This e-book is a compilation of The Hindus series of articles on Prime Minister Narendra Modis completion of one year in power.

Contents No acche din for higher education ................................................................ 3

Modi and his Chakravyuh ............................................................................. 7

The republic without a language .................................................................. 11

When the traveller returns ......................................................................... 14

The strategy behind the inaction ................................................................. 18

Ghar ghar Modi, Bharat bhar Modi ............................................................. 20

States unlikely to bridge gap in funding .................................................... 22

A strong show amid varied challenges ........................................................ 25

There is a palpable sense of hope and confidence ....................................... 27

The one-man show ..................................................................................... 29

Will Modi trot or knot? ............................................................................... 32

Year 1: Still Waiting for Acche Din? ............................................................ 34

An education in acronyms .......................................................................... 36

Modi should learn from the Chinese their deliberate rejection of self-

promotion ..................................................................................................40

Regressive phase ........................................................................................ 44

A year of hope ............................................................................................ 47

Promises unmet ......................................................................................... 50

Pushing the envelope in foreign policy ........................................................ 53

Best poised to deliver results ...................................................................... 57

Editorial: That missing vigour ....................................................................60

Decisive but to what avail? .......................................................................... 61

Editorial: Not up to expectations... ............................................................. 65

Editorial: yet successful abroad ............................................................. 66

No acche din for higher education

ZOYA HASAN

Besides cuts in state funding which is a critical area of concern, the BJP-led governments overall approach to education is destructive of autonomy, creativity and diversity.

Not a single Indian institution of higher learning figures in the

list of top 200 universities prepared by The Times Higher

Education Supplement. These dismal rankings are quite often

taken as a measure of the crisis of higher education in India,

notwithstanding the obvious limitations of the ranking exercise.

But all is not well with Indian universities.

So far, the Narendra Modi government has done very little to address the crisis in higher

education. The government started on a controversial note. Prime Minister Modis

selection to head the Ministry of Human Resources and Development (HRD) raised

questions about the importance of education under this dispensation as it showed scant

regard for education in spite of the fact that the Sangh Parivar takes education very

seriously.

Lower budgetary allocation

The governments first Budget has not delivered achhe din for higher education in the

country. The Union Budget for 2015-16 has reduced funds for higher education to the

tune of Rs.3,900 crore in its revised budget estimates for the financial year 2014-15. The

government has revised the figure to Rs.13,000 crore, as against Rs.16,900 crore for the

plan allocation. The overall education budget of the Modi government is down from

Rs.82,771 crore to Rs.69,074 crore. The government has also revised allocation for the

Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) which is a Centrally Sponsored Scheme

(CSS), launched in 2013 that aims at providing strategic funding to eligible state higher

educational institutions to Rs.397 crore as against Rs.2,200 crore in the original

Budget.

Despite the trend of passing on the responsibility of education to the private sector, there

is a strong case to expand state funding of education. The role of publicly funded

education in the democratisation of access to higher education in India is indisputable.

Treating the higher education system as a public good, the Indian state has been

successful in providing access to institutions of higher learning to many groups which

were hitherto not able to access it. This is only possible if there is adequate state funding

and public regulation for the entire system of education from school to university. Far

from expanding publicly funded universities with an increase in budgetary allocation of

education, state funding is being steadily withdrawn from education in general and

higher education in particular so that private capital, both Indian and foreign, can be

encouraged. The privatisation of higher education is now an irreversible trend in India,

where a majority of the institutions have been established by the private sector. In the

midst of this trend, it is the arts and humanities that are being pushed aside.

Move towards centralisation

Besides cuts in state funding which is a critical area of concern, the Bharatiya Janata

Party (BJP)-led governments overall approach to education is destructive of autonomy,

creativity and diversity. The manner in which the state is intervening in higher education

is causing concern among both teachers and students. There are alarming proposals to

change the very nature of higher education. The most disturbing is the proposal to revive

the Central Universities Act of 2009 which will require the Central universities to follow a

common admission procedure and common syllabus. Even though the United

Progressive Alliance (UPA) regime and the current National Democratic Alliance (NDA)

government have been remarkably similar in their desire to introduce changes in the

higher education system, most of the UPAs major proposals got drowned in the

Parliament logjam which continued till the last session of the 15th Lok Sabha. Also, there

was some debate and opposition within the UPA government which could be another

reason why the government couldnt implement its agenda. This government is pursuing

the reform agenda much more aggressively leaving little scope for dissent and

disagreement.

The Central University (CU) Act seeks to replace the existing Central universities with

one single Act which would require all universities to follow a common admission and

common syllabus along with transferable faculty. Indias higher education system,

serving a large and heterogeneous population, should ideally support a diverse and

decentralised system. However, the CU Act will do the opposite; it aims at centralisation

and homogenisation, ignoring the specificities and uniqueness of each university. Each

Universitys Act has a specific context and mandate, and each has developed its own

pattern of knowledge production and reproduction. For example, the Delhi University Act

(1922) was in response to the need to provide for the educational needs of an emerging

India and incorporates a wide college network. The founding ideas of the Jawaharlal

Nehru University, on the other hand are quite different from other institutions. The

impulse for the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Act (1966) was to institutionalise the

values and vision of national integration, scientific temper, and humanism. These Acts

have shaped their curriculum, academic ethos, teaching and research. Nullifying these

Acts would be a blow against diversity and pluralism as well as to minimum autonomy

without which a university cannot function and flourish. It will narrow the space for

innovation and create a teaching culture where creativity and critical thinking will be

curbed.

No academic logic

The Ministry of HRDs idea of reform is an egregious attempt to standardise higher

education and research by introducing a common framework for Central universities

based on the myth that uniformity will equalise quality and skills across universities. It is

not at all clear that uniformity will help in upgrading new universities or the State

universities, which is the ostensible aim of this exercise.

Some of the good universities such as JNU or the Ambedkar University, Delhi, are

successful precisely because they value heterogeneity and variation so that creativity and

innovation can thrive. Many Central universities reflect Indias extraordinary diversity in

their faculty composition and student body, and, above all, they offer very different

syllabi and courses which has helped in their academic growth. The CU Act advocates

transfer of faculty between universities. Nowhere in the world are transfers between

institutions practised. There is no academic logic here. Besides, transfers increase the

possibility of vindictiveness as it can be used as a punitive measure to silence dissent and

independent voices.

It is evident that the government is eager to control and direct universities both at the

Central and State level. For this the HRD Minister is pushing the idea of a Choice-Based

Credit System (CBCS), first mooted by her predecessor, Murli Manohar Joshi, during the

term of NDA-I, which would have a serious impact on the countrys education system.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has formulated the new proposals for a CBCS,

a common entrance test and a central ranking system ignoring the assurances given by

the government and the UGC that it would hold wide consultations with all stakeholders

before undertaking any subsequent educational reforms. A common syllabus is neither

desirable nor feasible as this will diminish creativity and lower standards in order to

conform to common standards. We need a university system that encourages diversity

and decentralisation, not one that centralises authority or enforces lifeless uniformity.

Even as the government has set the ball rolling for unveiling a new national education

policy, there is no public debate or consultation at the behest of the Ministry. Major

changes are being initiated and pushed without actually consulting the professionals

involved even though there is growing unease and opposition within Central universities

to the new education policy and the manner in which the exercise is being done. So far,

the MHRDs consultations have been limited to posting information and asking people to

post comments and filling out a mygov.in survey on higher education on the Ministrys

website. The public was given a period of one month for responding to the major

reforms. Would any half-serious attempt at reform of the education system treat such

momentous changes in this manner?

The right-wing agenda

The common syllabi system has to be seen in the context of attempts to saffronise the

education sector, particularly at a time when the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is

spearheading the agenda of the present government. Even though the right-wing

intelligentsia has failed to provide a credible account of Indias past and present, the

Sangh Parivar is nevertheless busy reorganising educational syllabi to reflect a view of

history and society gleaned from mythology and religious texts, in effect giving an open

licence to fantasise history. Within weeks of forming the government, the RSS held a

meeting with the HRD Minister where it pushed for introduction of moral education,

correcting distorted history being taught in educational institutions and giving proper

representation to forgotten idols of the country from the pre- and post-Independence era.

