What makes cities really smart

Rather than grandiose(impressive,भव्य) plans, smart cities should focus on just three things: transportation, e-governance and easy land titling
There is no one definition for India’s proposed smart cities. The Ministry of Urban Development provides benchmarks for various services — maximum commute(convert,बदल देना) time should be 30 minutes in medium-sized cities and 45 minutes in metros; water availability must be 135 litres per capita per day; 95 per cent of homes should have shops, parks, primary schools and recreational areas within 400 metres, and so on. The proposed cities range from Varanasi to Dholera to Amravati, covering brownfield and greenfield areas. Benchmarks would be different for both; given lack of significant Internet penetration, brownfield smart cities cannot, for instance, focus on skyscrapers(tall building with many stories,गगनचुम्बी) or lavish(rich,expensive,खर्चीला,महंगा) promenades(mall,विहारस्थल) first.

City planning has undergone several changes since Independence. In the 1950s, regional planning and the city master plan grew in importance, but stayed divorced from the complex realities of a poor, independent, post-colonial country. While urban poverty rose, master plans fetishised about leisurely(easygoing,slowly,धीरे धीरे), low-density, spread-out cities, and obsessed over removing slums. This “high modernism” resulted in plans for newer cities. The National Commission on Urbanisation identified 329 cities called GEMs (Generators of Economic Momentum), which were further divided into National Priority Centres and State Priority Centres. Urbanisation was expected to grow along those corridors.

Bhubaneswar and Chandigarh were especially planned to represent modern India, emblems(symbol,प्रतीक) of “a new town, a symbol of India’s freedom, unfettered by traditions of the past” (Nehru, 1948). A ‘garden city’ with no high-rise buildings, Chandigarh’s wide boulevards broke the city into self-sufficient sectors, promoting liveability and exclusion.

However, the structure had its failures. Chandigarh’s urban planning was defined by an “absence of local authority, a lack of understanding of the local culture and values on the part of the planners, and the history of the region.” (Kalia, 1985, 135). In a survey of 21 cities in the Annual Survey of India’s City Systems (2014, Janaagraha Centre), Bhubaneswar and Chandigarh came close to the bottom in quality of life. Bhubaneswar scored low in urban capacities and resources as well as in transparency, accountability and participation.

Over time, national plans grew more reactive, and stuck to managing things as they were. A desire for better, cleaner, inclusive cities remained unfulfilled. We renamed more cities than building new ones.

The idea of a smart city, for most of the 20th century, was science fiction. But cities can now integrate critical infrastructure such as roads, rails, subways and airports; optimise resources better; and plan preventive maintenance. Given India’s finance crunch, any smart city we plan should focus first on three things: urban transportation, e-governance and land titling.

Urban transportation

For a sustainable city, public transport has to be the main artery. With metro systems viable only in large cities, integrated bus services will be primary. While the National Urban Transport Policy, 2006, pushed for public transport to rise from 22 per cent to 60 per cent, only 30 major Indian cities out of 90 have an in-place bus system. Even Delhi, with its extensive metro, faces significant gaps in its efforts to provide cross-sectional connectivity, with just 6,500 buses instead of 20,000. India’s bus services continue to be hamstrung(powerless,कमज़ोर) by limited or declining fleet sizes, loss-making services, inadequate(not enough,अपर्याप्त) resources, poor service quality and ignorance about modern vehicle technology.

Cities should design bus routes to ensure multi-modal integration. A city-level Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority, backed by legislation, should facilitate coordinated planning and implementation of transport projects. We need an intelligent software to improve systems for vehicle location, collecting online fares, priority signalling for buses, and real-time bus information. Cities should also set up Traffic Information Management Control Centres for effective enforcement and monitoring of traffic rules.

Financing this will require significant restructuring. A dedicated Urban Transport Fund, as seen in Ahmedabad, Bengaluru and Jaipur, should seek to generate inflows through advertisement revenue, additional vehicle registration fees and congestion taxes to fund new projects. A special purpose vehicle (set up in collaboration with the municipal corporation, city and private players), as seen in Indore and Jabalpur, could manage bus operations.

