What Will India’s New Saffron Curtain Mean for its Economic Growth?

History has shown that most countries which built ideological curtains failed to generate economic wealth and achieve their social objectives. They typically gave you their social outcomes at the cost of your economic well-being.

After decades of being stuck in the Hindu rate of growth, 3.5% per annum growth rate in GDP, the Indian economy pulled out of the dark ages to grow at an estimated 6.5% per annum in the years after the 1991 reforms.

The current sluggishness in the economy suggests it may be at risk of being pulled down to a Hindutva rate of growth of below 3% per annum. And that has implications for your near term economic and job security and for your long term investments. Let me explain.

Many countries and civilisations have built physical barriers or “curtains” to protect themselves and to separate themselves from others. Some of these ventures have ended up being social and political disasters.

The Great Wall of China was built by many dynasties from 445 BC and completed by the Ming Dynasty in 1644 AD to keep out the invading armies from the Steppes – nomads like the Mongols.

The Iron Curtain, separating the communist East and the democratic West, was established after World War 2, and flagged off the start of the Cold War. The Iron Curtain was not a physical structure but a conceptual dividing line between the “free world” and the other world. The Berlin Wall, construction of which started in 1961, represented a small part of the physical structure which exemplified the division between the East and the West. Though limited in size to a height of 12 feet and a length of only 27 miles, the Berlin Wall had 302 guard towers and 55,000 land mines. It was a physical manifestation of the Iron Curtain.

The Bamboo Curtain of 1959 was a political demarcation between the Communist-ruled areas of Russia, China, and some nations in South East Asia — and the rest of the world. There was no physical Bamboo Curtain though there was this conceptual dividing line. Those behind the Bamboo Curtain were communists. Mao had just taken over China in the Great Revolution.

Hungary built a barbed wire fence in 2015 on its border with Serbia and Croatia to keep out Syrian refugees. There was no curtain, but Prime Minister Viktor Orban may as well have had one. He had said that Hungary was 96% Christian and must stay that way. Basically, the refugees from Syria, mostly Muslims, were to be kept out.

President Trump is going ahead with his plans to build the wall between the southern borders of the US and Mexico – though Mexico does not seem to be paying for it, as was promised in his 2016 election campaign. Since there are many Christians in Mexico, Trump cannot use religion as a dividing line. Thus, he has built a “rapist” curtain to keep the “criminals” out.

A world with borders is necessary.

Having a physical wall or border has its merits as a means of security. It protects the state from raiding marauders. Having a “curtain” is typical for demarcating a philosophy, or reinforcing a distinction based on an attribute such as religion, or, in the case of communism, enforcing tyranny on your subjects.

Also read: BJP’s Strategy of Pitting Hindutva as an Alternative Agenda to Development is Unravelling

India has physical fences and border walls with, for example:

1) The rogue state of Pakistan, often described as an army with a country.

2) Natural and man-made fences with the ever-threatening fire-dragon of China; and

3) Barbed wire fences with Bangladesh, a country with whom India has enjoyed great friendship and which is indebted to India for its Independence in 1971.

But now, with the move to implement the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), India may be building a saffron curtain between its neighbours and itself. If the critics are to be believed, the saffron curtain may divide India itself.

Count me, but don’t count me out.

To start with there is the need to have:

1) The National Population Register. A list of people who live in the country; a normal and useful database that every country must have. Aadhaar was meant to be this “national” database but it was voluntary  and its limited intent was to ensure that benefits given by the government were received by those who were meant to receive it. Aadhaar was the Holy Grail to stop the pilferage in the system that had become commonplace in every government subsidy scheme. In 2012, P Chidambaram, then home minister under the Congress-led UPA-2, had a public spat with Nandan Nilekani over the duplication of resources and money being used for Aadhaar (run by Nilekani) and the National Population Register (run by the Home Ministry). Chidambaram had branded the NPR as integral to the internal security of India was clearly in favour of an NPR.

2) The National Register of Citizens. This register wishes to find out who, from those who live in the country, are citizens of India. This NRC will also need to make a list of those Indian citizens who may be living outside India (for example, an Indian passport holder working for a tech company in USA under a H-1 visa still needs to be listed in the NRC.) Nothing wrong with that, either. Every country must know how many citizens it is responsible for.

