chapterforty-three

KOWTOWINGTOCHINA?

The kowtow (or koutou in the pinyin form of Mandarin Chinese) was to beperformedbeforetheemperorofChinafromancienttimes.Althoughitpossiblyoriginated in an even earlier era, it was well established by the time the Qindynastycametopoweraround221BCE.Althoughtherearevariousformsofthekowtow, it is essentially a gesture of deep respect towards one’s elders andsuperiorsandcaninvolvebowing,prostrating,kneelingoracombinationofallthree. In the past, the requirement of the kowtow in the presence of Chineserulers caused resentment among foreign ambassadors and non-Chinesedignitaries because it was a gesture of submission. Today, the kowtow is nolongerinvogue.ButasPresidentXiJinpinggrowsevermorepowerfulitisclearthatheexpectsmostof the foreignheadsofstateshedealswith tokowtowtohim in all but form.This is a problem that India has to dealwith head-on, asmore than most we have to figure out how to deal with China and its all-powerfulrulerinawaythatbestsuitsourowninterests.

AsIhavepointedoutearlier,NarendraModihasvisitedChinaandtheUSmorethanhehasvisitedanyothercountryintheworld.694HeandPresidentXiJinpinghavemetonnumerousoccasions,most recently inWuhanand then inJohannesburg.Butforall this, theredoesn’tseemtohavebeenmuchheadwaymadeonthemostseriousissuesconfrontingthetwonations—borderconflicts,thetradeimbalance,China’sgrowingaggressionsasitseekstofulfilitsregionaland global aspirations, to name just a few. As with the chapter on Indo–USrelationsthatprecedesthis,adetailedanalysisoftheIndia–Chinarelationshipisbeyondthescopeofthischapter,soletmejustfocusonafewaspects.

Possibly themostpressing issue is theconflictson theborder, theDoklamstandoffcontinuedformanymonths in2018before the twosidesstooddown;buttheproblemsthisyearhavetheirgenesisinalong-standingdisputeovertheborderthatdoesnotseemtobelikelytoeaseupanytimesoon,notwithstandingthe conciliatory noises that aremade from time to time.To sort out the long-unresolved border issue alone would require an extraordinary act ofstatesmanshipandtherearenosignsthatMrModi,asprimeminister,haseithertheinclinationorcapabilitytoachieveit.

Before Doklam, relations between the two countries took on an icy chillwhenChinese leaders turnedfuriousover theDalaiLama’sApril2017visit tothe northeastern Indian state ofArunachal Pradesh,whichChina claims as itsown.On8April,overloudprotestsfromChina’sgovernment, theDalaiLamaaddressed devotees from far andwide at the historicmonastery in the bordertownofTawang,wherethesixthDalaiLamawasbornmorethanthreecenturiesago.695

India and China view both the Dalai Lama and Arunachal Pradesh verydifferently. From India’s perspective, theDalaiLama is the spiritual leader oftheTibetanBuddhistcommunity,andsohastherighttoministertohisfollowersat the great Tibetan Buddhist monastery in Tawang. And, because ArunachalPradesh is a state of the Indian union, what happens there is India’s decisionalone.

InChina’s view, however,ArunachalPradesh is not really India’s.Yes, itofficiallybelongstoIndia, theysay,butonlybecauseoftheMcMahonLine,aboundarydrawnbyBritishimperialistsin1911,whichChinanolongeraccepts(thoughChinadidsettle itsboundarywithMyanmaralongthesameline).TheChinesegovernmentreferstoArunachalPradeshasSouthTibet.

In any case, says China, the Dalai Lama is not a spiritual leader, but apolitical one. And, given his support for Tibetan self-rule (Chinese officialsangrilycallhima‘splittist’696),hisvisittoasensitiveborderareawasviewedasadeliberateprovocation.

According to China’s spokesman, allowing the Dalai Lama to visitArunachal Pradesh could harm bilateral relations, with India facing the‘consequences.’ China also summoned Indian Ambassador Vijay Gokhale toregisteraformalprotest.697

India, for its part, took a conciliatory approach. TheMinistry of ExternalAffairsfirstattemptedtoassuageChina,statingthat‘noadditionalcolourshouldbe ascribed to theDalai Lama’s religious and spiritual activities.’And, in thefaceofChina’sincreasinglyintemperatefulminations,PrimeMinisterNarendraModi’s government reiterated its respect for the ‘One-China’ policy, urgingChina’sgovernmentnottogenerate‘artificialcontroversy.’698

But China was not mollified. Instead, when the Dalai Lama arrived inArunachal Pradesh, the Chinese official media declared that China might be‘forcedtotaketoughmeasures.’TheGlobalTimes,anEnglishlanguagetabloidpublishedbytheChineseCommunistPartymouthpiecethePeople’sDaily,tooka particularly belligerent tone. Citing China’s GDP, which is ‘several timeshigher than that of India,’ and its military capabilities, which ‘can reach the

IndianOcean’—nottomentionitsproximitytotroubledKashmir—itasked,‘ifChinaengagesinageopoliticalgamewithIndia,’whowillwin?699

ThesameGlobalTimeseditorialstressedthatthisvisitbytheDalaiLamatoArunachalPradeshwasdifferentfromhisprevioussix—thelastofwhichwasin2009—because he was ‘received and accompanied’ by India’s junior homeminister, Kiren Rijiju. India saw nothing unusual in Rijiju, an Arunachalipolitician, being present for a major spiritual occasion. In democracies, suchpublic events involving popular religious figures are common, and politiciansoftenenjoytheattentiontheyattractbyattendingthem.

But China preferred to use Rijiju’s attendance as evidence that the eventwas,infact,political,suggestingthatIndiawasusingthevisitas‘adiplomatictool to put pressure on China.’ The fundamental point, the Global Timesstressed, was that the Dalai Lama ‘is a highly politicized symbol in China’sdiplomacy,’somuchsothatacountry’sattitudetowardhimaffectsalmost‘theentirerelationship’withChina.700

Despite theModi government’s refusal to back down in 2017, it climbeddownin2018,whenitasked‘seniorleaders’and‘governmentfunctionaries’tostayawayfromeventsplannedinMarchandAprilbytheTibetangovernmentinexile to mark the 60th anniversary of the Dalai Lama’s arrival in India; thismovewas,ostensibly,toavoidexacerbatingtheDoklamcrisis.701

TheModigovernmenthasbeenengagedinanawkwarddiplomatictrapezeact toavoidprovokingChinawhile simultaneouslyavoiding the impressionofbending too far to accommodate its powerful neighbour.Togive creditwherecreditisdue,MrModihastriedtoworkwithChina,butwithlittletoshowforhis efforts. His government hailed his July 2018 meeting with President XiJinpingasanexampleofgettingdiplomacybackontrack,onlytobeconfrontedwiththeembarrassmentofconfirmingthatithadbeena‘no-agendameeting’—in otherwords, one inwhich India has been unable to raise any of the issuesrelating to its neighbour’s troublesome conduct, from Kashmir and CPEC toMasoodAzhar,stapledvisas,ArunachalPradeshandDoklam.Itdoesnotappearto have occurred toMrModi that to have no agenda is in fact to adopt youradversary’sagenda,sincehepreferstotalkonhisowntermsratherthanaboutyourissues.

