Political Commentary

Countdown in India

John Grigg

March 1977 will be remembered, perhaps above all, as a month when 350 million people in the Indian subcontinent—the voters of India and Pakistan—went to the poll. The result of the Pakistani election is already known and has taken most observers by surprise. Justice may have been done, but has not been seen to be done, because there is too much suspicion of ballot-rigging and intimidation. But the election in Pakistan may have served at least one good purpose, since the fact that it was to be held probably influenced Mrs Gandhi's decision to hold one in India.

She must have been unhappy, in any case, about the damage that her emergency regime was doing to India's good name in the world, and the possibility that Pakistan might come to seem more democratic than India may well have been too much for her. In addition, she had reason to believe that there would never again be a more favourable opportunity for securing popular endorsement of her regime. Two good monsoons running had been out of the ordinary; to count on a third would be tempting providence. Finally, she must have assumed that the opposition would be so unprepared, so divided and so destitute of credible leadership that she would be bound to win a smashing victory.

Her calculations were dramatically upset at the beginning of last month by a powerful and wholly unexpected revolt within her own party. The resignation of Jagjivan Ram was of special importance not only because, as leader of the Untouchables, he was likely to be worth seventy or more seats to the opposition, but also because he had the unique prestige of having been a member of the central cabinet ever since independence. The simultaneous challenge from two former chief ministers of states, 14. N. Bahuguna and Mrs Nandini Satpathy, was hardly less serious, however, because they had only recently been forced out of office by pressure and intrigue, and were still capable of wielding much influence within their own states, Uttar Pradesh and Orissa.

Mr Bahuguna has the further advantage of being relatively young in an opposition alliance which might otherwise be unduly weighted, in its higher echelons, towards old age. Should the opposition win, he would be a key figure in the next government. He and Mrs Sat pathy claim to have been pushed out because they refused to detain thousands of people at the behest of Mrs Gandhi's son, Sanjay, and his Youth Congress.

It is certainly true that the secession of major personalities, soon after the lifting of most emergency restraints upon freedom of expression, released a flood of pent-up hostility towards Sanjay, which his mother had never suspected. People at last felt free to say what they thought and the immediate result was that Youth Congress candidates, who were being fielded in large numbers, were dropped in favour of more experienced Congress politicians. Sanjay himself is standing, and it is quite right that he should, because during the emergency he has been the most powerful man in India and he is one of the main issues—if not the main issue —in the election.

Despite many obvious handicaps the opposition alliance, known as the Janata party, has been drawing huge crowds and evoking manifest popular enthusiasm. But so, apparently, did the opposition in Pakistan. Does this mean that, by fair means or foul, Mrs Gandhi will win a five-to-one majority like Mr Bhutto ?

The short answer is NO. India is a very different country from Pakistan—much larger and more diverse, with a democratic rather than a theocratic tradition, with a multiplicity of power bases (even now, after twenty-one months of virtual dictatorship), and with armed forces notably disinclined to political adventure. Apart from Jagjivan Ram's appeal to the Untouchables, and the influence of Mr Bahuguna and Mrs Satpathy in their respective states, the opposition will also benefit from the DMK machine in the southern state of Tamil Nadu (formerly Madras), and above all from a general feeling that things have gone too far.

On the other hand, Mrs Gandhi is a formidable campaigner when she senses danger, and she is still the only all-India figure on the political stage. The emergency has clearly produced substantial improvements in the economy, social discipline and the efficiency of public services, though most of these improvements could have been effected by the powers which the government already had, without the need for mass arrests, press censorship and other despotic measures. There may be some attempt to rig the election, though Mrs Gandhi herself would not wish to be accused of winning by dirty methods, and the opposition will now be doubly on its guard.

One of Mrs Gandhi's biggest assets in the past has been the trust that she has inspired in India's eighty-million-strong Muslim community, and it might be thought that she could be sure of their votes in this election, seeing that one of the elements in the opposition alliance is the Hindu Jana Sangh party. But only the other day a leading Muslim, Abdullah Bukhari, imam of one of Delhi's largest mosques, spoke after Jagjivan Ram at a mass meeting outside the mosque and proclaimed his full support for Spectator 12 March 1977 the opposition. Many Muslims have been outraged by Sanjay's impatient methods and the Muslim vote is sure to be divided.

The most likely result is victory for Mrs Gandhi, but not by a very wide margin—a result more like that of 1967 than like that of 1971. The Indian electors would thus register their distaste for much that has been done without risking the uncertainty of a change of government. Such a result would weaken Mrs Gandhi's authority within her party and some believe that it would lead to her removal from the premiership. The senior Congressmen who have resigned are by no means the only malcontents, and if she had only a small majority in the new parliament there would be a danger of defections.

As for Sanjay, he is likely to win his own

election and one must hope that his future political activities will be strictly democratic and constitutional. Some of his ideas are enlightened, and he may prove to have more 'talent as a politician than as a motormanufacturer. But he must remember that he is a Nehru, not a Pahlevi. (IncidentallY, the Shah's regime now looks pretty shakY. Democracy is more efficient than dictatorship in the long run.)

Though in my view outright victory for

the opposition is improbable, it is not impossible, and there are some grounds for thinking that it might be the best result for India. The one perennial flaw in Indian democracy is that there has never been a change of government at the centre. Of course the opposition groups have been irresponsible, but the longer people are kept out of power the more troublesome and fractious they become. The best way to make them responsible is to give them responsibility. If the opposition should happen to win, it can confidently be assumed that Mrs Gandhi would relinquish power without a struggle. But if Sanjay or any of his henchmen were to attempt a coup, they could expect no helP 'from the military. As well as the armed forces' natural and normal loyalty to the constitution, there would also be considerable personal loyalty to Jagjivan Ram, who was defence minister in 1971 during the triumphant war with Pakistan. In the event of an opposition victory Mrs Pandit would probably be elected to the vacant presidencY of India, so in one sense there would still be a Nehru at the top.

Whatever the outcome, the

eleshould at least dispose of the deadly myth that poor and illiterate people have no interest in democratic rights. Of all people, it is they who need them most. metyion

od Authoritarian rule may begin with go

intentions but it soon degenerates into worse muddle and corruption than the worst tha.t can flourish under democracy, because it nemesis, subject to fear of exposure and elector

is al For the world's underdogs,

pothe liberty is the only sure key to economic plenty. To sacrifice one for the sake of

other is to make a fool's exchange. litical