So far, so good. All this information is normal and useful. Other countries have their versions of the NPR and NRC; India must have hers.

The problem arose because of the implementation of the NRC in Assam which has, since the 1970s, seen an influx of immigrants (many illegal) from Bangladesh. The NRC for Assam was published under the watchful eye of the Supreme Court and released on August 31, 2019.

Of the 33 million people living in Assam, 31 million were counted as citizens. This means that about 1.9 million were not. Many of the 1.9 million were Hindus, a crucial vote bank for the BJP. In the 2019 elections for the Lok Sabha, the BJP won 6.4 million votes (9 Lok Sabha seats) while the Congress won 6.3 million votes (3 Lok Sabha seats). The Congress’s share of votes had increased but the BJP still gained more seats. There was an 81% voter turnout in Assam. A swing of 0.1 million votes led to a difference of 6 Lok Sabha seats under the first-past-the-post system in India. To allegedly ensure that many of the 1.9 million Hindu refugees, who may have been citizens of Bangladesh, qualify to be citizens of India, the Citizenship Amendment Act was passed. The CAA has a cut-off year of 2014 while the Assam Accord had a cut-off year of 1971.

The CAA was, allegedly, tailor-made to get the Hindus from Bangladesh into Assam by ensuring that a person “persecuted” for their religious beliefs could be given citizenship of India. Muslims were excluded from the list of people persecuted for their religion. The Muslims from Bangladesh, even if they were persecuted for belonging to a minority Muslim sect, will have to head back to Bangladesh.

So, there are two fears over the CAA:

1) The people of Assam don’t want anyone after the 1971 cut-off year to be given Indian citizenship and a right to live in Assam, irrespective of their religion. The protests in Assam are focused on this cut-off year – Hindu or Muslim refugee is not the issue here; the Assamese don’t want anyone who was a refugee after 1971 to be given a legal right to live in Assam;

2) The rest of India is concerned that the CAA (currently a move to legitimize many persecuted Hindus of Bangladesh origin) may be the first step towards future constitutional amendments and actions which evolve into a bias against those who are Muslims and who may legitimately be citizens of India – but do not have the papers to prove that.

There is a fear that if a Muslim is on the NPR list (which means he lives in India), the body-counters may not convert the Muslim into the NRC list: the list of citizens of India.

Also read: Hindutva Has Nowhere to Go Except Down the Road to Tyranny

Getting on the NPR list is easy. Getting on the NRC list may require more documents.

A Muslim in a Hindu Rashtra Raj could be denied citizenship, even if he was born in India, if he does not have the correct papers. In a country where tens of millions do not have a birth certificate – or where there are local rivalries preventing that person from seeking an endorsement of familiarity from others in the village, another criterion – this process of proving one’s citizenship could be a nightmare. IndiaSpend says that a “larger number of Indians, especially older Indians, do not possess birth certificates”. Additionally, IndiaSpend says that 38% of children under the age of 5 years do not have a birth certificate. “Further, those belonging to the poorest sections, scheduled castes and tribes, and families with no schooling are more likely to not have a birth certificate”. Getting a birth certificate the day you are born to register the child for a good school is an urban phenomena. Record-less rural India does not have that luxury!

More importantly, the Constitution does not permit the denying of a citizenship to any person based on the religion that they follow. This was against the spiritual belief of Mahatma Gandhi as he led the fight for India’s Independence:

“For me, the different religions are beautiful flowers from the same garden, or they are branches of the same majestic tree. Therefore, they are equally true, though being received and interpreted through human instruments equally imperfect.”

In a Hindu Rashtra, such lofty idealistic talk is, well, lofty idealistic talk. The Mahatma is dead and he was, in the eyes of those who want a Hindu Rashtra, a traitor to India for allowing partition and giving the Muslims their own country without giving the Hindus “our own” country. Jinnah got what he wanted for his Muslims: a country of their own; but we did not and Hindus have had to face the perceived injustice of sitting with 150 million Muslims around us on Indian soil. In the eyes of many, Islam, Christianity and Judaism are “imported” religions and need to be expelled. For now, the Hindu sangh recognizes Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism as offshoots of Hinduism: they can be tolerated.