Better e-governance

The Indian government has experimented with various e-governance initiatives, most of which have failed to materialise, given poor cyber security and significant privacy and data protection risk. But the implementation of a secure ICT Infrastructure, comprising wireless hotspots, wi-fi networks, and fibre optic Internet delivery at home, remains fundamental.

E-governance could learn from these examples. The U.K.’s “Tell us Once” service allows citizens to inform public authorities about birth, death or significant life events just once. San Francisco’s DataSF.org displays public transportation arrival and departure times, recycle zones, crime patterns and more. Service requests for pothole repairs can be tweeted. Sweden has verksamt.se, both for entrepreneurs and for citizens to use theme-based portals on healthcare, taxation, etc. All procurement and invoicing is conducted electronically, restricting corruption.

Land titling

Providing affordable housing remains a critical challenge. The has been exacerbated(make worse,बिगाड़ देना) artificially by poorly conceived Central, State and municipal regulations, leading to land prices that are much higher than intrinsic levels. Urban development projects still have to undergo(experience,झेलना) a lengthy approval process — developers have to spend two-three years getting permissions from nearly 40 departments.

Titling issues and the lack of property rights information make this worse. While the law requires compulsory registration of the sale of land, it does not ask the registration authority to verify land history or ownership from the seller, weakening buyer protection and acting more as a fiscal instrument for the state, instead of a statutory support of certainty to title. Cities recognise presumed ownership to land, a questionable claim, which can be challenged on many fronts.

A smart city would provide formal digitised recognition of property titles, along with increasing transparency and registered brokers, cutting down long search times and high costs of acquiring real estate. A less cumbersome(difficult to handle,जटिल) process of accessing land records through the Department of Registration would increase its use, while helping to show actual transaction prices. Further, land inventory needs to be mapped comprehensively, and be accessible to buyers.

Globally, many countries offer streamlined online processes and incentives to facilitate affordable housing — these can include tax deductions, density bonuses, direct subsidies, land grants, land use changes etc. Many countries such as Malaysia and Canada have revamped their administrative requirements through fee waivers and fast-tracking procedures.

Smart cities can make daily life easier for residents simply by automating routine functions, and providing a basic transportation and housing network. Grandiose visions can be kept for later.

Read more »

Turkey’s long-ago slaughter of Armenians

Turkey’s acknowledgement of the tragic events of 1915 is important because it might begin a necessary and inevitable(compulsory,अनिवार्य,जरुरी) period of truth and reconciliation(adjustment,सामंजस्य)
Where do I look for hope on this day that marks the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide(killing of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status,जातिसंहार)? To the brave Turkish and Armenian human rights activists who have gathered in Istanbul this week to commemorate(remember via function,श्रद्धांजलि देना) together the tragic events of 1915 and find a pathway to the future.

The Turkish activists embrace(adopt,अंगीकार करना) a demand that has been voiced widely this month, from Pope Francis to the European Parliament, for the Turkish government to acknowledge that “genocide” took place in 1915. Turkey’s acknowledgement is important because it might begin a necessary and inevitable period of truth and reconciliation.

Listen to the voices of three Turkish organisers of the commemoration, which was arranged with an Armenian diaspora organisation called Project 2015. They explain why April 24, the traditional date of remembrance, is important for Turks as much as for Armenians.

“What we are trying to do is raise awareness of the genocide that happened in 1915,” says Levent Sensever, the general secretary of the Association for Social Change. This will be the sixth year he and other Turkish activists have gathered at Taksim Square to mark the genocide. “We challenge the official version, to get a real history so we can have a democratic country,” he says.

Ayse Gunaysu, one of the leaders of Turkey’s Human Rights Association, publicly memorialised the Armenian tragedy (using the banned word “genocide”) in 2005. “We commemorate ... because of feelings of shame and guilt for becoming aware of the genocide so late,” she said in an email. “We felt responsible for the ongoing, aggressive, gross, vulgar denialism, and also the crime committed by our ancestors.”

