--_._----HINDUSTAN TIMES DATE:NAfvH: OF THE NEWSPAPER

~

2. 1 JUN 2012,-The end of EmpireThe battletor presidentis a throwback to the Mughaldecline, a reminder that Delhiis losing its sway over India

The sudden drama, ample din, fake fury and quicksettlement of the political battle that precedes theanointment of India's new president reminds me oftwo observations made by travellers to the Mughalempire.

In his 1655book Voyageto theEast-Indies, Englishclergyman Edward Terry notes how foresight appeared lackingin Indian battles. "The armies on both sides," says Terry, "usuallybeginne with most furious onsets, but in short time, for wantof good discipline, one side is routed and the controversie, notwithout much slaughter, is decided."

On May 29, 1658,Niccolao Manucci, an Italian traveller whoworked in Mughal and Rajput courts, watched the Jang-e-Samugarh, the battle of Samugarh, a decisive clash for succes-sion between Shah Jahan's heir Dara Shikoh and his youngerbrothers Aurangzeb and Murad Baksh. He says: "Of those moreto the rear, although holding their bared swords in their hands,the Moguls did nothing but shout, Ba-kushl Ba-kushl, and theIndians (primarily the Rajputs who made up large parts of theMughals' sword arm), Mar! marl-Kill! Kill! If those in the frontadvanced, those behind followed the example, and if the formerretired, the others fled, a custom of Hindustan ..."

The writer Abraham Eraly narrates how the declining daysof the Mughal empire were marked by soldiers putting per-sonal benefit above king, God and country. During Aurangzeb's

M h Bh Deccan campaign, says Eraly,a a arat Mughal officers at times tookmoney from the Marathas notto act against them - or gavemoney to the Marathas, to stopthe harassment. The generalsbickered and worked at crosspurposes, "hindering each otherand frustrating campaigns", hewrites in his 1997 account ofMughal India, The Last Spring.

Do these observations still sound familiar? That is becausesomething intrinsic to the Indian character has not changedover hundreds of years.

So it was the past week.Regional satraps Mamata Banerjee and Mulayam Singh joined

forces overnight, made loud declarations of battle against theCongress, fulcrum of the ruling coalition, only to break up thenext day. Mulayam, with an eye possibly on general elections in2014 and realising his son needs federal support, then backedthe UPA. The UPAS so-called ally,Mamata, opened a new fronton, er, Facebook. In the BJP, fulcrum of the Opposition, it wasevident there was no candidate or plan, exce t to oppose any-one the UPA proposes (though not every BJP ally thinks so).

You could argue - rightly - that at the end of this stageshow, India has a new president, this is how it has always been,and this is all that matters.

But the chaotic battle for India's new president also appearsto indicate a cusp, a transition, a changeover for Indian politics,reminiscent of the declining days of the Mughal empire, whenimperial power receded and the Marathas, Sikhs and Britishstruggled for ascendancy over Delhi. As in those days, today'spolitical alliances are tenuous, based on short-term self-interest

and economic gain.The decline of Delhi in the modern era has been gradually

evident. The difference in vote-share percentage between theCongress and the second-largest party declined from 65.7%in 1952to 4.5% in 2004, according to data from the Centre forthe Study of Developing Societies. Over the same 52 years,the percentage of seats held by state and other parties soaredfrom 6.95% to 32%.

'Fhe biggest change came in the 1990s, a period that over-lapped India's economic explosion. It is a reflection of India'sever-rising, impatient tide of aspiration.

The Congress and BJP, hostage still to the old Delhi-centredpolitics ofpatronage and divisiveness, have yet to come to termswith what voters want - visible progress, any which way.

This means corruption will never be as big an issue as themass media and the urban middle-class believe it is. This is whyJaganmohan Reddy, in custody, facing charges of corruption, ispoised to wrest Andhra Pradesh from the Congress. In sevenyears, Jagan's assets grew from 't361akh to 't365 crore in 2011,making him India's richest Member of Parliament.

Jagan's party, the YSR Congress, rides the developmen-tal legacy of his late father, YSR Reddy, who addressedhis people's aspirations by running some of India's mostprogressive and technologically accomplished pen-sion, jobs-for-work and other social-security schemes.If the UPA is losing its hold over the states in its control, theNDA is dominated by strong chief ministers running reasonablyefficient administrations in Gujarat, Bihar and Chhattisgarh.

As the India growth story falters, global rating agenciesand sundry experts forget that Delhi's job now is mainly toplant the signposts; the roads to release aspirations mustcome from the states. This is how Gujarat has reformedits electricity distribution, Chhattisgarh its subsidised-food network, Andhra Pradesh its pension payments.Acquiring political power can never again be about poweralone, a lesson also rooted in the eclipse of the Mughals.When their domain started to disintegrate, many soughtto rule India. The Maratha confederacy, for instance,gained 'enough power to occupy Delhi, but its chieftains,never empire builders, yielded quickly to the British. TheMughals somehow clung to power, until Bahadur Shah Zafar'sdominion ended at the gates of Delhi. His poetry reflectedtheir eclipse. Those who rule Delhi today - and aspire totomorrow - would do well to heed India's last emperor:Na kisi ki aankh ka noor hoon, na kisi ke dil ka qaraar hoonJo kisi ke kaam na aa sake main vho ek musht-e-ghubaar hoon(I am neither the light in any eye, nor the solace to any heartI am no use to anyone, a handful of dust).

The views expressed by the author are personal

"

" f