by John Elliott
In April 2013, the Supreme Court put the future of the project in the lap of the gods when, referring to the tribal forest dwellers, it said, ‘If the bauxite mining project in any way affects their right to worship their deity, known as Niyam Raja, in the hilltop of the Niyamgiri range of hills, that right has to be protected.’ It said that the local gram sabha (village council) should decide whether the tribals had religious rights in the area and whether ‘the proposed mining area, Niyama Danger, 10 km away from the peak, would in any way affect the abode of Niyam Raja’.37
This was significant because it recognised the role of local opinion in determining the future of projects and led to all the gram sabhas voting against mining, which cast further doubt on the project’s future.38
Notes
1. http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/2007/05/01/special-economic-zones-are-about-people-not-just-development/
2. Government of India official SEZ website http://sezindia.nic.in/about-osi.asp
3. Sri City on the borders of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh is one of the best examples of a zone firmly based on business activity but including social and infrastructure township facilities http://www.sricity.in/
4. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2006-06-20/news-by-company/27437256_1_reliance-haryana-reliance-signs-hsiidc
5. ‘Mukesh’s Great Gamble’, Business Standard, 15 April 12006, http://www.business-standard.com/article/beyond-business/mukesh-s-great-gamble-106041501025_1.html
6. ‘SEZs: “Farmers must get proper compensation for land”, says Sonia’, 23 September 2006, http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/India/20060923/459929.html
7. Dr S. Narayan, then Visiting Senior Research Fellow and Head of Research at the ISAS, National University of Singapore, and a former Finance Secretary and economic adviser to the Prime Minister of India, ‘The Special Economic Zones in India: An Update’, Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS), November 2006, by http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Publications/Detail/flots591=0c54e3b3-1e9c-be1e-2c24-a6a8c7060233&lng=en&id=26965
8. ‘Reliance SEZ on way out, Haryana govt wants its 1,384 acres back’, Indian Express, 18 January 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/reliance-sez-on-way-out-haryana-govt-wants-its-1384-acres-back/900903/0
9. http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-newdelhi/gurgaon-farmers-want-their-land-back/article4327284.ece
10. Raghuram Rajan, ‘From Paternalistic to Enabling – India needs to adopt a style of government that unleashes the people’s entrepreneurial zeal’, Finance and Development, September 2006, Volume 43, Number 3 IMF, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2006/09/straight. htm
11. ‘Tata abandons cheapest car plant’, BBC, 3 October 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7651119.stm
12. http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/west-bengal-hopes-for-a-communist-rout/
13. Asis Kumar Das, A Timeline of Nandigram (22 August 2005 – 17 June 2008), published by Mazdoor Mukti (Workers’ Emancipation) on Scribd.com, http://www.scribd.com/doc/3604739/Nandigram-Timeline-22-August-2005-17-June-2008
14. http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/poor-governance-in-indian-states/
15. ‘Amidst apologies, Buddha says all’s well on home ground’, http://www.content.ibnlive.in.com/article/04-Dec-2007politics/amidst-apologies-buddha-says-alls-well-on-home-ground-53581-37.html
16. Agreement between Tata Motors Ltd., Government of West Bengal and WBIDC, (undated), http://www.wbidc.com/images/pdf/Agreement%20between%20TML,%20WBIDC%20and%20Government%20of%20 West%20Bengal.pdf
17. ‘Singur row resolved, Mamata calls off stir: Drama Precedes Guv-Brokered Peace Deal’, The Times of India, 8 September 2008, http://www.epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:LowLevelEntityToPrint_TOI&Type=text/html&Locale=english-skin-custom&Path=TOIBG/2008/09/08&ID=Ar00100
18. ‘“Clear evidence of rival hand in Singur”: Ratan Tata’, Hindustan Times, 6 February 2007, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1211488401. html
19. ‘“I hope there is a bad M and good M”: Tata’, PTI, 7 October 2008, http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2008-10-07/news/27720805_1_singur-ratan-tata-nano-small-car-project
20. ‘Buddhadeb’s Nano new Bengal dream is over’, Indian Express, 4 October 2008, http://www.indianexpress.com/story_mobile.php?storyid=369344
