Is it a catalyst or does it signify lasting institutional presence in politics?
IN BECOMING CM of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has accomplished a miracle in Indian politics. With 28 seats in an assembly of 70, AAP finished second behind the BJP. The Congress, which won eight years and was pushed out of office, picked up eight seats and offered AAP support in a jesting, mocking, non-serious manner. AAP trapped the Congress by accepting the support, after going through a process of consultation.
How long will this government last? Will the Congress be forced to withdraw support if (or when) the AAP government begins investigating corruption by the previous, Sheila Dikshit administration? Will Kejriwal go into a midterm poll in Delhi as a martyr who lost an ally (Congress) and his chief ministry because he was fighting sleaze? Will the gain BJP gain instead, having grabbed the entirety of the opposition space? In the coming weeks, AAP will face a straightforward challenge. It has taken charge from a Congress government has run Delhi for 15 years. Along with the Union government, also led by the Congress, the previous Delhi government has been charged with many scandals, cases of malfeasance and embezzlement. Its opacity in public procurement – which famously came to light during the preparations for the Commonwealth Games of 2010—contributed to the Congress government losing support.
It would stand to reason that any new government, especially one which has been built on an anti-corruption platform, will re-open or intensify investigations. AAP could use this course to burnish its credentials as well as embarrass the Congress. Already, senior Congress leaders, as well as those associated with the Sheila Dikshit government, are talking of unconditional support being not quite unconditional and openly wondering how long the gimmick will last. To be fair, AAP has nothing to lose. It has placed the Congress in a dilemma. A quick midterm election may benefit AAP or may benefit the BJP. It will almost leave the Congress in an even bigger mess.
Even more important, however, is the issue of what the AAP phenomenon means for national politics and the upcoming Lok Sabha election. Can AAP or regional parties grab the non- BJP space in states and particularly urban areas where the Congress has lost ground?
On the other hand, is the AAP performance a freak outcome, an outlier and limited to just the unique environment and tiny constituencies of Delhi?
The BJP would certainly hopes it’s the latter. To some extent, it would have reason to be optimistic. After all, the type of Delhi voter who put his or her support behind AAP and Kejriwal is also the type of voter whom Narendra Modi is courting and seeking to aggressively identify with – young and restless, somewhat underprivileged or belonging to the aspiring middle classes, feeling let down by the cynicism and social hierarchies that define the Congress. It is perfectly possible that many AAP voters in Delhi – and Kejriwal sympathisers in other cities – could vote for Modi in May 2014.
However, a caveat needs to be entered here. If the Delhi verdict and the drubbing the Congress has suffered offers hope for the BJP, it also delivers a warning. An undercooked campaign, lack of due diligence in candidate selection and in addressing negative perceptions about even senior functionaries and the absence of new ideas and triggers with which to inspire impatient voters are going to hold back the potential of even as promising a prime ministerial candidate as Modi.
How does analyse AAP: is it a catalyst or does it signify lasting institutional presence in politics? Kejriwal’s fundamental appeal is not his populist promises (cheap water, lower power tariffs) but the fact that he has been willing to speak the unspeakable truth and bust the cosy and incestuous club of cross-party politicians. In a sense, he has thrown up poison and forced India to confront conflicts of interest it didn’t even see as conflicts of interest. Whether his government lasts or otherwise, in some crazy and manic way Kejriwal has served a purpose.
Having said that, running a government and running a rhetorical and angry election campaign are very different. The manner of consultation before AAP accepted the Congress’ offer of support and agreed to form a government was a process of asking the public to send text messages to indicate whether AAP should go ahead or otherwise. This, along with the trust Kejriwal seems to place on mohalla committees— sub-units of even municipal wards—is being described as AAP’s commitment to “direct democracy”. Is this a revolutionary idea—or a crackpot scheme? Does it suggest policy decisions and new laws will be subject to not legislative support but also attestation by ad hoc opinion polls, and use of text-message or Internet-based surveys? Does it involve referendums? As a device, the referendum is much used in Switzerland, a country AAP ideologues have often referred to. Even laws passed by parliament can be challenged and nullified. In the Swiss system, an individual citizen can force a plebiscite if he collects 50,000 signatures. Switzerland has a population of eight million. If its standards are applied to India, one is looking at collecting signatures of 7.5 million people.
Clearly the “go to the people” method is not feasible. How then can policy making and legislation be made more consultative? Civil society groups claim one route is to involve them in the process. They argue they work among grassroots communities and represent popular opinion. As such, they bring to policy shaping a humane heart, while civil servants and political administrators only contribute a clinical mind. AAP has bought into this notion wholeheartedly.
It is apparent a certain populism and emotiveness is built into this civil society argument. Whichever way one considers it, it ends up undermining technocratic specialisation, not to speak of elected government. In the long term, if AAP is mature into a party of governance – as opposed to a party of the op-ed pages—it will have to keep all this in mind