RSS ideologue, Dinanath Batra, unambiguously stated this: Political change has taken

place, now there should be total revamp of education. Activists of Batras Shiksha Bachao

Andolan are reportedly firming up recommendations for a revamp of education; they

believe the formal education system needs some key changes: a greater emphasis on

Indian knowledge traditions and a blending of the material and the spiritual in the

curriculum.

Leaders of the BJP are on record announcing their intention to change the textbooks and

syllabus. The larger Sangh agenda includes substantive changes both in the content of

education and appointments in prestigious institutions. Their aim is to influence their

working to reflect the Sanghs agenda by making key appointments of persons belonging

to the RSS and affiliate bodies in various institutions like the Indian Council of Historical

Research (ICHR), the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), the Nehru

Memorial Museum & Library (NMML), the Indian Institutes of Technology, the Central

universities, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and

the State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT), etc, who will loyally

execute such changes. Many of them will exercise influence on public policy, and will do

so not due to their scholarship, but due to their proximity to the RSS.

(Zoya Hasan, formerly Professor, Jawaharlal Nehru University, is ICSSR National

Fellow, Council for Social Development, New Delhi.)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 20, 2015

Modi and his Chakravyuh

PETER RONALD DESOUZA

The Chakravyuh in the Mahabharata was a seven-ringed, impenetrable battle formation. In his first year, the Prime Minister has successfully broken through two circles. But there are five more to go.

Abhimanyu was in Shubhadras womb when he heard Lord

Krishna reveal the secret of how to enter the Chakravyuha.

But he did not learn how to exit it, and that is the reason why

he was finally killed in fierce battle in the heart of the enemys

army. Not so Gandhiji, who triumphed over the Chakravyuh

effortlessly. Not only was he able to enter and exit it with

ease, he did so at a time and place of his choosing, dissolving

it with ahimsa and creating independent India.

Jawaharlal Nehru largely designed the Chakravyuh of the modern Indian state. Even

though not as easily as Gandhiji, he did succeed in entering and exiting it democratic

and secular India was the consequence. Indira Gandhi got trapped in the Chakravyuh.

Like Abhimanyu, she got to the sixth circle, but was felled by the Emergency and,

becoming increasingly authoritarian and paranoid, found the circles closing around her

and she succumbed to the arrows from enemies both imagined and real.

We could continue preparing a report card for all the Prime Ministers and their

Chakravyuhas but the coming anniversary of Modis first year in office is an opportunity

to speculate on his chances of successfully negotiating the Chakravyuha of government.

Abhimanyu heard Krishna saying that the trick was to attack and destroy the soldiers to

the left and to the right, so that irrespective of which way the circle turned, one would be

able to enter it. The Prime Minister has attacked the politics on the Left but is not quite

decisive in his support for the economic policies of the Right. While the Left is rebelling

against his social and cultural policies, the Right is beginning to grumble that nothing has

changed on the economic front. 'Nothing is changed on the ground said Mr. Deepak

Parekh.

In the Mahabharata, the Chakravyuh was a seven-spiralled, impenetrable battle

formation. Let us see what the seven circles of Indian polity are.

The seven circles

At the outermost seventh circle is foreign policy. This is the countrys interface with the

world the neighbourhood, the region, and the global political and economic order.

Here, Mr. Modi has been the most effective, gaining the attention of different

international power groups and having them compete for Indias friendship. From getting

the UN to declare International Yoga Day on June 21 to having the US President as Chief

Guest for Republic Day to establishing a BRICS development bank to land swaps with

Bangladesh, Modi has passed the first circle by neutralising the Left and ignoring the

Right. There is a distinct Nehruvian touch to his foreign policy.

The second circle too Mr. Modi has been able to penetrate. This is building a political

coalition for governance. By winning elections with a single party majority and ending the

era of compromise and coalition politics and then winning several State elections, Mr.

Modi has inaugurated a new phase of decisive national politics. Some political resistance

remains, from within his party and without, but these wont stop him from going through

this circle.

His penchant of concentrating power in the PMO when collegial governance is required

may present difficulties during the return journey, since the feedback mechanism of

politics that is required to manage such a diverse polity will be considerably enfeebled,

but there is little doubt that Mr. Modi has built a political coalition to give domestic

politics a decisive turn. At this point of time he is limited only by his will and his

imagination.

Mr. Modi has now reached the third circle the instruments of governance. Here, the

struggle has just begun. There are some good policies, such as the Pradhan Mantri Jan

Dhan Yojana (bank accounts), the Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana (life

insurance), the Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (accident insurance), and the Atal

Pension Yojana (pension for the unorganised sector), but these have to be seen in tandem

with plans to reverse the social impact assessment and consent clause of the Land

Acquisition Bill, the hasty environmental clearances, and the near-zero interaction with

the media in India. Thus, some very good initiatives that are people friendly, with some

questionable decisions that are people hostile. It is unclear whether his moves to defeat

the warriors on the Left will be as successful as in earlier circles. Equally, the warriors on

the Right are voting with their feet. Corporate India is beginning to speak about a

directionless economic policy steeped in hyperbole. Mr. Modis magic is losing its sheen.

It is at the fourth circle the respect for democratic and parliamentary institutions

that Modis achievements begin to look thin. Ordinances are frequently resorted to. In his

fortnightly letter to Chief Ministers, Nehru wrote on 16 August 1948, Nevertheless,

(ordinances are) a dangerous path to tread and governments get used to very special

measures which they cannot do without later. For us, with our past record in regard to

civil liberty, this is a particularly distasteful course.

The ordinance has become Mr. Modis instrument of choice not just in the very visible

land acquisition issue but also with respect to his desire to give a government job to just

one superannuated officer. This emasculation of institutions can be seen in his returning

the Supreme Court collegiums recommendations for elevation to the Bench of an

eminent senior advocate; in the governments defence of Clause 66A of the IT Act, which

was mercifully struck down by the courts; or in keeping important offices such as that of

the Chief Information Commissioner vacant.

In the fourth circle, Mr. Modi is making little headway. It is too early to determine

whether he has the capability to strengthen institutions or undermine them with early

evidence pointing to the latter tendency but we need another year to find out.

The real test

It is in the fifth circle that Mr. Modi begins to lose his capability to determine outcomes.

This is the circle that concerns the public discourse of a plural society; the discourse

required to build a modern democratic state. Entering it requires informed intervention,

speech and actions that support and consolidate the critical temper required by the

humanist aspirations of a modern India.

By his silence, Mr. Modi has allowed the regressive elements among his supporters to

determine the terms of public discourse. When the Chairman of the Indian Council of

Historical Research says that What we teach today in schools and colleges lacks both

moral and material content, which could mould character and conduct... Our history is

deprived of Bharateeyata (Indianness); or when the RSS chief says that Mother Teresas

services were governed by conversion motives, Mr. Modi has remained silent, allowing

public discourse to be dictated by a rabble-rousing minority.

If Mr. Modi gets through the five circles described above, the real test will begin in the

sixth (political philosophy) and seventh (personal ethics) circles. One cannot govern a

pluralist country like India with a philosophy crafted in a shakha. At its core must be a

commitment to secularism and social justice. Perhaps a different secularism than the

partisan one practised by the Congress, but secularism nonetheless.

A majoritarian mindset, which Mr. Modi seems comfortable with, is unfair to both the

majority and the minority in the population. What are Mr. Modis core beliefs? What is

his understanding of the relationship between communities? What steps does he plan for

the empowerment of women? And Adivasis? How does he see dignity achieved in a

society fissured by caste? What is his view on the rule of law even if it penalises his closest

advisors?

These are not idle questions. They constitute the sixth circle where Indira Gandhi fell.

Then, Mr. Modi will still have to face the seventh circle of personal ethics before finally

emerging triumphant.