Such setbacks in dealing with China have been common throughout MrModi’s tenure. For example, in 2014, PMModi not only welcomed ChinesePresidentXiJinpingtohishometown,Ahmedabad,onhisownbirthday;onthatsame trip, he also lifted the previous government’s restrictions on Chineseinvestments in sensitive sectors of the Indian economy, such as ports and

telecoms.702ChinesesoldierspromptlycrossedthedisputedfrontierwithIndiain theLadakhregionofJammuandKashmir,goingso faras topitch tentsonlandthatIndiaconsidersitssovereignterritory.703

Thatmini-crisiswas followed by a series of policy setbacks that reflectedChina’s scant regard for India’s sensitivities on various issues.China opposedIndia’s bid (strongly supported by the United States) for membership in theNuclearSuppliersGroup.704ItblockedIndia’srequesttonameMasoodAzhar,theheadofJaish-e-Mohammed(aPakistaniterroristgroup),toaUnitedNationsSecurity Council blacklist, despite support for the move from the council’sfourteenothermembers.705

ChinahasalsobuiltitsCPECthroughPakistan-controlledpartsofKashmir.706 China itself recognizes that the territory is disputed, yet its governmentcompletelyignoredIndia’sobjectionstotheviolationofitssovereignty.

Against this background, China’s expectation that India would respect itssensitivitieswasabitrich.YetChina’sarrogantapproachisnotnew.Infact,itsreactiontotheDalaiLama’svisittoArunachalPradeshaswellasDoklam,isofa piece with its behaviour in the South China Sea, where China insists thatsovereigntyshouldbedeterminedaccordingtoits‘nine-dashline.’707

Chinaexpectsothercountriestofallintolinewhenitmakessuchademand,asthePhilippineshasdoneunderPresidentRodrigoDuterte.708AndChinahasproved willing to turn up the heat on those that don’t, such as Japan andVietnam.709

ButIndiaissomewhatbiggerthanChina’sotherregionalneighbours,andismade of sterner stuff. Rather than adopting a confrontational stand, China’sleadersshouldworkwithus.Iftheydon’t,andinsteadmovetofollowthroughontheirthreats,theymaywelldiscoverthatIndia,too,hascardstoplay.

InPaxIndica:IndiaandtheWorldoftheTwenty-firstCentury,Ilaidoutanumber of areas for possible cooperation with China, particularly in themultilateralarena.ItisentirelypossiblethattherelationshipwithChinacanveeraway from confrontation towards at least coexistence if not extensivecooperation. That was also the conclusion reached by the ParliamentaryStanding Committee for External Affairs in its review of India-Chinacooperation in 2017–18. But to pull this off successfully requires an adroitcombinationofpoliticalfirmness,militarypreparednesstodiscourageanyPLAadventurism (strong defences would serve to prevent military means actuallyhavingtobeused),hard-headedeconomicnegotiationsandskilfuldiplomacy.Itcannotbeachievedthroughburstsofenthusiasmfollowedbysullennegativity,which have characterized the Modi government’s attitude so far. Polite

namaskarsmustbeIndia’salternativetothekowtow.

694VarunB.Krishnan,‘Modi’sforeignvisits:AlookatthePM’stravelpatternsandexpenses’,TheHindu,21July2018.695‘Live:ChinaWrongtoSlamDelhiOverDalaiLama,SaysArunachalCM’,TheQuint,5April2017.696JaimeFlorCruz,‘Analysis:WhytheDalaiLamaangersChina’,CNN,18February2010.697Apurva,‘Don’tuseDalaiLamatoharmourinterests:ChinatoIndia’,IndianExpress,7April2017.698 ‘ElizabethRoche, ‘India stands firm onDalai Lama’sArunachal visit in face ofChina opposition’,Livemint,5April2017.699‘India’suseofDalaiLamacardtactless’,GlobalTimes,6April2017.700Ibid.701ShubajitRoy, ‘DalaiLama events inDelhi cancelled,Tibetans shift “ThankYou India” function toDharamsala’,IndianExpress,6March2018.702 ‘PM Modi welcomes Xi Jinping in Ahmedabad; India, China sign 3 pacts’, Times of India , 18September2014.703 VictorMallet, ‘China-India border standoff overshadows Xi Jinping’s deals’,Financial Times , 18September2014.704‘USreaffirmssupporttoIndia’sNSGbid’,IndianExpress,11January2018.705ElizabethRoche,‘ChinaagainblocksbidinUNtolistMasoodAzharasaglobalterrorist’,Livemint,2November2017.706‘China-PakistanEconomicCorridor:Pakistan’sroadofhighhopes’,IndianExpress,18April2016.707DavidLague,‘Analysis:China’snine-dashedlineinSouthChinaSea’,Reuters,25May2012.708PanosMourdoukoutas,‘Duterte’sSouthChinaSeaFlip-FlopsWillPutThePhilippinesInAPlaceItDoesn’tWantToBe’,Forbes,30May2018.709‘JapanWillSoonHelpVietnamExtractGasfromtheSouthChinaSea.HowWillChinaRespond?’,NationalInterest,11August2018.

chapterforty-five

HAVEWELOSTNEPAL?

In the United States of the early 1950s, as Mao’s Communist party regimeconsolidated its hold on China and marched into Tibet, exilingWashington’sfavourite Generalissimo, Chiang Kai-Shek, to the island of Taiwan, theAmerican strategic community was convulsed in a debate over ‘Who LostChina?’IonlyhopethatnearlysevendecadeslatertheirIndianequivalentswillnotbelettingouttheanguishedcry,‘WhoLostNepal?’

As a result of a slew of unpopular decisions, India seems bent on drivingNepalintothearmsofChinaandothers.AsIhavepointedout,itissignificantthat the first statevisitor,PrimeMinisterofNepalK.P.SharmaOli received,afterbeingsworninon15February2018,wasthePakistaniprimeminister,S.K.Abbasi.714

Thereis,ofcourse,onlyoneplaceforfingerstobepointed,andthatisatourowngovernment inNewDelhi.Despite its increasingly feebledenials, India’sde facto blockade of Nepal for the past few years has choked the country’seconomy, cut off its oil supplies, caused genuine hardship and provoked agroundswellofhostilityagainstourcountry—fromtheoneplaceon theplanetwhoserelationshipwithusissofraternalthatwemaintainopenborderswithit.

