Electoral Dividends?

Modi has successfully furthered his cult by the diplomatic engagements surrounding this summit. But there are limitations

- Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay

THE frenzied sprucing up of the Indian capital where dirt and squalor are a decades-old ‘normal’ and the plethora of hoardings—not just limited to the ‘standard diplomatic arrival route’ from the airport to Lutyens Delhi—evoked a sense of déjà vu, but with a difference. Despite the compelling national movement against the colonial order, Indians were unable to shed the deep-seated belief in the necessity to ‘impress’ non-Indians, especially from western countries. Very early, and even before Independence, nationalists first gained acceptance in the west—Mahatma Gandhi too became an international icon first, after the colonial administration was rattled by the Salt Satyagraha and Dandi March.

Jawaharlal Nehru’s international profile benefited his domestic standing too despite the fact that he did not make much effort to publicise the global initiatives. He did not need to buttress his electoral standing by showcasing his global eminence. Nehru faltered post the 1962 war with China, but he did not have to face elections, so we do not know if he would have started harnessing ‘global endorsement’ domestically. Lal Bahadur Shastri did not get a full tenure to bloom on the international arena. But Indira Gandhi created opportunities and her domestic stature was enhanced dramatically, especially after the image of Durga was fastened to her, the result of her ‘tough’ handling of Pakistan in the course of the Bangladeshi freedom movement and the 1971 war.