2014 is the year of living tactically
The international response to Syria and to upheavals in the Middle East are examples of this tactical tendency, cites a report.
Many international publications review and evaluate key strategic developments in a world that is undergoing rapid transformation. Some of these are useful guides to the key trends shaping the global landscape and risks to the world’s stability..
Two reports published in the past few months offer instructive insights into the nature and direction of global change. They map a world in the midst of important geostrategic shifts facing complex challenges.
The first publication is the annual review of world affairs by the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS). The second is the World Economic Forum’s outlook on the Global Agenda for 2014. It is based on a survey, in which respondents were asked to identify the top challenges and trends for 2014 and beyond.
Another report, released in December 2013, is Alternative Worlds, by the US National Intelligence Council. This looks to 2030 to identify megatrends, game-changers and likely scenarios.
The principal theme of the IISS’s “Strategic Survey” is that political leaders and people in different spheres of life are responding “tactically” to manage the constant flow of events they confront. Like last year 2014 will be another “year of living tactically”. It cites the international response to Syria and to upheavals in the Middle East as examples of this tactical tendency.
From this, asserts the report, many have concluded that strategy, much less “grand strategy” has now become almost impossible. It is not just the breathless environment created by the 24/7 media that has hobbled the capac- ity of countries to undertake longer term planning. This is also a product of the failure of leadership to pursue larger goals that could yield more durable outcomes.
The report argues that looming developments of strategic consequence require larger, more coordinated strategies. If these are not forthcoming, it believes the world will continue to be in “a state of sublimated strategic anarchy”.
In assessing American policy, the report suggests that President Barack Obama’s “detached approach” to international affairs, with a pronounced focus at home, may herald a less interventionist era for the US. This has resulted from war weariness after a decade of military interventions as well as the preoccupation with economic recovery at home.
A theme that resonates in all three publications is that of rising popular discontent with governments’ ability to deliver in an era of rapid change. One of them is diminishing confidence of people in economic policies across the world at a time when economic stress is widely regarded as the most pressing issue.
The WEF report also highlights the opportunities ahead. The most promising among these is the expansion of the middle class in Asia. In his contribution to the report, the respected Singaporean scholar, Kishore Mahbubani, describes this explosion as “one of the biggest seismic shifts in history”. He says this hopeful development indicates a rise in living standards across Asia. Not mentioned in this section of the report is Asia’s uneven economic record, with some countries making extraordinary progress by implementing important reforms, while others remaining economically stagnant and thus excluded from the continent’s march towards an Asian century.
The far-reaching geostrategic implication of shale gas is highlighted in all three reports. The prospect of America attaining energy independence is seen by all as potentially leading to a shift of US focus away from the Middle East. Significantly, last month President Obama announced that the US was closer to achieving energy independence than it had been for decades.
The distinguished American scholar Joseph Nye shines another light on the challenges of governance in the information age. The final word on this however comes from an unnamed business leader quoted in this report. The world, he says, has yet to develop “a model of democracy that limits the short-termism of leaders at the expense of doing what is right for society in the long term”. There seems to be little doubt in anyone’s mind that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will be the single largest party after the 2014 Lok Sabha polls given that a strong antiCongress sentiment prevails in the country which Narendra Modi continues to exploit to his advantage. However, whether the BJP will lead the next government will largely depend on how many seats it finally wins and how it works out its alliances in the post poll scenario.
Modi has captured the imagination of a large number of people particularly because he is perceived as a strong and decisive leader as compared to the present Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh whose low profile and honest image no longer carries the appeal it did in 2009 when the Congress improved its tally from 145 in 2004 to 206 seats. Machiavelli who is considered to be an authority on statecraft has mentioned in The Prince that in every society people are by and large weak. But they always want their leaders to be strong. History also always remembers strong leaders and those considered not so strong are forgotten as years go by.
This is a reason why Modi is making inroads in many bastions of other parties and is attempting to once again resuscitate the BJP so that it increases its numbers. The party was marginally behind the Congress in 2004 at 138 but its numbers went down to 116 in 2009.
What needs to be seen is that whether the BJP spearheaded by an aggressive Modi campaign is able to first cross its first hurdle of 182 seats, the maximum the party has achieved under the overall leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the only Prime Minister India has had who was not from the Congress stable. If Modi is able to carry the BJP’s numbers beyond 200, it will be virtually certain that he shall be the next Prime Minister because finding allies may not be too difficult with power serving as a strong magnet.
However, if the number is below the score under Vajpayee, there could be problems. The BJP may be forced to review its strategy and look at scenarios of post-poll tie ups with some other leader as its general. There are many Modi supporters who refuse to believe that the BJP would be below 182 with most predicting even a single party government in 2014 headed by Modi. This belief is based on presumption of a huge Modi victory but since politics is a game of possibilities, things have to be also viewed if that does not happen and the BJP has to deal with other players by projecting somebody other than Modi.
If such a scenario was to develop, one can speculate on how things would unfold. Modi will naturally continue to have his say and may enjoy veto powers in even choosing an alternative to himself. Going by common sense in a real politic situation, he would never allow someone of his own generation to be the BJP’s front runner for the prime ministerial position. That would rule out Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, Rajnath Singh, Nitin Gadkari and even Venkaiah Naidu. Instead if he has to make a choice, it would be from leaders whom he considers will not have a long political innings left to play. Such a list would automatically point to L.K. Advani assuming the position of importance. His opponent may, however, say that since the BJP lost under his leadership in 2009, he should be out of reckoning. The second obvious choice could be Dr Murali Manohar Joshi, former party president and during whose Ekta Yatra from Kanyakumari to Srinagar in the early nineties, Modi played the mascot. Joshi enjoys the support of the RSS and is the tallest Brahmin leader in the saffron brigade after Vajpayee and has good equations with parties outside the BJP fold and thus could help in cobbling a coalition. But Advani and his supporters who continue to control the party may try and oppose him.
But these are stray thoughts which cross the mind knowing the fluidity of the political situation as it exists today and the limitations the BJP has of not having cadres in many states in the country. While talking in terms of seats, the BJP is the clear winner wherever it is pitted directly against the Congress, but its performance in areas where it has to take on regional parties’ remains a cause of concern and worry. Modi so far is doing extremely well in keeping the BJP as the front runner. He is the talking point in any discussion on elections where huge bets are being placed on his ability to carry the BJP to the seat of power in New Delhi. But will his efforts prove to be adequate? Between us.