How did this come to pass, andwhy? India’s displeasure at Nepal’s newconstitutionanditsrefusaltoaccommodatethedesiresofitsMadhesiandTharupopulation was understandable. The people of the Terai (or the Madhes, asIndians prefer to call the region south of the hills abutting our border) are inmany ways kin to—and essentially indistinguishable from—their brethren onoursideofthefrontier.

SomeNepalisconsiderMadhesis tobeessentially transplantedBiharis,buttheyhavebeenthereforcenturiesandmore,andnooneconteststheirlegitimateclaim toanhonoured role in shapingNepal’spoliticaldestiny.But rather thanchoosing an inclusive path by giving them their own autonomous regions orprovinces,thenewconstitutionofthecountrythatcameintoeffectinSeptember2015essentiallyrenderedthemaminorityinalmosteveryprovincebarone.

TheunhappinessofmostoftheMadhesipeoplewiththisdecision,andtherioting that followed theannouncementof thenewprovinces,added to India’s

disquiet, since problems in Nepal inevitably spill over into India. It isunofficially estimated that at the height of the Nepalese civil war less than adecadeago,7millionofNepal’s27millionpeoplehadsought refuge in India(undocumented,sinceNepalisneednopassportstocomehere).

If theangerin theTerai leadstoaseparatistmovement,for instance,Indiawilllikelybearthebruntofanewrefugeecrisis.NewDelhifelt,understandably,that Kathmandu’s leadership, overwhelmingly composed of the dominant hillelites, should have taken India’s concerns into account before announcing aconstitutionsofraughtwithpotentialproblems.

But it’s a far cry from feeling fraternal concern about a vital neighbourmaking amajor political error andmanifesting that irritation through virtuallycutting off that country’s lifeline from our country, thereby giving rise toprofoundresentmentofwhat is justifiablyportrayedasBigBrother’sbullying.Thesuspicion that indoingso theBJPgovernmentwaspandering tovoters inBihar’s assembly polls that were being held at the time was not entirelyunfounded.

The fact is there’s enough blame to be cast on our side too. The foreignsecretarywas sent as a special envoy towarnKathmandunot to embark on anegativecourse,butthatwasjustdaysbeforetheconstitutionwaspromulgatedand after it had already been agreed among all the major national politicalparties. The time for discreet but strong-arm diplomacy was months earlier,when the signs were apparent that the constitution was likely not to be theinclusiveoneIndiahadhopedfor.

The then foreignsecretarywasanoutstandinglyablediplomat,buthewasnoNepal expert andhadnever served there.Apolitical envoy,or an all-partyteam of Indian political leaderswithwell-established contacts in that country,shouldhavebeendispatchedbefore thesummerwithaclearandunambiguousmessageoftheimportanceIndiaattachedtoaformulaacceptabletoallshadesofNepaliopinion.

Ihavereasontobelieveourembassy,whichwasledbyAmbassadorRanjitRae (who was succeeded byManjeev Singh Puri in 2017), read the warningsignsintimeandsenturgentmessagestoNewDelhicallingforearlydiplomaticintervention. These were ignored. As I have mentioned earlier, one astuteobservertoldmeprivatelythatthe‘PMOtookitseyesofftheball’.

ThatwastheModigovernment’sfirstmistake.Bythetimeitwokeuptotheimpending crisis and dispatched the foreign secretary to Kathmandu, it wasalready too late.The time for quiet, discreet but effective diplomacyhad longsincepassed;theconstitutionwasalreadya‘donedeal’beforeweevenshowedourcards.

When the constitution-makers in Kathmandu went ahead and issued theconstitution they had already agreed upon, India reacted with a piqueunbecomingofamajorregionalpower.Weshowedourdispleasurepubliclyby,ineffect,cuttingoffessentialsuppliesonwhichallNepalisaredependent.

Theproblemwasnotjustthatthiscameacrossasoverbearing,butthatithadallthesubtletyofablunderbuss:insteadofsendingamessagetotheeliteinthehills, we hurt people we didn’t want to hurt—the aam aadmi of Nepalis. Anordinary worker in Kathmandu who can’t get an auto-rickshaw to take hispregnantwifetoahospitalbecausethere’snopetrolinthepumpsisn’tgoingtoworryaboutthenicetiesofconstitutionalinclusiveness.HeisjustgoingtocurseIndiafordoingthistohim.Wemadeenemiesoftheverypeoplewehavealwaysclaimedareourbrothers.

AndwhathastheModigovernmentachievedbydoingthis?Abasicruleofinternationalpoliticsisthatyouapplypressurecalibratedtoadesiredoutcome—in this case, changes acceptable to the people of the Terai. But instead weimposedablockadeaftertheconstitutionhadalreadybeenadopted;itwouldbeimpossible for any government inKathmandu to change it at this stage underIndianpressurewithoutbeingperceivedassurrendering itssovereignty.SoweincurreddeepunpopularityinthehillswithoutgaininganythingconcretefortheMadhesis—alose-loseproposition.

OntopofthatNewDelhialloweditselftobeidentifiedwiththelosingsidein the primeministerial race, unsubtly backing SushilKoirala and turning theonce-Indophile Oli into a raging anti-Indian chauvinist. Well, Oli is now theprimeminister,Delhi:dealwithit.

That was how an over-centralized Modi regime succeeded in alienatingNepal. Today, China is busy making inroads into the north, building roads,openingrailwaylinesintoNepal,andgrandlyofferinglandlockedNepalaccessto its ports as an alternative (though hardly a credible alternative, given theirdistancefromthecountry)toNepal’straditionalseaoutletinKolkata.Foralltheprofessions of fraternal bonhomie that have accompanied later interactionsbetween the Indian and Nepali prime ministers, it is clear that a significantchange has occurred in the relationship, to which India has no choice but toadjust. The decision by Prime Minister Oli to pull his country out of theBIMSTEC(BayofBengalInitiativeforMulti-SectoralTechnicalandEconomicCooperation)militaryexerciseat the lastminute inSeptember2018pointed tocontinuedmistrustbetweenthe twogovernments, towhichMrModi’spoliciesandconductappeartohavecontributed.715

The Modi mess in Nepal adds to the growing sense of disquiet amongststudentsofIndianforeignpolicyabout theModigovernment’smanagementof

relationson thesubcontinent.Acombinationofarroganceand ineptitude isalltoooftenvisiblewheresubtletyandpro-activediplomacycouldhavedeliveredthedesiredresults.