The link to the economy

In November 2016, the BJP government introduced demonetisation. That led to months of chaos as people lined up to change notes. This killed economic activity. The effects of that questionable policy were felt for quite some time.  Rather than adding to economic activity, people stood in lines. Barring those who may have been hawking pakodas, channa-singh, or chai to those who trudged distances to get to the banks there was little economic output. The political objective of demonetisation was achieved — to win the UP elections by ensuring that the horde of cash, stashed by the Opposition, was made worthless. None of the objectives stated on the floor of Parliament as a reason for the exercise of demonetisation were achieved.

Also read: The BJP Is Digging Its Own Grave

In July 2017, the GST was introduced. This questionable idea which ignored the vast differences in the stages of economic evolution of every state originated from the Congress government. Sadly, it was amplified and adopted by the BJP. Rather than allowing small businesses to work and continue to contribute to the economy, GST shut the small businesses out. It benefited two classes of people: (1) the software programmers, accountants and lawyers who got windfall fees from the trails of computer and paperwork for an ever-changing, ever-modifying set of procedures and rules, and (2) the larger companies, including multinationals, who gained business and market share in a slowing economy at the cost of the smaller companies. Since large companies do not add jobs to the extent that small companies do, there was a net job loss in the economy.

The fraudulent practices of many Indian CEOs and founders — from companies involved in banking to telecom to oil to power to steel to retailing — had caused a hole in the balance sheet of many banks. While this theft of money from companies and poor governance is a disease that has infected India for decades, it reached its Golden Age under the rule of the UPA government. With large losses from these legacy loans, the banks have neither the desire, nor the means, to lend more money. Economies only grow when the money is available to lubricate the engines of growth.

But not only was money not readily available, even the engines of growth were stalling.

Companies saddled with debt and lower sales (people standing in line can only buy pakodas and chai, not cars and steel; people who lost their jobs buy even less) have little incentive to borrow more to build factories and add to capacity or create jobs. Those few companies that do wish to borrow have fewer banks to borrow from.

With the banking system in a freeze and consumer demand in a tailspin, real estate companies are sitting on 12 months to 36 months of unsold inventory of flats. With no desire to build more homes, most real estate developers are not hiring labour to work on new projects. Fewer flats being purchased means that fewer people are buying toasters, microwaves, and furnishings for the new flats.

The economy is dead.

Killing a dead cat?

There was hope that the government would do something in the budget of 2019.

They did. And that 2019 budget was perceived to damage the economy further. It was a negative shock! After much criticism and pointlessly defending the indefensible, the government rolled the negatives back and took away the pain.

Then they gave a boost to large companies who pay tax. None of this has created jobs – not even in the stock market which has set successive new peaks due to the recent tax freebies to corporate India.

It is possible that the NPR will add jobs: someone needs to count the people in the country.

It is possible that the NRC will add jobs: someone need to scrutinize the papers of the people to figure out who is a citizen and who is not.

It is possible that those who are not classified as citizens will need to be housed in detention camps.

The building of these camps will require cement, steel, tiling and barbed wire. And labour to put it all together and guards to man the detainees. That could be a boost of some sorts for economic activity!

But those who are standing in line waiting for papers and waiting to be counted will neither be available to work, nor will they be consumers.

The pakoda, channa-singh, and chai sellers may see another spurt in business though.

Also read: What’s So Neoliberal About Narendra Modi’s India Anyway?

As protests sweep across India, there is a huge human cost and a large economic cost. Assam’s oil-fields produce 4.3 million tonnes of oil every year, about 12% of India’s domestic production and 5% of our annual consumption of oil products. If the oil supply is disrupted, and given the higher price of oil in global markets the past few days, there will be a further dent on the import bill and on the Indian Rupee. Tea from Assam accounts for 50% of all tea grown in India and tea generates 5% of the revenue for the state.

