“Sikh Who Saved India’s Economy Is Named Premier: A task of continuing reforms, but with more Indians benefiting,” by Amy Waldman, New York Times, 20 May, p. A3.
“It Is Settled: Singh to Be India’s Prime Minister: Economist Vows to Extend Market-Opening Policies, Buttressed by Aid for Poor,” by Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal, 20 May, p. A3.
Sonia sidesteps and a Sikh economist associated with Rajiv Gandhi’s historic turn toward marketization in 1991 steps into the legitimacy vacuum created by her close-call with herstory. By avoiding a lengthy exploration of Sonia’s backstory (Italian, Christian, political tourist), the Congress Party gets the media spotlight—not to mention the glare on India’s plummeting stock market—back where it needs to be: on the rural poor that feel left out of the BJP’s “India shining” vision.
This is all well and good. New PM Monmohan Singh can’t let this political change become an obstacle for India’s growing connectivity with the outside world. He may want to slow it on some levels, or redirect it on others, but he cannot stop it, deflect it, partition it, or deny its utility. Globalization has embraced India because India let itself be embraced. New Delhi can go economically autistic as a result of this political shift, but it will do so only with the rest of the Core returning the favor. That’s the joy and the strain of connectivity: disengagement hurts more than simply holding on—even when it’s for dear life.
By turning more attention to the rural poor, Congress can do more to preserve India’s growing status in the global economy than a uncritical pursuit of the BJP’s “India Shining” path. Balance is good, and the BJP will come back into power some day soon all the better for the recalibration it will be forced to pursue during its time in the penalty box. This election can end up being a great example of why democracies are good for globalization and globalization is good for democracies.
| Permalink |