714ElizabethRoche, ‘Why India is keeping a close eye onPakistan PM’s visit toNepal’,Livemint , 5March2018.715 Shastri Ramachandran, ‘Nepal PMKPOli sees “mischief” in India visit of ruling party chairman’,DNA,13September2018.

chapterforty-six

LETUSBEHUMANETOTHEROHINGYAS

ITheRohingyacrisishasledtoagreatdealofincoherentcommentaryinourmediaandaroundtheworldoflate.Globally,thestoryhascentredaroundthedemonizationofDawAungSanSuuKyi,theNobelPeacePrizelaureatewhoisthedefactoleaderofhercountry.Sheisbeingassailedascomplicitinher

military’sethniccleansingoftheRohingyaminority.TherehaveevenbeencallstostripherofherNobel;headlinewritershavedubbedher‘ig-nobel’.Thisismisguidedandill-informed,sinceitistheBurmese

militarythatcontrolstheRohingyapolicyandnother,butthatisanotherstoryandneednotdetainushere.

Thereareroughly40,000RohingyasinIndiaatthemomentandourattitudetowardsthemhasrangedfromtheappallingtothelessthanhumanitarian.Whenthecrisisfirstspilledoverourborderourresponsewasdisgraceful.Theministerofstate(Home),KirenRijiju,declaredhisgovernment’s intentiontodeportallRohingyarefugees—even thosewithdocumentsfromtheUnitedNationsHighCommissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recognizing them as such—as illegalmigrants.716

Thiswouldhavebeenanextraordinarysteptotake,becauseIndiahashadaproud humanitarian record of granting asylum to persecuted groups for over2,000years.SwamiVivekananda,inhisfamousaddresstotheWorldParliamentof Religions in Chicago in 1893, spoke of his country as a haven for thepersecuted, taking pride in Hindus’ acceptance of Jewish and Zoroastrianrefugees. 717 In recent years, Tibetans, Bengalis persecuted by the Pakistaniarmyin1971,ethnicTamilsfromSriLanka,Nepalisfleeingtheircivilwar,theChakmas of Bangladesh, Afghans and an assortment of individual Iranians,IraqisandSyrians,andAfricanshavebeenamong thosegivenrefuge inIndia,withvariousdegreesofformallegality.Thisisourtraditionalpracticeandtherehasbeenlittleseriousdissentaboutitanywhereinthecountry.

Thereisonemajordifference,though:unlikethemajorityofthosecases(theindividual Middle Easterners and Afghans excepted), the Rohingyas are allMuslim. The arguments advanced by Mr Rijiju all revolve around thisinconvenient fact. The Rohingyas, he says, are susceptible to recruitment byterrorist groups; they ‘pose grave security challenges’; their presence leads tosocial,politicalandculturalproblems;andthegovernmentisanxiousto‘ensurethedemographicpatternofIndiaisnotdisturbed’.718Inotherwords,wedidn’twant to play host to large numbers of Muslim refugees. This is, in a word,

appalling (and the government has not offered a shred of evidence for thesuggestionthatRohingyasareinanywaycomplicitinterrorisminourcountry).

There was no immediate threat to the Rohingyas, however, because ourgovernment had overlooked an inconvenient fact before Mr Rijiju made hisstatement: we had no place to deport the Rohingyas to. They all hail fromRakhineprovince inMyanmar,where theirancestors settledunderBritish rulesome 150 years ago, butMyanmar refuses to recognize them among the 135ethnicgroupslistedunderits1982CitizenshipAct,consideringthemforeigners.719

Yangon therefore has no obligation to take back people it considersforeigners,whose presence in their country they, however outrageously, deemillegal.(Indeed,inMyanmar,theverywordRohingyaistaboo:theycanonlybecalled ‘Bengali’, in other words illegal migrants from Bangladesh. 720 ) ButBangladesh acknowledgesno responsibility forpeoplewhohave, for themostpart,residedintheArakanareaforacoupleofcenturies.

After amassive outcry, the governmentwalkedback its inhumane idea ofinvoluntary deportation and has now begun talking of providing assistance toBangladeshtoresettleRohingyarefugeesthereaswellasprovidingassistancetoRakhine state so that the refugees can return there safely. 721All this ismuchbetter thanourgovernment’s initial reaction to theRohingyas,but it isstill farfrom implementability. In themeantime, the legal status of these unfortunatesremains indeterminate, depriving them of the possibility of finding legalemployment, or of improving their makeshift (and often wretched) livingconditions.

Legalitiesaside,thereisalsoasimplemoralcasehere.Ourso-calledHindunationalistsare,asusual,forgettingthevaluesonwhichtheHindufaithisbased,onecardinalprincipleofwhichis‘atithidevobhava’,theguestislikeGod.Thetimelessvalues invokedbySwamiVivekananda—andmorerecentlybyPanditNehru in welcoming the Tibetan refugees—cannot be cast aside to suit theprejudices of the ruling party, without doing violence to the principles theyembody. To make matters worse, the BJP government has been activelypromoting the passage of a new law, the Citizenship Amendment Bill, thatwouldgranttherightofIndiancitizenshiptorefugeesfromMyanmarandeveryother of India’s subcontinental neighbours, provided they are notMuslim. 722The Bill proposes citizenship to six persecutedminorities who come to Indiafrom neighbouring countries, but it names Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Parsis,Christians and Buddhists alone—not Muslims. Humanitarian policy thatdiscriminatesonthebasisofreligionisnothumanitarianismatall,butbigotry.

Refugees bring a great deal to their host countries. Albert Einstein was arefugee.TomStoppardwasarefugee.Inourowncountry,MilkhaSinghwasarefugee.Theyfledtheirhomelandsfortheirlivesandfoundawelcomeinanewhome,towhichtheybroughtlustrethroughtheirownachievements.

Acountryofover1.3billionpeoplecaneasilywelcome40,000Rohingyas.Let us stop allowing the ruling party’s bigotry to undermine more than twomillenniaof Indian tradition.Letusbehumane to theRohingyas—and in thatway,letusbetruetoourselves.

IITheRohingyasituationfindsanechoinasecondpotentialhumanitariandisasterthatalsoinvolvesBengaliMuslims,thistimeinAssam.Seventy-oneyearsafterthepartitionofIndia,andforty-sevenyearsafterthesubsequentrebirthoftheformerEastPakistanasBangladesh,oneofthelegaciesofthemessy

divisionofthesubcontinenthascomebacktohauntthecountry.Thecrisisinmid-2018overthepublicationofaNationalRegisterofCitizens(NRC)intheIndianstateofAssamhasthrownintodoubtthecitizenship,andthefuture,ofsomefourmillionhumanbeings,withincalculableconsequencesforthe

peaceoftheregion.

