The PM does not appear to have won a great victory in conceding a big defeat

On the day that Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced his government’s retreat on the farm laws, I was contacted by three leading Western media outlets to participate in debates and give a quick analysis of implications. What I noted is that they were as interested in the policy implications as in the psychological implications of the move. From the international news perspective, it was apparently both the story of the triumph of one of the largest protests in the world besides the humbling of a man the world now sees as the Supreme Leader of India.  

Indeed, a climbdown is a serious business when it’s done by a leader sought to be presented as omni-potent, omni-present. After all it’s in the course of this year itself that we have our living prime minister’s name on a monumental stadium, said to be the world’s largest cricket arena, in Ahmedabad. We also have his face on COVID certificates and during the month of THE LEADER’s birthday that fell in September the BJP distributed ration bags with the famous face on it. Not to forget the Thank You Modiji campaigns that have been run with great enthusiasm by the faithful, at considerable cost, on billboards, radio and TV. 

So, when a figure such as Narendra Modi bends and admits defeat it gets noticed not just in India but in the world. The question is why did he do so after a year of protests during which the farmers were described as first, not knowing what is good for them and later, as possible traitors and subversives within the country. The son of a Union minister stands accused of running over farmers in his vehicle in Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh, an incident that reflects the rage against the protests within the BJP. (The Union minister of state for home is yet to be sacked). We also have a recording of the Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar, a loyal RSS and BJP man, suggesting that cadres beat the protestors, adding that even if they go to jail briefly, they would eventually become heroes for doing so. 

 Mr Khattar rules Haryana, a state carved out of Punjab and he would certainly know all about the sensitivities of the Sikh community who were undoubtedly at the forefront of the struggle, besides the flank led by Jats of West Uttar Pradesh. It is therefore a bit rich to read opinions being offered post-facto that the PM suddenly backed down not because he is afraid of electoral consequences in Uttar Pradesh and other poll bound states, but because he was worried about the social fabric of Punjab being damaged by the protests and was concerned about the state returning to the “pre-1984 mood”. 

This kind of argument actually suggests that Sikhs protesting would ultimately be linked to terrorism, something of which there is no evidence in present day Punjab. Alienation from the regime in Delhi, yes, but to suggest that the community that has historically had one of the largest representations in the armed forces of the country, is inclined to turn against the nation because of a protest over economic and livelihood issues, reveals the subliminal prejudice and messaging behind such opinions. 

These are obviously alibis for why the PM made such a stunning turnaround on the farm laws. The first point to note is that the current BJP prioritizes its electoral conquest of India over everything else. Such a loss of face would only come if there are reports that the BJP needs to watch it’s back in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, where opinion polls that are broadcast are showing the gap of victory narrowing down the months, suggesting a surge in the Opposition. BJP is irrelevant in Punjab but now has a hand to play as “friend” of Congress’ ousted chief minister. 

It’s also important to factor in the psychology of the PM. A figure such as Modi who gives sermons to the nation in his radio broadcast Man ki Baat, would possibly imagine that the farmers hearts would melt on him making this great concession on the farm laws and actually apologizing to the farmers for the inconvenience caused as they apparently failed to understand his great intentions! The PM is obviously a talented politician but not known to seek counsel and could be trapped in his own image and posturing. He could therefore have made a miscalculation. 

For farmers hearts are not melting and they are asking for proof and more concrete steps from the government. The PM possibly failed to realise that the farmers have led a very structured movement and sustained it through the seasons and they have no intention of capitulating in the face of what the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM), one of the groups helming the protest, calls a “unilateral declaration of the government rather than a bilateral solution”. They have made many more demands and have even had a Mahapanchayat in Lucknow, the capital of the state that’s so crucial to the BJP’s calculations. 

So, the great prime ministerial concession has not met with the expected applause. What it has done is disillusion some of the free market propogandists who support the government and have styled themselves as experts on agriculture over the past year. They have been arguing basically that the farm sector needs reforms (even if the farmers don’t know it as yet) and they have lost face in their own constituency. Equally heartbroken appear to be some television anchors, struggling to defend a move they were attacking as against the interests of the nation, till the other day. In the immediate aftermath of the great announcement, the PM does not appear to have won a great victory in conceding a big defeat.

(This article first appeared in NewsTrail, a new Bangalore newspaper under the headline Lessons from the Kisan)