Of losses and quick wins

The Bihar assembly results are out and open to interpretation. There will be dissection, postmortem and blame fixing in the coming days. On the face of it, the resounding victory of the Grand Alliance, brings out some very interesting facts. First, the clean image of Nitish Kumar was a factor that helped, but his image was not clean enough and the Janata Dal (United) could only win 71 of the 101 seats it contested. Second, though the clean image of Nitish Kumar made him a popular Chief Minister, a corrupt and convicted Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal bagged 80 of the 101 seats it contested. Third, Indian National Congress, which was reduced to a humiliating four seats in the outgoing assembly managed to win 27 seats this time. Fourth, the huge crowds that the Prime Minister pulled during his 30 rallies in the state, did not like his message and hence voted someone else.

There are many reasons, which worked in favour of the Grand Alliance and pushed it to a two-thirds majority in the assembly. Similarly there are reasons, which lead to the crushing defeat of National Democratic Alliance. Some of the reasons that immediately come to mind are similar to the ones that failed corporations face during their turnaround. At the end of the last parliament, India was similar to a failing organisation. Big ticket scams, slowing economy, non-existent foreign policy, cash guzzling and zero value social programmes (MNREGA) and fuel subsidies were pulling the country down. India was not allowed to live up to its potential.

Failing corporations employ experienced consultants to turnaround the company. The consultants in turn use tried and tested (sometimes radical) measures to re-engineer the processes and bring in efficiencies. The Modi government promised a similar re-engineering for India. But the similarities end there. A good consultant knows that challenging the status-quo will inevitably bring resistance. Change is the only constant, yet it is the most difficult thing to accept. Try bringing in a radical change in an organisation and it is doomed to fail. The consultants know this and they have found a way around. For the entire organisation to see the benefit of the turnaround exercise, they use quick wins. Quick wins are tasks that are easy to do, take little time to implement but show results that are visible and tangible.

Once the quick win succeeds the rest of the organisation can be easily taken on board and they will act as partners in the turnaround. The Modi government failed in identifying quick wins. Let alone implementing them. The government embarked upon dream projects like Make in India and Swachh Bharat. Both very well meaning projects and will yield results, but in the long run. The mammoth task of bringing millions in the banking network was achieved rather swiftly but again it falls short on expectations. Having a bank account is good but there has to be enough money in it for the account holder to benefit.

The PM is repeating the mistakes the Vajpayee government made. Stressing on big ticket reforms at the cost of quick wins cost them the 2004 elections and the UPA I reaped the benefits five years later.

One of the easiest quick wins for the government is job creation. Job creation in semi-skilled sector. That is where the rural population hunts for employment. The government should emphasis on sectors like highway and manufacturing. These are labour intensive sectors and have a high multiplier effect. Red tape and archaic concession agreements make it difficult for the private sector to bid aggressively and for the government to close the transaction efficiently.

A construction site or a factory not only provides employment to the actual workers, it also generates business opportunities for transport companies, taxi services, restaurants, hospitals, housing companies, and so on, creating further employment opportunities. It helps create an ecosystem, which brings in prosperity and jobs to a region.

So far the government has done things for India, it is now time to do things for Bharat. Gold monetisation might attract India but a country where two thirds of the population is poor, Bharat might find it elitist. The government has lost a year and a half, if it does not wake up to quick wins, it might see a repeat of 2004 and the next government will reap the benefits of the long term reforms that the Modi government is carrying out today. Bihar is a warning bell and we know for whom it tolls.

India and its near neighbours

Six Decades and counting

After sixty four years and five wars, India is yet to sort a single dispute with its neighbours. On the contrary it has got itself into uncomfortable situation in the past. Be it the peacekeeping forces in Sri Lanka or constant meddling in the internal affairs of Nepal. Relationships with the neighbours are anything but cordial.

In 1971, India championed the cause of Bangladesh and helped carve a new country in South Asia. The first government of Bangladesh lead by Sheikh Mujibur Rehman looked all set to enter into a long lasting friendship with Mrs Gandhi. The dream met a premature end with the coup in 1975, which wiped out most of Bangladesh’s first family. India hardly took a second look at Bangladesh after that. With India getting more and more obsessed with its western neighbour Pakistan in the past few decades, there was hardly any attention paid to rest of neighbourhood.

India’s issues with Pakistan are deep rooted and extremely sensitive with its political class. It can be safely assumed that all the issues with Pakistan (including Kashmir) can not be resolved overnight or even in the medium term. However, this should not distract the attention of Ministry of External Affairs from its near neighbours. Pakistan is and will be an ongoing affair for a long time to come. India should spare some energy and resources to mend its ties with countries which can prove to be long term partners in regional cooperation.

What can we do?

Handing out aid is not a guarantee to good relations. Had it been the case, America should have been the world’s best friend. Secondly India can not afford to offer aid on a large scale, given the fact that there is a pressing need for social development with in the country. Under such circumstances the best way forward is to engage in increased business activity. And for once, these business activities should move beyond exchanging a few truck loads of onion and sugar, which only helps a handful of people that too for an extremely short period of time.

The long term strategy for India should be to establish business relations with countries like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal on a larger scale. Bangladesh after a long time has a friendly government in power. Civil war in Sri Lanka has come to an end and Nepal will sooner or later have a full time prime minister. Given these favourable situations India should push for large scale contribution to these countries in form of setting up manufacturing facilities and some kind of secondary outsourcing (which some big Indian companies already are doing with South East Asian countries).

India should look for incentives for its private sector companies from sectors like two wheelers, pharmaceuticals, FMCG, BPOs, etc to set shop in countries like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. This will prove to be a win all situation for the countries. The local population will benefit from employment generated at the manufacturing unit, the economy will benefit from the money pumped in, the parent company will benefit from incentives and possible relaxation in export rules to foreign markets (Bangladesh gets substantial tariff exemption for its textile export to Europe).

Economic and trade connection will inevitably bring in more people to people contact, which in turn will help reduce the trust deficit. All three countries mentioned share very close cultural, linguistic and religious bonds with India. A little push on the economic front can change the way South Asians see each other. But before India does any of this, it should raise the profile of the ministry of external affairs.