ThedepartingBritishpartitioned India in 1947on thebasis of religion, inordertocreateaMuslimstate,Pakistan,outofMuslim-majorityprovincesintheWestandEastofIndia.EastPakistansecededin1971toformBangladeshaftera brutal and genocidal campaign by the Pakistani army had driven some 10million refugees to India.Once India had vanquished Pakistan inwar and thePakistani army in the east surrendered, the refugees streamed back home tonewly-independentBangladesh.Butsome,perhaps,stayedoninIndia,mergingseamlesslyintothepopulation.

Overthecourseofthenextfewyears,theywerejoinedbymillionsofothermigrants fromBangladesh, fleeing economic hardship and land scarcity in anovercrowded country.While those who slipped into the Indian state ofWestBengalwere easily assimilatedby their fellowBengalis, thosewhomadenewhomes in the north-eastern state of Assam were culturally, linguistically,ethnically and religiously different from the majority of their Assameseneighbours.Fearingtheywerebeingsqueezedoutoflandandjobopportunitiesintheirowncountry,Assamesestudentsbeganmassprotestsinthe1980s,whichoccasionallyeruptedintoviolenceandmadeAssamallbutungovernable.ApairofsavagemassacresofBengaliMuslimmigrantgroups,includingofsome3,000intheAssamesevillageofNelliein1983,revealedtheextentofthecrisis.Theagitation was only defused when then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhiconcludedan ‘AssamAccord’ in1985,pledging to identify all thosewhohadmigratedillegallyfromBangladeshintoAssamsince1971.

Thiswas easier said thandone, anddespite estimates of 20million illegalimmigrants from Bangladesh, an assortment of tribunals set up to identify

foreignersfailedtospotmorethanafewthousandover theyears.Noconcreteactionwastaken,andtheproblemwaslefttosimmerfordecadesbysuccessivegovernments. But the election of a hardline Hindutva government in 2014revived the process, underSupremeCourt supervision.When it concluded themainphaseofitsworkattheendofJuly,itpublishedtheNRC,alistofpersonswhocouldprovideproofofantecedentsinAssamprecedingtheaccord’scut-offdate of 1971. Just over 4 million people, who could not, found themselvesrendered,ineffect,stateless.

Thereisstilltimetoappealthefindingsoftheregister,anditisanticipatedthatsomeof themoreobviouserrorsofomission—somemembersofa familylistedandothersnot,forinstance—willbeswiftlyrectified.ButthequestionthatbedevilsAssamtodayis:whathappenstotherest?

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party of Prime Minister Narendra Modi issimultaneously taking credit for having identified ‘foreigners’, and shelteringbehind the protection of the SupremeCourt’s supervision of the process. Theimplicationisthatthisisaneutralexercisethathasnothingtodowithpolitics.But at bottom the exercise is indeed intensely political—since it is aboutwhocanownland,claimjobsandvoteinBJP-ruledAssam.

WhateverthesizeofthefinallistofforeignersdeemedineligibleforIndiancitizenship, it is assumed that the excluded will be overwhelmingly, if notentirely, Bengali Muslims.What will happen to them? Some speak glibly ofdeporting them toBangladesh.But there is no deportation agreement in placebetweenNewDelhiandDhaka,andBangladeshhasmadeitclearthatitassumesno responsibility forpeoplewhoarenoton its soil.Will theybe turfedoutoftheirhomesinAssamandfindthemselveswithnoplacetogo?

SomesuggestthesettingupofcampstohousethesepeopletemporarilytillBangladesh can take them back, a prospect that has human rights groupshorrified—not leastsince thatdaymaynevercome.Indeed,Bangladesh isoneof the fewneighbouringcountrieswithwhich thepresentgovernmentof Indiahasbeenable tomaintaingood relations.Creatingamigrationcrisis,orworsestill,attemptingforceddeportations,willdestabilizearelationshipthatisvitaltoIndia.

ThehumanimplicationsoftheNRClistarealsotroubling.ManywhomayindeedhavecometoIndiaafter1971(andarethereforedeemedineligibleunderthetermsoftheaccord)havelivedinAssamforoverfourdecadesandknownoother home. Can they now be stripped of the rights they have exercised indemocraticIndiamostoftheirlives?

Ithasbeencynicallysuggested thataprincipalpurposeof theexercisehasbeentostripBengaliMuslimsoftherighttovote,asgeneralelectionsloomin

early2019.Inastateof26millioninhabitants,disenfranchising4millioncouldhaveasignificant impactontheelectoralfortunesof therulingparty,whichisnot known to enjoy much support among India’s Muslim electorate. But thelegal implicationsofsuchanactionhaveyet tobeparsed,andwillbeopen tochallengeinthecourts.

Sofar, thecrisiscreatedby theNRChasbeennon-violent,butas tensionsmountonboth sidesof the issue, the riskof aneruption is ever-present. Is anaccord arrived at in 1985, setting a cut-off date in 1971, necessarily the bestframeworktoresolve the issue in2018?CandemocraticIndiaafford to ignorethehuman rightsof a fewmillionpeoplewhohavebeen livingon its soil fordecades?WhileprotectingIndia’ssovereigntyandtheintegrityofitscitizenshiparelaudableprinciples,cantheybeappliedinpracticetocreatestatelesspeoplewhoseliveswouldsuddenlybeplungedintolimbo?

There are no clear answers to any of these questions, though passionatevoicesonbothsidesoftheargumenthavenodoubtwhatthoseanswersshouldbe. At a time when the BJP’s majoritarian assertiveness has already raisedconcernsaroundtheworld,theanswersIndiafindswillmarkahugelyimportantstepintheevolutionofitsturbulentdemocracy.

716 Krishna N. Das and Sanjeev Miglani, ‘India says to deport all Rohingya regardless of U.N.registration’,Reuters,14August2017.717‘FulltextofSwamiVivekananda’sChicagospeechof1893’,BusinessStandard,11September2017.718DeepakK.Singh,‘EmbracetheRohingya’,IndianExpress,13September2017.719AngelaDewan,‘WhoaretheRohingyaandwhyaretheyfleeing?’,CNN,13September2017.720‘TheMostUnwanted:AgrippingaccountofRohingyarefugeeslivinginIndia’,IndianExpress ,26June2018.721‘IndiaextendssupporttoBangladeshforresolvingRohingyacrisis’,TheHindu,9April2018.722NafeesAhmed,‘RohingyasfleeMyanmar:Indiamustdropreligiouscriteriainrefugeelaw’,BusinessStandard,6September2017.

chapterforty-nine

AMANOFDESTINY?NOTQUITE

The phrase ‘man of destiny’ is most commonly associated with NapoleonBonaparte. It is used to describe Napoleon’s unshakeable belief in his owndestinyassomeonewhowouldruletheworlddespitehisoriginsasamemberofan impecuniousCorsican family and thenumerous setbackshe encountered inhisdrivetogreatness.

