While presenting the Interim Budget 2024, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, on 1st February, announced the Modi government’s decision to table a ‘White Paper’ in the Parliament. The White Paper gave a comparative study about the performance of the Narendra Modi-led NDA government viz-a-viz Dr. Manmohan Singh-led UPA regime on the economic front, in their decade-long tenures.
The 59-page white paper details how the UPA inherited a healthy economy in 2004, but when the Narendra Modi government replaced the Manmohan Singh government in 2014, the Indian economy was in very bad shape. Comparing key macro and micro-economic parameters, it highlighted how the UPA’s decade of governance (or absence thereof) was embroiled in systemic corruption and policy paralysis, leading India to be classified among the notorious ‘fragile five’ economies. Additionally, it traced the contrasting performance of the NDA government during its ten years in power.
Along those lines, there could be supplementary ‘White Papers’ examining their performances on several other key parameters, including the welfare of different communities – Sabka Vikas vs placating for Ganga Jamuni Tehzeeb, that is the contrast between appeasement politics and politics of saturation.
Idea of Sabka Vikas: Need for appeasement or judicious upliftment?
With a plethora of policy measures in ten years of NDA and UPA governments, clear disparities in the ‘Idea of Sabka Vikas’ and action plans on those lines become evident. While the Modi government’s ‘Sabka Vikas’ entails the philosophy of welfare politics through ‘politics of saturation’, the UPA government was marred with the accusation of having a communal tilt, politics of appeasement.
Under its stated ambitious goal of ‘politics of saturation’, the Modi government targets 100% coverage in schemes like PM Awas Yojana, Har Ghar Nal Se Jal, and health coverage through Ayushman Bharat Yojana, vaccination among others. It aims to achieve ‘Sabka Vikas’ – ‘development of all, appeasement of none’ – which is the upliftment of every Indian to abridge ‘Dil ki duri’, if any. It has put in motion actionable agendas like welfare schemes for all, including minorities, infrastructure expansion to remote or lesser connected regions like the Northeast, and ‘representation’ irrespective of caste, religion, or region like Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam.
In its ten years of governance, the Congress-led UPA government worked along the lines of appeasement so much that Former Defence Minister AK Antony held ‘its minority appeasement’ policy as the major reason for its route in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.
People have lost faith in the secular credentials of the party. They have a feeling that the Congress bats for a few communities, especially minorities, AK Antony had underscored after analysing reasons of party’s defeat.
Here are a few examples of how the Congress party faired on the allegations of appeasement politics.
- Pandering to the Muslim vote bank, Congress gifted 123 properties in prime locations in Delhi to Waqf right before the 2014 Lok Sabha elections
The Congress-led UPA government in 2014, handed over 123 properties in prime locations in Delhi to the Delhi Waqf Board. Ahead of that year’s Lok Sabha elections, the Congress government exercised its powers under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013 to denotify 123 properties from the land acquisition process. The said properties were to be handed over to the Delhi Waqf Board.
The government notification was subsequently challenged by the Indraprastha Vishwa Hindu Parishad. In the same year, a Delhi court passed an order asking the Centre to listen to the grievances of the stakeholders and make a decision.
After due process, the Modi government, on 17th February 2023, corrected the UPA government’s decision. It posted notices outside these 123 properties in Delhi, stating that they were no longer considered properties of the Delhi Waqf Board.
- Appeasement Policy Continuum: From Communal Violence Bill to rhetoric pleasing Islamists
The draft of the Communal Violence Bill, officially referred to as the Prevention of Communal and Targeted Violence (Access to Justice and Reparations) Bill, 2011, would have proved to be one of the most disastrous laws if it were to be enacted. It assumed that only religious or linguistic minorities and people from the Scheduled Castes and Tribes could be the victims of communal violence conveniently ignoring all ground realities. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had correctly said then that the bill was anti-majority and presumed that the majority community is always to blame for the communal violence. Here is a detailed report on the members who were entrusted to draft this outrageous bill.
Apart from communally-charged executive or legislative measures, the Congress-led UPA government made rhetorics, as part of its appeasement policy, that emboldened Islamists. Evidently, sensing its eroding political capital, Congress made an abject surrender to the Muslim vote bank ahead of the 2012 UP Assembly elections which is considered a virtual semi-final before Lok Sabha elections. It is considered that the party that gains big in UP, possesses a better chance of excelling in Lok Sabha elections.
In one of his rallies during the 2012 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, Salman Khurshid had said that Sonia Gandhi, the then Congress President, cried bitterly after seeing the images of the slain terrorists who were killed in the 2008 Batla House encounter. In brief, the Batla House encounter took place on 19th September 2008, during which two Indian Mujahideen terrorists namely Atif Amin and Mohammad Sajid were neutralised.
It is important to highlight that remarks invoking sympathies for terrorists from a sitting Minister can’t be shrugged off as mere ‘slip of the tongue’ or erroneous unharmful mischief as vote-getter rhetoric rather it works as a tactical shield for Islamists, creating a sense of aggrandisement in radicals and law and order situation and a no-go zone for security forces.