Other states and industrial hubs across India (Gurgaon, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Pune) are larger and contribute more to the national exchequer – and have a roster of global clients and customers. In May 1974, there was a 20-day strike by the Indian Railways demanding the implementation of 8-hour days. 46 years later, the Indian Railways are more crucial to a more integrated domestic economy. The Bharat Bandh, called on January 8, is reminiscent of those unsettling days.

The building of a saffron curtain will cost a lot of money.

The direct cost of Rs. 21,000 crore for the demonetisation (about 0.5% of the annual budget, though this cost was borne by the RBI which many say has already morphed into a Division of the Government of India) was more than the “economic earnings” from demonetisation. The indirect cost of the demonetisation to the economy which went into a slump and had low tax collections, was felt for years. Some have estimated this cost to be in the region of 1.5% to 2% of GDP.

The economic pain of the demonetisation for most people has been significant – even though the BJP may not have lost elections. (For this, the BJP has to thank the Congress for still insisting on being around. As an aside, the expiration date of the Congress was supposed to be 1947; the year India won its Independence. Having led the Freedom Struggle, Mahatma Gandhi said the work of the Congress was over and it should be disbanded.)

Building walls for security is a necessary activity. Building a saffron curtain to segregate a population by religion may be a socially and economically expensive political passion.

India could potentially get stuck in the quicksand of the past.

Under a saffron curtain, India may rewind the clock not to the pathetic 3.5% per annum “Hindu rate of growth” of GDP under the Nehruvian period of the 1950’s to 1980’s, but to a sub-3% p.a. Hindutva rate of growth under the BJP.

And, if the data points released by the government are to be believed and adjusted for the change in the way data has been compiled since 2015, we already are at a Hindutva rate of growth of sub-3% per annum, a new low in post-reform Modern India. This does not make it worse or better than the 7% per annum growth rate achieved under the UPA 1 and UPA 2 governments, where much of the growth can be attributed to crony capitalism and the initiation of projects that were so poorly financed that the banking system is paying the price for those blunders today. The Indian economy has been badly bruised by the poor policies of the UPA and may be knocked out by the social focus of the BJP.

The budget of 2020 will be a challenge. It will have to offset the likely adverse economic impact of a Saffron Curtain and seek ways to boost the creation and distribution of wealth by kick-starting a dead economy. It will not be an easy task. The 2020 budget may either prove our Hindutva-ness – or reinforce our faith in the idea of a more economically prosperous India.

History has shown that most countries which built ideological curtains failed to generate economic wealth and achieve their social objectives. They typically gave you the social outcome at the cost of your economic well-being. And that, too, for a short period of time. The victorious social outcome tended to lose their veneer over time to expose the rot within. A saffron curtain is not what India needs now – it needs focus on the sabka vikas that was promised in 2014. “History”, as Mark Twain said, “never repeats itself, but it often rhymes.” For India, its tryst with destiny may be ending as a curtain rises.

Ajit Dayal is a mutual fund veteran and  is the founder of Quantum Asset Management Company. This article was originally published on EquityMaster. You can read it here.

As GDP Growth Slips, Opposition, BJP Allies Attack Govt Over Slowdown

Several BJP leaders have felt that their party’s poor electoral performance in Haryana and Maharashtra could be attributed to the economic slowdown.

New Delhi: On the day when India’s quarterly GDP growth dropped to a six-year-low 4.5%, members of the opposition, the ruling party and its allies came together to slam the Union government for its inability to curb the economic slowdown.

Allies question BJP on the economy

The first to question the Union government were the BJP’s own allies. “The state of the economy is alarming, we all are concerned. It is causing alarm because of joblessness and lack of growth which is leading to unemployment.” Shiromani Akali Dal leader Naresh Gujral told the Indian Express.

Gujral went on to say that there was a sense of disquiet among NDA partners and that the BJP had not convened a single meeting with its allies to discuss important matters. “The allies are quite unhappy. The oldest ally, Shiv Sena, has already walked out and others are waiting at the departure lounge. Allies are not vying for positions, but there has to be consultation,” Gujral said.