(Peter Ronald deSouza is Professor, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. The

views are personal.)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 20, 2015

The republic without a language

NISSIM MANNATHUKKAREN

The more we use words like saviour or super hero, the more we lose the language of democracy and dumb down the political discourse.

To politicise the masses is not and cannot be to make a political speech. It means driving

home to the masses that everything depends on them, that if we stagnate the fault is

theirs, and that if we progress, they too are responsible Frantz Fanon

The extraordinary thing about the Brazilian football legend

Scrates was his realisation that football was not the raison

d'tre in a world defined by injustice and oppression. A

qualified doctor, he showed unprecedented courage in

challenging his own nations military government, even while

he captained its mercurial football team. For Scrates,

democracy and justice were primary; everything else,

secondary.

Narendra Modi came to power on May 26, 2014. Since then, these questions have been

asked incessantly: can Mr. Modi change India? Can he do what Manmohan Singh could

not? Can Mr. Modi take India to superpower status? But the critical point is this: these

questions are completely contradictory to the ethos of a democracy. It is the inability to

rise above them that is the greatest crisis in Indian politics: the lag between the formal

shell of democracy and its practice, the republic and its language.

That is why we already see ennui setting in about the Modi regime things being the

same, and fading hopes of a new India. But how can a nation of Indias size transform

itself when people are completely divorced from the transformation?

Peoples power is being systematically decimated and ceded to political rulers.

Increasingly, individual leaders are seen as agents of change a renowned scholar saw

Mr. Modi as a potential Abraham Lincoln and a popular columnist sees him bringing

development to India if not thwarted by Hindu fanatical organisations. Here, Mr. Modi

the individual exists in a bubble separated from the social forces that brought him to

power.

The wrong questions

The more we pose questions from this framework of the leader as the saviour, the more

we get tendencies like the complete negation of the parliamentary system and the role of

the prime minister as simply primus inter pares or first among equals. Do we have

another example of a Cabinet made so redundant by the omniscient power of the Prime

Minister? If the early photo of Ministers standing like schoolchildren in front of the

Prime Minister was ominous, the brutal clipping of the wings of the foreign minister, in a

regime so focussed on making India a global power, is degrading.

If Dr. Singhs office was rendered weak being subject to extra-constitutional authority,

Mr. Modis has concentrated power in itself. Ironically, the weakest and the strongest

Prime Minister have both struck at the edifice of democracy and produced a policy

paralysis. The strengthening of the executive wing of the state is not the only problem;

unprecedented attacks are being launched on the judiciary, too.

Despite these top-down moves, what is dangerous to the language of democracy is the

servility of the people themselves. The governments confrontational attitude towards

civil society has not been resisted enough by the citizenry. A pliant media refuses to

question the government. If before only Dr. Singh was silent, today the whole government

is silent. It arrogantly believes that a republic can be built by the monologue of Mann Ki

Baat.

The lack of resistance is pushing democracy as monologue. The fawning NRI audiences of

Mr. Modi reinforce this, and reduce politics to superficialities. Of course, all mass and

popular politics is superficial to an extent, especially in a media-saturated culture, but

superficialities cannot devour all substance.

Witness the speech by Mr. Modi in Toronto, which was, like his other speeches abroad,

ridden with theatrical hyperbole. Complex problems like Indias waste, which have

dimensions of caste, class, technology, etc., were reduced to caricature. Unsurprisingly,

the examples he gives to show a tectonic shift in cleanliness is Sachin Tendulkar cleaning

up a street in Mumbai or two young women cleaning the ghats of Varanasi. That the

Prime Minister can pitch his speeches at this level seemingly addressing children is

incredulous in the Information Age. But they are met with rapturous ovation. The

problem is not created by an individual politician like Mr. Modi; it is a reflection of the

consistent infantilisation of citizens in these democracies, which have eviscerated their

power. What is more concerning than the dumbing down of political discourse is the

publics response.

The fundamental problem is the lack of a critical mass of peoples organisations

challenging the status quo and deepening the language of democracy around substantial

issues of food, education, health and ecology. Indias great agrarian devastation is more

than two decades old but, astonishingly, the 60 per cent of the population engaged in

agriculture has not been able to generate an independent democratic movement that

could bring the nation to a standstill.

The degeneration of political parties has led to the language of superhero as saviour. The

Congress, with its nonexistent inner party democracy, is not the one that can deepen

democracy. The Bharatiya Janata Party and the Sangh Parivar, built on a regressive

majoritarianism and now captured by a supremo culture, have always been

fundamentally against democracy.

The mainstream Left parties, which had once built deep democratic roots and

momentous peoples struggles, are now mostly a mirror image of the bourgeois parties.

If the phenomenal victory of the AAP showed how even a minor tinkering of the language

of democracy can enthuse the masses, its later travails show that even that can lead to

resistance and implosion from within.

Decentralising power

As writer and revolutionary Frantz Fanon recognised, empowering the masses means

decentralising power: The flow of ideas from the upper echelons to the rank and file and

vice versa must be an unwavering principle.

When Scrates began to campaign for democracy against the military regime in Brazil, he

started with building democracy in the lowest unit: his football club. Unless there are

democratic organisations representing every walk of life, the language of democracy

cannot be constructed.

If dynasties control parties, it is because the language of feudalism, of hierarchy and

deference, pervades all other aspects of society. The attitude of the citizens in a

democracy to their rulers should be that of Diogenes, the Greek philosopher, to Alexander

the Great. When Alexander went to meet the famous philosopher, who chose to live on

the streets in penury, he was basking in the morning sun. Alexander asked him if he could

do anything for him. Diogenes replied: Yes. Stand out of my sunlight!

Leaders, however illustrious, do not build democracies; people do. As Fanon put it, the

magic lies in their hands and their hands alone.

The destiny of 1.3 billion people cannot be left to a single individual. Vibrant peoples

struggles for democracy do exist, but are fragmented, and on the margins. They have to

coalesce into new and robust social and political formations that are interested in

building democratic language and institutions. Only then can we stop asking if the prime

minister will change the nations future.

(Nissim Mannathukkaren is with Dalhousie University, Canada. E-

mail: nmannathukkaren@dal.ca)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 20, 2015

When the traveller returns

SANJAYA BARU

If Year One was about diplomacy, Year Two has to be about the economy. The world is waiting to see what India has to offer in real terms.

At the end of a year of hectic diplomacy, Prime Minister

Narendra Modi may well have come to the same conclusion that

his predecessor Manmohan Singh did when he told the India

Today Conclave in February 2005, The world wants India to do

well our real challenges are at home.

It is by ensuring that the Indian economy kept in step with an

annual rate of economic growth of over 8.0 per cent in 2003-10, creating expectations of

an India on the rise, that the government of the day was able to undertake important

diplomatic initiatives. The economic slide after 2011, and the crisis of domestic

governance that followed, brought the India Story to a grinding halt by 2012-13. A year

ago, the political consequences of that misgovernance followed. A new leader took charge.

Most comments this past week on the Modi government completing one year have made

the point that while the Prime Minister shines on foreign policy, his record at home on

political and economic management has been below par. While Mr. Modis foreign forays

have been impressive, both in style and substance, how the world will come to view India

in the years ahead will depend on how the Indian economy performs and the polity

managed. That Mr. Modi understands where the real challenges lie is demonstrated by

the fact that he has made national economic development the focus of his international

diplomacy.

Bilateral tripod

Nobel Prize economist Thomas C. Schelling famously observed, in a testimonial to a

United States Congressional Committee on U.S. foreign policy, way back in 1993, that

international relations is all about three things: war and the avoidance of conflict;

migration and the management of the movement of people; and trade, in its many

dimensions.

This way of viewing international relations and foreign policy enables one to quantify the

importance of bilateral relations. If the three dimensions to foreign policy are

government-to-government (G2G), people-to-people (P2P) and business-to-business

(B2B) relations, then it is possible to track relations between nations based on an analysis

of how they fare along these three tracks.

