INDIA’S business leaders are joining ranks behind Narendra Modi, the controversial and egocentric chief minister of Gujarat and a leading light of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), in advance of India’s next general election. Their support was evident as the chairmen of some of the country’s biggest companies, led by Ratan Tata of the giant Tata group, lined up as speakers at the opening and closing sessions of last weekend’s

“Vibrant Gujarat” event

. Mr Modi (whom we last

interviewed in September 2012

) staged it as a large-scale biennial conference and trade exhibition to build up both the image of the state and of his leadership.

Though none of the businessmen present openly backed Mr Modi’s political ambitions (the only speaker who did was a regional politician from Russia), the implication was clear. Along with ambassadors and other foreigners in attendance, they tend to prefer Mr Modi’s style of leadership to that of India’s current government. Privately, several businessmen were more outspoken: they said that Mr Modi is the sort of leader India needs, and that they would welcome him as prime minister if he were to clear the political hurdles that stand in his way. “Of course we’d like it—he gets things done,” in the words of one.

Running a clean administration is a key part of Mr Modi’s approach. He seems to have been broadly successful, judging by what the companies here have to say. Mr Modi is seen as a rare example of a chief minister without involvement in bribes or extortion, though his BJP cadres presumably have to raise funds somewhere. (Some high-profile companies operating in Gujarat do not however have entirely clean records; there are widespread pay-offs to facilitate the dry state’s trade in illicit liquor, eg.)

The praise from the business community has rattled the government enough for Manish Tewari, India’s new information minister, to escalate his party’s personal attacks against Mr Modi. He suggests that the applauding businessmen ought to take a lesson from German companies’ “similar fascination” with Adolph Hitler in 1930s.

Mr Tata, till recently the chairman of Tata Sons, spoke at the opening session and his successor, Cyrus Mistry, followed at the closing event. Mr Tata is grateful to Mr Modi for providing him with land for his company’s Nano mini-car factory. The Nano found Gujarat more than four years ago, after political hassles in West Bengal drove it to look for a new home. Mr Tata’s group also has major chemical, power and other interests in Gujarat. He credited Mr Modi with making his state “better than anywhere else” as an investment destination. His government “executes what is promised”, Mr Tata said, in tribute that few companies would make about most other state governments, and certainly not about the national government.

Mukesh Ambani, who runs Reliance Industries (RIL), another leading group with a big stake in Gujarat, praised Mr Modi as a “leader with a grand vision”. Anand Mahindra, the chairman of the Mahindra car-and-tractor group, said that Gujarat compared favourably with China “in terms of deliverables”. Chanda Kochhar, the CEO of ICICI, a leading financial-services business, praised Mr Modi’s state as “one of the fastest-growing regions in the world”. Together these leaders represent an elite within the business elite.

There were 7,000 people in the hall for the opening session, which was probably the largest such audience ever seen in India. Delegates came from some 120 countries, including 225 from Canada, 170 from Japan and around 70 each from America and Britain. The Japanese ambassador said that his country has a “natural win-win relationship” with Gujarat. Ron Somers, the president of the US-India Business Council, said Mr Modi had set a new benchmark and proved that “progress trumps politics”. Sir James Bevan, the British high commissioner, declared himself a “son of Gujarat”—on the grounds that he was born in Leicester, which has the largest expatriate population of Gujaratis.

Mr Modi’s ambitions—which he has not declared openly—are nonetheless hindered by the fact that he was Gujarat’s chief minister during the Hindu-Muslim riots of 2002. He stands suspected of encouraging, or at least allowing, a rash of pogroms that killed thousands of men, women and children, most of them members of the Muslim minority. Hence, several of the “Vibrant” speakers were careful to praise Gujarat more so than Mr Modi. Sir James said at a press conference that Britain had not forgotten the riots, in which three British nationals were killed. After 2002, Britain had avoided contact with Mr Modi until last October. By then the diplomats in London had decided it was time to move on, and Sir James paid Mr Modi a visit. Mr Modi recently attended a lunch held by the German ambassador in Delhi for other European diplomats, indicating that their countries were prepared to soften their line. That will probably lead to America finding a way to lift a ban that it has in place, against Mr Modi’s being issued a visa to enter the country.

Sensitive to the charge that he has courted corporate investment while doing little for the poor, Mr Modi is now launching a new development programme with a focus on improving education, health care, agriculture and the environment. He made that the theme of the conference’s closing address, in which he painted a picture of Gujarat as leading India’s development and education, and inspiring the young.

With most political leaders, such claims might be dismissed as largely posturing. With Mr Modi however they have to be taken at least partly seriously. His friends and supporters say he is effective because he takes quick policy decisions, instructs his ministers and top bureaucrats to carry them out, and then monitors their progress without interfering. Anyone who fails or is found to be corrupt, they say, loses his job.

Mr Modi’s approach seems to be working in Gujarat, but such an autocratic style would be difficult to apply at the national level, especially in an era of coalition government. Gujarat will have benefited anyway, whether or not Mr Modi ever moves to Delhi and has his shot at playing prime minister. His determination to develop the state has almost certainly been impelled by his need to transform his own image since 2002. He has set about doing what he can to change his appearance, from that of an anti-Muslim, Hindu-nationalist to that of a broad-based political leader, capable of delivering boom times to all.

(Picture credit: Vibrant Gujarat 2013)