Mr. Gunaysu explains why it’s important for Turks to liberate their country from a false narrative about the past. “Without the extermination of the Christian peoples of Asia Minor, it would have been impossible to establish a Turkish nation-state. In order to persuade(belief,विश्वास दिलाना,मनाना) the new generations in Turkey that there was no genocide, a new Turkish identity was constructed based on lies. ... We believe that to make only one person question the official thesis is a victory in itself, as the recognition will come from below, not from above.”

Osman Kavala, the head of a cultural organisation called Anadolu Kultur, says that he uses the word “genocide,” but not all the time in his conversations with fellow Turks. It’s so loaded it may not be “the best tool” to encourage honest discussion of the past, he notes. “We try to explain that this is something Turks are doing for themselves. It’s in their own interest to be objective.” The Turkish government may not be ready yet to recognise genocide, Mr. Kavala says, but in the meantime, Turkish activists can take smaller steps, such as writing accurate textbooks or working jointly with Armenian groups to preserve religious and cultural sites.

I focus on these Turkish activists because this is a tragic anniversary for Turkey, as well as for Armenians. No country can be at peace with itself until it can reconcile past and present. The founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, called the forced deportation and slaughter of the Armenians “a shameful act.” That shame smoulders(fire with no flame,सुलगना) inside Turkey still, even as officials successfully pressure President Barack Obama and other leaders not to attach the name “genocide” to what happened.

One of the mysteries of this anniversary date is why Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan doesn’t seize the opportunity to write a new chapter in Turkish history, much as he has done in reaching out to Turkey’s Kurdish minority. Mr. Erdogan bears no responsibility for the genocide; he leads a movement to create a modern and dynamic Turkey. Last year, he offered condolences(expression of sympathy,शोक) to the Armenian people, but he hasn't taken the next step.

I don’t pretend to be objective about this issue. My late grandfather was born in the town of Kharpert in what was then the Ottoman Empire. He came to America in 1903 and lived a long and happy life. But members of his family who stayed behind were not so lucky. Two of his sisters made the death march across the Anatolian Desert. One died on the way, with most of her children. Another survived the desperate trek, clutching her Bible to her breast, according to family lore. She reached Syria and then, miraculously, America.

Armenians, like people everywhere who have experienced great tragedies, have a part of their souls that is forever in the shadows. But I felt some healing light, speaking with Turkish activists who want to acknowledge the past so they can walk honestly, with Armenians, into the future. — © 2015. The Washington Post

Read more »

Juveniles need reform, not prison

The Cabinet has decided to treat 16- to 18-year-olds as adults for ‘heinous’(deeply criminal,जघन्य) offences. This assuages(relieve,satisfy,कम करना,शांत करना) post-Nirbhaya rage but strongly violates the rights of the child.
By clearing amendments to the Juvenile(below 18 year,किशोर)
Justice Act and allowing juveniles between the ages of 16 and 18 to be tried and punished as adults for ‘heinous offences’ (offences that are punishable with imprisonment of seven years or more), the Cabinet on April 22 sounded the death knell for juvenile justice. It consciously overlooked the Parliamentary Standing Committee Report that found the transfer system proposed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Bill violative of India’s constitutional mandate and its international obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Committee had been particularly critical of the drastic approach of the Ministry of Women and Child Development, stating that “one must not forget that juvenile justice law is based on a strong foundation of reformation and rehabilitation, rather than on retribution”. It recommended that all clauses proposing “differential treatment of children between 16 and 18 years of age needs to be reviewed.”

Despite this, the Cabinet has approved the transfer system. The Press Information Bureau release states that the decision to transfer will be based on an assessment of whether “the crime was committed as a ‘child’ or as an ‘adult’”, to be undertaken by the Juvenile Justice Board that will have psychologists and social experts. What it does not spell out is that a child tried as an adult will end up in prison.

Can’t determine cause and effect
The edifice of the proposed system stands on three flawed assumptions: children are as culpable(guilty,आपराधिक) or blameworthy as adults; it is scientifically possible to determine maturity and mindset beyond reasonable doubt; and the transfer system will effectively deter(try to prevent,रोकना,कम करना) juvenile crime and enhance public safety, particularly of women.