21. Information provided to JE by West Bengal sources.
22. Automotive Mission Plan 2006-2016, para 2.6.5, Department of Heavy Industry, January 2007, http://www.dhi.nic.in/Final_AMP_Report. pdf
23. ‘SC asks Tata Motors to consider returning Singur Land’, Economic Times, 11 July 2013, http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-07-11/news/40515178_1_tata-motors-singur-land-tata-nano
24. Media release on ‘Whose Land is it Anyway?’ Jaipur Literature Festival session moderated by JE, 27 January 2013, http://jaipurliteraturefestival.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/whose-legacy-is-it-anyway-land-people-and-development/
25. Audio on Jaipur festival website http://jaipurliteraturefestival.org/program-2013/27-jan-2013-program/
26. ‘Green panel suspends POSCO’s environmental clearance’, Business Standard, 31 March, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/green-panel-suspends-posco-s-environmental-clearance-112033100038_1.html
27. http://www.newageweekly.com/2013/02/police-attack-villagers-to-acquire-land.html
28. ‘Orissa govt pre-empts land acquisition bill, completes land acquisition for Posco’, Business Standard, 4 July 2013, http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/orissa-govt-pre-empts-land-acquisition-bill-completes-land-acquisition-for-posco-113070400796_1.html
29. http://ridingtheelephant.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/posco-on-a-learning-curve-about-india%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Csocial-process%E2%80%9D/
30. ‘MoU signed projects to go under CAG scanner’, 14 June 2012, http://www.visionofdate.com/2012/06/mou-signed-projects-to-go-under-cag.html
31. ‘A Hotbed of Controversy’, Business World, 10 November 2012, http://www.businessworld.in/en/storypage/-/bw/a-hotbed-of-controversy/607520.0/page/0
32. ‘Mining scam unearthed in Orissa’, CNN-IBN, 27 September 2011, http://ibnlive.in.com/news/ballerylike-mining-scam-unearthed-in-orissa/188072-3.html
33. ‘CAG finds illegal mining in Orissa’, Asian Age, 27 March 2013, http://www.asianage.com/india/cag-finds-illegal-mining-orissa-674
34. ‘Justice M.B. Shah Commission probing illegal mining’, Indo-Asian News Service, 4 March 2013, http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/justice-mb-shah-commission-probing-illegal-mining-to-miss-deadline-338228
35. ‘It is “no” to Vedanta’s mine project in Orissa’, The Hindu, 24 August 2010, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/it-is-no-to-vedantas-mine-project-in-orissa/article591546.ece
36. ‘Centre rejects eco-clearance for $1.7bn Vedanta mine’, Hindustan Times 24 August 2010, http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Centre-rejects-eco-clearance-for-1-7-bn-Vedanta-mine/Article1-591035.aspx
37. ‘SC leaves Vedanta’s fate in tribal deity’s hands’, The Times of India, 19 April 2013, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-04-19/india/38673085_1_gram-sabha-alumina-project-bauxite-mining-project
38. ‘Last gram sabha opposes Niyamgiri bauxite mining’, Hindustan Times, 19 August 2013, http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Odisha/Last-gram-sabha-opposes-Niyamgiri-bauxite-mining/Article1-1109960.aspx?htsw0023
IV
DYNASTY
12
Families Galore
South Asia is swamped with dynasties that have rarely contributed much to their countries’ well-being or development. They have played a dominant role in politics since before the countries gained independence from Britain, and they survive partly because of strong feudal, tribal and hierarchical traditions and hereditary social structures1. The poor and unsophisticated sections of the electorate look up to them as icons and achievers beyond their reach. Middle-class supporters respect their legacy and see
m to subscribe to the principle of the ‘devil you know is better than one you don’t’, while the elite cling to them in order to share their prestige and powers of patronage, which is especially important in status-conscious and influence-peddling societies.