For example, Indias bilateral relationship with the U.S. would score high on all three

G2G, P2P and B2B. The Soviet Union also used to score high on all three during the 1970s

when India had close G2G relations, the Soviet Union was an important trade partner,

and students of my generation were as willing to study in Moscow as in any other

Western capital. Russia slipped down the B2B and P2P rankings even as it has

maintained high scores on the G2G dimension.

China, after 1962, scored low on all three counts. Over the last two decades there has been

a gradual improvement of G2G relations, but it is the sharp rise in B2B interactions over

the past decade that has contributed to increased G2G and P2P relations. Given that the

India-China G2G relationship can only improve when India feels more comfortable with

Chinas geopolitical stance in Asia and the resolution of the border question, Mr. Modi

seems to have decided that the border issue can wait till the B2B and P2P aspects of

India-China relations improve further and inject greater trust into the bilateral

relationship.

Since the focus of foreign policy is on a widening of the space for Indias economic

development and creating a stable regional environment to facilitate this, Mr. Modi has

extended the policy of non-reciprocal unilateral liberalisation, pursued in the past with

less developed economies in Asia and Africa, to China, offering e-visas to Chinese

tourists. Such a policy is aimed at creating mutually beneficial inter-dependencies and

constituencies for better relations.

Its still the economy

Having surprised the world and citizens at home with his energetic and flamboyant

diplomacy, Mr. Modi would do well to turn his attention to an improved management of

the economy and domestic affairs in the months ahead. After all, the question can be

asked, why does the world want India to do well? In large part because the economic

betterment of over a billion people, as in China, presents opportunities for the rest of the

world. Which is why the proper management of the economy is the key that will open new

doors for Indian foreign policy.

Views about Mr. Modis management of the polity and economic policy tend to gravitate

to two extremes. His critics focus on communal polarisation, agrarian distress, tax

terrorism and the persistent unease of doing business in India. His admirers view all such

criticism as sour grapes and the frustrated rage of the marginalised elite.

The truth is that Mr. Modis record at home has been mixed. The economy is certainly

doing better, but things could have been even better. For reasons so far not explained, the

government wasted its first six months in office as far as economic policy and governance

reform were concerned. It paid a political price when it lost the local elections in Delhi

and a handful of by-elections elsewhere.

For all his political brilliance, Mr. Modi initially allowed himself to be portrayed as a

friend of business oligarchs, thereby curtailing his political space for policy action on the

economic front, and has subsequently tried to distance himself from this image by not

paying enough attention to improving the ease of doing business. If the Make in India

campaign had been launched instead as a nation-building effort, like the Swachch

Bharat campaign Bharat Mein Banao, Bharat Ko Banao (Make India by Making in

India) the Prime Minister and all his economic ministers would have had wider

political space to act.

The economy needs to move back to higher rates of investment and savings and higher

levels of spending at home. This means expectations must turn decisively positive and

remain so. The opportunity to alter expectations for the better immediately after coming

to power last May was wasted. And only in 2015 has the government focussed on

governance.

Birthdays are always occasions for resolutions and renewals. If the government decides

that the coming year will be about better and inclusive governance, and about increasing

investment and business opportunities to create new jobs and better infrastructure, then

expectations can still be turned around. This also requires careful management of social

and political tensions at home. The quality of both the political and the administrative

leadership dealing with these challenges has declined. Thus, more effort is required to

translate the slogan minimum government, maximum governance into meaningful

improvement in the quality of administration.

What the world wants

Man does not live by bread alone, nor do nations. So, it is not just the performance of the

economy that matters for Indias relations with the world, but also what India brings to

the global plate, so to speak. The international community does, by and large, celebrate

the idea of India. Successive prime ministers have used the metaphor of Vasudhaiva

Kutumbakam (The world as one family) to define Indias own identity, as a nation, and

its approach to the international community. Mr. Modi, too, has adopted this idea.

Apart from Indias economic rise, the success of its secular, liberal and plural democracy

is also desperately sought by a world divided along sectarian, ethnic, racial and religious

lines. Indias rise as a democracy, and on the basis of the inclusive concept of Vasudhaiva

Kutumbakam, has an appeal as important as the market for goods and talent that India

represents.

These impulses ought to define the agenda for the governments second year in office.

The ruling coalition still has the advantage of numbers. The principal opposition party

remains hobbled and unable to regain momentum. The government can have no excuses,

other than its own inertia or lack of imagination, for not moving forward faster, and in a

more inclusive way.

(Sanjaya Baru is Director for Geo-Economics and Strategy, International Institute for

Strategic Studies, and Honorary Senior Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 22, 2015

The strategy behind the inaction

DHIRAJ NAYYAR

Big bang economic reform is politically risky for the BJP, whose first priority is to replace the Congress as Indias default party.

In India, it is often argued that good economics is bad politics

and bad economics is good politics. There is a perception that

free-market reform rarely wins elections. Indias favourite

reformers Narasimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and

Chandrababu Naidu all bit the dust at the hustings. Equally,

there is a perception that populism wins; Sonia Gandhi in

2009, Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy in 2004, the Dravidian parties

in Tamil Nadu. Narendra Modis historic 2014 win against

the populist United Progressive Alliance might have buried that ghost. But it likely hasnt.

The reality is that the relationship between economic reform and political success is more

complex than simple clichs. The fact is that while on balance a greater number of people

will gain from economic reform, some will lose. And in democracies, the losers can often

command the louder voice, with some help from opportunist political parties.

An astute politician like Mr. Modi knows that. He also knows that while in Gujarat

economic reform may have translated into good politics (as seen in the repeated elections

wins), the same equation may not add up elsewhere in India. Any assessment of Mr.

Modis record in office must recognise this tension (often perceived and sometimes real)

between economics and politics and the fact that for Mr. Modi and the Bharatiya Janata

Party, his unique mandate isnt just about an economic project to transform India. It is

also about a political project to grow the BJP as a political party, to install Chief Ministers

in States it has never held power in before, and to eventually replace Congress as the

default party of governance in India.

If you ask a BJP member what the high point of Mr. Modis first year in office was, many

would probably say the partys twin victories in Maharashtra and Haryana in October

2014, when Devendra Fadnavis and Manohar Lal Khattar became the first-ever BJP

leaders to rule those States. The BJP (or should we say Mr.Modi and Amit Shah) had

succeeded in storming two new bastions within six months of the general election.

Reforms come second

Those expecting Mr. Modi to push ahead with radical economic reform in his first six

months (the honeymoon period) whether on labour laws, land acquisition or even FDI

were always going to be disappointed. Put simply, those reforms, whether necessary or

not, would have given a stick that the Opposition could wield at Mr. Modi and the BJP.

The political project demanded clear priority. The Modi wave could not be disturbed by

the logic of economic reform. Imagine the political controversy that the amendments to

the land bill would have caused in Maharashtra and Haryana, two States where a lot of

land acquisition by industry actually happens. Unsurprisingly, elements of the reform

process on land, labour and FDI picked up after those two elections and have, at the

least, created some political storm.

How does the defeat in Delhi in February 2015 fit into this narrative? Was that a vote

against the lack of reform and the growing disillusionment with Mr. Modi? Was it a

setback to the political project? The answer to the second question is no, because while

the defeat in Delhi was a blow to the BJP, the party retains a strong presence (it is the

second biggest party and ahead of the Congress by miles) and is well placed to capitalise

on AAPs non-performance. The answer to the first question isnt so obvious. It probably

was a vote that signalled impatience with a lack of outcomes, rather than a vote for or

against a particular set of policies.

More elections up ahead

Going forward, the BJP has a crucial political project coming up in Mr. Modis second

year in office the Assembly election in Bihar in September-October 2015. That is

another State where the BJP hasnt had a Chief Minister and has been in government

previously only as a junior partner in a coalition. The Modi-Shah duo will want to change

that. Now, Bihars electorate is probably not so bothered about FDI, land or labour

reforms because the State has very little investment and industry in any case. But Bihars

electorate would be greatly concerned about subsidies (particularly food and fertiliser)

and government welfare programmes, including the Congress-founded MNREGA.

