Despite all his experience, why is Modi so threatened by Kejriwal?

Sections of the media love to compare Arvind Kejriwal’s leadership style to that of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The comparison of Arvind to Modi is an unfair and far-fetched one for a whole host of reasons.

Arvind is a beginner in politics while Modi has been at it for decades. Arvind, whose humility has never been in question, will be the first to admit that Modi is a pro, while he is still a novice in politics. Modi, on the other hand, is yet to acknowledge Arvind by name in public.

Also read: Kejriwal now wants AAP to party in Goa

Many of his critics would like us to believe that Arvind wakes up each morning wondering how he could become the next PM. The reality is that Arvind never thinks that far ahead! He lives and thrives in the present. Besides, Arvind is not the scheming, conniving, cold and calculating kind of politician who is planning and executing his next move.

Sometimes I wish he were so, instead of being a straight shooter all the time. If he were, he would not find himself in political hot waters as often as he now does.

The AAP is a bottom up party where Arvind’s stature is not crafted but came about because he was one of the key founders. Modi, on the other hand, after rising through the ranks of the RSS/BJP, enjoys an image of a development messiah meticulously crafted by PR agencies.

Also read: Not Modi, it's Kejriwal who has redefined governance

The PR agencies that approached AAP to give Arvind an image makeover were politely shown the door. This kind of artificial buildup and packaging is against the basic ethos of the AAP and the fundamental makeup of Arvind, the person. He is the ultimate human embodiment of "what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG)."

Also read: We can all finally know who's funding Modi government

Mufflerman, and other creative manifestations of Arvind that caught fire in social media, are the handiwork of AAP volunteers acting entirely on their own initiative Critics of Arvind from within the AAP were upset about the "Paanch Saal Kejriwal" slogan and termed it as an attempt to mimic Modi.

This is a misunderstanding. This hugely successful slogan was not the result of some PR agency’s work or a slogan-generating internal team of any sort. It was suggested in passing by one of the volunteers, and it had such a nice ring to it that it caught fire.

Vishal Dadlani’s peppy tune made the slogan a household one in no time and then there was no looking back. Most importantly, as Karan Thapar rightly pointed out to Prashant, "So what? It gave you 67 seats!"

While Modi probably has entire teams handling his tweets, speech writing, and other outreach, Arvind handles all this himself. He prepares and delivers his speeches himself. In fact, he never writes a speech. He just makes notes and delivers them extempore. This was true even of his inaugural speech as CM.

For all his political savvy and experience, Modi and his team seem to be at a complete loss when it comes to handling the imaginary threat Arvind and AAP poses for him and the BJP, both short term and long term. The two leaders have had a couple of meetings but they turned out to be nothing more than mere exercises in PR on the PM’s part.

Also read: Why must Delhi taxpayers fund Arvind Kejriwal's national ambitions?

It appears that the central government is creating administrative roadblocks for the AAP government in Delhi. Arvind has mentioned more than a few times that this is an issue of major concern to him and his government.

Yet, it is a mystery as to why Modi does not take up these issues head-on with Arvind and resolve them once and for all? After all, he is the senior in this dynamic and can, to a large extent, influence the direction of the resolution to these issues. Yet, his approach and that of his party is befuddling in this regard.

By leaving no stone unturned in its quest to create roadblocks for the AAP government in Delhi, the BJP is unintentionally pushing the AAP and Arvind to the center stage of national politics, despite Arvind’s publicly expressed lack of interest in such forays.

Other opposition governments are slowly starting to look up to AAP and Arvind as their natural ally, having been the biggest victim of BJP’s harassment.

Not surprisingly, Arvind seems to be fast becoming the "go-to" guy for solutions to issues that have national scope and implications – FTII students, disgruntled BJP members, movie stars, army personnel fighting the OROP issue, singers, musicians, cricketers unhappy with the BCCI, farmers seeking solutions to their problems, Sikhs seeking justice for 1984, and many others have called on him on their own accord.

While Arvind has struggled with addressing intra-party issues, it is interesting to observe how Modi has balanced both governance and party politics simultaneously, despite fairly trying circumstances.

One of the key challenges for an established political party wanting to reform is phasing out the influence of the old guard, whose grip on internal power dynamics makes such reform almost impossible. While this is smaller problem for AAP, as a new comer, it is an issue that has plagued the BJP.

In his very first year, Modi has phased out the BJP’s old guard – LK Advani, Murali Manohar Joshi, Jaswant Singh and Yashwant Sinha – with a minimum of fuss by establishing the margdarshak committee. He made this potentially politically deadly move so easily that if you weren’t following the news, you would have missed it.

In fact, this move has received widespread public support, from both within and outside the BJP, because it is common knowledge that Indian politics does not have the practice of veterans willingly making way for younger folks. Modi deserves special credit for being a trendsetter in Indian politics in this regard (as in many other aspects of his politics).

Successful leaders operate efficiently with the aid of trusted, capable lieutenants who have a good track record. The manner in which Modi gave complete charge of the BJP to his long trusted lieutenant Amit Shah, and how he "cleaned up shop" thereafter, has a lesson for every political party in India.

It sends a strong message of "shape up or ship out," which instills much needed discipline among the ranks. Amit Shah’s presence, and his involvement in pretty much everything, serves as a terrific buffer for Modi. It has helped Modi remain above the fray without having to get his hands dirty.

One of the problems facing political parties in India, as well as the rest of the world, is the rise of radical-fringe elements gaining hold of the agenda. As a Hindu nationalist party, the BJP has suffered badly from this affliction.

