12-25-2007, 01:57 AM
<b>Life after V-G Day</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ashok Malik
Forget what the BJP's critics are saying. The issue is not Narendra Modi. For the BJP parivar, the choice is between the Gujarat model and the Madhya Pradesh model
In the one week between end of polling in Gujarat - on Sunday, December 16 -- and announcement of results, Mr Narendra Modi was in Delhi to attend a meeting of the National Development Council (NDC). As he walked in, the Gujarat Chief Minister was greeted effusively by his colleagues. Mr Parkash Singh Badal and Mr Naveen Patnaik posed for photographs with him, joking with the photojournalists that, "This is the NDA together." Another NDA Chief Minister walked up and told Mr Modi, "I hope you're winning. Don't let us down."
<b>The most touching -- and politically loaded -- gesture came from Mr M Karunanidhi, the ailing veteran who rules Tamil Nadu. Ignoring physical discomfort, the DMK patriarch got up to shake Mr Modi's hand</b>. On verdict day -- Sunday, December 23 -- after Mr Modi had won a famous victory, Ms J Jayalalithaa, the ADMK leader, called up the Gujarat strongman to congratulate him. It left at least one political observer wondering how Mr Modi had united Amma and Kalaignar.
<b>Through the Gujarat election campaign, non-Congress politicians -- not all of them members of the NDA -- were in touch with the Modi camp, making inquiries about the state of play. Many of them realised triumph for Mr Modi and the BJP in Gujarat was essential to give the NDA fresh energy, and to weaken the Congress</b>. [Who are these great soul]
<b>Why were Mr Modi's new friends acting the way they were? As hard-boiled political practitioners, they were appreciative of a fellow politico and a mass leader who had fought a tough election, taken on a range of forces and yet emerged on top. It was peer respect. It was also recognition that, at some point, this was a man they may have to do business with, in the bewildering coalition-building enterprise that is national politics.</b>
Politicians are inherently pragmatic, not obsessed with TV studio shibboleths. It is so different with political pundits. Having unsuccessfully predicted a setback for Mr Modi -- and even suggested a hung Assembly in one of India's most bipolar polities -- the familiar bunch of anchors and commentators groped for new one-liners as the extent of the Gujarat mandate became known: "This is victory for Modi, not the BJP"; "Is it a return to Hindutva for the BJP?"; "Modi is fine in Gujarat but he won't be acceptable nationally". Underlying all this was the mother of all questions: When will Modi give up his job in Gujarat and move to Delhi - and is a civil war in the BJP imminent?
The problem with such accusatory breathlessness is that it is premised on unreal absolutes and certitudes. Consider the samples quoted above. First, granted, the victory was Mr Modi's and granted he had to overcome in-house saboteurs, but re-election in Gujarat cannot possibly weaken the BJP, can it? Second, Hindutva as it was understood in, say, 1991, was not the issue in this election. India and Gujarat have moved on; yet, the so-called "liberal intelligentsia" is stuck in a time warp.
Third, as Mr Modi's NDC experience and as informal pointers from a variety of non-Congress, regional chieftains have shown, the Gujarat Chief Minister is scarcely unacceptable to potential allies. Of course, before that he has to get his party behind him and extend his appeal to India's voters.
If he succeeds, the allies will come; if he doesn't, they won't. It's as simple as that. Bogus debates on secularism and frustrated denunciations -- <b>as made in a newspaper article on Monday morning -- that insist India ought to be "ashamed" of Gujarat and Gujaratis are not operative factors.</b>
Finally, the anxiety over Mr Modi's possible timetable also misses the point. A move from regional leader to national candidate is inherently incremental. Opportune circumstances will decide Mr Modi's future, nothing is written in stone and certainly he is not foolish enough to have strict deadlines in mind. Indeed, immediately after his victory, he promised a memorable 50th birthday for the State of Gujarat in 2010. That suggests a job change before the next Lok Sabha election is not on his agenda.
Even so, the Gujarat verdict has clarified two things that adherents of the BJP will be satisfied with. One, any organisation -- from business corporation to political party -- must have a succession plan. After his resounding success, Mr Modi has made himself integral to the BJP's post-Advani succession plan. He has rendered it impossible for small-timers who have presided over the atrophy of the BJP in their States to continue to pretend that they are nationally acceptable or, perhaps, bridegrooms-in-waiting.