In a similar vein, Janata Dal (United) leader K.C Tyagi too hit out at the Modi government for failing to protect India’s national assets. The senior leader said that his party was worried about the declining growth rate, the Centre’s plan to privatise public sector enterprises and the all-pervasive agrarian crisis which has led to a steep rise in distress migration.

“The government should not ignore or ridicule warnings of economists or former RBI governors. It should open modes of communication, there should be a meeting of political leaders and economists. People like (former PM) Manmohan Singh should be called to discuss the issue. Because this is not a matter of confrontation, it is a matter of consultation,” Tyagi told the Indian Express.

“Being a socialist party, the JD(U) has serious concerns about the pace in which assets of PSU are being sold to private firms. Selling PSU assets for revenue collection has proved to be a wrong method of dealing with economic crisis. During Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s time, there was a ministry for it, but it did not yield results. Even in Manmohan Singh’s term it happened but with no results,” he said, adding that the government should not have ignored or ridiculed warnings from economists and former RBI governors.

Watch | The Wire Business Report: Understanding the Q2 GDP Slump

Gujaral, on the other hand, pointed out a “talent deficit” in Modi’s cabinet. He said that all those ministries which are being “manned by competent ministers” were doing well but most others were not because of a lack of efficient administrators. Which ministers Gujaral was pointing towards remains unclear.

While the BJP leaders who spoke to the national daily avoided public remarks, they did not downplay the crisis. “When NSSO reports on unemployment and rural consumption reports came to light, our people cited alternative statistics on automobile sale, Ola/Uber services, full airports, cinema earnings to counter. That the finance minister has come to a situation to admit slowdown, if not recession, is a way of acknowledging the situation ultimately,” a BJP leader told the daily on the condition of anonymity.

Another senior BJP MP said, “There is no buoyancy in industry/business these days. Even GST collections are down. It is a matter of concern. We will talk over it. But not on phone please.”

Another saffron party’s functionary said that the economy should be the government’s focus as the “situation doesn’t look promising”. The leader remained doubtful that the finance minister’s budget announcements had any sort of positive impact on the economy.

BJP leaders have felt that the poor electoral performance of their party in Haryana and Maharashtra could have been a result of this economic slowdown that had led to joblessness and general insecurities.

Such has been the impact of the slowdown that the National Democratic Alliance members took turns to question the government in the Rajya Sabha on Friday.

Gujral asked Goyal whether RoDTEP, a scheme to refund taxes to exporters who allege that the new taxes imposed by the Modi government has affected their standing in the global markets, would materialise anytime soon. Union commerce minister Piyush Goyal responded by saying that the scheme was being discussed between finance and commerce ministries.

Similarly, Narendra Jadhav, a nominated member, asked why India had not been able to take advantage of the US-China trade war that had led to manufacturing units fleeing China. Goyal then spoke about the slash in corporate tax and other economic measures to “boost entrepreneurship”.

A view of the Rajya Sabha during ongoing Winter Session of Parliament, in New Delhi, Monday, Nov. 25, 2019. Photo: PTI

A BJP member Lt Gen D.P. Vats (retd) asked Goyal about possible job losses due to increasing automation. The commerce minister replied by saying that although it was true that “modernisation and technology upgradation” affects employment temporarily, “India cannot afford to be left behind”.

“I think, there is no empirical evidence or very detailed evidence of workers losing jobs in a very big measure,” Goyal said.

Opposition reactions

To a question by Trinamool Congress’s Subhasish Chakraborty on whether India is losing its competitive edge in the manufacturing sector, Goyal said that the government was taking steps to address these issues.

Also read: Latest GDP Numbers are ‘Unacceptable’: Manmohan Singh

The Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said that while the government concentrated on politics of religious polarisation for electoral gains, it had no inkling about how to contain the economic slowdown.

“India’s GDP has collapsed to an abysmal 4.5%. We are in a virtual free-fall. This is the lowest GDP quarter in 6 years. But why is the BJP celebrating? Because their understanding of GDP (Godse Divisive Politics) suggests double digit growth levels. All in the perspective,” he said on Twitter.

