Reflections on an anniversary
An Emergency is unlikely to happen again, but the media must introspect on its vulnerabilities.
Ihave always found that sombre anniversaries of distasteful events from our history serve a more useful purpose than celebratory ones. Of course, for a young generation in India — this columnist included (I was born in 1978) — that did not live through imperial rule, the attainment of freedom and the temporary loss of freedom between 1975 and 1977, the celebration of Independence Day and the anniversary of the imposition of Emergency (it’s the 40th this week) are equally good occasions to dive into history, learn and reflect. The present and the future, after all, are being increasingly determined by the 66% of India under the age of 35. And if there is one thing India must preserve from 1947, it is political freedom (we never got economic freedom, but that’s the subject of a different column).
One of the questions that have been asked by many this week is whether an Emergency-like scenario may return to haunt India. Some paranoid commentators have even warned that we are already in such a scenario. Needless to say that it is a false and preposterous claim. It is true that the current government is not pleased with dissent. Some of its actions, like the crackdown on foreign funded NGOs, smack of desperation more than authoritarianism. But an aversion to dissent is not peculiar to Modi’s government. The Congress-led UPA also tried some ham-handed measures to curb dissent, like shutting down Twitter accounts. In fact, an aversion to dissent and preference for control is remarkably present in governments in most democracies — just note how much Wikileaks has revealed about the American “police/ surveillance” state.
Given a choice, most governments in democracies lean to- wards control (not freedom) of citizens. The test of a democracy is whether citizens and civil society cave in or fight back. Fortunately, in India (and indeed in western democracies), at least in recent times, citizens and civil society (especially, but not only, the media) have largely stood up to government, and maintained checks and balances. The advent of the Internet and social media hasn’t just made authoritarian regimes nervous; it worries democratic governments too. Recall how the social media-powered Anna Hazare movement brought the UPA to its knees.
On the anniversary of the Emergency it is important though to reflect on the role of the mainstream media in preserving our freedoms. In 1975, the capitulation of the media (there were some notable exceptions) more than any other institution enabled Indira Gandhi to get away with her authoritarian act. The mainstream media is vulnerable to the government for a number of reasons. A great majority of media outfits are run as for-profit business enterprises — there is nothing wrong with that as long as business models are sound. But in India, circa 2015, too many media businesses run in the red, dependent on government-owned banks and government advertisements for survival. That puts them at the government’s mercy.
India’s citizens must share the blame for this state of affairs. While consumers are willing to pay increasing amounts of money for all kinds of goods and services, there remains no real appetite to pay for news — neither print, digital nor television.
That means that the media has to rely on advertising for revenues. That requires the goodwill of other businesses, which are also vulnerable to government pressure because of the extraordinary amount of control the state still exercises on economic actors. One way to overcome the problem of relying on local investment and revenues alone is to permit 100% foreign investment in the media. But neither the Indian media nor the government are keen to go down that route for fear of losing “control”. Both the media and its consumers must reconsider the reality of existing business models if they want an important pillar of democracy to be immune from government interference.
Fortunately, unlike in 1975, a vibrant Internet and social media (which is mostly free of business constraints, at least for individuals) will make up for failures of the mainstream media. Still, it is important for every institution to remain strong if India is to preserve its political (and increasingly economic) freedom. The war within the Bharatiya Janata Party is out in the open. The issue is no more about Lalit Modi but about intra party intrigue within the saffron brigade. The Lalit Modi episode is being used to essentially weaken Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s position. And unless the PM acts decisively and clears the air about the scant respect his party colleagues have shown in respect of propriety, his image of a strong leader was bound to be dented. The matter is refusing to die down since the fires are being stoked by functionaries of the Sangh Parivar. The object is to both test the Prime Minister and to push him into a corner, so that his mega image, which has been overshadowing the party and the Rashtriya Sawayamsevak Sangh (RSS) takes a hit.
Both Sushma Swaraj and Vasundhara Raje should have been given marching orders by now. Similarly, two other women, Pankaja Munde in Maharashtra and Human Resources Development Minister Smriti Irani should have been put on notice. Nothing of that has happened and the BJP’s credibility as well that of the Prime Minister is being questioned even by the common people. Lalit Modi has precipitated the crisis. Objectively speaking, he is wanted for questioning in cases of financial irregularities, but no criminality against him has been established as yet. He is a suspect in wrongdoings during his tenure as the Commissioner of IPL and so are several others, who collectively took decisions during that period. They are also liable to being probed in the same manner as he is. It is the mess in the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) that is threatening to consume several top politicians in the country. It is, therefore, a decisive moment for the Prime Minister to clear this mess and act in a transparent manner. Whoever is guilty of violating the law of the land must not be spared. This includes Lalit Modi and others for their role in BCCI’s infringements and the two top women leaders — Swaraj and Raje in the BJP.
Narendra Modi had come to power on the promise of providing a clean and transparent government. He had obtained a massive mandate for the BJP, which was unprecedented. In the process, he had also rubbed many others in the wrong way in his own party and the Sangh. His larger than life image had come to haunt many of his colleagues who nursed ambitions of occupying the highest office. However, they could do nothing as Modi was perceived by the cadres as the man who alone could deliver. He still is the only leader who has their complete backing.
Thirteen months is a long time in politics and though the first one year passed very well for the NDA government, with no scams coming out in public domain, the last one month has eclipsed the good impression people had of this government. The way the BJP and the Sangh have been reacting on a daily basis after Swaraj and Raje’s roles in helping Lalit Modi came to light, it appears that no one is in control. The government and the party are in a tailspin, something which they cannot afford to do. The perception is that either no one is in charge, or that those who are at the helm of affairs are finding it difficult to manage the crisis. The inexperience of the new dispensation of dealing with complex problems at the Centre is in evidence.
Narendra Modi, who proved to be a successful Chief Minister in Gujarat, is in the process of establishing himself as a successful Prime Minister too. He has the ability and the determination to go down in history as a man who has the capacity to take India to the next level. He is now facing the difficult task of extricating his government and party out of an extremely delicate situation. He does not lack either the will or political acumen. Therefore, this is an opportunity that he has to grab to put his seal of authority over which direction the party and the government would go in the future. He should certainly not demonstrate any reluctance to act at this crucial juncture.
The biggest challenge before him is how to control the domino effect of seeking the resignation of Swaraj and Raje, whose supporters are digging in their heels to indicate that they would not go down without taking down some others. Narendra Modi has to rise above various considerations and take the appropriate action against the two women leaders, as well as those he feels could embarrass the government and the party in future. The veiled threats that Raje could split the party in Rajasthan or Swaraj could spill the beans on several others should not deter him. He should always remember that people voted for him in the 2014 polls and not for anyone else in his party. Therefore it is his credibility and standing that is on the line. He should show that he is a decisive leader. Between us.