The logic of economic reform requires that Modis government take firm steps to

rationalise subsidies (many of which are lost in corruption) and cut down unproductive

government spending on populist schemes to divert it to productive investment in

infrastructure. Again, there has been disappointment among supporters of reform on the

lack of concrete action on this front. If anything, Messrs. Mr. Modi and Mr. Jaitley have

committed more money to MNREGA than the Congress did. But repealing any major

subsidy or abolishing a populist government programme would give the Opposition in

Bihar something to beat the BJP with. Such radical reform, while good in the long term,

entails a political risk in the short run. The Opposition would go on overdrive arguing

that Mr. Modi has cut spending on the poor and that his policies are pro-rich. The BJP

government next faces an election in 2019, but the party has to battle in different States

every year. The smaller political projects must also be kept in mind.

It is perhaps peculiar to India that the country is in a continuous election cycle. After

Bihar, it will be West Bengals turn in 2016 another State where the BJP wants to make

inroads. In 2017, it will be Uttar Pradesh where the BJP will want to reclaim power after

more than a decade. In 2018, its core States of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and

Rajasthan will go to the polls. When the larger political project isnt simply to win re-

election in 2019, but also to extend the partys reach in other States, Mr. Modi has no

honeymoon period to take what might be difficult economic decisions.

That is probably the best explanation for the chosen path of creative incrementalism on

economic policy rather than big bang reform. In Mr. Modis view, that may be the only

way to balance the logic of winning elections with the need to power growth. That is why,

in the BJPs view, the first year of Mr. Modis government has been quite a success.

This article was published in The Hindu on May 21, 2015

Ghar ghar Modi, Bharat bhar Modi

V. N. DHOOT

Modi succeeds in building the foundation of a resurgent India, says V.N. Dhoot.

Within just 12 months of taking charge,

the Prime Minister Narendra Modi has succeeded in building

the foundation of a stronger and resurgent India. From a

mood of despair a year ago, almost every CEO is now turned

into an optimist and is busy making plans to invest more

especially in the infrastructure and nation building sectors

such as roads, ports, defence and manufacturing.

This change in mood came mainly due to the decisive leadership of Modi and his team A.

The economy is on the right track. Some of the initiatives taken by the government such

as successful auction of coal and spectrum, a clear GST (goods and service tax) roll out

time frame, higher FDI (foreign direct investment) in Defence and stronger relationships

with global powers such as China, the U.S. and Russia will take India to new heights. The

control of inflation has come as a big relief for the man on the street.

I travelled with Mr. Modi to attend the Hannover fair in Germany and the response of

global investors towards India was extremely positive. Most of the foreign investors were

once again eager to invest in India. I witnessed a similar positive atmosphere when the

PM visited the U.S. and the mood among NRIs was electrifying. Many of the Indians

settled abroad took a holiday just to attend the PMs meeting at Madison Square. The PM

succeeded in giving hopes not only to Indians but to millions of Indians living abroad.

The successful evacuation of thousands of NRIs from Yemen has increased the respect of

the common men in Modi government. Yoga is the new Mantra in the U.S., where many

Universities want to teach Yoga to their students.

India is a very complex country with over 1.2 billion of population. It is not possible to see

the changes within a year. But the PM is moving in the right direction by reducing red

tape, taking a firm stand against corruption, bringing in legislation to curb black money

and making the bureaucracy more accountable. I am sure we would see the positive

changes in the fortunes of India within the next few years. With all the initiatives taken by

the government, we can expect corporate earnings and the economy to turn around by

the second-half of the current fiscal as consumer spending will increase during the

festival time.

For the next few years, the Indian government should make it easier to do business in

India. Currently, we are at the bottom of the list of ease of doing business. When

compared to the neighbouring countries, Indias corporate tax rates are still high. The

road map to reduce corporate tax in the budget by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley this

February will go a long way in convincing investors to invest in India.

If India has to grow, we have to develop our industry. We have to export more and set up

manufacturing plants, which can take on competition from any other country across the

world. The youth and the poor in India finally see a hope in Mr. Modi.

Finally, there could be challenges like a deficient rainfall or unexpected global events (like

a crash in crude oil and commodity prices) which could send the world markets in

turmoil. But with a leader like Mr. Modi, I am sure India will overcome these challenges.

To sum up, I would say: Gujarat ke sant, tune kar diya kamaal.

(V. N. Dhoot is the Chairman of Videocon group)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 21, 2015

States unlikely to bridge gap in funding

VIDYA VENKAT

Greater share in taxes may not compensate for budget cuts in Central schemes.

As the National Democratic Alliance government completes a

year in office, an emerging area of concern has been the fallout

of cuts for centrally sponsored social welfare schemes in Budget

2015-16.

The Centre, which accepted the recommendations of the 14th

Finance Commission in February this year, has argued that the

increased share of tax revenue allocation for States as per its recommendations, will

compensate for the reduction in Central spending on social sector programmes. However,

experts from the field of economics, NGOs monitoring social welfare spending and select

think tanks have questioned this.

Steep fall

A preliminary analysis of budget allocations for food and nutrition programmes in 2015-

16 in two States Bihar and Himachal Pradesh conducted by the Forum for Learning

and Action with Innovation and Rigour (FLAIR), a Delhi-based NGO, has shown a steep

fall in allocations.

As a proportion of the total Union Budget, allocation for schemes contributing to Food

and Nutrition Security is only 10.9 per cent in 2015-16, much lower than last years share

of 12.5 per cent, Ajay Sinha, Executive Director, FLAIR and lead author of the report,

told The Hindu. Our study of budgets in Bihar and Himachal Pradesh shows no

corresponding increase in allocations at the State level, he said.

In Bihar, the report shows that allocations for the schemes contributing to food and

nutrition security came down from Rs. 8985.91 crore in 2014-15 RE (Revised Estimate) to

Rs. 6054.447 crore in 2015-16 BE (Budget Estimate), a drop of 32.6 per cent. In

Himachal Pradesh, there was an increase of 8.76 per cent in the allocations for schemes

contributing to food and nutrition security from Rs. 2326.19 crore in 2014-15 RE to

Rs.2425.69 crore in 2015-16. However, this does not adequately compensate for the

decrease in allocation at the Union level, the report shows. The researchers for the Report

compared previous years RE with this years BE as RE for this year is not available as yet.

Misleading explanation

Speaking at an event organised in the capital on Wednesday to review the performance of

one year of Modi government, eminent economist Prabhat Patnaik said, The substantial

reduction in social sector spending by the NDA government over the past year made it

clear that all the explanations about the increase in state share of taxation from 32 per

cent to 42 per cent is misleading as the total transfer of Central budget to States had

reduced from 6.1 per cent to 5.8 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product.

He said this reduction was ruinous especially for poorer States like Uttarakhand, Bihar

and Odisha. With the introduction of the Goods and Services Tax, the autonomy of the

States to raise their own resources and levy taxes would be further curtailed, thus

preventing States from being able to compensate the lack of budgetary support.

Schemes of no use

Social activist Aruna Roy, who was speaking on behalf of the civil society group Jan

Awaaz said the poor and the marginalised will not benefit from any of the contributory

insurance and pension schemes launched by the NDA government as the social sector

spending cuts had hurt their ability to earn. If there are no jobs under MNREGA due to

budget cuts, how will the poor contribute money to avail of insurance schemes of the

government? she asked.

She further said the NDA governments emphasis on a paperless office was a move

towards an unaccountable system, making it difficult to track decisions taken within

closed doors .

Sona Mitra, Research Coordinator at the Centre for Budget and Governance

Accountability has recently authored a paper The Myth of Increased Resources for States

published in Macroscan in which she has argued that though net spending abilities for

States has increased under the 14th Finance Commission, in real terms that increase is

not reflected in financing expenditures for the social sector.

She told The Hindu: States have to increase their budgets for schemes such as ICDS by

50 per cent to cover for Central cuts, over and above other expenditures they incur. We

spoke to the health department in Maharashtra who told us that they were waiting for the

government to issue directives on spending. However, the NITI Aayogs proposed white

paper on this would not be ready until the end of June.

