Delhi Diary/By A K B Krishnan

It is an accepted fact that democracy is not the best form of government. But given the diversity of history, culture, language, religion, genetics and a host of other imponderables, a country like India is best served by democracy. Despite being poor, the civil liberties, an independent judiciary and a free press, among other things, that are enjoyed by Indians are the envy of people in many other countries, foremost among them China. Or even Singapore, for that matter.
There are many imperfections in the democratic system, but Indians accept them with equanimity and a live-and-let-live attitude. To paraphrase what a not-so-famous Western tourist said, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, during a recent interaction: “Traffic in India is the best advertisement for democracy in action. It’s all a matter of adjustment. Everywhere you see violations, but everyone adjusts. So the horse-drawn carriage mingles with the overloaded handcart and the latest Mercedes and all of them give way to the helmetless motorcyclist with three or more pillion riders heading the wrong way. It is chaos to begin with, but slowly a pattern begins to emerge. There is individual assertion in the beginning, but in the end collective adjustment prevails.”
The tourist in question, who reiterated he would never want to drive on Indian roads, had little interest in India’s politics and, therefore, was blissfully unaware of the fact that while there may have been adjustment on India’s roads, there is little of that in evidence in the nation’s parliament. Instead, what you get is demonstrations in the well of the house, shouting matches, disruptions and walk-outs. All in the name of democracy, of course.
The government that was in opposition a few months ago did it then. The opposition that was the government then is doing it now in return. Arun Jaitley, the all-powerful finance minister in the present government and the leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha till May 2014, is on record saying that though he did not like it, disrupting parliament is a “legitimate weapon” for the opposition in a democracy. (He said this at the height of the agitation in the wake of what has come to be known as the “2G scam”).
Anand Sharma, minister for commerce till May 2014, is now leading the pack of disrupters in his new avatar as the Congress Party’s chief crusader in the Rajya Sabha. Nobody has yet asked Sharma but he would also say that he would not like to disrupt parliament.
But they all do. And they all claim to be using a “legitimate weapon” in the larger interest of democracy. Caught in between is the hapless Indian who has learned and practised democracy day in and day out on the streets of Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkatta and what have you.
The Congress knows that what it is doing is wrong. Having been in power for most of the post-independence period, it is aware that governance in a democracy is a matter of co-operation and adjustment with the opposition. It also knows that a “responsible” opposition should never be swayed by silly, inflated egos, but should always serve the larger interests of the nation. But in the scheme of things that is peculiar to India, the opposition’s main, nay, one and only, job is to try and topple the government at any cost.
There is little chance of that happening any time in the near future. So the Congress will do the next best thing - obstruct governance and spoil the government’s image. Disrupting parliament any which way is one way of obstructing governance. And if in the process the country is the ultimate sufferer, it’s just bad luck. Try telling an Anand Sharma or an Ajay Maken that two wrongs do not make a right and all you get will be blank stares.  
There were many key bills that should have been cleared in the winter session of parliament that ended just before Christmas. Curiously enough, some of these like the insurance bill which hikes foreign participation to 49% were, in fact, the brainchildren of the Manmohan Singh government. With the world showing renewed interest in India’s growth story, these were mainly aimed at bringing the much-needed foreign investment into the country that could create more jobs and, in turn, more prosperity.
But the Congress is in no mood to co-operate or adjust. The obvious conclusion is it doesn’t want to be seen as facilitating India’s progress because, for some strange reason, it thinks it won’t get any credit while Prime Minister Narendra Modi will take away everything. So you rake up any small issue and blow it out of proportion with the help of a sensation-mongering 24X7 television. This is narrow-mindedness of the worst kind. It is also the mindset of an era long gone.
With 50% of Indians below the age of 25, and a good majority of them skilled and educated, attitudinal changes are the need of the hour for every political party if it wants to survive. Revolution as a way of change was never going to be sustainable. If there is any doubt, ask the communists. They refused to change with the times and now find themselves almost irrelevant in countries where they once held sway. In India they are now relegated to the status of a regional party. If it does not change, and change quickly, the Congress too will be looking down that same barrel very soon.
Rahul Gandhi is being pushed and prodded to take over the reins of the Congress from his mother. But he has been an on-again-off-again Congressman throughout his short political career. He promised changes that “you cannot even imagine” that will re-energise the Congress. That was in December 2013 when the Congress was pushed to a distant third by a fledgling Aam Aadmi Party in the Delhi assembly elections.
But that was it. Either Indians have very poor imagination that they have not seen what Gandhi has done to his party or Gandhi has simply not delivered on his promise. Subsequent elections to the Lok Sabha and a series of state assemblies have only proved that Gandhi’s was a vain boast.
Yes, it could have been unimaginable change if the Congress were to co-operate with the government and help it pass these important legislations. If Gandhi were to direct his partymen that all forward-looking laws that could help improve the economic situation of the nation must be supported inside and outside parliament, Indians would have noticed that he is reforming the party in ways they had not imagined. They would have then supported him and his party if and when the government were to attempt to bring in controversial legislation like the introduction of a uniform civil code or abolition of Article 370 and such.
It is not too late for the Congress to mend its ways. Like a new party in government needs time to get accustomed to the power equations, a party that had been in power for long takes time to get used to being in the opposition. Democratic evolution too takes time to mature, as has been proved in many western democracies. Only, with the advent of the Internet, the sense of urgency has hit a peak.
The budget session of parliament beginning next month will give Gandhi and his party a rare opportunity to show their maturity. If it’s important for Modi to prove his pro-reform agenda, it is perhaps more important for Gandhi to tell Indians that the Congress will not stand in the way of India’s progress. Indians are watching!



The bear-hug that Prime Minister Modi and President Obama exchanged was as spontaneous as it was mutual as they seemed to think that a mere handshake and elbow-touching was inadequate.
And strangely enough it may have never taken place had not Modi taken the initiative to personally receive the American president at Delhi airport. Of course, it could not have come as a surprise to Obama to see the Indian prime minister waiting for him at the bottom of the staircases as he alighted from Air Force One. That scenario must have been relayed to him well in advance.
But what was surprising was how some television channels went overboard describing Modi’s “gesture” of going to the airport to receive a foreign head of state as “unprecedented.” In their hurry to score brownie points over their rivals, these channels either forgot or decided to forget that Modi’s predecessor Manmohan Singh had done precisely the same thing not just once, but three times!
Singh had travelled to the airport to receive Obama when he came to India in 2010 and also his predecessor George Bush. Singh had also met King Abdullah at the airport when the Saudi monarch came visiting in 2006. But for the TV channels that wanted “breaking news” by the minute such details were of no consequence.

Related Story