Needless to say, appeasement politics is often presented as a ‘qualifying criteria’ for secular credentials or as a measure for community protection or development. This approach promotes the idea of ‘development’ for minority communities, often perpetuating their status as a ‘perennial vote bank’ deliberately kept behind by such policies.
- Judicious upliftment of the poor vs number-dressing
In 2012, Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia removed poverty and uplifted poor en-mass with a stroke of a pen. The UPA drew massive flake for hailing its poverty alleviation measures by doing number-dressing.
Back then, Ahluwalia had said that poverty has come down, no matter what method one uses. The Commission gave an estimation that the poverty ratio had declined to 29.8 percent in 2009-10, from 37.2 percent in 2004-05. However, it was found that the ratio had been worked out based on a controversial per capita daily consumption of Rs 28.65 in cities and Rs 22.42 in rural areas.
Contrarily, in the tenth year of the Modi government, recent Research reports have hailed government initiatives for improving rural livelihood and bringing the poverty level down to 5 percent of the population.
Notably, on Tuesday (27th February), a research report published by the State Bank of India (SBI) corroborated the findings of the Household Consumption Expenditure Survey (HCES), which was conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO).
It noted the positive impact that the schemes of the Union government had in reducing poverty, checking inflation, increasing the Monthly Per-capita Consumer Expenditure (MPCE) and bridging the urban-rural divide in spending power. For instance, rural poverty has decreased from 25.7% (2011-12) to 7.2% (2022-2023) while urban poverty has reduced from 13.7% (2011-12) to 4.6% (2022-2023). Complete details of these reports can be read here and here.
Authoritarian, undemocratic, and illegal measures to perpetuate power, system, and/or ‘money’
Democratic ways of functioning could be another subject matter for a supplementary ‘White Paper’ to compare the ten years of NDA vs UPA. The last policy measures of the UPA would be succinct to point out how the UPA used authoritarian, undemocratic, and illegal measures to scam Indian democratic ethos and perpetuate power, system, and/or ‘money’ for itself.
On the day when UPA lost power to NDA in 2014, the outgoing Finance Minister P Chidambaram signed an order that benefitted 13 companies including that of Mehul Choksi. A CNN-News 18 report had revealed that former finance minister P Chidambaram signed an order in a great hurry on 16th May 2014 that allowed certain specific companies to import gold.
As per the details, the RBI circular allowed 13 companies to import gold under the 80-20 scheme and Mehul Choksi’s Gitanjali Gems was among them. The RBI circular was dated May 21, 2014, and it was signed by the then Finance Minister P Chidambaram on 16th May 2014, on the day that the general election results were announced and UPA had lost power. Around 50% of the entire benefit was cornered by 7 companies, and Mehul Choksi’s Gitanjali Gems was again one of them. Gitanjali Gems is believed to have imported 400 kg of gold under the scheme after the order. Economic fugitive Mehul Choksi is one of the accused in the 11,000 crores PNB Bank fraud.
Similarly, the caretaker-UPA government also made hurried appointments on several prominent posts including that in PSUs and Army Chief (however it got relief on it, despite it being a last-minute decision and of a caretaker government). It also faced stiff opposition to carrying out certain acquisitions. The Congress party was accused of appointing ‘favourable persons’ to hold a prolonged power in the system. In fact, it is often said that Congress still commands a hold in the system as it has its favourable persons in the system.
Division of a state in an undemocratic manner to gain votes
Ahead of the Lok Sabha elections 2014, the Congress-led UPA also carried out the bifurcation of erstwhile Andra Pradesh in a hurried manner to gain advantage on 17 Lok Sabha seats in the newly carved Telangana. It was a hurriedly drafted bill that led to unruly scenes in the Lok Sabha and passed in a completely chaotic undemocratic manner.
The infamous pepper spray incident in the Lok Sabha occurred when this bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha in February 2014.
The Act was so badly drafted that even now there are unresolved issues between the Telangana and AP state governments. For example, Jairam Ramesh failed to list 12 institutions whose assets have to be distributed between the states and now they are fighting for them! After assuming power, it was the Modi government that corrected the UPA’s politically drafted bill.
The drafting of the act was so careless and shoddy that the Modi government had to redraw the boundaries of the two states, in its very first cabinet meeting in May 2014.
The Congress and I.N.D.I. alliance partners have regularly opposed major reformative measures and Bills of the Modi government using the flimsy trope that they were passed in the din, or not sent to a select committee, extending the benefit to a section ‘without’ them asking for it – as happened in the case of Triple talaq or the Farm Laws. However, when it was in power as a caretaker government, it took substantive policy measures, undemocratically and illegally.
The nation, particularly voters, will benefit greatly if supplementary ‘White papers’ are presented so that they can make an informed decision while going to the polling booth and not fall in the trap of divisive agendas hiding appeasement of radicals in virtuous planks, ‘unity, brotherhood, tolerance’ etc.
