Author: Editorial
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: May 15, 2009
Remember 1996, fear the 'Third Front'
In about a week's time, India will have a
new Government in place. It is possible that a fractured mandate may lead
to the formation of a 'Third Front' Government, one not led by either the
BJP or the Congress. Familiar voices have welcomed the prospect of such a
conglomeration of regional parties, without the overarching presence of a
national party. Once again it is being argued that India itself is a coalitional
civilisation, and that State satraps, who are political equals, can somehow
provide for an equitable distribution of resources across regions. This is
romantic sociology and sounds nice in air-conditioned intellectual salons.
How does it measure up to the heat and dust of governance? Can a Government
without a national party spearheading it, bereft of a mainstay serve India?
Rather than provide a quick and categorical answer, it would be wise to look
at precedents. India's most recent example of a 'Third Front' Government was
the United Front administration of 1996-98. It gave India two Prime Ministers,
collapsed within a year-and-a-half and caused an early election. What was
its lasting legacy?
Take the economy. The period between 1996
and 1998 saw India coping with the 'Asian flu', the financial meltdown of
the East Asian 'tiger economies'. India came out of that relatively unscathed.
This is being held out as a triumph for the United Front, especially in the
context of the current recession. That reading is a gross oversimplification.
India's economy was still largely insular then, not as externally linked as
it is in 2009. Audacious steps are called for to stimulate demand this time.
These could range from fiscal incentives to infrastructure spending. Both
of these will necessitate the Government finding more money to spend or cutting
costs or both. Any rejuvenation will also require a stable regime to boost
consumer confidence. The United Front Government's 1997 Budget, with brave
tax cuts and Laffer curve projections, ultimately failed because of the absence
of such stability and confidence. A 2009 'Third Front' Government is likely
to be fiscally profligate and devoted to populist, Left-leaning shibboleths.
A similar atmosphere in the United Front years lead to a Pay Commission award
that was well beyond expectations of Government employee trade unions. A ministerial
committee that included such people as Mr Ram Vilas Paswan came up with a
salary giveaway that sunk Government finances. State Governments were forced
to match Central pay hikes and this drove State after State to bankruptcy.
It took them a decade to recover.
Move to security issues. The United Front
had a maverick External Affairs Minister who later became Prime Minister.
He ran a lone-wolf foreign policy, depending overly on eccentric advice from
one or two individuals outside the system. His so-called 'doctrine' was no
more than a series of one-sided strategic giveaways to neighbouring countries.
For example, the United Front Government unilaterally dismantled India's entire
covert intelligence network in Pakistan. The implications are still haunting
India. Even after the Mumbai terror attack of November 2008, little headway
has been made within Pakistan simply because India lacks critical strategic
assets in that country. It is amply clear that a 'Third Front' Government
is likely to be no more than a free-for-all and could do long-term damage.
India may still be saddled with one; but it must know what it is in for.