Advances in neuroscience and studies by the Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice at the MacArthur Foundation, U.S., show that the human brain undergoes key physical changes from the ages of 16 to 18, and this continues right until the mid-20s. This evolutionary process of the brain primarily concerns risk-assessment behaviour that is directly tied to what we term as “maturity”. Though persons in this age group may ‘know what they are doing is wrong’, it has been shown incontrovertibly that they are unable to act on that knowledge and restrain themselves. This is precisely because at this stage they underestimate risk, are susceptible(weak,sensitive,अतिसवेंदनशील) to negative influences, and lack foresight. Their ability to understand legal processes and make decisions is not the same as that of adults. This is endorsed by an internationally renowned expert in child and adolescent psychiatry, Shekhar P. Seshadri, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, NIMHANS, Bengaluru. Professor Seshadri explains that “adolescents are less culpable than adults because adolescent criminal conduct is driven by transitory influences that are constitutive of this developmental stage. By nature of their psycho-biological profile, adolescents are greatly influenced by their environment, and too immature to weigh the consequences(result,परिणाम) of their actions.” This predisposes them to poor decision-making — a key factor that distinguishes them from adults. But, just as they can be influenced negatively, they can also be moulded in the right way. To try and punish them like adults and send them to prison would grossly violate their right to equality.

Latest research by Bonnie and Scott (2013) shows that individualised assessments of adolescent maturity are not possible and suggesting it can be done would mean “exceeding the limits of science”. The assessment thus proposed is fraught with errors and arbitrariness and will allow inherent biases(unfair treatment,पक्षपातपूर्ण) to determine which child is transferred to an adult court. When psycho-social maturity or mental capacity cannot be measured accurately, it would be a travesty(broad satire,farce comedy,मज़ाक) of justice if children accused of breaking the law are transferred to the adult system and ultimately sent to an adult prison based on such a flawed assessment.

Jail doesn’t reduce violent crime
Despite ample(full,more than enough,abundance,काफी,प्रचुर मात्रा में) evidence that punitive(punish,दण्डात्मक) laws do not improve public safety or deter juvenile crime, the government is bent on importing a failed Western model. The independent Task Force on Community Preventive Services set up by the U.S. Centre for Disease Control reviewed scientific evidence on the effectiveness of transfer laws and concluded that: “….transfer policies have generally resulted in increased arrest for subsequent crimes, including violent crime, among juveniles who were transferred compared with those retained in the juvenile justice system. To the extent that transfer policies are implemented to reduce violent or other criminal behaviour, available evidence indicates that they do more harm than good.” The U.S. is now closing down prisons and redirecting funds to community-based treatment programmes.

Instead of dealing with the root causes of juvenile crime, such as poverty, broken families, unregulated access to pornography, or the failure of the child protection system, the government seems to be blindly targeting adolescents. This is surely an erroneous strategy to protect women or to assuage the public outrage(anger,गुस्सा) after the Delhi gang rape, given that these juveniles will graduate from adult prisons as a much higher risk to the community.

Tragically, the grave human rights violations inherent in the transfer system were recognised by the multi-party Parliamentary Standing Committee, but dismissed entirely by the Ministry responsible for protecting children.

On being informed about the proposed law, a young boy who journeyed through the juvenile justice system said, “We learn everything from adults. From people who take drugs, we learn to take drugs; from people who make bombs, we learn to make bombs. And that is what we will learn when you send us to jail. So, if you send us to jail, we will become like them.” Another young woman, a victim of trafficking who went on to do the same to a 12-year-old-girl herself, said, “Please do not kill our spirit and hopes by sending us to jail. Help us, guide us, advise us, support us and show us the right path — don’t condemn(express strong disapproval,निंदनीय,दोषी ठहराना) us to a life in jail”.

With the Ministry and the Cabinet having turned their back, all hopes are pinned on Parliament to do what is right for India’s adolescent children.

Read more »

Revamping public procurement

A properly designed and implemented procurement law is long overdue. It can improve financial management, and bring large financial and governance benefits
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s 2015-16 budget speech signalled the government’s commitment to formally legalise India’s public procurement system as a part of its continuing reforms in public financial management. Following this, the Ministry of Finance is seeking suggestions to refine the Public Procurement Bill of 2012, introduced by the previous government.

