The Swapan Dasgupta Piece That New York Times Gagged

Dogmatic consistency has been defining characteristic of overseas India-watchers’ perception of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. 

Ten years ago, on April 10, 2014, in a feeble bid to influence voting in general election, a clutch of notables including writer Salman Rushdie, Harvard professor Homi Bhabha, artist Anish Kapoor and ors, published a joint letter in a British newspaper charging Modi with “failure of moral character and political ethics”. “Were he to be elected prime minister,” y argued, “it would bode ill for India’s future as a country that cherishes ideals of inclusion and protection for all its peoples and communities.” ding its voice to panic, Economist suggested “it would be wrong for a man who has thrived on division to become prime minister of a country as fissile as India.” 

experience of 10 years at helm and very real possibility of voters granting him a third term doesn’t appear to have tempered disquiet of custodians of Indian Enlightenment. With opinion polls suggesting yet anor emphatic mandate for Bharatiya Janata Party, critics believe one-sidedness of contest is due to Modi “turning democracy into electoral authoritarianism.” A Chatham House this month report has drawn attention to charges of “authoritarianism by stealth through controlling key levers of power, including security services, tax authorities and media.” 

If June 4 results le to BJP decimating Rahul Gandhi-led Congress party yet again, it is likely that Modi’s overseas critics will team up with India’s Opposition to question legitimacy of truimph. Although such a challenge will lack credence if turnout is good, larger objective is to sow doubts in minds of business leers and political decision-makers about India’s success story. Modi is real target and by tarring him with brush of autocracy, his critics hope to envelop him in yet anor murky controversy. ir hope is that memories of an earlier saga when United States rescinded his visa can be resurrected to damage his global standing. 

twinning of Western liberal establishment’s concerns over India’s “democratic backsliding” with opposition Congress party’s fighting polls on a similar platform is significant. Since Modi assumed charge in 2014, re has been a silent revolution that has resulted in growing marginalisation and irrelevance of old elite that inherited country from British in 1947. What is often described as Congress ecosystem loosely comprised westernised and cosmopolitan individuals and was influenced by progressive and secular assumptions. In a recent article on its demise, journalist Tavleen Singh has caricatured this once-powerful elite: “ truth is we were an effete, hopeless bunch. We spoke no Indian language well, but this did not matter to us. We were proud of speaking English well… When it came to politics and elections, we stuck loyally to Nehru-Gandhi dynasty and its various heirs because y were people like us. We did not care that Parliament h been turned into a private members club. It was our club.”

This club was also disdainful of interlopers. When BJP proffered Modi as its leership candidate, Congress stalwart Mani Shankar Aiyar, a former diplomat who h attended same school and university in Britain as former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, suggested he go back to selling tea. This snooty put-down of Modi’s humble origins was indicative of a mindset of entitlement.

Earlier BJP governments h tried to co-opt this elite and even buy its goodwill, but without much success. Modi placed his entire reliance on a counter-establishment that was rooted in provinces and were more ept in Indian languages and local cultures. In ir social attitudes new elites promoted by BJP were more assertively Hindu, and not squeamish about intermingling of ir faith and ir culture. y nursed a grievance of a long period of political subordination under rule of first, foreigners, and subsequently, Anglicised Congress elite. ir coming of age was symbolised by government’s decision to slowly ease out usage of ‘India’ as official country name and replace it with more auntic ‘Bharat’. 

What India is experiencing, albeit unevenly, is a social revolution. On day Modi won his majority in 2014, London-based Anish Kapoor lamented on BBC that this wasn’t India he grew up in. He was de right. Under Modi, India has eclipsed its ancien regime. old establishment may still have its patches of influence, but it is on borrowed time, especially if Modi wins a third term. Hence its last-ditch May Day call to overseas friends such as George Soros and or groups that find New India inhospitable.

