No one can deny that the grain producing farmers are the most pampered section in the farming community. Even the ruling party had fought for more and more gratis for them from free power and irrigation water facilities to subsidies seeds and fertilizers. Even after the BJP got into power corridors it had been playing politics to draw them in its vote bank. The Uttar Pradesh chief minister Aditya Nath Yogi began the charade with announcement to write off Rs.94,000 crore unpaid back debts of farmers in his state. He forced the other BJP ruled states including two coalition governments in Maharashtra and Punjab though both had no resources even to meet the normal establishment expenses.
The loss of power in Punjab and failure to win a mandate in Haryana in the last assembly polls came as a shock to the BJP that its advocacy for liberal financial assistance to farm community did not win their votes as small and marginal farmers were under dictations of big farmers who controlled 80 per cent of marketed grain surplus. Actually they wagged away all benefits accruing from the minimum support prices and urbanites were made to pay for it. The enhancement of the MSP for grains by ten per cent for the last 47 years was responsible for escalation of prices of all life essential commodities.
But the Prime minister was not bugged by consideration to provide succor to urbanites from disease of price escalations due to increases in grain prices but he was motivated by a bug to modernize this sector to facilitate the entry of big players in the retail trade sector with annual business volume of Rs. 1.2 million crore to induce other big players to come to India. They needed assurance that India’s democratic structure would not cause hindrances. Hence he decided to prove he was the sole authority. To prove it he sought to introduce reforms in the sector though it annoyed the partner of thirty years in Punjab, the Shiromani Akali Dal to break away.
With three farm reform laws, he invited the wrath of big farmers who were major losers due to withdrawal of the msp system. The government has not been able to control them though they have not been brought in tax net work or in the licensing need regime. The big farmers lobby fears that by allowing the NaMO regime to get away with authority to make laws in the farm sector would embolden him to legislate that would affect their interests in future. That makes farmers to take to the warpath with only demand repeal the three farm laws. Then only they would be willing to negotiate with the NaMo regime on needs to reform the retail trade sector.
The Prime Minister is ready to meet every demand of small and marginal farmers but not surrender his authority to reform farm sector it is difficult to say whether his political colleagues fully understand what the battle is all about. Even his favourite junior minister Piyush Goel put in the panel of three ministers to talk with agitating farmers has launched tirades against agitating farmers as hand tools of Naxalites. Other members of the fan club are also resorting to abusing the small and marginal farmers without realizing that the real villains are big farmers.
One can easily blame him for not taking leaders of other parties in confidence through prior consultation. The very need to present himself as the sole authority in Indian system so as to induce the big foreign capital to invest in India may have restrained his hand. Many friends may accuse me of overplaying him and his ability to foresee the future needs. His earnest desire to be a bigger name in history of India can explain his directive for the Lockdown of India nine months ago long before the corona virus became a dreaded pandemic for Indians.
No one can accuse him of not knowing consequence to the Indian economy of the stoppage of all economic activities for months and then inviting more troubles by inviting small and marginal farmers to threaten him of dire consequences over changes in the laws relating to agriculture. He ruled the state for 12 years before he bided for power to rule India. His knowing mentality, aspirations, needs and demand of Indians was amply proved by his success in 2014 with his unprecedented success in winning the mandate. He had sidetracked the original identity of his party and had retained only the election symbol Lotus.
He had set his priority of toilets before temple to mesmerize the young generation. He stopped talking of economic development but introduced measures to prove that the temple talk alone cannot lift up India from her centuries’ old morass. He took up arms against big farmers. They are using and exploiting small and marginal farmers as their tools in their fight against the man who is seen by them as their main enemy. This is not a small battle over the grain or minimum support prices. At the stake is whether or not India can emerge as the economic power. The followers in his political outfit are unable to read his mind and his game.
Only fallacy in his attempt is his lack of comprehension of the basic Indian temperament. For thousands years, through their religions and social structure, Indians have displayed their preference for democratic living. In five thousand years they did not come under the single strong political authority. Small Gan Sangh states existed all around the first major and powerful Magadh Empire. NaMo seems to be unaware of it.
BATTLE FOR ASSERTING THE FUTURE
Vijay Sanghvi - 2020-12-14 08:56
The stalemate over the new farm laws clearly indicates that both the NaMo government and farmers are battling for future. The farmers know their accepting authority now would embolden the NaMo government to curtail their advantages. The government cannot surrender by repealing the farm laws. It would mean opening flood gates for more demands. The battle between the two is virtually to acquire and deny the authority for future actions. The government has offered to meet every reasonable demand provided farmers accept the new farm laws but farmers are adamant on their demand to repeal now new farm laws before they even open dialogue. The conflict is over the authority to impose new laws and denial of right to the government to tamper with the existing legal structure.