India Is Lucky To Have Both Nehru And Modi

If one has to compare the tenures of the two prime ministers one must credit Nehru with laying the foundations on which Modi is building a grand edifice, asserts Colonel Anil A Athale (retd).

On June 10, Prime Minister Narendra Modi becomes India's longest continuously serving PM. A record hitherto held by India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges since the circumstances and challenges faced by two leaders are vastly different. But in the currently polarised atmosphere in India, the debate is often posed as Nehru versus Modi.

The binary has gone to the extent that if one admired Nehru's certain achievements, one is labelled anti-Modi or vice a versa.

Here is an attempt to rise above this partisanship and have an objective assessment of two of India's great leaders.

In recent times, Nehru's legacy has suffered because of the doings of his descendants and Modi's achievements are distorted by the 'bhakts. This article will stay clear of these two extremes.

My studies of Anglo-Maratha wars gave me an insight into the great contribution of Shivaji and the Marathas to Indian Independence. As a student of the history of the freedom struggle, one is aware of the forces at play in the 20th century that shaped the Indian political scene.

I was lucky to have access and an opportunity to study original material as part of the history division at the ministry of defence, especially the events related to the 1962 border clash between India and China. Subsequently as a Kennedy fellow, I got acquainted with the international dimensions of that issue.

In this connection, an extensive conversation with the late Professor John Kenneth Galbraith in Boston in 2003 helped in understanding some policy issues related to Nehru's vision of a mixed economy. This article is a cumulative result of all of the above.

Assessing Jawaharlal Nehru

Nehru's contribution to building democratic institutions is immense. At a time when many tall leaders of tghe anti-colonial freedom struggle succumbed to temptation and made their countries either dictatorships or a one-party State, Nehru remained steadfast on a democratic path and stuck to a multi-party democratic system.

As a true democrat, he regularly attended Parliament and not only listened to but also acted upon the suggestions and criticism of his political opponents.

But Nehru's democracy was also 'elitist'. At the beginning itself, he delivered his landmark Tryst With Destiny oration at midnight on August 14-15 1947 in chaste English. This was at a time when barely one percent of the Indian population understood English.

The administration, top rungs of the bureaucracy, the armed forces remained the preserve of English knowing and speaking people.

I studied in a Marathi medium school and to get into the armed forces had to switch to English medium for the UPSC exams in 1964, the year Nehru died.

I was amongst the very few exceptions at the National Defence Academy having come from what used to be called kanya putri path shala or 'vernacular' schools.

The bulk of officer cadets were from elite English medium schools. I cite this example to show that Indian democracy under the so-called socialist leadership was by the elite and for the elite.

It was as late as 1979 when under the Kothari Commission Report, this system was reformed and students could give examinations in regional languages as well.

Nehru also created the IITs, elite technological institutes. The idea was to create top universities and research centres around these clusters.

However, that remained a dream for a very long time and the IITs became a pipeline to supply trained manpower to the West. But over time the situation has rectified and the IITs have begun to play a role in technology generation.

Nehru also created the atomic energy department under the legendary Dr Homi J Bhabha. Nehru ensured total autarky in this field.

It is to Nehru's vision that India owes its current nuclear status.

• Nehru's Vision, Bhabha's Mission

Nehru also promoted industrialisation of the country in the teeth of opposition from the West. Building of steel mills, a machine building industry and a large number of hydro electric projects like the Bhakra Nangal dam in Punjab are his legacy.

Jawaharlal Nehru was the original development leader of India.

On the political front, Nehru continued the pre-Independence strategy of wooing the Muslim minority even after conceding of Pakistan.

His colleague Vallabhbhai Patel could see the futility of this failed approach, but Nehru persisted in the appeasement strategy vis a vis the Muslim minority and Pakistan.

A generous Indus Water Treaty was the epitome of this approach to buying peace with Pakistan. He failed in this as did earlier attempts by Mahatma Gandhi.

The one black mark in his copy book is the 1962 debacle at the hands of the Chinese. Nehru's critics accuse him of losing 37,000 sq km land to China, referring to the occupation of Aksai Chin by China in the late 1950s.

This is absurd since the Aksai Chin area that China encroached upon (not captured) was unoccupied land with no clear legal or historical status.

In Ladakh, there are three boundaries, the traditional one marked by the area conquered by Dogra General Zorawar Singh and the two lines drawn by the British during the 19th century that had more to do with the looming Russian threat than any other reason.

China had proposed a reasonable resolution in December 1960 but Nehru, then under immense pressure by the Opposition, turned it down.

All the file notings by Nehru as well as his instructions to G Parthasarathy not to trust the Chinese show that he was well aware of the Chinese threat.

But in his calculation, with tacit American support, he felt China would not use force against India. Many US strategic analysts including Thomas Schilling have testified to this. This calculation was proved right when on November 21, 1962, the US had alerted its air force based in the Philippines to help India. It is this that led China to declaring a cease fire and withdrawal.

It was Nehru's and India's misfortune that the Cuban Missile Crisis coincided with the Chinese attack that checkmated US support. There is a reason to believe that it was no coincidence and the Chinese knew about the crisis in advance.

Nehru's oft repeated assertion that the Chinese would not attack was no empty boast but grounded in solid calculation. The 1962 disaster can be put down to that accidental global event and a Nehru calculation gone wrong.

In 2003, Professor Galbraith called the 1962 India China clash an accidental war. To blame Nehru for an accident is unfair.