Trinamool Congress Derek O’Brien too tweeted, “Lowest GDP growth in 26 quarters! No answers from FM. No wonder, full Opposition walked out of Rajya Sabha 40 minutes into the FM’s speech this week. And ministers dozed off in their seats #Parliament.”

CPI(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury speaking at a conclave too spoke about the state of the economy and said that the lack of coordination between states and the Centre was also responsible for such a poor situation.

“This is the New India. This government wants a Hindu Rashtra which they want to do keeping states at bay. FM (finance minister) says this is not a recession, then what is the solution? The economy is the county won’t do better until there is public pressure. It is complete one-way traffic, no consultation. An authoritative govt which doesn’t want to listen to anyone,” he said.

Even the former secretary to the government Siraj Hussain, who is a specialist in the agrarian economy, joined the ranks of critics. “4.5% is bad news, this means there are no jobs and it really doesn’t bode well for the country, the government needs to give this a very serious thought,” he said.

Nirmala Sitharaman Meets Private Sector Lenders, Says ‘Things Will Look Up’

The GDP growth in the first quarter of the current financial year has slipped to an over six-year low of 5%.

New Delhi: Finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Thursday said the economy will start looking up in the second half of the current financial year as consumption rises and banks increase their lending operations.

Weeks after meeting public sector bankers, the finance minister met heads of leading private sector lenders and financial institutions. They categorically told the finance minister that there is no liquidity crisis and there is enough demand for loans.

To cash in on the festive demand, Sitharaman urged the lenders to join the outreach programme in 400 districts to push lending and boost consumption.

After meeting the top management of 29 leading private sector financial institutions, she said, “On the whole, it was a tonic-like meeting where I have heard a lot of good things, positive things and not one voice said there is a concern, there is a shortfall of demand but to my surprise…none of them voiced liquidity concerns.”

She said economic slowdown seems to have bottomed out and the coming festive season will help the economy start looking up. The GDP growth in the first quarter of the current financial year slipped to an over six-year low of 5%.

Also read: Explainer: What’s Sparking Panic at PMC Bank?

“Things are looking forward and upward. That is why I started by saying it was like tonic for me and I hope this message goes across…The message that I get from this meeting today is consumption is happening,” the minister added.

During the upcoming festival season, the demand will pick up, she said.

“From what has emerged today I think demand will get back and motivate our economy to move at a faster rate… in the coming half year things will have to look up…,” she added.

The minister further said the lenders of private sector banks and financial institutions told her that the slump in commercial vehicle sales is “cyclical” and likely to pick up in the next one or two quarters.

As regards slowdown in the passenger vehicle segment, she was told that it was driven by “sentiments” and will improve in near future.

Financial Services Secretary Rajiv Kumar said public sector banks will hold outreach programme in 400 districts across the country during the festival season with a view to enhance credit disbursal.

In the first phase between October 3 and 7, 250 districts will be covered and remaining districts will feature in the second phase which will begin from October 11 and last till Diwali.

Private sector banks have also been invited to join the outreach programme.

Also read: With New Round of Bank Mergers, Is the Govt Ignoring Lessons From the Past?

During the meeting, banks and non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) also suggested the limit for affordable housing eligibility be raised to Rs 50 lakh from the current Rs 45 lakh.

Noted private banker Uday Kotak, who also attended the meeting, said private investment will respond to the reduction in corporate tax. He said most banks will follow external benchmark-based lending from October 1.

Kotak said private sector lenders would very much like to contribute to the customer outreach and double their lending efforts over the next 30 to 60 days.

“We believe in one country one financial system. this is an opportunity for us to do what is our ‘dharma’. It provides opportunity to grow our business through the outreach programme,” Kotak added.

Some of the lenders have stressed the need for self declaration of present address in respect of borrowers who are eKYC authenticated to enable hassle-free lending and ease in co-origination of loans by banks and NBFCs.

The finance minister assured them that appropriate instructions would be issued to address the concern by October 1.

On the issue of restriction imposed on Punjab & Maharashtra Cooperative (PMC) Bank, the finance minister said the RBI as a regulator is handling it at this stage and also provided some relaxation.