In India, members of the Nehru-Gandhi family have resolutely clung to power at the top of the Congress party and India’s government for most of the years since Jawaharlal Nehru became India’s first prime minister, but the country would probably have been better off without them. In Pakistan, the Bhutto family has led the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) since the 1970s, but has done little for the good of the country. Bangladesh has been riven by battles between two dynasties, while a dictatorial family is now running Sri Lanka.
These dynasties have provided what should have been transitional leadership as their countries have developed political systems to replace colonial rule. Yet, while they have helped to build or restore democracy at some stage of their history, they have thwarted the emergence of other leaders and new ideas. The Nehru-Gandhis have blocked the top jobs and internal democratic development of the Congress party, and have also imposed their views on policy. Rahul Gandhi has tried to introduce democratic grassroots elections that ultimately could transform the party and sideline his dynasty but, without his family in control, that would almost certainly have happened earlier. As Mark Tully, the veteran BBC correspondent, wrote in 1991 at the end of his best-known book No Full Stops in India2, ‘For all its great achievements, the Nehru dynasty has stood like a banyan tree overshadowing the people and the institutions of India, and all Indians know that nothing grows under the banyan tree.’
Greed and corruption lie behind many dynastic ambitions. A large number of sons, daughters and other relations of Indian politicians are now encouraged to enter politics by their families and by political parties. They frequently run family business interests, which is part of the reason for a surge of political dynasties in recent years. Their involvement broadens and protects the base of politicians’ riches and powers of patronage, and it also helps with the management of illicit wealth passing from one generation to another.
That partly explains why politicians’ relatives are often rumoured to be handling their parents’ corrupt deals. They can help to protect the money involved and provide continuity in what might be called investment management. Massive amounts of money gained from bribes are often invested in real estate and other ventures through benami (Hindi for anonymous) names that are either false or belong to less visible people such as associates and servants. Sometimes the money is laundered through ‘round tripping’ via Mauritius and other tax havens and back into India as investments, with the politicians’ identities hidden in the benami names and shell companies. The downside for the families is that the people whose names are being used sometimes refuse to hand back the wealth, for example after a politician dies, so the existence of a dynasty can help to manage such problems. On the other hand, relatives become ambitious and use their proximity to someone in power to further their own separate business interests, with or without a politician’s knowledge.
Political parties gain from dynasties because, as with film stars and sports stars, family candidates are instantly recognisable, so they usually have less difficulty selling themselves in huge political arenas like India where there can be as many as 30 candidates and three million potential voters in one constituency. Most important of all, it is the family name that matters – Brand Gandhi generates instant recognition. It is not surprising therefore that, in the past decade, there have been increasing numbers of dynastic parliamentary candidates, in addition to the older political families who are led in terms of prominence by the Gandhi clan – Rahul and his Italian-born mother Sonia, plus Sonia’s estranged sister-in-law Maneka and her son Varun who are BJP MPs. The brands may not always pull in the votes however, as Rahul Gandhi discovered humiliatingly when he campaigned in state elections in 2012 and 2013. The offspring’s activities bring enhanced importance to a family brand and to its longevity in the public spotlight. This strengthens politicians’ own positions because they will have people around them who can (usually but not always) be trusted.
This is not to argue that all dynasties are necessarily corrupt, nor that all the family members who go into politics do so merely for reasons of sustaining power and patronage down through the generations. And, of course, India is a democracy, so all dynastic aspirants have to win elections and confirm themselves as leaders, as the Nehru-Gandhis have done since the 1920s. Dynasties are also common in many other areas – from company promoters to film stars and lawyers. In all of them, as with politicians, individuals have to establish their own success to a greater or lesser degree.
In Western democracies, elected dynasties play a limited role. In America, the Bush family has not come to dominate the Republican Party and the charismatic Kennedys, though inlf uential, only produced one president and have not controlled the Democratic Party. The Clintons so far have only had a husband and wife with top jobs, though their daughter Chelsea admitted in a Vogue magazine interview that she doesn’t rule out entering politics, seeing it (in a way that is unusual in India) as ‘part of being a good person ... part of helping to build a better world [and] ensuring that we have political leaders who are committed to that premise’.3 In Britain, Winston Churchill’s heirs were high profile but failed to carve out a political niche, while Margaret Thatcher’s offspring did not try, though both the Churchills and Thatchers cashed in on their parent’s name in their careers.