The jurisdiction of the Bill covers any Ministry or Department and any public sector undertaking of the Union government, or any company in which the government has a stake of more than 50 per cent. The procurement processes of the States and the local governments are thus not covered by the Bill.

It is in this context that we focus on three aspects relating to the Bill: its potential benefits, selected design features, and implementation challenges.

Benefits

There are many benefits of a well-designed and well-implemented public procurement policy. These include fiscal savings from annual procurement expenditure; generating much needed fiscal space; and enhanced flexibility to channel government expenditure into growth-enhancing areas. It could also help in a shift towards rule-based institutional procurement.

However, the poor quality of data on procurement expenditure and its major components means that we don’t have a good estimate of potential savings from a better process. The problem needs to be addressed. Our crude estimate of potential savings generated by the revised Bill ranges between 0.6 per cent and 1.2 per cent of GDP, depending on the extent of efficiency achieved. This could assist in addressing the revenue deficit of 2.9 per cent of GDP projected for 2014-15 by the budget.

The savings would be greater if the States, whose expenditure equals that of the Union government, and all the public enterprises, also initiated similar procurement reforms. This task could be entrusted to NITI Aayog.

Several measures may be suggested to improve the design features. In its present form, the Bill’s objective is too complex, which dilutes(reduce,कम करना) accountability. Hence, a simpler set of objectives, as is also a global practice, would be desirable. This would also assist in improving the accountability of procuring agencies, and facilitate the task of internal and external auditing agencies.

Second, the Bill’s definition of the ‘procurement process’ implies that post-tendering steps such as contract management, payment, monitoring and so on, after the award of a contract, are excluded from the ‘procurement process’. The definition should be broadened to include the post-tendering procedures.

Third, given judicial delays and the lack of economic literacy often displayed by the judiciary, non-judicial procurement redress committees would be preferable. This needs to be better specified in the Bill to prevent undue discretion(awareness,समझदारी) by procurement agencies and redress committees.

Fourth, the international practice is to designate a nodal agency for procurement. Hence, we need to clarify whether the proposed Central Purchasing Organisation (CPO) will be such an agency. When a framework for the nodal agency is established, it will need to be reconciled with the decentralised procurement process, which has also been suggested by the two recent committees to the Indian Railways.

Fifth, the Bill is not applicable to procurements for less than Rs. 5 million, emergency procurements made for disaster management, and procurements for the purpose of national security. While excluding the latter two government activities is routine, the basis for discretion for procurements below Rs. 5 million, which is a significant amount, is not defined. The corresponding procedures for such procurements should also be specified.

Sixth, the Bill also permits the procuring entity to limit competition in order to achieve other objectives, as well as exempt certain procurements from any of the provisions in the legislation such as the transparency requirements in “public interest”. However, in case of limited competition, certain other requirements such as reporting requirements, advance contract award notice, risk management techniques should be introduced to ensure that transparency is achieved.

Once a revised Bill is passed by Parliament, the following implementation challenges will need to be addressed.

First, data management capabilities and standardisation must be enhanced. Both bidders and procuring agencies have significant data and information needs to ensure transparency in public procurements. Hence, the new procurement regime(government,शासन) needs to be accompanied by streamlined data and information systems for various aspects of public tenders that are put out and the standardisation of information provided in the submitted bids against the tenders.

Second, the 2012 Bill contains more than 20 references to ‘rules’. However, the general principles on which the rules will be based require clarity. Once defined in the Bill, the rules must be coherent(ordered,सुसंगत) and credible, while permitting flexibility.

Third, there is an implementation challenge concerning the skill sets of the officials, who will be at the interface of public procurement. Public procurement should be regarded as a task requiring professional skills. Capacity building in this direction should be undertaken urgently to ensure appropriate skill sets and that an understanding of business practices and logic is inculcated(instill,मन में बिठाना) in the officials and in the organisations seeking procurement contracts.

Designing and implementing a strong procurement policy is a long overdue step towards better public financial management, and it has large potential fiscal and governance benefits. Its early passage, therefore, should be a high priority.

