The burden of Dr Singh’s song was this: I’m working under constraints, such as coalition politics, so I can’t be blamed for the government’s failures. I’m squeaky-clean, you can’t doubt my integrity. Second, I have taken action, haven’t I, against former telecom minister A Raja? And ISRO has cancelled the contract with Devas. Third, the UPA government is doing OK: there’s 8.5 percent GDP growth. Our policies don’t need to be reviewed and revised.

Dr Singh deplorably invoked “coalition dharma”, a sordidly unethical term invented by the Bharatiya Janata Party to rationalise its opportunist alliances with parties ideologically opposed to it. What dharma allows the DMK to milk ministry after ministry? And why did Dr Singh promote Mr Vilasrao Deshmukh, indicted by the Supreme Court for protecting loan-sharks, to Rural Development, a cash cow for venal politicians? Mr Deshmukh belongs to Dr Singh’s own party.

The issue is not Dr Singh’s integrity, but his leadership, in particular, his failure to prevent corrupt practices and destruction of institutions. Mr Raja was sacked only after the Central Bureau of Investigation probed the 2G scam under the Supreme Court’s supervision. Mr Raja’s removal doesn’t resolve the flaws in the policy framework within which he worked. Dr Singh can’t plead helplessness on the Central Vigilance Commissioner’s appointment. He personally signed the papers, violating the norm that the appointment must be based on consensus with the Opposition.

It’s simply illegitimate for Dr Singh to blame the Congress or its partners for his government’s failures, which are all attributable to elitist policies, creating a climate conducive to the siphoning off of public funds, pampering of Big Business, and inattention to inflation arising from blind faith in the market’s ability to automatically correct distortions, and hence reluctance to intervene in it to bring down prices. In fact, the UPA’s single greatest failure—absence of inclusive, pro-poor growth—is directly attributable to Dr Singh’s mindlessly pro-rich, pro-corporate neoliberal policies.

Yet, the only thing on which Dr Singh spoke passionately is that same neoliberal model, and his determination to persist with investor-friendly “reforms”. He even minimised corruption and growing inequalities by likening the losses from telecom scams to government expenditure (totalling Rs 80,000 crores) on food subsidies. Such subsidies are not losses; they represent a social gain—correcting structural social-economic perversities which perpetuate hunger and malnutrition. Adequate food is a fundamental right of the people; providing it is the duty of the government. Governments that cannot provide this are dysfunctional and illegitimate.

Dr Singh’s interaction has increased the UPA’s political vulnerability and encouraged its opponents to expose the irrational solutions it prefers to various problems. For instance, the government seems inclined to exploit today’s high food prices to promote foreign direct investment in multi-brand retail trade on the spurious plea that this would improve food distribution and stabilise prices. This speaks of the utmost cynicism.

The present moment offers the Opposition a unique chance to confront the UPA with alternative agendas. Alas, the Left, which could have offered alternatives, seems totally preoccupied with West Bengal and Kerala, where make-or-break Assembly elections are due. The Bahujan Samaj Party and Samajwadi Party are sparring with each other as the Uttar Pradesh elections approach.

That leaves the BJP, which is seemingly better placed to take on the UPA. In reality, the BJP is at sixes and sevens and cannot mount a serious political attack on the UPA which will weaken it before the next general election.

This is so for at least five reasons. First, the BJP leadership is divided and confused. Recent scandals have suddenly electrified the 83-year-old LK Advani into hyperactivism and leadership assertion. The “Loh Purush” was to have retired—under RSS dictates, no less—from active politics and made way for his acolytes, Mr Arun Jaitly and Ms Sushma Swaraj.

But Mr Advani probably sees a chance to fulfil his life’s prime ambition—to become Prime Minister. His hyperactivism has upset the BJP’s leadership equations, further weakened party president Nitin Gadkari (never the most suitable candidate for the post), and embarrassed his own groupies.