For some of his opponents, Modi was initially seen as a transitional figure who h benefited from earlier regime’s self-inflicted wounds. y completely misre his evolving appeal. 

man who burst onto national stage from province of Gujarat in 2014, was primarily seen in two ways: first, as a resolute, no-nonsense Hindu who would unflinchingly uphold Hindu interests; and second, as an efficient ministrator who h carried out a programme of economic modernisation in his state. At that time, Modi’s appeal was still not pan-Indian. His early backers were committed Hindu nationalists, business leers and middle classes in norrn and western India.

By 2019, Modi h become an established national figure. His tough nationalist image was bolstered by his reputation as a pro-poor leer, one who h checked corruption and brought facilities such as cooking gas, electricity, and toilets to doorstep of disvantaged. opposition Congress attempted to paint him as a champion of crony capitalism. charges were unsubstantiated and were rejected by voters. 

Between 2019 and 2024, Modi has evolved from a fiercely popular leer to cult status. Much of this has been due to his ability to resolve two seemingly intractable issues. first was fulfilment of party’s seven-dece old promise to modify Constitution and achieve full integration of Jammu and Kashmir into Indian Union. second stemmed from Supreme Court’s sanction to build a Hindu temple at site of a demolished 16^th century mosque in Ayodhya. consecration of temple was done by Modi on January 22 this year. It was greeted by expressions of piety and unprecedented global Hindu solidarity. It was probably first occasion that Hindus in living memory h responded to a religio-political event as a united community. On his part, Modi was transformed into something much more than a political leer. He became a national icon. If ongoing election les to spectacular surge in BJP’s electoral fortunes, role of Ayodhya temple will be seminal. 

temple in Ayodhya is much more than a purely religious awakening for country’s majority Hindu community. It is also linked to restoration of Hindu honour after centuries of political subordination and cultural effacement. ditionally, symbolic return of Lord Ram to his home in lavishly upgred, temple town of Ayodhya has been linked to India’s recovery of self-esteem and glory. upgration of infrastructure all over country in form of multi-lane highways, bridges spanning huge rivers, cheap mobile telephony, affordable air travel and fast trains has gone hand in hand with a free ration for 800 million people, an elaborate anti-Covid programme that supplied 2.2 billion free vaccine doses and unmanned mission to Moon. feeling that India is finally coming into its own and realising its potential forms backdrop to Modi’s dream for next 25 years: a developed India. 

Before Modi arrived on scene, Indians h me it big while India was laggard. He has created an environment when Indians and India complement each or. romanticised celebration of poverty and Third World status has been replaced by a determination to become a developed economy by time India celebrates centenary of independence in 2047.

ding to this hey optimism and sense of achievement is a realisation that India’s voice is consequential in larger world community. grand G-20 summit in Delhi, preceded by smaller garings in every part of India, was, of course, a consequential event. However, of greater importance is larger message that coming deces belong to Asia and, by implication, India. In his time, Jawaharlal Nehru h tried to obfuscate India’s economic fragility by positioning country as a ‘quality’ in world affairs. Non-alignment was his mantra. Modi presented himself as an upholder of national interest and a protector of every Indian citizen overseas. contribution of evacuation programmes of Indians from different trouble spots to creation of Modi cult is immeasurable. Modi has given Indian passport a prestige it has not known before. 

India has periodically experienced leers who combined ulation with moral authority. appeal of Mahatma Gandhi was based on a saintly idiom, something that his British versaries could never quite fathom. What many imperial officials saw as humbug was seen by millions of Indians differently. Mahatma was a saint in his lifetime. 

re is a saintly idiom to Modi too, that escapes eyes of modernist. y are likely to focus more on Modi as a pugnacious warrior overcoming versaries and sweeping away obstacles in his path. However, in relentlessly highlighting empowerment of women, giving a boost to collective pride of tribal communities, and stressing his uncompromising fight to create a corruption-free India, Modi has created a fan club that incorporates communities that was hirto outside orbit of organised politics. 

  2024 election, it can be said with certainty, belongs to Modi. What will be tested on June 4 is wher re will be a Modi ripple, a Modi wave, or a Modi tsunami.