“I don’t think I’ll get into this at this stage. Will wait, let there be some kind of comprehensive picture emerging post which certainly government will have to see what best can be done…,” she said.

The government’s intention is to have a stable environment, she added.

In a major relief to the hapless customers of crippled PMC Bank, the Reserve Bank on Thursday increased cash withdrawal limit to Rs 10,000 per account from Rs 1,000 set earlier over the next six months.

(PTI)

 

Watch | With the Economy Sinking, Can the BJP Retain Its Political Hold?

How will the present crisis affect the BJP’s political fortune?

In this issue of Media Bol, senior journalist Urmilesh discusses the decline if the Indian economy with economist, journalist and writer Pooja Mehra, Delhi School of Economics student Aakriti Bhatia and The Wire‘s founding editors M.K. Venu.

How the BJP’s Political Narrative Filled the Holes in the NDA’s Actual Performance

The messaging around national security and last-mile schemes allowed Modi to present himself as the best short-term solution, regardless of his long-term vision.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) – and more than that, Narendra Modi – has come back with a larger mandate than what it was given by India’s voters in 2014.

At one level, this is remarkable given the economic distress all around, which should have led to a strong anti-incumbency and a decline in the saffron party’s votes. The mandate is, in part, a reflection of short-term politics trumping the longer term issues facing the nation.

This is not the first time that this has happened in India.

In 1984, after Indira Gandhi was assassinated, her son came to power with a majority that even Nehru never had. In 1991, when Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated between the two rounds of elections, the vote share of Congress dramatically increased in the second round. It came to power as the single largest party with P.V. Narasimha Rao becoming prime minister.

In 1984, the big issue confronting the nation was the separatist movement in Punjab. How voting massively for Rajiv Gandhi – a reluctant politician, with little experience of politics and the issues at hand – would solve the problem was not of concern to the voters.

Similarly, for the 1991 elections, the critical issue was a sinking economy. Many voters who were not voting for the Congress suddenly shifted allegiance to that party because its leader was assassinated. The critical issue at hand became immaterial.

It is clear that a political narrative can either emerge or be created that diverts the attention of the public from the critical issues facing the country. Modi has managed to do that by focusing on muscular nationalism. This trumped the key issues of youth unemployment, the farmer crisis and growing alienation of minorities.

In media interviews and ground reports, many of the poor said yes they were hurting but when the nation is in danger that is more important.

Many, believing that the nation is in danger, wanted a strong leader and Modi projected himself as just that. If the threat was from Pakistan, it was easy to consolidate the Hindu vote. Finally, the opposition was projected as a rag-tag grouping without a common strong leader – so, there was no alternative (TINA). The BJP also strongly pushed the narrative that nothing had happened in the last 65 years and all gains in the country were achieved in the last 5 years.

Former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. Credit: INC

Missing the forest for the trees

It’s often easy to think of the immediate and not the long-term. An immediate retaliation against Pakistan is seen as more important than having  a nuanced foreign policy which serves the wider long-term national interest. For a majority, India’s isolation in the neighbourhood and an ineffective foreign policy vis a vis China matter little.

Instead, the bear hug with foreign dignitaries becomes a symbol of India’s growing external clout and is more important than the content of the relationship with those nations. Obama’s chiding Modi for a deteriorating communal climate is less important than his hug. Trump’s praise is more important than the spoke he has put in our relationship with Iran and the impact it will have on our energy security.

The well-being of people is not just economic but has political and social features which may be more important, depending on the situation. Slogans that have a ring with the public have often mattered more than the issues. So, garibi hatao became a big pull. Now it is nation in danger.

When one’s own life is precarious due to economic hardship, it is easy to believe that the nation is in danger.

Modi’s two big economic actions – demonetisation and the Goods and Services (GST) regime – were projected as being inherently nationalistic. Demonetisation was said to be a mahayagya for the nation in which everyone had to give ahuti by bearing hardships. A parallel was drawn between jawans standing at the border and people standing in queues at the banks.

GST was projected as a new freedom and unification of the nation. But ultimately, these nationalistic issues were hardly used in the election campaign as they sparked crises in the unorganised sector of India’s economy.

