Jawaharlal Nehru famously justified his appropriation of external affairs in India’s interim government by claiming that foreign policy defines a nation while everything else is local government. The illusion was understandable for Nehru had no experience of running an administration when the interim government was formed in 1946. Politics was either mesmerizing the masses for which his mere presence sufficed or meant lobbying world leaders and global institutions at the highest level. Given the vision that made him a better writer and philosopher than administrator, Nehru was eminently suited for an international role. One might even say with the benefit of hindsight that Vallabhhai Patel would probably have handled India’s problems more expeditiously.
Narendra Modi is no Nehru. But it would not be too difficult to see him as a latter-day Patel if his first 12 months as prime minister had not been spent in chasing the Nehru dream. His supporters were confident he would lose no time in projecting his experience as chief minister on the national screen and demonstrating that what is good for Gujarat is good for India. Instead, he has visited 18 countries in one year alone.
Not that all the jetting around can be written off as an exercise in futility. Modi’s invitation to the leaders of neighbouring countries for his inaugural was a masterstroke of diplomacy. So is the emphasis he lays on the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, making Bhutan his first port of call, visiting Nepal twice, and rushing aid to the landlocked Himalayan country when earthquake struck. If a visit to Bangladesh does materialise in the near future and the Teesta waters treaty is belatedly ratified, that will be another feather in his cap following the finalisation of a landmark border agreement. At the same time, his firmness with Pakistan and caution on the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar economic corridor suggest a reassuring continuity when it comes to security in neighbourhood strategy.
There may be more dividends to come in easing Sino-Indian tension, attracting American investment, obtaining South Korean funds to modernise traction and furthering technical cooperation with Japan. Ministers like Arun Jaitley, Suresh Prabhu and Manohar Parrikar are expected to make a difference in the domestic sphere too. But whether they do or not, the spectacle of the prime minister tirelessly trotting the globe is dangerous for the multitude. As in the Nehruvian years when famine stalked the land while the prime minister’s views on Congo or Palestine made global headlines, this focus on foreign affairs fosters a false notion of what matters most to Indians. The encomiums of leaders like Xi Jinping or Barack Obama suggest to the simple that things are moving. The euphoria generated by highly publicised encounters abroad distract attention from the real issues at home. There’s an unhappy human dimension too. With our durbari television channels and newspapers playing up every word he utters and every step he takes, we see at once that Modi abroad is a very different creature from Modi at home. There he is joyous and light-hearted, playing instruments, cracking jokes and making himself agreeable to everyone. Here he is austere if not dour.
There’s a whiff of Hans Andersen and the emperor’s new clothes about his travels. Some of the journalists, civil servants, businessmen and politicians with him recall the two weavers who persuaded the emperor his new suit of clothes was invisible to all those who were either unfit for their positions or stupid or incompetent. Or else, they are like the courtiers who dared not tell him he was wearing nothing lest it show up their own inadequacy. In the outcome, basic tasks at home are neglected. I don’t mean major issues with political overtones like land acquisition but simple uncontentious details of daily life. A hundred “smart” cities may be on the anvil but our existing cities are decaying. Public transport is abysmal. So are housing, education and medicare for the poor. I thought battered post boxes whose bottom has fallen out were found only in Calcutta’s dereliction but a friend in Pune tells me he posted a letter the other day and out it popped from the broken base. Bombay is instantly flooded if a cat pees, to repeat an old Bengali crack about Calcutta. Delhi is shrouded in heavy pollution while the Defence Colony canal dwindles into a stinking stagnant ditch.
One need only enter the lavatory in the main National Archives building in Delhi’s Janpath to realise that “Swachh Bharat” is just another populist slogan like Indira Gandhi’s “Garibi Hatao”. The malodorous lavatory recalled the filthy toilets in Calcutta University’s Alipore complex that forced a foreign delegate to trudge to the Taj Bengal Hotel nearby. Any mention of the problems of retrieving material in the National Archives annexe where students work or the haphazard stacking of reference volumes might seem like a reflection on the polite and helpful staff. But the canteen reminded me of the unwholesome hovel that the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library canteen used to be. The Chinese who see their present global glory as only the rightful due of 5,000 years of unbroken civilization should have reminded Modi that the future can’t be built without respect for the past.
Modi signed nearly 50 agreements and MOUs with a total value of $30 billion with China which is obviously the centrepiece of his foreign policy. If that seems a practical equation, it is largely because of the cooperative ties Manmohan Singh’s government established with the US on which Modi built in his encounters with Obama. The Chinese are highly sensitive to the implications of that partnership. Nevertheless, India will have to work hard to achieve on her own account the balanced relationship that alone can safeguard this country’s interests and secure Asian stability. Japan demonstrates that enhanced trade or investment (which can aggravate disequilibrium in the Sino-Indian context) don’t necessarily solve political differences. It’s similarly unrealistic to believe unilateral concessions will earn goodwill. Or that India can afford not to hold China to its commitment regarding “well-defined and easily identifiable natural geographical features” and the “due interests of … settled populations in the border areas.”
Despite the razzmatazz of Modi’s visit, the problems of territory, security and influence on land and at sea will remain as acute as ever until India can talk to China at least from a position of equality. Lee Kuan Yew claimed India could “look China in the eye” with the support of the Association of South-east Asian Nations. Perhaps. But the main effort must still be India’s to build up the economic and political muscle that was Nehru’s dream. It will take time but given the resolution of a Sardar Patel, it can be done, though not by whizzing round the world in an aeroplane.
Sunanda K Datta-Ray
