Modi’s India: economics, identity and democracy

This year is teeming with some forty momentous elections worldwide, but among them a keen eye falls on India – a nation set to witness its own electoral spectacle between April and May. The Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi — whose controversial image in the West clashes with his staggering 78% approval rating at home — is bidding to be re-elected for a third term.

Modi has already been in office for a decade. If he wins again it would firmly place him in history as one of India’s most popular PMs, alongside Jawaharlal Nehru, who led the country from independence in 1947 to his death in 1964, and his daughter Indira Gandhi, who served two terms for a total of 15 years before she was assassinated in 1984.

While some corners of the British press paint Modi as a perilous nationalist leader linked to communal conflicts, the disjunct between the Indian experience of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the British viewpoint on its governance becomes apparent. The complexity of India defies simplistic summaries, and the narratives and ground realities often diverge, making it challenging to discern the truth. How can we begin to accurately understand Modi’s India? Forget political commentators and press pieces, start with law and policy.

One significant move by Modi’s BJP government was the ban on the practice of triple Talaq, a law specific to Muslim communities using Sharia courts. This law allowed a man to divorce by declaring “I divorce you” three times, often leaving women destitute. Additionally, the BJP has proposed a Universal Civil Code to eliminate parallel religious laws in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance, emphasising a secular approach.

From a British perspective the notion that parallel legal systems and discriminatory practices such as triple Tilaq are possible in a multicultural secular democracy is abhorrent. However, this push towards secularism has been viewed by the political opposition to the BJP as an affront to minority religious rights. Where accusations of human rights abuses are made against India, none are more ready to put pen to paper than sections of the British press. In one typical Guardian article, the reader is reminded of accusations against Modi of bias against Muslims, rather than emphasising the impact triple Tilaq has on women left without husband or home.^[1]

Economically, the BJP pursues a delicate balance between market-driven growth and socialist policies aimed at alleviating poverty. Modi’s tenure has witnessed significant infrastructure development, including the construction of over 300,000 kilometres of roads, modernisation of rail networks, and the establishment of more than 250 airports. However, critics argue that state-backed corporations have become wealthier and more influential under “Modinomics”.

Despite some successes, Modi has faced challenges with his proposed agricultural reforms, leading to India’s longest-ever farm protests and the subsequent revocation of the reforms. Farming issues hinge on several localised issues. They are driven by the traditional practice of dividing land between family members, poor crop management, and corrupt local governance and police. Modi alienated the state through allowing the protests to continue for over a year.

Images of elderly Sikh Punjabi farmers protesting in the streets of Delhi evoked memories of historic violence against Sikhs in the 1980s, allowing identity politics and calls of minority oppression to seep into the national discourse. With little to no intellectual resilience on the topic, parts of the British press, Western celebrities (including Rihanna) and even some British politicians swallowed the narrative of an oppressive BJP.

While some policies and actions are falsely given a religious sheen and understood through a lens of minority oppression, genuine concerns exist. 2019 saw the Citizens Amendments Act (CAA) passed. The Act ensures that all persecuted minorities from neighbouring states are given safe refuge in India, including Christians, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists — but not Muslims. The CAA prevents the same safe passage for persecuted minority Muslim sects and groups in Pakistan, such as Ahmadiyya Muslims, Hazaras and LGBT Muslims. This law is undeniably anti-Muslim.

Beyond policies, certain BJP narratives risk polarising identities and fostering division, such as the assertion that all dharmic traditions should be understood as Hindu. The entry of this discussion into politics has echoes of historic assimilative politics that contributed to the divisions between Hindus and Sikhs. What might have been intended as an attempt to find common unifying ground may well have the opposite effect.

A deep understanding from the centre towards 780 languages, a myriad of different religions, cultural practices and tribes may never be wholly possible, nor is it entirely required. India has a federal system that allows 80% of the action to happen at state level. However, a greater sympathy and genuine outreach from the central government to the states can strengthen relationships within India and enhance its international image.

In sum, dichotomies exist in Modi’s India, as they do elsewhere. One can definitively assert that the BJP has implemented policies that intend to reach and improve the livelihoods of all in India, whilst also holding to be true that the new CAA law is explicit in its discrimination against Muslims. It all comes down to where one would like to put emphasis, which story one wants to tell. To be a wise British onlooker, as the election period kicks off, one needs to discard identity politics, look to what is being done rather than what is being said, and delve deeper to grasp the complexities of this emerging global power.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.

^[1] ‘Historic’ day as India outlaws ‘triple talaq’ Islamic instant divorce | India | The Guardian