Also Read: Debate: Beware Glib Explanations for Modi’s Election Victory

Indeed, these economic shocks were neatly sidestepped. At the time of the Uttar Pradesh elections soon after demonetisation, people willingly accepted their hardship because they felt that it was done to tackle the menace of black economy. They believed that the rich and the poor had been brought into the same queue and those with black money had been hurt and irretrievably damaged. They felt that justice had been done. This narrative changed when it was realized that all the money had come back to the Reserve Bank of India and none of the black money was demobilised. So, in the national elections this issue could not be used. Similarly, GST had hurt the economy with hundreds of changes in the last 22 months and could not be used as an issue of nationalism.

If these two issues had been highlighted, especially as nationalistic moves, it would have backfired upon the BJP. What came in handy was the Pulwama and Balakot incidents. The first reflected the danger confronting the nation and the second highlighted a muscular response establishing Modi’s credentials as a strong leader. People forgave or did not recall Modi’s unscheduled stop in Pakistan to greet Nawaz Sharif or the invitation to ISI after the terrorist attack in Pathankot. Modi repeatedly referred to martyrs of Pulwama and invoked Balakot to appeal to the voters. He asked the first-time voters to vote for the men who executed the surgical strike (meaning his party).

Demonetisation was one of the two shocks that created a crisis in the economy. Credit: PTI

On the economic front

If there was economic distress at various levels, how was this contained? We know that India’s poorest were hit by the two big shocks to the economy which led to a decline in the growth rate of the economy, rising unemployment and a farm crisis. This has meant a loss of Rs 25 lakh crore of incomes in the unorganised sectors of the economy in the last two and a half years.

Firstly, there was partial compensation for this loss through schemes like Ujjwala, Mudra and Swachh Bharat, whose aim was to primarily build rural assets, but whose implementation has not been the best.

The messaging around the different programmes was excellent. The BJP in particular did a good job of publicizing them, though many of the schemes were not new and merely continued what the efforts of past governments.

For instance, rural electrification has been going on for the last 70 years. Before this government took over, electricity had reached 6.3 lakh villages. Modi’s government added another 20,000 villages but tried to portray as if they had electrified all villages in the country.

These schemes however did not give the BJP a significant advantage in the recent 2018 assembly elections where it lost. Even in specific by-elections in Uttar Pradesh, the BJP lost. The question then becomes why these schemes yield dividends in the national elections but not in the assembly elections?

That Pulwama and Balakot turned the tide in favour of the saffron party is clear from the fact that there was some amount of panic within BJP till these events occurred. For instance, to overcome the perceived anti-incumbency, in the budget on February 1, the government offered Rs 6,000 per annum to 12 crore farmers, pension to the unorganised sectors workers, and tax concessions to the middle class – even though revenues were inadequate and the fiscal deficit was likely to rise.

There was a rush to give the first tranche of Rs 2,000 before the announcement of the elections but only about 10% of the farmers could be identified and given the first tranche. Its various state governments offered loan waivers to farmers. Allocation to MGNREGS was jacked up to Rs 60,000 crore to provide work in rural areas.

All these steps were taken even though many of them go against the economic and social rhetoric that the BJP often deploys.

The crisis many poor Indians faced due to economic shocks also opened them to the idea of a nation in crisis, caused by outside forces or the ‘other’ in society.

These immediate issues have taken precedence over long-term ones. Building a harmonious society becomes secondary to defending one’s faith and imposing one’s beliefs on the other. The other is projected as a source of trouble and must be subjugated.

India is not alone in this trend of short-term trumping the long term. It is visible globally in the election of Trump, vote for Brexit, rise of Le Pen in France, decline of popularity of Angela Merkel, rise of Erdogan in Turkey, what is happening to the ANC in South Africa or to Suu Ky in Myanmar, changes in Egypt, Brazil, Philippines and so on. Modi is in step with this global trend.

But India is far more heterogenous than any of the countries mentioned above and needs a far more nuanced approach to its problems – will this now happen?

Arun Kumar is Malcolm Adiseshiah chair professor, Institute of Social Sciences.