As a result of this, States are now exploring the idea of a supplementary budget, in order

to compensate for the lack of resources, but this process will not be over until August.

Meanwhile, the uncertainties faced by State departments over funding have stalled social

welfare projects, she said.

This article was published in The Hindu on May 21, 2015

A strong show amid varied challenges

CHANDRAJIT BANERJEE

The Union government's policies have shown results with investments picking up and the economy showing definite signs of a recovery. Industrial growth has turned around, and the stage is set for a spurt in industrialisation.

Coming to power in May 2014, the two most significant

challenges faced by the Modi Government were a sharp

slowdown in the investment cycle and a loss of faith in

government institutions. In the face of such difficult

circumstances, it has shown single-minded focus on

development and growth, building its strategy around well-

designed campaigns such as Make-in-India and Swachh

Bharat. Its economic philosophy has been to make India a

stronger manufacturing base by easing business conditions within the country, and

encouraging foreign investment.

These policies have shown results with investments picking up and the economy showing

definite signs of a recovery. Industrial growth has turned around, and the stage is set for a

spurt in industrialisation as our competitiveness has improved. Take the case of the

power sector where the country has achieved significant capacity additions. Once

transmission and distribution constraints are taken care of, industry will be able to

reduce its excessive dependence on diesel generators. The entire process of e-auctioning

of coal blocks has provided much-needed transparency to the coal allocation process

while mining, in general, is expected to revive with competitive bidding being introduced

following the passage of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation)

(Amendment) Act.

Perhaps the governments biggest achievement on the economic front has been its ability

to tackle inflationary pressure. The sharp moderation in inflation should not be

attributed purely to the happenstance of falling oil prices but also to determined policy

action. These include using excess food stocks to cool down food prices and limiting the

profligate increase in minimum support prices. Sticking to the process of fiscal

consolidation has itself helped in curbing inflationary pressure. It is to be hoped that

further reduction in subsidies and a move towards direct benefits transfer will help keep a

lid on inflation, especially as oil prices have begun climbing up.

So far, the government has been somewhat fortunate in the external circumstances that

determine the economys short-term performance. Thus, the sharp fall in the price of oil

and other commodities has helped in moderating inflation and controlling the fiscal

deficit. However, adverse weather conditions at home have dealt a blow to the countrys

agricultural production and uncertainty about the coming monsoon continues to weigh

upon the performance of the agricultural sector. This underlines the importance of

investing in long-term assets so that dependence on rainfall is reduced, agricultural

productivity is enhanced and the agricultural supply-chain is developed.

A key piece in the domestic strategy has been greater empowerment of States. It is

increasingly apparent that key areas of reform ranging from labour to land and

infrastructure lie within the domain of the States. States are also responsible for

improving peoples access to critical social sectors including education and healthcare.

The government has, therefore, increased the percentage of tax revenue transferred to

States while doing away with their dependence on Plan-based fund transfers. This is a

major advance in fiscal federalism wherein states will become responsible for their own

development. At the same time, the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST)

will introduce a uniform tax system in the country. The challenge for the government in

the medium-term is to tackle the issue of creating livelihoods to fulfil the aspirations of

people. It is by now well appreciated that while the Indian economy did well after the

initial reforms in the 1990s opened it to greater competition, it has so far failed to

leverage its demographic strength. Employment has remained a concern, and many

young people remain locked into low productivity jobs. Enterprises in India remain small

with various disincentives to growth. These include the large number of clearances and

permits that are still required to start and operate a business as well as labour laws that

kick in once an establishment grows beyond a certain size. The lack of well-developed

infrastructure only adds to the constraints.

Policies are being drafted keeping in mind the need to remove such impediments to

growth. Measures have been taken to facilitate infrastructure building on a large scale

where the challenges are many. Significant new initiatives include work on high speed

trains and modernisation of railways stations, focus on urban infrastructure through the

smart cities programme and introduction of the hybrid annuity model for road building.

The bill on land acquisition is critical for implementation of large infrastructure projects,

as it aims to ease procedures in critical areas such as industrial corridors, PPP projects,

rural infrastructure, affordable housing and defence. Ultimately, the provision of better

infrastructure will be critical for the successful implementation of the Make-in-India

project.

What is heartening is that a clear direction has now been set for the growth and

development of the country. Industry has found new energy to participate in programmes

such as Smart Cities, Digital India and Sanitation of schools.

CII, for example, is working with its member companies to construct 10,000 toilets in

government schools by March 2016. Much progress has also been achieved in developing

a skill curriculum that is aligned to industrys needs. Greater prevalence and acceptance

of vocational education has made college students employable by industry.

With these developments, the partnership between government and industry has become

one of shared responsibility towards building the nation.

(The writer is Director General, CII)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 21, 2015

There is a palpable sense of hope and confidence KUMAR MANGALAM BIRLA

One year after it swept into power riding

on a historic mandate, the Government

led by Prime Minister Modi has restored

a faltering economy back on track. The wheels of Government

are moving. There is a palpable sense of hope and confidence,

and better days to come.

The uptick in the economy is perceptible. GDP growth in FY

2014-15 was 7.4 per cent. The Index of Industrial Production grew 2.8 per cent in the

April-February period of FY 2014-15, compared to a decline of 0.1 per cent in the

corresponding period last year. The current account deficit has been contained and

foreign exchange reserves stood at $341.6 billion at 2015 March-end, compared to $304.2

billion a year ago. The fiscal deficit target of 4.1 per cent of GDP has been achieved. The

Wholesale Price Index inflation for all commodities averaged 2 per cent in FY 2014-15,

against 6 per cent in FY 2013-14. During the year, the rupee has been one of the most

stable currencies against the U.S. dollar. The performance has prompted the rating

agencies to upgrade the outlook for India.

PM Modi has moved swiftly in key areas. A fair and transparent auction process was

speedily implemented to allocate coal mines, resulting in a surge of revenues to the

Centre and to States where the mines are located. In the same vein, the auction of

spectrum has set the stage for unleashing the telecom revolution. The decision to shift to

pooled pricing for natural gas will help to clear bottlenecks in the energy sector.

Concerted steps are being taken to restructure the non-performing assets of banks. The

Government has shifted to market-based pricing of petrol and diesel. The landmark

nationwide Goods and Services Tax regime is now much closer to taking off.

Changes are happening at the micro level too. For instance, the number of factory

inspections by different inspectors is sought to be drastically reduced. Moves are also

afoot to revamp the Factories Act, the Apprenticeship Act, the Industrial Disputes Act

and the Contract Labour Act. Once these changes are implemented, it will be easier to do

business in India.

Many of the initiatives bear a distinct stamp of innovativeness. Game changing reforms

such as the JAM trinity (Jan Dhan Yojana, Aadhaar identity, Mobile) for effective subsidy

delivery, crucial tax reforms, and huge tax devolution to the states augur well for the

nation. The Jan Dhan Yojana connects almost all households to bank accounts. Welfare

and subsidy schemes have been redesigned so that leakages are reduced and benefits flow

to those who need it the most. The Mudra bank will boost the funding available for small

and medium enterprises, who account for the much of the employment generation.

There are numerous missions that have been unveiled. These span a wide spectrum,

among them making India a manufacturing hub, making cities smart, improving the

levels of sanitation and cleanliness, pushing bottom of the pyramid insurance coverage,

developing highways, and capitalizing on Indias coastline and inland waterways.

One of the more notable and visible achievement of the government relates to Indias

global footprint. The Prime Ministers diplomatic push in the past year has extended

across a wide swathe of the world our South Asian neighbours, the U.S., China, Japan,

Australia, South Korea, France, Germany and Canada. Key breakthroughs have been

made in areas such as nuclear energy, defence, infrastructure and attracting foreign

direct investments. India has played a lead role in establishing a multilateral financial

institution that rivals the existing World Bank and IMF. The efforts to build bridges to the

Indian Diaspora are laudable. He has given a clear message that there is much more ease

of doing business now in India.

