Politics, near & far

India has slipped internationally because of a weak prime minister and government.

By N.V. Subramanian (27 March 2013)

New Delhi: International politics is connected to domestic politics in ways that are, in the Indian context, at any rate, either not accepted or understood. In the presidential system, the popular vote unifies international and domestic policy decisions in one person, over and above the checks and balances and advices provided by the elected legislature, the cabinet and the bureaucracy. In a totalitarian system or one of limited democracy like Russia’s, political and establishment forces inevitably propel a strong leader into a supreme position, such as with Vladimir Putin earlier, and with Xi Jinping in China now. A strong leader makes for a strong nation, and it is pointless disputing this logic.



In a Westminster system such as India’s, the problem comes when the national parties suffer erosion in strength and countrywide presence, and become dependent on other groupings and forces, regional, linguistic, chauvinistic, regressive, and so forth. The problem has been compounded by the Congress which has turned its back on strong leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and P.V.Narasimha Rao who crafted their own foreign policy to prefer weak, nominated prime ministers today. This is a function of the fear and insecurity of the current Nehru-Gandhis, which compelled Sonia Gandhi to choose the lacklustre and powerless Manmohan Singh as prime minister. Her son and heir, Rahul Gandhi, will apparently prefer P.Chidambaram for PM if the country should have the misfortune to vote the United Progressive Alliance to power again. In style, Chidambaram may be different from Manmohan Singh, but he would be a substantial non-performer like the present prime minister.



The Bharatiya Janata Party, on the other hand, has Narendra Modi who will make for a strong prime minister. Under Modi, India is bound to have a strong and independent foreign policy, because it would flow from the nature of his distinct individuality. Modi faces powerful opposition within his own party, in the National Democratic Alliance, and generally among the political class. Which is why he seeks to address the people, the electorate, above the heads of power-brokers. What Modi is trying to do in the process, although he may be unaware of it, is that he is unifying the country on some higher principles and interests, values that cut across regions, castes and communities, linguistic chauvinism, politics of victimhood, and so on. The links to all this and domestic politics is clear.



What is less obvious but discernible if you look for it is that this unification is necessary for India to pursue a strong foreign policy and be perceived as a strong nation. When a system does not incarnate supreme power in one person, the people have to come together to strengthen the hands of an indirectly elected head of government. This process of unification does not happen on its own. It has to be spurred. And the only potential prime minister candidate who is doing it today is Narendra Modi, whilst his rivals are engaged in competitive divisiveness. Nitish Kumar is begging for Bihar to be granted special status. The Congress is using Nitish’s weakness to prise him away from the National Democratic Alliance. In other different ways, the Congress is splitting other parties and dynastic groupings. This politics of divide and rule of the Congress has naturally and inevitably divided the country, and given it a weak and effete prime minister. How on earth can India compete with the likes of China or the other great powers lead by single-minded individuals?



In other words, the links between international and domestic politics cannot be discounted or minimized. If the prime minister was a self-sustaining national leader, the Tamils’, Teesta and Sir Creek issues would not have acquired their present state-specific salience. A prime minister cannot conduct foreign policy in isolation of domestic politics and local sensitivities. In the end, everything is politics. The wretched Indian establishment does not understand this simple but all-too-critical point. The Ministry of External Affairs and its scented babus believe international politics to lie in another sphere, in a terrain entirely divorced from domestic politics. Reality is the opposite. Domestic politics dictates foreign policy. The Chinese have always conducted international politics on that philosophy. It stems from their belief that they are the centre of the universe, citizens of the Middle Kingdom. Learning from the Chinese example, India must return to the roots of its greatness and build upon it. The separation of international from domestic politics must end.