Two, over 20 years, as the BJP has grown into a party of governance, its relationship with its broader parivar has seen both wrenching internal debate and fairly sordid power play. After Gujarat, the benchmark for the political arm's autonomy has been set. Henceforth the party-parivar relationship will have two models before it -- Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. The difference is for all to see; the choice is the BJP's.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Forget what the BJP's critics are saying. The issue is not Narendra Modi. For the BJP parivar, the choice is between the Gujarat model and the Madhya Pradesh model
In the one week between end of polling in Gujarat - on Sunday, December 16 -- and announcement of results, Mr Narendra Modi was in Delhi to attend a meeting of the National Development Council (NDC). As he walked in, the Gujarat Chief Minister was greeted effusively by his colleagues. Mr Parkash Singh Badal and Mr Naveen Patnaik posed for photographs with him, joking with the photojournalists that, "This is the NDA together." Another NDA Chief Minister walked up and told Mr Modi, "I hope you're winning. Don't let us down."
<b>The most touching -- and politically loaded -- gesture came from Mr M Karunanidhi, the ailing veteran who rules Tamil Nadu. Ignoring physical discomfort, the DMK patriarch got up to shake Mr Modi's hand</b>. On verdict day -- Sunday, December 23 -- after Mr Modi had won a famous victory, Ms J Jayalalithaa, the ADMK leader, called up the Gujarat strongman to congratulate him. It left at least one political observer wondering how Mr Modi had united Amma and Kalaignar.
<b>Through the Gujarat election campaign, non-Congress politicians -- not all of them members of the NDA -- were in touch with the Modi camp, making inquiries about the state of play. Many of them realised triumph for Mr Modi and the BJP in Gujarat was essential to give the NDA fresh energy, and to weaken the Congress</b>. [Who are these great soul]
<b>Why were Mr Modi's new friends acting the way they were? As hard-boiled political practitioners, they were appreciative of a fellow politico and a mass leader who had fought a tough election, taken on a range of forces and yet emerged on top. It was peer respect. It was also recognition that, at some point, this was a man they may have to do business with, in the bewildering coalition-building enterprise that is national politics.</b>
Politicians are inherently pragmatic, not obsessed with TV studio shibboleths. It is so different with political pundits. Having unsuccessfully predicted a setback for Mr Modi -- and even suggested a hung Assembly in one of India's most bipolar polities -- the familiar bunch of anchors and commentators groped for new one-liners as the extent of the Gujarat mandate became known: "This is victory for Modi, not the BJP"; "Is it a return to Hindutva for the BJP?"; "Modi is fine in Gujarat but he won't be acceptable nationally". Underlying all this was the mother of all questions: When will Modi give up his job in Gujarat and move to Delhi - and is a civil war in the BJP imminent?
The problem with such accusatory breathlessness is that it is premised on unreal absolutes and certitudes. Consider the samples quoted above. First, granted, the victory was Mr Modi's and granted he had to overcome in-house saboteurs, but re-election in Gujarat cannot possibly weaken the BJP, can it? Second, Hindutva as it was understood in, say, 1991, was not the issue in this election. India and Gujarat have moved on; yet, the so-called "liberal intelligentsia" is stuck in a time warp.
Third, as Mr Modi's NDC experience and as informal pointers from a variety of non-Congress, regional chieftains have shown, the Gujarat Chief Minister is scarcely unacceptable to potential allies. Of course, before that he has to get his party behind him and extend his appeal to India's voters.
If he succeeds, the allies will come; if he doesn't, they won't. It's as simple as that. Bogus debates on secularism and frustrated denunciations -- <b>as made in a newspaper article on Monday morning -- that insist India ought to be "ashamed" of Gujarat and Gujaratis are not operative factors.</b>
Finally, the anxiety over Mr Modi's possible timetable also misses the point. A move from regional leader to national candidate is inherently incremental. Opportune circumstances will decide Mr Modi's future, nothing is written in stone and certainly he is not foolish enough to have strict deadlines in mind. Indeed, immediately after his victory, he promised a memorable 50th birthday for the State of Gujarat in 2010. That suggests a job change before the next Lok Sabha election is not on his agenda.
Even so, the Gujarat verdict has clarified two things that adherents of the BJP will be satisfied with. One, any organisation -- from business corporation to political party -- must have a succession plan. After his resounding success, Mr Modi has made himself integral to the BJP's post-Advani succession plan. He has rendered it impossible for small-timers who have presided over the atrophy of the BJP in their States to continue to pretend that they are nationally acceptable or, perhaps, bridegrooms-in-waiting.
Two, over 20 years, as the BJP has grown into a party of governance, its relationship with its broader parivar has seen both wrenching internal debate and fairly sordid power play. After Gujarat, the benchmark for the political arm's autonomy has been set. Henceforth the party-parivar relationship will have two models before it -- Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. The difference is for all to see; the choice is the BJP's.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->