Second, Mr Advani made an extraordinarily irresponsible public statement accusing Ms Sonia Gandhi of having Swiss Bank accounts, for which he had to apologise abjectly. This has taken the wind out of the BJP’s sails. It cannot launch a credible attack on the UPA if it indulges in reckless accusations.

The episode also exposes the low quality of the BJP’s intellectual capital. Mr Advani’s statement was based on the report of a party Task Force, consisting of Messrs S Gurumurthy, an IIM professor, former policeman Ajit Doval, and lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani.

This is the best talent that the BJP can mobilise. But so petty are this grouping’s main minds that they accepted a wild allegation carried in a Swiss tabloid about Ms Gandhi controlling a $2.2 billion account—without verification. Mr Advani showed his own ignorance of Parliamentary procedure by demanding that the 2G JPC should cover the Commonwealth Games and other scams too.

Third, the RSS has been put on the defensive by extremely damaging disclosures about the Hindutva terrorist network and close connections between sangh national executive member Indresh Kumar, Swami Aseemanand and other key culprits in the Malegaon, Hyderabad and Ajmer blasts at Muslim places of worship, and for the Samjhauta Express bombings.

The RSS leadership has reacted contradictorily to the allegations, beginning with “Sadhvi” Pragya Thakur. It first rushed to her defence and claimed she was being falsely implicated. Later, it said Hindutva terrorism is a contradiction in terms and it doesn’t believe in violence—although there’s compelling evidence that it does and was the ideological inspiration behind Gandhiji’s assassination. Now, the National Intelligence Agency and Military Intelligence have discovered clinching evidence linking RSS office-bearers and former pracharaks to the blasts.

As more skeletons tumble out of the Hindutva cupboard, including the systematic planning of the bomb attacks at Aseemanand’s Shabari Kumbh in the Dangs in Gujarat in 2006, and his confession expressing remorse for implicating innocent Muslims, the RSS has changed its tune. It’s suing for peace. It has written to Dr Singh offering its “cooperation” in investigating the extremist organisations involved in the recent bombings at mosques and dargahs.

Fearing a ban, the RSS has tried to distance itself from such organisations and individuals. This is completely unconvincing. These groups were inspired by and were members of the RSS; some continue to be sangh office-bearers. This is becoming a big liability for the BJP and will severely limit its freedom of action.

A ban on the RSS as a “terrorist” organisation would be extremely damaging. Its membership is already shrinking. Its legal flow of foreign funds would ebb. Many middle-class people would shun contact with an extremist illegal grouping.

Fourth, the BJP seriously lacks a distinctive vision or coherent policies to counter the UPA. It is even more tied to corporate interests and neoliberal policies, and a pro-Western foreign and security policy. Its claim to be “a party with a difference” has lost what little credibility it ever had. The BJP in Karnataka has taken venality and corruption to new heights and its defector-based government has become predatory on the people.

BJP governments in some states may not be much inferior to Congress-led ones in implementing Central programmes and schemes, including NREGA and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. But that doesn’t add up to a different vision based on a distinct worldview, a philosophical framework and coherent policies.

So, the BJP sounds particularly shrill and unbalanced when it criticises the Congress/UPA, especially when similar scandals occurred during its own rule at the Centre and in the states. Money-laundering and spiriting away funds abroad isn’t new. The BJP never curbed such practices. Now that the UPA has agreed to set up a Joint Parliamentary Committee on the 2G-scam, the BJP stands robbed of a strong issue on which to confront the UPA.

Finally, the NDA remains anaemic and has failed to attract partners other than the Janata Dal (United), Akali Dal, Indian National Lok Dal, and Shiv Sena. Its much-touted anti-corruption campaign never really took off. Most potential allies didn’t join it. Even Mr Nitish Kumar kept away. Meanwhile, the Left parties have recruited the Telugu Desam and AIADMK into another front.

So, the BJP’s prospect of emerging as an alternative pole to the UPA is bleak. It can at best hope to gain from its opponents’ mistakes. Thanks to its communal sectarianism, it still remains Indian politics’ Odd Man Out. (IPA Service)