Narendra Modi can certainly be described as Napoleonic in his single-mindedpursuit of power andhis belief in his owndestiny froma very youngage.Manyofhisadmirerspointtohisvisionaryspeeches,hissoaringambition,andhisunshakeablefaithinhisownandIndia’sdestiny,asevidencethathehasthe special qualities that the iconic French leader possessed. However, whileNapoleonisremembered,despiteallhisshortcomings,forhisbrilliantforesightandhisbeliefin,andimplementationof,manyoftheideasthatarefundamentalto the world today—among them religious tolerance, property rights, andequality before the law—the same cannot be said of Narendra Modi. Hisspeecheshavebeencompelling,buthehasbeenunabletoimplementhisideas.At thesametime,hehasfailedtopreventorstopforcesthathaveunderminedIndia’s prospects.On hiswatch, forces of bigotry, communalism and divisionhavebeenunleashed thathave set Indiabackdecades, andmake itdifficult toratehimpositivelyonpracticallyanyqualitythatdefinesagreatstatesmanandruler.

InthischapterIwilltryandsumupmuchofwhatIhaveexaminedinthisbook about the record thus far of India’s paradoxical prime minister. (AnyrepetitionofideaspreviouslyexpressedinthebookisdeliberateasIamseekingheretoreiteratewhatIbelievearethemainfailingsandcontradictionsinherentinNarendraModi.)Let’sstartwithMrModi’simpactonthelivesofIndiansandIndiansocietythatIlookatinSectionII,‘TheModi-ficationofIndia’.Justoneincidentwillservetosumupthedeleteriouseffecthehashadonsomuchthatisgood and intrinsic to our country.His failingwas hammered home to him byAtalBihariVajpayee,thegreaterBJPprimeministerinmostIndians’reckoning,in 2002, when Mr Vajpayee rapped Mr Modi on the knuckles for failing toobserve raj dharma, the dharmic code of conduct that rulers are expected to

follow.OneofthetextsinwhichrajdharmaisexplicatedistheShantiParvaoftheMahabharata.Inthelastessayheeverwrote,‘LivingwiththeMahabharata’,published in Seminar in April 2010, the great philosopher, writer andMahabharatascholarChaturvediBadrinath(1923–2010)defined thedharmaoftherulerinthefollowingway:‘Theprotectingofthepeople,thisisthehighestdharma of the king. Indeed, the protecting of all living beings with kindnesstowardsthem,isthehighestdharma.Therefore,thatkingwhohasthecharacterofprotectingwithkindness,thosewhoknowwhatdharmatrulyisregardasthehighestdharma.’730

MrBadrinath then goes on to say that good governance, according to theMahabharata,istoprotectpeoplefromfear.Hequotestheepicaslayingdownthe following injunctions: ‘Let the king protect his subjects from their fear ofhim;fromtheirfearofothers;fromtheirfearofeachother;andfromtheirfearofthingsthatarenothuman.’YettodaytheModiregimehasgeneratedwhatIhave already quoted a columnist as dubbing ‘an ecosystemof fear’.On everyone of these counts, NarendraModi and the government he leads have faileddismally. The India we live in now is a society that is polarized and fearful.Minorities,liberals,womenandDalitsareharassedandbrutalizedwithimpunityandlumpenthugsterrorizeallandsundryinthenameofHindutva.

This is the India Prime Minister Narendra Modi presides over, not thesecular,plural, freeandequal society thatour founding fathershadenvisionedandwasbuiltinitsfirstsixandhalfdecadesasafreenation.ThisisthefirsttestPrime Minister Modi fails when it comes to being regarded as a ‘man ofdestiny’.Noleaderwhosedestinyisbuiltoncorrodingthedestiniesofmillionscanbesaidtobeworthyofthename.

Let’s move on to his sorry record of misgovernance. In Section III ,‘ModitvaandMisgovernance’,ItakeacloselookatthemultipleareasinwhichMrModiandhisgovernmenthavemadeahashofgoverningIndia,oftentakingthe country backwards rather than letting it surge forward. The rise ofwidespread communal violence, mob lynchings and the bizarre phenomenonknownas‘cowvigilantism’;theshrinkingspacefordissent,withthosewhodareto think differently experiencing the daily fear of vulnerability to intimidationandcoercion;theetiolationoffreedomofexpressionandfreedomofthepress,thebulwarksofanydemocracy;thesideliningandoftendemonizationofIndia’sminorities, to a point where many feel unwelcome in Modi’s new India; theunleashing of a crude form ofmob bigotry, both on the streets and on socialmedia, that are perceived as enjoying the patronage of the authorities; thehollowing out of institutions built up over decades, whose independence andimpartiality are being systematically stifled; the eradication of checks and

balancesandtheexaltationofgovernment-sponsoreddefinitionsofnationalismthat reduce alternative viewpoints to the category of ‘antinational’ and ‘anti-Hindu’, themselves seen as largely synonymous; and the creation of a ‘newnormal’ in society which makes acceptable the diffusion of a malevolentcommunalpoison in thenameofa triumphantmajoritarianism thathaserodedthefundamentalvaluesofIndia’ssecularandnominallyegalitarianrepublic—allof these have cast a blight on the meaning of our citizenship inModi’s newIndia.

Movingon,wecometoanareainwhichPMModi’sperformancehasbeeninglorious—the economy, as described in Section IV , ‘The Failure ofModinomics’.Thebookdetailsachecklistofspectacular failures,headedbyaGDPgrowthratethat,ashasbeennoted,hasfallenbynearly2percentbecauseof the twin self-inflicted blows of demonetization and the botched rollout ofGST. Demonetization, in particular, has badly dented investor confidence,drastically reducing much-needed investment in the economy. The recentlyreleased ‘back-series’ figures show that GDP growth under UPA-1 (8.87 percent)andUPA-2(7.65percent)washigherthanthefirstfouryearsofNDA-2(7.35 per cent). Worse, the GDP fell for five consecutive quarters under MrModi, hitting a low of 5.7 per cent in the first quarter of 2017–18. The IMFprojectsGDPgrowthof7.3percentinthecurrentfinancialyear,lowerthanitwasunderUPAandthanitmighthavebeenhadtheeconomynotbeendealtthe‘double tap’ of demonetization and GST. The growth that has occurred haslargelybeenbecauseofanunsustainablegovernmentspendingspree(attwoandahalf timesprivate consumption).Manufacturinghas contracted, exportshavedeclined(wellbelowtheUPA-erapeakof$312billionin2013–14)731,growthinindustrialproductionhasslowedandagricultureisstagnating(orworse,giventheannualriseinthenumberoffarmersuicides).Thecurrentaccountdeficitisprojected to grow from 1.9 per cent to 2.6 per cent of GDP this year.Unemployment is on the rise, despite far-fetched claims of new jobs beinggenerated,whicharenotapparenttothosewhoshouldsupposedlybeworkinginthem.Petrolanddieselprices,whoseworldwidefallwasnotreflected inIndiathanks to theModigovernment’sdisgracefuldecision todip itshands into thepockets of the public with record levels of fuel taxes, are again on the rise,hurting the common man and having a knock-on effect on the prices of allessentialcommodities.732Andafterdeclaring‘Nomoretaxterrorism’,theModigovernment inflicted taxdemandsonentirenewcategoriesofvictims,shakinginvestorconfidence.

