Seven years of Modi

Price of the Modi Years acknowledges the exceptional popularity of the leader but cannot ignore the fact that his strident pro-Hindutva stance and economic policies have hardly brought succour to the common man, says Aakar Patel in an interview with Rehmat Merchant.

Modi’s projection looms large over the Indian horizon yet he seems somehow accessible. The citizenry hero worship him and the words he utters yet he shuns spontaneous media contact. He calls himself a chaiwala but is obsessed with his wardrobe. He wants to flaunt machismo but cavalier charm is not his thing. Many see him as a monk in a politician’s garb but others see blood stains on the hem of this decoration. He’s one of the most powerful prime ministers of India ever yet his concocted enemies are the weak and oppressed. His ideology has stitched a family called Hindu Rashtra but he goes home to an empty house.

What is this political phenomenon called Modi? The task of unswaddling this tugged at the pen of Aakar Patel, political commentator, columnist, author, and Chair of Amnesty International India. Patel waded through data and debates to delve into the man and the myth. He chose to challenge the claims made by the ruling dispensation with proclamations from the man himself and government information. Patel’s analysis neatly loops in the character of Modi around the decisions and actions of the man in his seven years of reign. Price Of The Modi Years is a chronicling of India since 2014 assessing the negative impact of Modi’s rule on the economy, national security, federalism, foreign relations, legislations, judiciary, media and civil society.

In how many dimensions are you exploring the “price” of the Modi years in India? You are obviously referring to costs that go beyond the economic ones?

Yes, India is feeling and will continue to feel the effects of what Modi and Hindutva have done to the country. India’s image as a chaotic but well-meaning nation has been replaced as one obsessed with brutalising its minorities. A national security policy focused on counterinsurgency has come apart at the borders, after it became clear that China and not Pakistan was India’s primary threat. The judiciary has become compromised with a former chief justice being given a Rajya Sabha seat. Violence in Kashmir is trending up again and we have distanced ourselves from what friends we had in the Valley. An angry Hindu nationalism appears to be a permanent feature now in our polity because it has been devolved to the population. The economic damage is severe but it is not the only price India has paid and will continue to pay.

You have drawn attention to the electoral bonds and shown them as a tool that will keep the party incontestable when it comes to financial resources. Please explain.

The electoral bond is a bearer instrument, like cash. An individual can purchase one, sell it to another entity (say a foreign w company or government) which can then anonymously give it to a political party. This has effectively sold Indian democracy. Three fourths of all of electoral bonds money, which totals Rs 8000 crore, has gone to the BJP. From whom? We do not know, but we can assume that it is from entities or individuals that want something from the BJP government. This amount of resource disparity will swing elections especially tight races.

You have used Demonetisation, GST, and more recently the sudden lockdown to illustrate the character of Modi as a whimsical leader who wants to show who is in charge without thinking through the consequences. Is that so?

Yes. The day Demonetisation happened, the Cabinet was summoned and ministers were told to leave their mobile phones behind. This meant that they did not know what was coming and their departments did not know and could not prepare. This lack of preparation showed itself as most Indians experienced. The BBC filed over 200 RTIs to find out which government department had been consulted before the national lockdown. The answer was none. Once again, the impact of whimsicality showed itself.

With an uncritical media and weak Opposition, what other factors could challenge the present dispensation?

The outcome of democratic politics is difficult to predict in the medium term, by which I mean about a decade. India is quite fragmented and poor and its diversity will remain for a long time. This means that the popularity of Hindutva will fade in time. The question is how long this will take, given the state of the media and Opposition. My guess is that it will take between 10 and 20 years, but it is inevitable that Hindutva will be erased from India after this period because modernity does not tolerate extremism.

Do you feel that the Modi years have put pa