Read more »

Three speeches, three futures

Last Sunday, Narendra Modi, Rahul Gandhi and Sitaram Yechury all put in very different performances, each insisting that they represent the people. Each party seemed to take the poor as a pretext for politics, yet is absent-minded about their real concerns
Politics has a strange way of making you rethink ideas and stereotypes(old belief,रूढ़िवादी) by merely juxtaposing(place side By side,निकट रखना) events. Just as one finishes typecasting persons and parties and feels smug(self-satisfied,आत्मसंतुष्टि) about such judgments, politics delivers a series of googlies forcing a rethink. Last Sunday, one saw such a juxtaposition of events when three leaders addressed mass meetings. The triad of speeches included one by Rahul Gandhi who was returning from his sabbatical(leave,छुट्टी) and addressing a kisan rally. In the second, Sitaram Yechury was taking over as the general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) from his more tacitum predecessor, Prakash Karat. Finally, Prime Minister Narendra Modi was addressing a rally of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) workers after his return from Canada.

Foil to the other

None of the three speeches was by itself exceptional. But each of the trio, and then together, created a conversation as if three hit movies had been introduced on the same day. The first surprise was that of Mr. Modi. He looked almost reluctant(unwilling,अनिच्छा) to be in India after the highs experienced after visiting Europe and Canada. In all his overseas visits, it is clear that Non Resident Indians (NRIs) dote(love,प्यार) on his nationalism and his alleged(declared,कथित रूप से) efficiency while he revels in their success and their enthusiasm for him. After the exciting NRI engagements, India almost seems banal(commonplace,साधारण) and disappointing to him, one could say. Mr. Modi, in his speech, seemed to complain about the Indian gene that discourages an approval of authority. The native Indian, unlike his counterpart abroad, is a determined contrarian. Worse, the Opposition seemed to have stolen Mr. Modi’s punch lines. His voice had more of a bully’s humour and he almost sounded like yesterday’s newspaper.

In contrast, Sitaram Yechury sounded human, relaxed, even casual. As visual appearances go, the careful grooming of Mr. Modi was not for him. Mr. Yechury almost looked like an absent-minded boy scout being asked to take over his party. He presented a clenched(tight,जकड़ना) fist which lacked a dramatic touch. This gesture was informal, almost absent-minded, as if he was flagging down an auto. Yet, one realised why he is the human face of the party. He sounded almost matter of fact. The CPI(M) tried to create a sense of drama but the performance on the podium appeared almost listless.

While Mr. Yechury enacted his leadership role, I looked at how Rahul addressed the kisan rally. For once he was coherent(ordered,सुसंगत), sentences flowed into each other; now, he seems ready to be a leader. Senior Congressmen smiled with content that their “slow” nephew had blossomed at last. The realists knew that he has years to go but at least for the 22 minutes he spoke, his spirit of leadership seemed willing.

Each leader enacted a characteristic script which acted as a perfect foil to the other. Mr. Modi began, didactic as ever, realising that his party has been slipping while he was playing to audiences abroad; the BJP is now losing initiative and is being seen as anti-poor and anti-farmer. Mr. Modi has begun to sound like a speaker at a FICCI meeting and when he declaims that his party has been pro-poor, he sounds hollow(empty,खोखला). The charisma is gone. The poor do not interest him. He projects them as a Congress conspiracy(unlawful act,षड़यंत्र). Now, Mr. Modi wants to talk of the second stage of development; of his exploits and negotiations abroad. He wants to tell his aspiring masses that his negotiations with France and Canada have enabled him to access nuclear energy. He sounds like Father Christmas but the audience is not convinced.

Rahul worked hard in presenting a pro-poor Congress, listing out the party’s attempts to waive rural debt, and remembering how he had promised to fight for them. He contrasted this with Mr. Modi repaying his electoral debt to the capitalists by selling land. He talked of the tribals from Niyamgiri, Odisha, as his little fiefdom, and cited(make reference,उल्लेख करना)  how 400 of them swore to him that if they lost their land, they would become naxalites. Rahul seems more alive, almost grateful for the land issue. What began as a morsel of an issue might turn out to be the crystal seed of a Congress revival. Rahul attacked Mr. Modi with ease contrasting the indifference of the BJP to the Congress’s attempt to side with the farmer.