Amidthissorrycatalogueofeconomicruin,theBJPhasbuiltitselfupinto

thewealthiest political party in India by far. 733 It is flushwith funding frombusiness and has passed a law allowing political parties to receive foreignfinancialcontributionsthatpermitittotapintoitsnetworkofsupportersabroadwho no longer carry an Indian passport. 734 It has also introduced ‘electoralbonds’ that canbe purchased anonymously anddonated to political parties, inorder to ensure that it can collect additional contributions while assuringcontributorsthatthesourcesofitsfundingneednotberevealed.735

Finally,wecometoanothergreatexampleoftheimage-buildingPMModiexcelsat,thistimeontheglobalstage.Herewehaveadecidedlymixedrecordofpretension—theprimeministerclaimsthatIndia’sstandinghasgoneupintheworld thanks tohim, that an Indianpassport finallyhasvalue it didnot enjoybeforehisascent,andthatpriortohisascendancy,IndiansabroadwereashamedtocallthemselvesIndian—thatcontrastsembarrassinglywithwhathasactuallybeen achieved on the ground and the reality of global perception as I havediscussedinSectionV,‘FlightsofFancy’.

Yes,MrModiiscapableofevolution.HisreactiontomyDubaiPortsWorldproposalwasinmymindwhenIpubliclyraisedthequestionofwhyMrModi,in the extensive international travels of his first year, had not visited a singleIslamic country. It must be said that he amply made up for it in subsequentyears, inparticularfocusingonimprovingbilateralrelationswiththeUAEandSaudiArabia, tobothofwhichhemadesuccessfulvisits.(Henonethelessalsomanaged a visit to Israel in a way that did not elicit any protest from theneighbouringArab states, andwelcomedan Israeli primeminister to India forthefirsttime.)Ifasprimeministerhehasbeenabletoovercomehisprejudicesandthoseofhisfollowersinthegreaterinterestsofthenation,thatiscertainlytobe welcomed. But in this he was following the well-worn footsteps of hispredecessors,whohadlaidthegroundworkforhimtotreadupon.

Where he acted in accordance with the time-honoured traditions ofcontinuityinforeignpolicy,MrModikeptIndiaonanevenkeel.Butwhereheattemptedhisowninitiatives,hehasleftbehindasorrylegacy—withNarendraModi’sIndiasnubbedintheSeychelles,marginalizedintheMaldives,negatedinNepal,sidelinedinSriLanka,underminedintheUS,compromisedbyChinaandprovokedbyPakistan(andfoundwanting).Meanwhile,India’sinestimableasset,itsglobalsoftpower,wasbatteredbytheunsavouryreportingworldwideof the mounting intolerance, bigotry and lumpen violence unleashed by hissupporters. 736 To compoundmatters came the Rafale fighter deal. The UPAgovernment had chosen to purchase 126 Rafales from France that would beassembled by the public-sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited in Bangalore.

PrimeMinisterModiabruptlyreducedtheseto36aircraftofftheshelfatthreetimes thepriceperaircraft. Inaddition, therewereseveralotherquestions thatwere raised, especially byCongress presidentRahulGandhiwho demanded aJPCprobeintotheRafaledeal;theprimeministerhassimplyrefusedtoanswerthem.737

As I hope I havemanaged to show in this book,much ofwhat theModigovernment isallabouthas turnedout tobe littlemore thanaseriesofemptygesturesandmarketinggimmicks,whileonlysmidgensofsubstancehavebeenachievedontheground.IhavedemonstratedhowallhishighlytoutedinitiativesinGujarat,overthreetermsaschiefminister,haveactuallyleftthestateworseoffonseveralfronts.Insimilarfashion,ashenearstheendofhistermasprimeminister, the country is reeling on several fronts—a fearful populace, aneconomythathasbeenhobbledbyfoolhardyinitiatives,apainfullackofjobs,adevastatingnumberof farmersuicides, insecureborders, instability inKashmirand the palpable failure in implementation of even laudable initiatives likeSwachhBharat, skill development andBeti PadhaoBetiBachao. In short,MrModi’srulehasbeenbadforIndia,anditallrisesfromtheModiparadoxthatIhavedescribed inchapterafterchapter—his inability to riseabovehisnarrow-minded,mean-spirited,sectarianpoliticalorigins to the levelsofstatesmanshipand good governance that a country like India needs and thatmany hoped hecould deliver. Winning elections thanks to the ruthless management ofconstituencies, as well as the exploitation of the worst traits of his coreconstituency,doesnotagreatleadermake.

As the writer Arundhati Roy observed in late August 2018, when a half-dozen left-leaning civil rights activists were suddenly arrested on what werewidely seenas a flimsygrounds, ‘theBJPandPrimeMinisterNarendraModiare losing popularity at an alarming pace (for them). Thismeans that we areentering dangerous times. There will be ruthless and continuous attempts todivertattention fromthe reasons for this lossofpopularity,and to fracture thegrowingsolidarityoftheopposition.Itwillbeacontinuouscircusfromnowtotheelections—arrests,assassinations,lynchings,bombattacks,falseflagattacks,riots, pogroms. We have learned to connect the season of elections with theonsetofallkindsofviolence.DivideandRule,yes.Butaddtothat—DivertandRule.’738Thearrestsandprosecutionswouldbeoneformofdiversion;worsemightyetfollow,thoughperhapswarningaboutitinadvancemightdiscourageit.

