image

The sudden ascent of stocky,
62 year old Narendra Modi as a serious
contender for the nation’s leadership
has taken people by surprise. The
general election is still a year away but
the average, open minded, middle-of-
the-road Indian wonders how to think
about the polarizing chief minister of
Gujarat. Either you love him or hate
him, which is precisely why one must
not react with a knee-jerk but try and
go beyond the shallow surface of a
flawed but remarkable human being.
India today is discontented
and troubled as a result of corruption
scandals, high inflation, declining
growth, and a government in denial.
Sick of the drift and paralysis, people
desperately seek a strong leader, and
insistently ask if Narendra Modi might
be the one. Clearly, he has proven the
ability to build a vibrant economy and
usher in corrupt free governance. Could
he be India’s best chance to ungum the
bureaucracy, tackle corruption and
restore the economy to health? But
Modi also has a clear downside: he is
dictatorial with communal tendencies.
Should one risk India’s precious
secular and collaborative traditions for
the sake of good governance and
prosperity? It is a dreadful moral
dilemma between equally important
values–a classic dharma-sankat.
No Indian leader in recent
times has spoken with such passion
about ‘governance’ and ‘development’.
His talk of ‘less government and more
governance’ resonates with the aspiring
young middle class. He has changed the
language of politics with words like
outcomes, accountability, and
unbureaucratic service delivery. Visit a
municipal office, he says, and you will
only see clerks; but an urbanizing
nation needs technical people to solve
sanitation, transport and infrastructure
problems; so, he hired engineer interns
and gave them an opportunity to solve
municipal problems in Gujarat.
Implementation is his obsession and he
compares two canals of equal size–the
Sujalam Sufalam Yojana, which he
completed in two years while the old
Sardar Sarovar canal from Nehru’s days
is still incomplete.
Every country must protect its
environment, he argues, but none stops
750 industrial projects and delays them
for years. By covering Gujarat’s canals
with solar panels, he is conserving
water and has made Gujarat a model of
solar power. India’s schools face a
serious problem of quality, and the
Right to Education Act refuses to
measure outcomes; so, he plans to
make Gujarat’s schools accountable
through continuous, quality testing. He
inspires young people, saying ‘IT + IT =
IT’ (Indian Talent + Information
Technology = India’s Tomorrow.) Not
since Jawaharlal Nehru has a politician
given people such a sense of
possibilities. They see in Modi an
underdog, a David challenging the
Goliath of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty.
But every temptation has a
price. Modi is considered anti-Muslim
and many cannot forgive him for the
events in Gujarat in 2002. He may not
have actively connived in the violence,
they say, but why doesn’t he show
remorse? After all, it happened under
his watch, and he is responsible. By
polarizing the country, people fear he
might alienate India’s Muslims and this
might enhance the risk of domestic
terror. The temptation to vote for
prosperity and good governance must
be tempered by the imperative to keep
the nation united and secular.
Those who dismiss the middle
class’ impact on elections forget that a
new generation of voters has joined the
middle class after 1991, and it is in a
rage over violence against women and
children and longs for a leader who is
tough against crime. But it also does
not want an Indira Gandhi who will
subvert the institutions of democracy.
Modi is not likeable–Rahul Gandhi is
far more affable–but people today seek
an effective, not a friendly leader.
India’s dilemma is that Modi is the most
likely candidate to provide corrupt free
governance and restore the economy to
high growth, create masses of jobs and
lift millions into the middle class. But
his communal past is a threat. In the
end, each voter will have to choose in
2014 between several imperfect
candidates and make a trade-off. Those
who think corrupt free governance and
prosperity are more important will vote
for Modi. Those who worry about
communal harmony and domestic
security, will not vote for him. It is an
unhappy but unambiguous choice.