Reinventing a party

I was watching the show with Kiran Majumdar Shaw of Biocon who detected a deep immaturity in the Congress. She claimed that in being a pro-farmer, pro-tribal, Rahul sounded anti-development. For a corporate leader, there is no greater heresy(unorthodox,अप्रमाणिक). She ended by saying that the Land Acquisition Act needs to be read and understood. Suddenly one realises that what one has on hand is a major class battle.

It is here that the CPI(M) was in the limelight(spotlight,चर्चा में). In his acceptance speech, Mr. Yechury was relaxed, uttering(express,कहना) a few happy lines in Telugu and Hindi. His ease of language was a foil to Rahul’s, and his relaxed sense of leadership, a dramatic contrast to Mr. Modi’s. Whether it is the Congress party’s masses or the CPI(M)’s classes, both seem ready to battle the aspiring generation of Mr. Modi.

There was a vestige(shadow,निशान) of scientism in Mr. Yechury’s speech. He talked of the objective situation and referred to the BJP as a communal party enacting the neo-liberal agenda. He accused the BJP of confusing history with mythology, of being anti-scientific. Like most Marxists, he appealed to history, claiming that history is on his side, inviting the CPI(M) to enter into battle with the BJP. Yet, he was so amiable(friendly,स्नेही) that one was not quite sure whether he was delivering a lecture on table manners or on class war.

One wished that there was less certitude and more doubt. He talked of his comrades(associate,साथी) dying in West Bengal due to the Trinamool Congress’s aggressive and violent ways. There was no moment of reflection, or of guilt that this culture of violence was initiated by the CPI(M) when in power. The personality of the man dominated the moment. With the entry of Mr. Yechury, even people critical of the CPI(M) felt that “acche din aagaye hai” (good times are here). In his speech, he did not have to strain(stress,जोर लगाना) for effect like Mr. Modi or Rahul had to. It was clear that the CPI(M) has found a leader who can reinvent the party of the future. However, his claim that socialism is the way for the future sounds happily old-fashioned.

One needs to contrast the atmosphere of the three speeches. The CPI(M) oozed(leak,बहना) a sense of solidarity. The Congress looked at its potential leader avuncularly(relate to elder,बड़े बूढो जैसा). There was a sense of hope, and of modest expectation. On the other hand, the BJP atmosphere was surly. Mr. Modi was almost disappointed with India and he told his cadres to work hard and ignore ‘the games of the media’. This response reminded one of sour grapes. The man who was, hitherto(so far,अभी तक), the darling of the media, suddenly felt that things are not the same. One could sense unease beneath the superficial(apparent,अल्पज्ञ) calm in his party. He realises that the BJP faces an uphill battle in Bihar and that his party has messed up the script in Jammu and Kashmir.

A hollowness

Even as the detached spectator prepares the report cards of the three men — awarding an ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ to Mr. Yechury, Rahul and Mr. Modi respectively — there is an unmistakable sense of dread(fear,डर). One wants to join in the celebration of the prospect of revival of the CPI(M) and the Congress but there is clearly a degree of hollowness around this political exercise. One wonders whether the three parties can offer much to address the ongoing crises in agriculture, the way to revive the economy and open and good governance. All three thrive(grow,फलना फूलना) on old categories and have little sense of the future. There has never been a time where political ideas in the public sphere have lagged so far behind the imperatives of institution building. It is a strange time for India, what a friend called “a conspiracy of mediocrity(ordinary,साधारण कोटि का) and hysteria”. At this moment, a touch of civility almost seems like a moment of genius.

Each party seems to take the poor as a pretext for politics and yet is absent-minded about them. The Congress has a seasonal interest in the issues of the farmer. The CPI(M) has for long ignored issues related to marginal groups and instead focussed only on organised labour. The BJP prefers the middle class and finds the poor an obstacle(problem,बाधा) to development. One is almost desperate and wants to say “stop the train, I want to get off”. One faces a desperation, where the crisis of faith is so deep, that even a few morsels(bite,कौर) of hope make one grateful.

Read more »