There isnodoubt that theoneareaNarendraModihassucceeded in ishisown self-projection. Many who have not examined his record in detail still

ascribe to him qualities of decisiveness, devotion to duty, incorruptibility anddeterminationthatintheireyesmarkhimoutasagreatleader.Hecontinuestolead inmost public opinion polls as themost deserving primeminister of thecountry.Thismaybeatributetohismarketingsavvy,hisstirringspeeches,hisrepeatedprojectionsofhisownpersonality,hisassiduousandmellifluoususeofevery communications tool frommonthly radio broadcasts to daily tweets, hisrelentlessburnishingofhisownoutsizeimage,orsimplyareflectionthatmasspublicopinioncanbeeasilyswayedbyrhetoricalflourishesandskilledPR.Butthis is really the ultimate paradox of our paradoxical primeminister—that hisperceivedstaturerestsonappearancesthatarethemselvesbeliedbythemultiplefailuresoftheadministrationheleads.

Compounding all this is theman’s extraordinary ego.NarendraModi hadbeen seen, even as chief minister, as being above his party affiliation; hereported to no one, felt accountable to no one (especially after the BJP lostpower in the national general elections in 2004) and took his own decisions,withoutregardevenfor theviewsofhisoldorganization, theRSS.Intheend,therefore, hemust be judged for himself; since he claims all successes as hisown,histranscendentfailuresmustinevitablyalsobelaidathisowndoor.

It is all very well to say, as PMModi did during his Independence Dayaddresson15August2018,thathewas‘impatientbecausemanycountrieshavemoved ahead and India has to go forward… I am restless because I have toimprovethequalityoflifeofourcitizens…IamconcernedbecauseIndiahastobe at the forefront of theFourth IndustrialRevolution… I ameager because Iwantthecountrytouseitsresourcesandabilities…’739,butwhatthecitizensofIndianeedtoasktheirprimeministeristhis:whenwillyougobeyondmakingfinespeechesandactuallydosomethinggoodandlastingforthiscountry,wherein addition to being ‘impatient’, ‘restless’, ‘concerned’ and ‘eager’, you showthrough your actions that you are concerned about the welfare of every lastIndian rather than justwinningelections and imposingyour fraudulent agendaonahaplessnation?

In recent months, it has become increasingly apparent that people are nolonger taking PMModi at his word. TheModi paradox is beginning to takeeffect.Hisgovernment’sfailuresarebeinghighlightedanditistobehopedthatvotersin2019willnolongergivehimthemandatetoplayfastandloosewiththelivesandfortunesofmillionsofhiscountrymen.

Perhapsone indication that the tidemaybe turningagainsthim is the factthatsomeofhisclosestsupportersarebreakingrankswithhimandhisparty.ABJPMP,NanaPatole,resignedfromhispartyandfromtheLokSabhain2017,declaringthattheprimeministerwasaone-waycommunicatorwhodidnotcare

tolistentovoicesontheground,evenofhisownparty.HistwolargestalliesintheNDAcoalition(intermsofLokSabhaseats),theTeluguDesamandtheShivSena, have repeatedly and publicly expressed their disenchantment with him,withtheTeluguDesamgoingsofarastoquitthecoalitionandmoveamotionofno-confidenceinhisgovernmentin2018.

On12March2017,writinginThePioneer,erstwhileBJPRajyaSabhaMPand newspaper editor Chandan Mitra had this to say: ‘Indians cutting acrosscasteandclass, religionandbeliefhave reposed faith inaman theybelieve isIndia’sManofDestiny,onewhowillleadthecountrytoaGoldenAgeofPeaceandProsperity.’ In July2018,Mitraquit theBJPand shortly thereafter joinedtheTrinamoolCongresspartyofModi’sbittercriticMamataBanerjee,inwhomhe now publicly reposes his faith. If so many of Modi’s most prominenterstwhilefollowersnolongerseehimasIndia’s‘ManofDestiny’,thenneithershouldanyoneelse.

730ShantiParva,71.26,27.731 (In a fewplaces in the text figures denominated in foreign currencies have not been converted intoIndianrupeesforreasonsofcontext,sourcematerialorcomparison.)732Asof3September2018,alitreofpetrol was selling at ₹79.15 in Delhi, ₹86.56 in Mumbai, ₹82.24 in Chennai and ₹82.06 in Kolkata;‘Petrol,dieselpriceshitall-timehigh’,NDTV,3September2018.733SunetraChoudhury,‘BJPrichestnationalparty,with₹1,034croredeclaredincome:report’,NDTV,11April2018.734PragyaSrivastava,‘Modigovtlegitimisesforeignpollfunding;SubramanianSwamycallsit“terrible”:Whatyoumustknow’,FinancialExpress,22March2018.735AnshumanTiwari, ‘Electoralbonds:HowModigovernment is incentivising India’sbiggestpoliticalscam’,DailyO,18January2018.736EllenBarry, ‘TollFromVigilanteMobsRises, and IndiaBegins toRecoil’,NewYorkTimes , June2017;737AviralVirk,‘WhytheCostoftheRafaleDealisModiGovt’sWorstKeptSecret’,TheQuint,26July2018;Sagar,‘OnaWingandaPrayer’,Caravan,1September2018.738ArundhatiRoy,‘MyNameisArundhatiRoyand#MeTooUrbanNaxal’,TheWire,30August2018.739 ‘PM’s address to the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on the 72nd Independence Day’,www.pmindia.gov.in,15August2018.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thisbook,morethananyofmyotherworks,hasbeeninmanywaysacollectiveeffort, with the author being inspired, guided, assisted and pushed by theextraordinary team at Aleph Book Company. My friend and editor, DavidDavidar,whoseoriginalideathisvolumewas,hasbeencloselyassociatedwiththe book at every stage of its conception and execution.His colleague, SimarPuneet,andthetirelessresearcherRosemarySebastianhavealsoplayedavital,indeed indispensable, role in bringing The Paradoxical Prime Minister toreaders.BenaSareencameupwithagreatcover.Nowordsofgratitudecandojusticetotheirrole—soIwillhavetocontentmyselfwithaheartfelt‘thankyou,team’.

Therewaslittletime,inthisprocess,toconsultandseekinputsfromothers,butIhavebenefitedfromthecounselofthoseclosetomewhohavereadpartsofthemanuscriptatvariousstages,especiallyManuPillai,RaghavSharma,myniece,Ragini Tharoor Srinivasan, andmy son,KanishkTharoor. Some of thematerial in thebookalsobenefitedfromthe inputsofmydedicatedcolleaguesJohnKoshyandArvindAbraham.Toallof them,mygrateful thanks.Thoughtheirinsightshavegreatlyimprovedthebook,theresponsibilityforitscontentsandconclusionsremainminealone.

Iairedsomeoftheideasinthebook,indifferentforms,inmycolumnsandwritings for avarietyofpublications, notablyProject Syndicate ,NDTV.com ,TheQuint ,ThePrint, TheWeek ,TheHindu,Urbane ,NationalHerald andIndian Express . Their offering a home to my words and ideas is gratefullyacknowledged.

ShashiTharoorSeptember2018