Tavleen Singh writes: Why Modi won and could win again about:blank

indianexpress.com /article/opinion/columns/why-modi-won-could-win-again-8900205/

Tavleen Singh writes: Why Modi won and could win again
⋮ 8/20/2023

Listen to this article

Tavleen Singh writes: Why Modi won and could win again

x
00:00

1x 1.5x 1.8x

Every now and then comes along a week that reminds me why Narendra Modi has become India’s prime
minister twice and seems on his way to winning a third term. The week gone by is one of those weeks.
I happened to travel to a Southeast Asian country that was as poor and disorderly as India when I first went
there thirty years ago. It is now many, many years ahead of us. It does not matter which country because
most southeastern countries have overtaken us in the quest to give all citizens a decent standard of living.
This can be done with good governance and investment.

This time I returned after an absence of three years. And I drove into the countryside as I have done many
times before and the changes I saw left me wonderstruck. I drove on a fine highway, past small towns and
little villages that exhibited a degree of order, cleanliness, and planning that we in India still aspire
desperately to. What struck me most was that nowhere did I see dirt or rotting garbage. It reminded me that
until Narendra Modi started his Swachch Bharat campaign we did not have a single prime minister who

1 of 3 8/22/2023, 11:18 AM
Tavleen Singh writes: Why Modi won and could win again about:blank

noticed the squalid, filthy conditions in which most Indians are forced to live. Modi has not succeeded fully in
making Bharat truly Swachch but he is at least trying.

The reason why we are decades behind most Southeast Asian countries is because of the criminally
negligent governance that defined the Congress era. It would be more accurate to use the phrase the Prime
Minister did to describe that time in his speech from the Red Fort on our 77th Independence Day, ‘rule of
the family, by the family, for the family.’ This is exactly what it was, and ‘the family’ got away with it because
in Lutyens’ Delhi they remained cocooned by courtiers and sycophants.

When I came back to India, I found that a publisher had sent me a book written by one of the most devoted
members of Rajiv’s Durbar. No other than he who once declared that Modi would never become prime
minister but since he was a ‘chaiwallah’ he was free to come to Delhi and serve tea in Congress
headquarters. It was a stupid, arrogant thing to say and it helped Modi win in 2014. If Modi had paid Mani
Shankar Aiyer to say what he did he could not have done a better job.

My reason for reading this courtier’s memoir was personal. While glancing through it I noticed that he had
said some very rude and untruthful things about me, so I read what else he had to say about the days when
I knew him, and Rajiv was prime minister. It did not surprise me to find that his memoir about his time as
Rajiv’s right-hand man is no more than an elaborate tissue of lies. From the vantage point of this devotee
Rajiv made not a single mistake. He did not justify the pogrom that caused the death of more than 3,000
Sikhs in the first week of his becoming prime minister. He concedes that Rajiv made a speech in which he
admitted that after the assassination of his mother there was terrible violence but when ‘a big tree falls, the
earth shakes.’ He absolves Rajiv on the grounds that the speech came long after the pogrom. So?

Shah Bano’s case and the law Rajiv’s government passed denying divorced Muslim women the right to
maintenance was not his fault either. It was the fault of people around him. The Bofors scandal was also
nothing to do with Rajiv but there could have been people in his circle who were bribed in this arms deal.
There is no mention of Ottavio and Maria Quattrocchi in whose Swiss bank accounts Bofors bribe money
was found thanks to some excellent investigative journalism by Chitra Subramaniam. If they were brought
into his memoir, he would have to explain why Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi’s closest friends were bribed by
Bofors. Quattrocchi was a fertilizer salesman not an arms dealer.

What truly appalled me was this courtier’s account of a trip to Kalahandi with Rajiv and Sonia Gandhi in
1987 when this district of Odisha was in the grip of a terrible famine. Children were dying of hunger because
they had lived on birdseed for more than six months. Women were selling their babies for as little as a
hundred rupees out of desperation. I know because I traveled to the villages where these things were
happening and when I returned to Delhi, I sent a list of villages to one of Rajiv’s senior ministers in the hope
that if the prime minister visited them, his chief minister would offer more help than sending boxes of
antibiotics.

Rajiv went to Kalahandi and his faithful memoirist went with him, but they did not go to the villages where
there was famine. They stayed in safer territory where villagers were disappointed only because they did not

2 of 3 8/22/2023, 11:18 AM
Tavleen Singh writes: Why Modi won and could win again about:blank

catch a glimpse of Rajiv’s ‘udan khatola’. This famine was one of the worst stories I have ever covered
because there is nothing worse than seeing children dying slowly of starvation.

Reading this memoir revived memories of the ruling class that was swept out of power when Modi became
prime minister in 2014. They were a useless bunch that deserved to be dumped.

3 of 3 8/22/2023, 11:18 AM