It seems that every few days, one of the extreme elements in the BJP is making some bizarre pronouncement that rapidly spirals into a PR nightmare for the party. These fringe elements not only serve to make the PM and his party look bad, they make India look bad.

Indeed, Modi has personally taken a lot of flak, from within India and abroad, for not responding soon enough to these issues. While it is likely that these matters are being dealt with internally (perhaps by Amit Shah), Modi has chosen not to indulge in any public condemnation of these individuals.

Instead, Modi has responded indirectly, by talking publically about ending the practice of female foeticide, celebrating India’s openness to people of all religious faiths, and other innocuous pronouncements that serve as fodder for his backers in the media to fill up their echo chambers.

This approach serves his purpose because it makes him appear as being focused on moving India along while letting the fringe elements keep alive issues that ultimately help his party stay alive.

Modi surely has an excellent team of close advisors and he has done a fine job of keeping their identities under the wraps. At the end of the day, advisors play only a supporting role. The credit should go to Modi for showing the right instincts while navigating through some pretty serious challenges, both on the governance front and with regard to his party.

Barring the handling of the various scams (Vyapam, Lalitgate, and DDCA, to name a few), which he has simply ignored, for all his purported faults, it is impossible not to admit that Modi is operating at a whole new level in comparison to other politicians in the country – smooth, focused, and determined, the controversies notwithstanding. But if his first year is any metric, there are enough signs of chinks in his armour and turning things around over the next four years is going to be a serious challenge.

The primary focus during the first year seems to have been to lead the news cycle than to get things done. "Record-breaking new bank accounts, but majority without even a paisa in them" – the second part of this reality is quietly ignored by an eternally supportive media. "Achhe din isn’t happening anytime soon," seems to be the general consensus, and experts from all fields have found plenty to be distressed about.

"Mr. Modi’s 'Make in India' drive, which aims to supercharge manufacturing growth to 12 per cent to 14 per cent a year, is so far mostly hype. In the year that ended March 31, manufacturing activity expanded by 6.8 per cent, from 5.3 per cent the previous year, with electricity shortages and congested ports holding back growth,’ reported the WSJ which has thus far backed Modi.

Sadanand Dhume, who has been an ardent Modi fan in the international media, now writes in the WSJ, "India’s prime minister was an effective state administrator, but those methods aren’t working in federal government."

As far as institutions are concerned, the Lokpal at the center seems to be a forgotten institution. During the rule of UPA-II the SC famously said the CBI is a caged parrot under the control of the central government. Under Modi it continues to remain the same.

The Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and Chief Information Officer (CIC) posts have not been filled for more than a year. The choice for CVC has turned out to be a controversial one with Prashant Bhushan, Ram Jethmalani and other noted lawyers raising serious objections to the appointment.

The censor board has been politicised and so have the post of governors. Modi has not lived up to the hype and hoopla about his administrative experience prior to the election.

Aruna Roy, noted social activist believes that it is clearly "bure din" for the social sector under Modi. Moreover, she stresses that this government has no roadmap for the social sector.

The much respected Juilo Rebeiro (retired IPS officer and Padma Bhushan awardee known for his services during the Punjab insurgency) opines that the Modi government is more concerned about fixing Greenpeace and Teesta Setalvad than focused on fundamental changes.

Ironically, under this government while Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai was prevented from leaving the country, the flamboyant Vijay Mallya enjoyed a smooth exit!

The fundamental failure of the first year of this government is that it has consistently over-promised and under-delivered – black money being just one of many examples.

If this trend persists, the PM and his party are likely to have a hard time fighting re-election on performance. With no sign of change on the street, a PM who is mostly seen and heard gallivanting globally is likely to be on an even weaker wicket.

There are also significant differences in style between the two leaders that are fast becoming apparent. Modi is believed to be one of the best India has ever produced when it comes to pitching India’s case on a global stage (though the jury is still out on the bottomline impacts of these jaunts).

At the same time, the "dog and pony" shows, especially those held abroad are carefully rehearsed and stage managed. However, Modi despite all his bravado and showmanship abroad, has chosen not to entertain the media back at home. Arvind, on the other hand, is never afraid of facing the media.

For all his much touted "chai-wala" origins, Modi has slowly transitioned to carefully hand-picked designer clothes with an assortment of colourful headgears to suit the occasion (the Muslim skull cap being a permanent exception), not to mention his stylishly trimmed beard, blow-dried hair, state-of-the-art accessories and an affected demeanor.

Modi clearly enjoys looking the part of PM, but recent events have increasingly showed that he is not willing to do what it takes to live the part.

As for Arvind, he is simply comfortable in his own skin, has no interest in material possessions, especially fancy outfits, and he comes across as someone who does not care to look any part.

Arvind is less worried about looking good and more concerned about doing good. I have little doubt, however, that he has any trouble living the part of a political leader, be it at a state or at a national level.

Modi has clearly centralised all power at the PMO. Arvind, on the other hand, has chosen not to hold any portfolio but act as a guiding hand for all his ministers and set the overall direction of the government.

The recent killing in Dadri, the murder of Kalburgi, and other events related to intolerance in society, and the PM’s stony silence on these issues, has resulted in several non-Hindus viewing the PM with a general sense of suspicion. For Arvind, on the other hand, honesty and trust have always and continue to be his strong suit.

The BJP has clearly evolved into a top-down, command-and-control run party with the PM at its helm - not very different from the Congress party, or any of the regional parties, at least organisationally.

In a country of over 1.25 billion people, is the top-down, command-and-control model even a sustainable, scalable model?

It is in light of the failure of all these parties to address India’s most basic needs that AAP’s original concept of an open source style politics is worth exploring.

(Reprinted with the publisher’s permission.)