Indian politics and politicians do not seem to have kept pace with economic strides and the globalization process of which India has become an intrinsic part. There is persistent talk of an early election, an election that no one wants. However, in view of a steady deterioration in ties between the Congress and the Left parties over the US nuclear deal, it is difficult to see how the two can remain together for the rest of the term. Indeed, the principal cause of conflict is the nuclear deal. The threat comes, not only from the Left, the outside prop, but also from the ruling alliance partners. For them, staying in power and warding off election is the only objective.
The Left’s gingerly assessment is that having stemmed the tide of its electoral losses, the BJP, with an eye on the future, may decide to woo the United States, the business leaders, media and the urban middle class that support the deal. If it doesn’t, then Congress corners these influential sections, going to them as modern-day martyrs, thwarted in their quest to take the country on the path of global glory. Thus, taking a long shot, the deal would go through, if not by the present Govern lent, then its successor - and JS President George Bush’s successor. After all, China took 13 years, and the European Union five, to sign similar agreements with the US.
As of now, however, politics has awakened the prophets of doom. High inflation, has forced a lowering of India’s gross domestic product (GDP) and everyone is having doubts about an early election. But then, elections take place in India even when nobody wants them - neither the political parties, nor the bureaucracy and certainly not the people. With leaders of national stature fading the political arena has basically provincial satraps calling the shots. There seems no end in sight to coalitions of parties, some one-person shows, aligning only to share power. So much so that many have begun to see virtues in governance by coalition as the representative of, and panacea to deal with, the diversities that abound in this vast land.
The coalition partners agree to a common minimum programme, smoothening out for public consumption their rough individual edges, and stick together for power. One would not quarrel with this arrangement if it provided good governance. The problem is that it slows down decision-making, even prevents it. A small minority can hamstring the Government. India’s democracy seems condemned to be run by the lowest common denominator. Politicians of practically all hues think the parliamentary form is the best. Conceding that they are right, they need to do a great deal of introspection as to why it has worked the way it has. The system of political parties has to evolve.
The parliamentary system requires the existence of clearly defined political parties, each with a coherent set of policies and preferences that distinguish it from the others. In India, a party is merely a label of convenience to be adopted and discarded at will. The parliamentary system borrowed from the British has become, in Indian conditions, nothing but a recipe for Governmental instability. India, with its critical economic and social challenges, cannot afford it. India needs a system of Government whose leaders can focus on governance rather on staying in power.