a creative way to force us to think about societal deficiencies. The expression of dismay about Delhi’s insider culture, or the tendency to protect one’s turf at the expense of fulfilling social objectives, rang true. As did his invocation to develop self-confidence in a nation that needs to craft its role in a challenging, interconnected world, welcoming of all while mindful and proud of its roots.

If despite a ‘masterly’ performance, there still remains a nagging disquiet, it is not merely because of Narendra Modi’s past, more specifically his long stint as the chief minister of Gujarat. Even if one puts aside his rather questionable role in the 2002 pogrom, or the many allegations of extra-judicial killings that dogged his regime, there can be no justification of his administration’s failure to combat, if not exacerbate, the growing ghettoization of the Muslims in his state. Blaming motivated secularists or misdirected human rights activists for stoking a feeling of ‘separateness’ in the Muslim community is somewhat disingenuous. None of this helps to bolster his claim at wanting to construct a tolerant and inclusive society.

Equally disappointing has been Modi’s choice of cabinet colleagues, with many managing multiple portfolios. Many of the policies, as also the budget, more resemble a holding operation than signal a fresh beginning, disappointing all those anticipating a radical shift – a slashing of subsidies, easing of the regulatory regime, and so on. And while there is discernible improvement in office attendance and cleanliness, these are hardly achievements to crow about. Surely, Modi would be aware that these were the very developments that the Emergency presented as a success.

The manner in which this government has handled the issue of state governors appointed by the previous regime, the controversy over proposed appointment of Gopal Subramaniam to the Supreme Court, or the constitutionality of the new architecture to select judges, does little to inspire confidence about its views on the sanctity of institutional procedures. But what most disturbs many of us, even those willing to reserve judgement on this regime and not be governed by our prior prejudice, is the PMs unwillingness or inability to control elements in the larger parivar. The communally charged statements/actions by elected representatives, including ministers, the free play given to mavericks like Dina Nath Batra to demand a ban on books or alter school curricula – to mention a few, significantly undermine Modi’s claim of working towards a peaceful and inclusive society. If Modi is to emerge not merely as a communicator but a statesman, he must not be mesmerized by the affirmation of the faithful and acquire the ability to listen and engage with the skeptics. Maybe then he can hope to represent us all.

Harsh Sethi