Dynasty has enabled women to become leaders in Asian societies4 where it would otherwise have been difficult for them to attain high office (though this has not made a significant difference to the role of other women in these countries, apart from token appointments). More often than not, the women have, like Sonia Gandhi, been the widows or daughters of assassinated former leaders. In Pakistan, there was Benazir Bhutto, the daughter of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who was executed in 1979. She herself was assassinated in 2007 (after which her husband Asif Ali Zardari became Pakistan’s president and their son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari is now entering politics).
In Bangladesh, there are two warring families headed by Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia, who have both been prime ministers. Both entered politics after the assassination of close relatives. Hasina’s father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, leader of Bangladesh’s independence movement and its first prime minister, was killed in a 1975 army coup along with other family members. Zia’s husband, General Ziaur Rahman, seized power after Mujib’s assassination and was himself assassinated in an abortive 1981 coup. By destabilizing each other’s governments when they are in opposition, the two women have allowed their feud to stymie the development of one of the world’s poorest countries, and both have sons or other relatives lining up to succeed them. In Sri Lanka, there was the Bandaranaike dynasty and the country is now controlled by a new dynasty led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa. In Myanmar, there is the iconic opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi. The small Himalayan countries of Nepal and Bhutan used to keep it simple with hereditary monarchs, but Nepal’s was ousted in 2008,5 and Bhutan’s has been partially replaced by a democratically elected government.
The Families
The acceptance of dynasties fits with the idea of making do with things as they are – if a dynasty works, why change it! But does it work? It has certainly been supremely important in India because of the Nehru-Gandhi leadership of both the Congress party and the central government, but the country’s politics would have developed differently if the family had moved to the sidelines in the second half of the twentieth century. Despite persistent rumours – unproven and denied – that have continued to swirl around the Gandhis since the Bofors gun corruption scandal in the late 1980s, few people would suggest that the family is in politics primarily for financial or personal gain.
Positive committed motives can be ascribed to other dynastic rising stars of Rahul Gandhi’s generation such as Jyotiraditya Sc
india, Sachin Pilot and Jitin Prasada, who are all in their thirties or early forties. Scindia is the aristocratic heir to a maharajah’s title in Madhya Pradesh and to the Gwalior parliamentary seat where his late father, Madhavrao Scindia, was an MP. From widely differing backgrounds, they are all sons of former senior Congress ministers and became ministers of state in the Congress government elected in 2009. Some were given further promotions. In the same age group, Omar Abdullah, National Conference chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir and the son and grandson of former chief ministers, is also in politics for constructive reasons, ignoring the advice passed down from his grandfather Sheikh Abdullah, Jammu and Kashmir’s first chief minister, that ‘politics is a dirty game and once you are in it, you’ll never be able to get out’.6
Sachin Pilot, who is in his mid-thirties, is married to Omar Abdullah’s sister, merging two dynasties. To test his commitment, one has to go no further than his official bungalow on Delhi’s Safdarjang Road, close to the prime minister’s enclave and opposite the exclusive Gymkhana Club. There, every morning, this tall, slim and at first glance rather stern-looking politician, holds a durbar for 100 or so of his constituents from Rajasthan and for the poor from Uttar Pradesh (his family’s home state) and elsewhere. They are given chai, visit toilets (he’s installed six to accommodate them), and wait to meet this grandson of a rural Gujjar dairy farmer who went to Wharton in the US. ‘It gives them a sense of belonging,’ he told me when I interrupted a morning session.7 ‘About 20 per cent get the work they want done, while the others are able to talk about what they need – work transfers, police problems, family feuds, buffaloes that have run away. This is a job a politician can do.’ I wondered as I left how many other senior politicians had this dedication – probably not more than four or five.
