HVK Archives: Left alone in a tight corner
Left alone in a tight corner - The Telegraph
Kewal Verma
()
16 April 1997
Title : Left alone in a tight corner
Author : Kewal Verma
Publication : The Telegraph
Date : April 16, 1997
Should the president give the United Front another chance to form a
government after it elects a new leader? Going by the rule book, he should.
But there come occasions in the history of nations when the head of the
state has to use common sense and overstretch his technical duties. The
president is the ultimate repository of the ,integrity of the state. The
legislatures have precipitated a crisis which could be very costly for the
nation. Indrajit Gupta in his otherwise lacklustre speech made a Significant
point. He said another election within a year would strain the system too
much.
Already there is a sense of disenchantment with politicians. Elections would
make people more cynical and apathetic. This is dangerous for the system. In
addition, the economy is passing through a critical phase. Any prolongation
of political uncertainty would be disastrous for the economy. The members of
parliament have failed. The president should step in. So, he should do
everything possible to avert mid-term polls.
But installation of another United Front government would not remove
political uncertainty. This is the third time that the experiment of a
minority government with outside support has collapsed in less than a year.
In 1990, the V.P. Singh government collapsed when the Bharatiya Janata Party
withdrew support, and in 1991, the Chandra Shekhar Government collapsed when
the Congress Withdrew support. Thus, installation of another United Front
government under a new leader with outside support of the Congress wouldn't
generate confidence in the government's longevity for a reasonable period of
time. It is true that coalition governments, by their very nature are not
very stable.
In 1979, the Janata Party coalition disintegrated. But coalition governments
last longer than minority governments with outside support. Since there is no
escape from a coalition government, the new arrangement should be a coalition
of the United Front and the Congress.
So, the president should persuade, Cajole and even blackmail to bring about a
coalition of the United Front and the Congress. It is certainly a difficult
task because at the state level the Congress is in conflict with the
constituents of the United Front. Yet, one step was already taken to
reconcile the conflict by giving precedence to national interest, when the
Congress decided to extend support from outside to the United Front
government. Even in this round there were conscious efforts to contain
bitterness between the two. The coalition would require one more step
forward on the part of both the Congress and the United Front. This could
prepare the ground for one more step forward later to give a one to one fight
to the BJP in its strongholds.
The intrinsic strength of the experiment which collapsed is indicated by the
fact that it is being resurrected. If it were not so, some of the
constituents of the United Front would have walked over to the BJP. More so
as the BJP has been bending over backward to give a really good deal to
regional parties. It is often missed that the BJP and the regional parties
are ideologically incompatible. Regional parties are secular in character in
the sense that they aspire to represent all sections of the people of the
region.
Even the Asom Gana Parishad transformed itself from being a party of Assamese
Hindus to a party of all people residing in Assam. Even though the regional
parties may not be in clash with the BJP, they rightly feel that they would
lose their regional character if they go under the umbrella of the BJP. The
only exception are the Akalis. This is because there are no Muslims in
Punjab. On the other hand, while the Congress might have faltered here and
there, its basic culture is quite responsive to regional aspirations. Unity
in diversity is the foundation anchor of the Congress. When M.K. Gandhi took
over the leadership of the Congress, one of his first acts was to reorganize
Congress committees on a linguistic basis.
It is now the left which is obstructing the resurrection of the secular
arrangement at a higher level. The Indian left was born with a brief from
Comintern: "Build an anti-imperialist front on the ruins of the Congress."
It failed in its historic mission. Independence was won under the leadership
of the Congress. The left never reconciled to it. It provided intellectual
and organizational support to anti-Congress. When Hindu communalism emerged
as a serious danger, the left resurrected its old brief in a new form: "Build
an anti-communal front on the ruins of the Congress." This ideological
posturing received sustenance from the fact that in its strongholds, namely
West Bengal and Kerala, the main enemy of the left is the Congress. It took
quite some time for Jyoti Basu to grow from being a leader of only West
Bengal to playing an effective role at the national level. But the party
apparatus, stuck in Stalinism, killed his aspirations. The communist
movement in India is replete with historic blunders.
A comparable blunder was committed in early 1942. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel
was then annoyed with socialists and admired communists for their honesty and
intellectual capabilities. He called a communist leader, H.R. Sardesai, and
told him that the Congress was about to launch a big movement and had
persuaded Gandhi that after the arrest of Congress leaders the movement would
continue in underground form. He offered the communists charge of the
underground movement. Sardesai replied: "But sardar, we cannot. Our policy
has changed. It is no more an imperialist war. It has become a people's war
after Hitler's attack on the USSR." Patel, holding his forehead, said, "What
to do, your luck is bad." The United Front leaders must have uttered the same
words when Basu told them that he couldn't accept the offer of prime
ministership. The left missed the opportunity to play a hegemonic role in
the struggle for secularism.
After the assassination of Gandhi, the Jana Sangh remained politically
untouchable for nearly 20 years. After the demolition of the Babri Masjid,
the BJP will remain untouchable for at least 10 years. Secularism will
remain a principal agenda in Indian politics till the BJP's challenge is
beaten back effectively or it dilutes its Hindutva. But in this political
battle, the left will play only a marginal role.
This is the price it will pay for its failure to make up its mind - which is
the main enemy, the Congress or the BJP. The political arithmetic is clear.
Non-Congress secular forces don't have the strength to successfully fight
both.
But the left doesn't accept the ground reality. The illogical position of
the left is evident from another fact. It says that India has entered the
phase of coalition politics. Yet it would not have a coalition with the
Congress.
During the national movement, the left also got isolated. But there was
Jawaharlal Nehru. He singlehandedly ensured that the nationalist movement
didn't take a rightwing shift on social and economic issues.
If now the left is isolated from secular forces, the voice of the poor would
become weak in the ruling secular front. When a strategic shift is taking
place from state led to market led growth, the weak political voice of the
poor would make things very difficult for them.
Back
Top
|