Indias successful rescue and evacuation efforts, in Yemen and Nepal, have raised its

diplomatic profile and standing immensely. The payoffs from these initiatives will surely

unfold in the coming years. There are areas that still need to be addressed, key among

them being legislation on land acquisition, revamping of labour laws, boosting growth

and exports, generating employment, and stepping up agriculture output and

productivity. The PM carries with him the burden of huge expectations. The initiatives

over the past year have sown the seeds of future growth. There is every reason to be

optimistic that the reforms bandwagon will keep rolling, steadily and surely.

(Mr. Kumar Mangalam Birla is the Chairman of the Aditya Birla Group)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 22, 2015

The one-man show

ANITA JOSHUA

The Prime Minister is mostly absent in Parliament. When present, he is scornful of the system.

On his first day, first show at Parliament House on May 20, 2014,

Prime Minister-in-waiting Narendra Modi was a picture of

humility. He was seemingly overwhelmed by the moment and by

the enormity of it all, even choking on his words, standing in the

imposing 87-year-old structure awaiting the formal coronation

by his party.

He knelt on the stairs of Parliament House to touch his forehead to the ground in a show

of respect to the temple of democracy and later acknowledged the work done by

previous governments for Indias development. There was little sign of his default option

the stump speech.

That carefully calibrated appearance at the Bharatiya Janata Party Parliamentary Party

meeting in the Central Hall of Parliament House had a short use-by date. Seventeen days

later, on June 6, while introducing his Ministers to the Lok Sabha, Prime Minister Modi

encountered his first brush with some heckling from the fragmented Opposition when it

became evident that Minister of State for Power Piyush Goyal was not present.

Visibly irritated at being interrupted as he raced through the introductions almost

turning a parliamentary convention into a roll-call he cast an impatient glance at the

Opposition and said in his gruff style in Hindi, OK, will introduce him later. There was

none of the tentativeness of a rookie, not just at the premiers job but also as a Member of

Parliament.

He is, after all, the first of 15 Prime Ministers, including interim premier Gulzari Lal

Nanda, to get the top job without any parliamentary experience. By a curious coincidence,

he also entered the Gujarat Assembly for the first time as Chief Minister without any

legislative background.

Charges piling up

According to Shaktisinh Gohil, former Leader of the Opposition in the Gujarat Assembly,

Mr. Modi is trying to replicate the much-talked-about Gujarat model in Parliament. He

once got 12 laws passed in 17 minutes in 2009 after getting the Opposition suspended

from the House. Under him, the Assembly would be convened once every six months just

to meet the constitutional requirement.

The Congress insists that Mr. Modi never addressed the legislature not even during

the motion of thanks to the Governor's address nor responded to questions pertaining

to ministries under his watch. Further, a third of the starred questions asked by the

Opposition would never even reach the Assembly, where it had become a norm to

suspend Opposition members every Session. And the Gujarat Assembly never met for

more than 23 days in a year through his years as Chief Minister.

With a bicameral legislature, multiparty Opposition and national media scrutiny, no

replication of the Gujarat model of parliamentary democracy has been attempted in

Parliament till now but charges of disregard for parliamentary procedures are piling up.

Standing committees are being given a go-by in the name of the speed mantra of the

Modi government, new bills are sprung upon the House through supplementary business

circulated at the eleventh hour, efforts were made to amend certain laws by smuggling

them into the Finance Bill to bypass the Rajya Sabha where the government is in a

minority and, now, the two Houses are being pitted against each other to reduce the

significance of the Council of States because it is indirectly elected. Mr. Modi entered

Parliament with the theatrical gesture of calling it a temple but that is only if it is

monotheistic. There cant be more than one god and this is reflected in Finance Minister

Arun Jaitley who does a ventriloquists job questioning the indirectly elected Rajya

Sabhas right to scrutinise Bills cleared by the Lok Sabha, says Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay,

author of Narendra Modi: The Man, The Times.

Mr. Modi himself rarely puts in an appearance unless absolutely unavoidable and

even missed the crucial vote on the Constitution Amendment to introduce the Goods and

Services Tax regime. He made amends the following day when the Constitution

Amendment for the land swap agreement with Bangladesh was put to vote and, in a rare

show of bipartisanship, even thanked the Opposition for its passage.

Few interventions

Let alone the Opposition, he seldom engages with his own party legislators or ministers

when he does attend the Lok Sabha. Few BJP members dare to approach him, even

though he is the Leader of the House. His interventions have been few and far between,

and he does not brook counter-questions. After ceaselessly calling his predecessor Maun

(silent) Mohan Singh, Mr. Modis silence in Parliament speaks volumes. Even the

mandatory statement presented in both Houses after an overseas visit is left to External

Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj.

The Opposition held its fire for the first couple of sessions but began to cry foul from the

Winter Session of 2014 when it became evident that the Prime Minister had made more

addresses in parliaments abroad than at home in his first five months in office. Till then,

the only time he had addressed both Houses was in the mandatory reply to the Motion of

Thanks to the Presidents Address.

He was conciliatory then but when it was time to repeat the annual exercise this year, Mr.

Modi went back to his default option scornfully announcing in the Lok Sabha that he

would keep the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Act alive as a monument

to the failure of successive Congress governments and accusing the Communists of

following an imported idea in the Rajya Sabha. In the process, he invited upon himself

and his government the first embarrassment in the Upper House, with a united

Opposition forcing an amendment in the Motion of Thanks, something that has

happened only three times since Independence.

Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M), who pressed for the amendment, said he would have

withdrawn it had Mr. Modi heard him out. But it seems they [treasury benches] want a

fight. So let there be a fight. For close watchers of Mr. Modis political journey like Mr.

Gohil and Mr. Mukhopadhyay, his evident lack of interest in Parliament except as

theatre for the occasional grandstanding is no surprise. It reflects his inability to work

with systems and structures. He is most comfortable with a unitary system one people,

one faith, one institution, one House (read unicameral legislature) where there is only

one-way traffic; a monologue, not dialogue. And, certainly, no questions.

anita.joshua@thehindu.co.in

This article was published in The Hindu on May 22, 2015

Will Modi trot or knot?

DILIP CHERIAN

The thin veil that separates a strong decisive leader from an authoritarian strongman is fraying at the edges.

That lone heckler from among Uttar Pradeshs feisty MPs

hasnt triggered any muscle knot in his foot soldiers who are

out to battle. No effort is spared to mark The Sarkars first

anniversary in office. BJP spokespersons nationally, after

instructions from the Delhi brass, fan out to every corner and

studio. Mantris will schlep it to their constituencies to repeat

the same. Government goes into an overdrive to project

achievements and everyone will vie with the other to

overstate exaggerated targets. But beneath that hype whats the lingering image of The

Man?

The holographic images (which cost Rs. 60 crore) portended it domestically at election

time, but today hes global. From Myanmar to Mughal Gardens he schmoozes global

leaders, and from Madison Garden to Shanghai hes the darling of Modi-chanting Global

Indians, who are expected to be the shining ambassadors of the less-lucky ones back

home. Our Man is now actually everywhere.

This is a man whose image remains that of an unchallenged champion. He may slip or be

on the back foot but is he ever going to admit it? Never! The Modi image does not include

retreat or apology or even fleeting self-doubt.

Master of the Image game

The current avatar we have of Leader Maximus is that of a noticeably fairer visage, with

carefully coiffured hair and never a stitch out of place (yes, yes, Im coming to that too).

Professionally accoutered, he choreographs appropriate hand gestures and an arsenal of

clever acronyms and alliterations (that the fecund Mr. S crafts) peppers his speeches. You

are watching a Master of the Image game.

He strode through his first year with amazing smoothness. A pace that goes well beyond

what a brute majority commands. Its his running style. He displayed it recently in the

sudden springing of the Rafale deal during a slope through France. He cut a swathe

through red tape and struck a perfect Gujju bargain. This is classic Modi. He reiterated it

in China with an e-visa announcement that hurdled smoothly over what his spooks had

set up before.

There have, of course, been a few flubs. There are hints now of a subterranean shift in

public perception of The Man.