But Nehru's reluctance to be realistic on the border row with China has got India stuck in a quagmire. Nehru can well be faulted for not being courageous enough to tell the truth to the Indian public and accept a reasonable compromise that was then being offered by the Chinese.

Nehru's sterling contribution to nation and institution building is marred somewhat by his two glaring failures. Nehru failed to give due importance to the basic issue of compulsory primary education and also reasonable population control.

There was no dearth of experts like J R D Tata who had advised him on these issues, but Nehru neglected this vital long-term need.

It is fair to say that at the end of his 12 year rule Nehru left an India with a sound industrial foundation, several institutes of higher learning, a strong democratic structure and high prestige in the comity of nations.

Given all these flaws, Nehru stands tall as a stalwart nation builder in the 20th century.

If India today aspires to be the third largest economy and a major military power in the world, it owes Nehru a huge debt. It is Nehru who laid the foundations for a strong India.

On Nehru's desk was scribbled a poem by Robert Frost:

The woods are lovely dark and green,
but I have promises to keep and miles to go before I sleep.

This was the measure of Nehru's greatness, well aware of the challenges ahead and the need to go on. India was indeed lucky to have him as its first prime minister and on balance his achievements far outweigh his failures.

Assessing The NAMO Era

It is difficult to assess a sitting prime minister as the present is alive and ever changing. However, despite this constraint, 12 years -- or a tapa -- as referred to in the Indian system is a long enough period to make an assessment of achievements and failures.

If the 12 years of Narendra Modi were to be described in one sentence, it would be a corruption free and safe India.

A single measure like GST and abolition of octroi ended one of the biggest sources of corruption and black money. But that would be doing grave injustice to him.

The true measure of the Namo era has been the mental transformation that he has brought about in the country. From a passive, fatalistic nation, Narendra Damodardas Modi has transformed India into a confident, pro-active nation.

This is more important than all the highways that he has got built or the infrastructure he has created. He has restored the confidence of a 'wounded civilisation' (a description by V S Naipaul in his first book on India in the early 1960s).

The challenges faced by Modi were qualitatively different than those confronting Nehru but no less daunting. Before Modi came to power hardly a day passed without one or the other corruption scandal being unearthed.

In a coalition with a weak leader, governance had taken a toss. In addition, the appeasement and passive strategy against terrorism had meant that on every festive occasion the country was on tenterhooks.

India suffered from the proxy terror war launched by Pakistan.

At the beginning of his term, Modi did attempt to mend fences with Pakistan, his invite to then Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif, his surprise visit to Lahore in December 2015 and even permitting the ISI to visit Pathankot after the terror attack on the Indian Air Force base can be seen as the last chance he gave Pakistan to change its behaviour.

But once the olive branch initiative failed, Modi's India, through surgical strikes, air strikes and destruction of terror hubs inside Pakistan, used the iron fist to end the terror threat.

It can safely be said that under Modi, India has finally dealt with the threat of the Islamist terror threat emanating from Pakistan.

By abolishing the special status of Kashmir, Modi also squashed the last separatist hopes and commenced the long journey to peace in Kashmir.

The holding in abeyance of the Indus Water Treaty has signalled the end of the appeasement strategy vis a vis Pakistan.

India and Modi were indeed lucky that the international economic environment in the initial years was conducive for economic growth.

But then came the Covid challenge of 2020 to 2022. Modi showed extraordinary leadership to steer the country out of that difficult phase.

Modi baiters have been making fun of his various techniques like lighting lamps or collectively banging pans during that period. Little do these critics realise that at a very difficult time, Modi sustained national morale through these measures.

Modi's leadership during the COVID-19 crisis was a master class in building morale and will be studied long after he is gone.

One of Modi's great success has been the near eradication of open air defecation. Both Gandhi as well as Nehru had been trying for this reform but had failed.

It is to Modi's eternal credit that he has managed to get this behavioural change done in India.

Modi's 12 years will also be remembered for unprecedented Hindu political consolidation. This is one of the prime reasons that he attracts hate from a large section of Indian citizens who see this in negative light.

Hindus have been a social community for over a millennium but never had political unity. It was possibly the single biggest cause of India's succumbing to foreign invasions.

Using symbolism like the reconstruction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, Modi has achieved the near impossible. In this endeavour, he stands comparison to Shivaji the Great and not Nehru.

The Modi regime's successes have also brought about new challenges. Rise of an assertive India has generated suspicion worldwide. External powers have begun to conspire to stall Indian progress.

Modi's consolidation of Hindus has been a double edge weapon. Instead of the lofty philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita, Hindutva has degenerated to ritualism.

Modi himself has been indulging in it. In the long-term view this is negation of all that Hindutva stands for. Instead of Dharma, the public space has been occupied by karma-kand or rituals.

Revival of Indian civilisation has got into the negative connotation of opposing Muslims. Hindu consolidation has led to political marginalisation of Muslims, who are 20% of the population.

All attempts so far to get the Muslim minority into the national mainstream have failed. India cannot become a great power unless this is rectified.

While the Modi government has indeed reduced corruption, it is yet to dismantle the 'inspector raj' that the common man faces every day. The education sector, scientific research and the judiciary are all in need of major reform.

Narendra Modi will do well to remember the lines that reminded Nehru of 'miles to go' before India become fully developed.

If one has to compare the tenures of the two prime ministers one must credit Nehru with laying the foundations on which Modi is building a grand edifice.

These are Colonel Anil A Athale's personal views.
You can read Colonel Athale's earlier columns here.

Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff