Family feud in Indian election

Press, 24 January 1984, Page 16

Family feud in Indian election

From

“The Economist,” London

Indians sniff an election in the air. Mrs Indira Gandhi’s term of office runs until January, 1985, but there are signs that she may call an election in March or April this year. The most telling signs are the pre-election giveaways: bonus payments and an interim pay increase

for all central civil servants; a state takeover of 13 ailing textile mills in Bombay to save jobs; increased minimum wages in several industries; and an export ban on the most popular tea to bring its local price down. The Prime Minister has also announced a new food-for-work

programme for rural areas, which could create up to 80 million mandays of employment between January and March, which in turn could mean a few million votes. The bogey of an external threat (meaning Pakistan, with the possible assistance of the United States) is figuring in prime ministerial speeches again, even though there is not the slightest evidence of war preparations. A little war hysteria is always useful for rallying support behind the Government in an election year. Talk of a foreign threat is also aimed at voters in Punjab, in particular, where Mrs Gandhi is being challenged by the increasingly militant Sikhs and their local party, the Akali Dal. The prime minister claims that Sikh terrorists are receiving foreign assistance.

Congress Party strategists see two main arguments in favour of an early election: a record grain harvest and the lack of unity among opposition parties. Although foodgrain production is expected to his 142 million tonnes this year, prices have stubbornly refused to fall so far; the wholesale price index is 9.4 per cent higher than it was a year ago. This has given pause to advocates of an early election, but on the other hand, if drought follows this year’s good monsoon, a later election would be much more

chancy. Mrs Gandhi’s Congress Party has traditionally won about 40 per cent of the vote, with the rest shared by a fragmented opposition. In 1983 a number of opposition parties got themselves together into two incompatible coalitions divided more by personalities than by ideology: one led by the Janata Party, and the other consisting of the Lok Dal and Bharatiya Janata

Party. The Communist parties are sympathetic to but not members of the Janata-led group. The failure of the opposition parties to put up a single united front is encouraging for Mrs Gandhi but does not guarantee success. She has lost much of the support she once enjoyed in southern and western states to the advantage of regional parties. Inflation is one vote-losing issue. Others are the widespread complaints about corruption and maladministration. There were 14 by-elections to Parliament and state assemblies late last month, but the results have muddled rather than clarified the political picture. Mrs Gandhi’s Congress Party captured three assembly seats and one Parliamentary seat from opposition parties, but lost the same number.

The main opposition parties could not draw much comfort from the by-election results either, except for the Rashtriya Sanjay Manch, the new party led by Mrs Maneka Gandhi, Mrs Gandhi’s estranged daughter-in-law. Of the three seats which it contested, the new party won one and came a respectable second in another. So far the rest of the opposition, which hated Maneka’s late husband, Sanjay, has treated her as an amusing curiosity with minor nuisance value. But now it seems that she commands a fair

measure of support in Uttar Pradesh, India’s largest state. She has declared that she will contest at least 200 seats in the next General Election, and at least 45 of the 85 in Uttar Pradesh. She personally will oppose her brother-in-law, Rajiv Gandhi, in the Uttar Pradesh constituency he took over from Sanjay. What is still not clear is whether the Rashtriya Sanjay Manch is

taking votes away from the Congress Party or from the opposition. If it cuts into the Prime Minister’s vote, that will be a serious setback for her in one of her strongest political bases.

Maneka is interested in an electoral alliance with other opposition leaders, but since most of them were imprisoned by her husband during the 1975-77 emergency, past antagonisms present a problem. Many people are astounded to find voters supporting a party named after Sanjay, who was more a muscleman than a statesman, but most Indians now regard all politicians as crooks and gangsters and elections as a choice between predators. The important thing, therefore, is to select somebody who gets things done, which means muscle.