A recent online poll shows Mr. Modi enjoying approval ratings of 74 per cent, comforting

for any leader, even if it is lower than the 82 per cent he had 10 months ago before his

Kejriwal trashing and the monogrammed suit bashing, and of course the unchecked

braying of fundamentalists.

But he is still triumphantly at the top of the political heap. He may be hobbled by the

Land Bill progress, but at least the jumla (pet phrase) about black money not having

come home is firmly buried with his personally designed draconian money laundering

bill. Rahul Gandhi depradations he shrugs away and for him the Opposition are pygmies.

The swift sprinter we saw on the election trail has now comfortably settled into the pace

of a long distance runner. He handcrafts image personally through Mann Ki Baat radio

talks and a multilingual but constant Twitter stream. Two dinners with scribes, at Mantri

Arun Jaitleys home, added a direct-to-home media strategy. His campaigns and

branding are vibrant; be it Swacch Bharat or Make In India or Jan Dhan. The message

stays steadily on The Man. Not even a hint that hes part of any relay team.

But is everything really hunky dory? The Mans sprinter-like persona and his effortless

jumping hurdles in 18 countries in 12 months notwithstanding, people back home have

questions about the arrival of the acche din. Mantris and their madaris are balking at his

massive centralisation of power in the all-powerful Prime Ministers Office. And the thin

veil that separates a strong decisive leader from an unabashedly authoritarian strong man

is now fraying at the edges.

The big inflexion point coming up is the Bihar elections. If it delivers the political

equivalent of a double whammy (after the Delhi debacle) it could hurt NaMos serial-

winner image; in which case expectations are that a new NaMo may be unveiled. Will the

image segue from man on the track to pugilist in the ring? Will it be closer to the

more Dabangg-like Modi that Gujarat saw in the panic after the riots? At that time,

mantris vanished, police ruled and diktat replaced democracy for many.

The upswell of anxiety in the last few months may be purely episodal. But those watching

the trends, social as well as economic, tend to worry now. Minorities and farmers seem

restive, whether one goes by the incidents of Naxal violence or farmer protests. The

recent coal and spectrum auctions mean that costs, across a wide range of industries, are

poised to climb. The run of good luck on global petroleum seems too good to last, as the

weekend petrol price hikes augur.

Whats worse is that nervous FIIs are sitting on edge with hot money that may flee.

Domestic capital is sulking, as black money inspectors crack the whip ominously.

India has defied doomsday scenarios before and Mr. Modi will have to break into a trot if

he is to ensure that his Version of India keeps growing. If he wants the laurels of a leader

who either won us the Olympiad (even if it is after 2024), or a Security Council seat, or

even just the moniker of next Global Superpower, he will now have to break into a quick

pace as Lap 2 begins. Image exercises alone wont hack it.

(Dilip Cherian is founder of Perfect Relations.)

This article was published in The Hindu on May 22, 2015

Year 1: Still Waiting for Acche Din?

SHIV VISVANATHAN

At the end of one year in office, has Narendra Modi met expectations and delivered on his promises? Our writers take up five crucial areas politics, society, environment, education and the economy to assess the Prime Ministers first year.

Society: A victory of propaganda

Narendra Modis favourite incarnation was the hologram. It

added dimensions to his stature and hyphenated him between

the real and the simulacra because Modi has to be seen as a

projection of the social. He is a social construct and it is the

social changes that he has triggered, influenced and created that

one must capture.

As a pracharak, as CM and now as PM, Modi created a vision of the nation state, as the

ultimate loyalty, and then sought to rectify its history, and deeply and fundamentally

created a majoritarian state that for the first time felt home in history and modernity.

Modi has consolidated a Hindu middle-class, which is proud of its moment in History. He

created a Nehru Mukta Bharat, which literally delegitimised words like socialism and

secularism. The BJP failed to remove it from the Constitution but it has demobilised

these words.

The first year of the Modi regime is thus not an achievement in policy or economic

performance but in institutionalising an image, a mirroring of it in the electoral world. It

was a victory of propaganda where the middle class, desperate for growth, found an

ecology to articulate its world view. It beliefs were no longer embarrassing. It could

combine religion and technology, recover the past as nostalgia, reduce history to myth

and claim it was being scientific. It was a particular idea of India not a diverse India of

ideas that Modi and his BJP regime created.

Modi won a war of ideas and can now create a set of cultures and institutions around it.

Legitimising this world and its weird combination of culture, nationalism, religion and

technology was the diaspora. The diaspora validated Modis dream of a new middle-class

India, which wanted to feel at home in India and secure and powerful in the world. In the

first year, Modi created a social imaginary and marshalled the electoral, political focus

that would help routinise this world.

It also helped remove claims of the informal economy, doubts and protests of marginal

and minorities by building a new religion around growth and development. In fact civil

society groups, which criticised the costs of development, were virtually condemned as

seditious. Margin, civil society, radicalism, minority retreated before the new cult of the

nation state committed to growth. Modi was the new prophet and the priest of this cult of

development. In fact one could witness this evangelism on his return from Canada, when

he called nuclear energy the second modernity.

It is at the level of ideas and their incorporation into culture that the regime is

performing. At the level of bureaucracy, economy, or institution building, it has little to

report. In fact the regimes celebration of itself seems to alternate between electoral

victory and investment promises.

All this is obvious and clear. What is difficult to sense is the silences, the doubts, the

ambiguities created by the regime. One hears little of dissent today, despite the sheer

cheekiness of the Naxal attempts to kidnap people attending his rally. The regime has

created a society through brute consensus and acclamation. Most of the news is about the

technocrats around him, labouring like worker bees to create his image of a new society of

instant cities, cloned IITs, a privatised medicine and a devastated ecology. A majoritarian

India will celebrate the percolation of its ideas. The question is: will history and future

feel equally open ended five years from now? The moral luck of politics is all on his side

now as he comes up victorious trumping all dissent and opposition.

This article was published in The Hindu on May 23, 2015

An education in acronyms

ANJALI MODY

Amid a plethora of cleverly named new schemes and tech-fixes, the HRD Ministry is busy tinkering with bureaucratic processes.

Every year multiple agencies, private and public, tell us that an

unacceptable number of school-going children at age 14 are

functionally illiterate and that their numbers are not declining.

Teachers and teaching, almost everyone is agreed, are at the

heart of this problem. Every year a tiny fraction of hopefuls

clears the Central Teacher Eligibility Test (CTET) or TET

exams necessary to a get a teaching job in a government school.

There are massive teacher vacancies across the country and the

question that those responsible for CTET are grappling with is whether the tests to

qualify as a primary schoolteacher should be at the class 10 level or the class 8 level.

Lowering already low standards for qualifying teachers in order to fill the massive

teaching vacancies is clearly not the solution to the problem of low learning outcomes in

schools. Changes in pedagogy and improvements in teacher education, however, top the

list of necessary changes if we expect the trend to reverse any time in the future.

A promising start

The Union government appeared to get off to a good start with the announcement of a

teacher education mission. The Prime Minister inaugurated the mission with great

fanfare, speaking of a five-year training course and exporting teachers across the world

in lakhs. His government, however, allocated only Rs. 180 crore a year for five years

towards this goal. This works out to less than Rs. 400 per existing teacher per year a

derisory sum that suggests the Prime Minister is prone to flights of fancy and that his

government has absolutely no understanding of the enormity of the problem. Combined

with cuts across the board in the Centres education spending, the message that the

government appears to be sending is that mass public education is not its priority; it just

hopes the State governments will do something about it.

School education is, in the main, the concern of State governments. But it was to address

the failure of State governments and the huge regional disparities that the Centre

intervened in the first place. From a universal mid-day meal scheme to Sarva Shiksha

Abhiyan, central allocations have been responsible for vastly increasing student

enrolment, attendance and completion. However, their focus on numbers the

quantifiable goals beloved of both politicians and bureaucrats has ignored the larger

issue of learning or the quality of education. The next logical stage, for any government

serious about mass education in the country, would be to devise a sustainable policy for

improving teaching and learning standards across the country. The Human Resource

Development (HRD) Minister, however, reinforced the impression that this government

does not grasp what is