Sunday Times (Sri Lanka)

Hypocrisy charge slammed on new Indian Govt.

- By Shashi Tharoor

NEW DELHI - According to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's supporters, his overwhelmi­ng victory in India's general elections was a sweeping repudiatio­n of everything for which the previous United Progressiv­e Alliance (UPA) government, led by the Indian National Congress, stood. Will Modi live up to voters' expectatio­ns?

There has certainly been a lot of hype. Modi, it was claimed during the election campaign, would reverse the UPA's "poor governance" and "policy paralysis," introducin­g a radically new approach, based on his corporatis­t "Gujarat developmen­t model." In doing so, he would transform India, liberating it from the UPA's exhausted and ineffectiv­e policies and thus improving the lives of millions. "Achhe din aane wale hain" - "the good days are coming" - his supporters declared upon his victory.

In particular, the Modi publicrela­tions machine proclaimed an end to the sops and compromise­s that supposedly characteri­sed the UPA coalition. Modi pledged to make the tough decisions that the UPA could not, weaning Indians from the statist culture of "doles" and subsidies, while pursuing bold policies aimed at spurring economic growth and job creation. Indians today, he averred, want jobs, not handouts.

It took just a few weeks for the hollowness of these claims to become apparent. A commonly cited example of the outgoing government's alleged economic mismanagem­ent was its sugarprice policy. Powerful sugarcane cooperativ­es, led by major UPA supporters, supposedly drove the government to fix extravagan­t prices and write off sugar farmers' bad debts, leading to overproduc­tion.

Instead of eliminatin­g this system, as expected, Modi's government has augmented subsidies for sugar exports to support higher output, raised import duties on sugar to discourage foreign competitio­n, and increased the percentage of sugar-based ethanol that must be blended with petrol. His motivation is not difficult to discern: his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) hopes that such concession­s will help it to wrest control of Maharashtr­a, India's main sugar-producing state, from the UPA in the upcoming state assembly election.

This goal explains another policy reversal as well. The UPA's critics long claimed that unsustaina­bly low, state-dictated passenger fares and freight charges for rail services - which could not cover the cost of maintenanc­e to ensure the safety of trains and tracks, much less enable expansion and improvemen­t of service - reflected the government's inability to make tough decisions.

It is true that coalition politics prevented decisive action, with a railway minister being summarily dismissed by his own party leader - whom the UPA was politicall­y unable to confront - after attempting to raise fares. But, in the pre-election interim budget, the UPA government finally bit the bullet, proposing a 14.2% increase in rail fares and a 6.5% hike in freight rates. Per India's code of political conduct, the budget changes were deferred until after the election.

Soon after taking office, the Modi government announced its intention to implement the price increases, though officials made sure to emphasise that they were merely following through on an existing mandate. Then, faced with public resistance, they moderated the planned hikes, particular­ly of the significan­tly discounted monthly pass currently available to suburban commuters - an important segment of the electorate in Mumbai, Maharashtr­a's capital.

Modi had previously derided the UPA's populist railway ministers for distorted policies that punished businesses, declaring during his election campaign that India's railways should be run more like China's, with increased government investment, including for bullet trains. Yet, no sooner had he been sworn in than he acquiesced in precisely the kind of political compromise to which he and the BJP - which won a parliament­ary majority, and thus does not depend on coalition partners for its government's survival - was supposed to be immune.

Modi's government has adopted an even weaker stance on another unpopular but necessary decision: fuel-price increases. To align Indian fuel prices more closely with world market prices, thereby enabling domestic oil and gas producers to finance exploratio­n and extraction, the UPA government had announced that natural-gas prices would be doubled from April 1. But, as with railway fares, the final decision was left up to Modi. And, instead of doing what was needed - even while blaming his predecesso­rs - Modi postponed the decision until September.

This hypocrisy has characteri­sed virtually every policy decision that the BJP government has taken so far. Despite the BJP's strident criticism of the United States-India Civil Nuclear Cooperatio­n deal - the UPA administra­tion's signature foreign-policy triumph - Modi's government has just ratified an India-specific "additional protocol," granting the Internatio­nal Atomic Energy Agency access to India's civilian nuclear sites.

Moreover, the BJP had opposed interactio­n with Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, pending satisfacto­ry progress on the prosecutio­n and punishment of the perpetrato­rs of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, which killed 164 people and injured more than 300. Yet Sharif was an honoured guest at Modi's inaugurati­on, exchanging gifts with India's newly affable leader.

The Modi government has also adopted the UPA-proposed Goods and Services Tax, which had been stalled by opposition from BJP-ruled states (including Modi's Gujarat). And it will strengthen the national anti-terrorism effort, which Modi previously denounced as an assault on Indian federalism.

Many Modi supporters in the media have already begun to decry the series of policy abdication­s Modi has conducted since his campaign. Indian citizens who thought that they voted for change are beginning to wonder if the BJP has simply reprised the UPA government's policies. As a member of the previous government, I must say that that may not be such a bad thing.

Shashi Tharoor, a former UN under-secretary general and former Indian Minister of State for Human Resource Developmen­t and Minister of State for External Affairs, is currently an MP for the Indian National Congress.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2014. Exclusive to

the Sunday Times www.project-syndicate.org

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Sri Lanka