The electorate has again shown remarkable political insight, discernment and perspicacity. It has not fallen for the restoration of “political stability” which was the principle priority and concern of the main contenders in the 15th Lok Sabha election. It has not endorsed the cult of personality in politics either, which finds manifestation in the Congress and has extended its baneful influence to several other opposition parties as well.

The election result has upset many political calculations. But, even more significantly, it has frustrated a grand design for the preservation, enlargement and enforcement of the regime of privileges for the elite in the name of market-friendly economic growth process. Addressing the pressing needs of the people and development of the social sector, primary education, basic health care facilities, rural roads instead of toll-paying expressways, and export of capital by big business in India to acquire companies abroad have been the driving force that determined the voting pattern in this general election.

The electorate too has neglected a coalition government at the Centre, to give wider scope for the assertion of democratic rights of the people in the governance of India. A coalition government indeed offers wider opportunities for the exercise of popular surveillance over its functioning and greater respect for the norms of political accountability. The experience of the people after India gained political independence is that a centralized political structure is remote from their concerns and has nurtured vested interests.

Regional pulls and pressures, as well as communal, caste and ethnic considerations do influence any arrangement for governance. But coalition politics can contain such influences more effectively within the framework of democratic consensus. This is in contrast to the authoritarian political responses and administrative measures which tend to be adopted by the leading party in the government - hallmark of the era of single-party domination of the polity.

What is needed for stability in governance are appropriate policy alternatives combined with accountability to the people. This alone can usher in orderly change in economic and social conditions of the people. A coalition with credible policy alternatives to end the social and economic hegemony of vested interests has not emerged as yet. Economic policy adjustments which were made over the years in the phase of single party hegemony in the Indian polity have been either of a populist nature or geared to accelerate economic growth, without any regard for equitable distribution of the gains of growth. These adjustments have resulted in disastrous consequences for the economy as well as the polity.

The emergency regime in India in the seventies was a case of populist policies and politics. After the return of the Congress party to power preceded by a brief interregnum of coalition government in 1977, foreign influences found wider opportunities to derail the process of self-reliant economic growth. The moot question is whether the demolition of single-party hegemony in Indian polity would broaden political support for restoration of the effort for self-reliant socio-economic development. Failing that, coalition politics will cease to serve a positive purpose and will become effete.

After it attained Independence, India gave high priority to a broad-based economic development process, social cohesion and peaceful external relations, especially with the neighbouring countries. India made considerable progress, with relatively manageable infractions in these directions after gaining political independence. The original commitments, domestic and external, however, weakened in the nineties. There has since been a violation of the commitment to independent economic development itself. This has encouraged moves for structural retrogression in socio-economic as well as foreign policies. India is now under extreme stress and facing grave uncertainties on all fronts.

It is a pity in this context that Left politics and the progressive intelligentsia have lost vigour in the struggle to give appropriate orientation to the socio-economic policy. It has been giving precedence to pragmatism in its politics relinquishing commitment to its ideology to uphold and firmly support socio-economic policy concerns of the mass of the people through mass mobilisation and struggles of the working people. In this process, the position of the Left in Indian politics has been marginalised even as the so-called secular politics has been debased in the general election by blatantly communal appeals for minority votes against BJP and for the so called secular parties, including the Congress.

On the economic growth front, mobilisation of foreign funds for investment to promote growth to satisfy the demands of the upper crust in society is bound to come into conflict with the economic and social priorities which subserve the needs and aspirations of the deprived and exploited majority in India. There is certainly need for basic reforms in the socio-economic structure. But reforms must be regulated and must resolve rather than accentuate the clash of social and economic interests in democracy. Incentives for investment to promote market-friendly growth must be sufficiently democratic in favour of the deprived mass of people. There is much more to meaningful and effective coalition politics and economic policy. The fact is that powerful social and political forces in India are desperately trying to enhance their stakes in the power structure. This puts great strain on any coalition arrangement. For a coalition government to be viable and to be able to give the desired results, a series of compromises between the coalition partners have to be negotiated.

The conflict of interests in the Indian society and polity, which were curbed during five decades post-Independence by the single party domination of the polity, are now coming out in the open. There is also clash of interests between urban big business and its hangers on among the middle class professionals and the rich farmers and their political champions. This tussle often finds gross and grotesque articulation in the political arena. The contending parties are striving with characteristic zeal to establish a new political equilibrium to safeguard their vital interests against the growing challenge to their supremacy from social forces that do not fit into their scheme of things.

It is indeed fascinating to watch the policy adjustments and political-administrative arrangements as well as personal wheeling-dealing that is a part of this process. There is also much confusion and lack of cohesion on policy matters and political activity. The coalition governments based on a programmatic alliance of social and political forces cannot, therefore, remain static. It has to be dynamic. There are also serious misgivings over the “secret” diplomacy and negotiations on reordering India's economic policy and foreign relations, especially with the USA, which encompass, besides economic exchanges, such matters as strategic arrangements which impinge on India's relations with its neighbouring countries, CTBT, external security and so on. The policies and administration of the government should be clear and unambiguous if the problems before the country are to be faced squarely and solved on the basis of a broad consensus. (IPA Service)