The past two days have witnessed a spectacular bout of what rarefied academics love to call ‘inversion’. Those who go all mushy and starry-eyed over their golden retrievers have, in line with obscure theological injunctions, suddenly taken umbrage to the term ‘puppy’; and those who don’t think twice about kicking the first dog they encounter have abruptly taken membership of the SPCA.
Not that this is in any way unexpected. When it comes to the Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, nothing is more exhilarating than a bare-knuckled fight with rival crowds baying for a knockout blow. And although he has been a little circumspect of late, Modi rarely disappoints.
The latest controversy, centred on the interview to Reuters, was, however, needless. In essence, what Modi said that those who were collateral victims of the Godhra train arson attack had his heartfelt ‘human’ sympathy. But his analogy triggered a storm. Would it have been different had he referred to the elephants who are routinely knocked down by speeding trains, or even cows who often get hit while straying across highwaysIJ Unlikely.
The point to note is that regardless of what Modi says about the unfortunate Gujarat riots of 2002, he is going to be pilloried by his opponents who, unfortunately for him, control the levers of media power. If he was to fall on his knees and beg for forgiveness, as some of his detractors have suggested he should, it would be the beginning of a clamour for his prosecution on the ground that he has admitted his culpability. If he remained silent, as he was prone to doing until he was catapulted to the national stage, he would inevitably be accused of heartlessness and insensitivity.
When it comes to those who have a one-point ‘stop Modi’ agenda, the man from Gujarat cannot win. If there were any doubts on this count, the storm over the Reuters interview should have disabused those who insist that there is a reservoir of fairness
that moulds Indian democracy. Modi has entered the national arena as the proverbial outsider who is threatening the cosy consensus that binds the entire political class. He would be naive to expect his candidature to be greeted by an invocation of old-school cricketing values. Batsmen these days, as the Ian Bell episode in the Ashes Test last Friday vividly demonstrated, just don’t ‘walk’.
This lesson has to driven home to all those who are inclined to see the next general election as a normal five-year encounter which, at best, could see a change of guard in Delhi. That may well be the essence of democracy but there is a difference this time.
First, Modi is the archetypal outsider who didn’t get to the top of the BJP pile on the strength of just being there for a sufficiently long time. He was elevated as first among equals by popular acclaim, and despite the opposition of entrenched groups. Second, the Indian Establishment is still clueless about the real Modi. They may like his Gujarat record but they have no ‘connections’ to him. The question I am often asked is: Who constitutes Modi’s inner circleIJ My answer that he makes up his own mind leaves the power brokers dissatisfied. How, I can hear the power brokers thinking, can we elect a guy we don’t have a direct line toIJ
These may appear to be Modi’s shortcomings as far as the Delhi durbar is concerned, but these very same attributes could well become the main selling point to an electorate that is completely exasperated with the political class. And this is the real lesson for Modi: He must stay focussed on his strengths, rather than play on a pitch that has been carefully doctored by the opposing team. What this essentially means is that Modi has now focused on something that Indian politicians seem to think matters the least: Messaging.
He won’t prevail in an election that is reduced to a post-mortem of the happenings of 2002. This may interest a handful but it has got to be recognised that most Indians are looking to a future and not to an event that happened 11 years ago. Even at the risk of being called evasive and unapologetic, Modi has to greet the inevitable questions about 2002 with anodyne answers. Anything else, no matter how clever and how candid, will inevitably draw him into a controversy that suits only his opponents.
At the risk of showering him with gratuitous advice, Modi must realise that his political messaging to the voters must focus on the big picture. He has to ask the young voters whether their future is assured in an underperforming IndiaIJ He has to spell out his message of resurgence. He has to ask women voters whether they can tolerate this state of permanent insecurityIJ He has to promise to clobber the criminals, regardless of their caste and religious denomination. And finally he has to debunk the culture of entitlement whereby the status of an individual is determined by his pedigree. In short, he has to promise an opportunity society.
Of course, a general election also depends on other factors such as regional issues and the quality of candidates. It will also depend on the tricks of image management, the advertising agencies excel in. Yet, one thing is certain: Modi will not gain a single vote by trying to accommodate the concerns of those who imagine that the 2002 Gujarat riots was the Indian equivalent of the Holocaust. They will fight him to the bitter end and their only weapon is going to be Modi’s perceived unconcern for the proverbial members of a particular community.
For good or for bad, this is how it is going to be from now till polling day. The Arabs, I am given to understand, have a nice phrase to describe such a situation: “The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.”