AAP Ascendant

The BJP probably thought they were on a strong footing when the CBI raided the Principal Secretary of Arvind Kejriwal. It was a continuation of the harassment campaign that has been going on under the auspices of Najeeb Jung. Unfortunately they have landed up with egg on their faces. Notwithstanding the merits (or demerits) of Rajender Kumar the AAP has very efficiently turned the tables on BJP's rather ham fisted shenanigans. Arun Jaitley is clearly a worthy target and there just could be some substance in the accusations that Arvind Kejriwal is making against him. Yet again the BJP has demonstrated that they suffer from acute foot in mouth disease. The sacking of Kirti Azad is virtually proof of their discomfiture at the goings on that have been unleashed. It does not help that the CBI does not seem to have found anything significant against Rajender Kumar so far. Clearly the tables have been turned with a vengeance. Jung continues to do his bit by declaring that the probe ordered by the Delhi Government is illegal. Whether it is or not the optical war has already been won by Kejriwal. That is the beauty of our media obsessed society today.

It comes as no surprise that the BJP has learnt nothing from the Bihar debacle. As I had predicted they continue to carry on as if nothing has happened. It is a measure of the party's failure to see beyond their noses that the kind of mess that has happened in Delhi continues to happen with alarming regularity. The party badly needs clear headed, logical and strategic thinkers.

Meanwhile the AAP continues to make steady progress. The odd even rule for cars in Delhi is a masterstroke. It is important to realise that Delhi's pollution is nothing short of a crisis and there is no room for half measures. There is also no time for long term steps however important they are to the city in the future. In the circumstances the idea of reducing the number of cars on the road is indeed a very good one. Naysayers such as the all time dolt Suhel Seth notwithstanding one can see a strong rally behind the AAP's program as the time approaches. Even the politically astute Police Commissioner has seen the way the wind is blowing and has half heartedly stepped into line. I suppose he realises that if the idea fails he will be the first to be blamed.

Outside Delhi the news from Punjab is looking all the better for the AAP. Clearly the public is really disillusioned with the SAD/BJP combine and the Congress does not seem to offer much of an alternative. Fertile ground for the AAP and they are exploiting it in the best possible way.

All in all the fledgling political party needs to be congratulated. They have withstood the 'slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' fairly well so far and appear poised to gain in strength. Every attack by fat cats such as Arnab Goswami (who by now seems to be angling for a ministerial berth in the BJP Government such is his devotion to their cause) only serves to cement their love affair with the real Aam Aadmi. Long may it last and hopefully they will achieve some real change in the body politic in the months to come.

Bihar and Beyond

Now that the Bihar election is done and dusted and endless commentaries have been written on why the BJP failed and how the rag tag Mahagathbandhan (MGB) decimated the the mighty BJP it is time to look ahead. There is a section of people who dismiss the MGB win as a clever caste grouping that managed to create a synergy between the Nitish and Lalu caste base. This would be a dangerous oversimplification in my view as the Bihar win has wider implications on how political equations will play out in the near future.

Firstly, how will the BJP react to this defeat. There are several factors that point to what the reaction will be:

1. Why did they not see it coming? It implies that the political machinery did not have its ear close to the ground or that lower level functionaries  were too scared to provide unbiased feedback. Local BJP party workers are clearly considered inferior to the centre. There is a trust deficit and also an implied contempt for their intellectual caliber. 
2. Who formulated the BJP strategy? The general view is that it was Amit Shah and that the strategy was endorsed by the PM.
3. Is religious polarisation part of the BJP central strategy or is it forced upon them by the RSS or the so called 'fringe' groups? This is an important question because religious polarisation takes away from the development plank of the Modi administration. If it still finds a place in their approach the agenda is clearly being driven by powerful forces.

In view of the three points above my considered opinion is that the BJP will not backtrack from its current political approach. They will continue to follow a centrally driven agenda that will start with development as its central focus but will inevitably degenerate into name calling and religious divisiveness. They are also unwilling or unable to develop strong regional leaders and will thus find themselves at a disadvantage in all the important states that are coming up for election. They will also find the going difficult in parliament as a rejuvenated opposition will be baying for their blood.

Bihar will also have its fair share of turbulence. Lalu is too canny a politician not to demand his pound of flesh. This will probably result in his son getting an important post in the Government (maybe Deputy CM) and he will continue to interfere with Nitish in state affairs. Whether this will reach the level of Azam Khan/Akhilesh has to be seen. Clearly Nitish has larger ambitions - even if he does not the role may be thrust upon him.

The vacuum created by the demise of the Congress is yet to be filled. In any mature democracy the two principal parties are generally perceived as left of centre and right of centre. The latter position is clearly occupied by the BJP. If a worthwhile coalition of secular parties with a socialist bent could come about with Nitish as the head it would be a 'consummation devoutly to be wished'. Earlier I had hoped that Kejriwal could be a contender for that role but the BJP has successfully entangled him in a political imbroglio with Najeeb Jung. However, I would not write him off as yet. I get the feeling that the Aam Aadmi in Delhi is fairly happy with the AAP Government. Secondly, the AAP is growing in strength in Punjab and may yet pull off a coup of sorts. India seems to have developed a taste for decisive elections and Punjab may yet surprise us.

So there you have it. The BJP is on a sticky wicket and it does not appear that they have the drive and vision to extricate themselves. Left of centre groupings are beginning to emerge and there could be some interesting developments with either Nitish or Kejriwal as the focus.

I had said in an earlier blog that India has a habit of discouraging extreme positions. The Bihar elections is clearly a pointer in that direction.

What an Idea Sirjee!

One of the most hackneyed phrases is the 'Idea of India' It's the sort of thing that people pontificate about and generally there is a large dose of Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru and other bygone greats who are referred to in reverential terms whenever the topic comes up. If you were to try and involve the younger generation in any such conversation it would be met with a huge yawn. The fact is that this whole concept is mired in the baggage of the past - Nehruvian Socialism, State Control over Resources, License Raj and what have you. So much so that the kernel of what it really means has been lost in the rhetoric that surrounds it.

I have a thesis. That the real 'Idea of India' can be summed up in a very simple phrase and that is 'Common Sense' or 'Pragmatism'. There is also an element of assimilation and a tendency to avoid over reaction. In a nutshell it is this thought has allowed an ancient civilization to survive over the millenia while others have perished. As the poet Iqbal said:

Yunan-o-Misr-o-Roma sab mit gaye jahan se 
ab tak magar Hai baki naam-o-nishan hamara,
Kuchh baat hai ke hasti mit’ti nahin hamari
Sadiyon raha hai dushman daur-e-zaman hamara

Translated this means, while the Greeks, Egyptians and Romans have all vanished, we are still here. There must be something special about us that we still exist despite the whole world being against us.

I think Iqbal may have got a bit carried away by the last line about the whole world being against us. On a lighthearted vein it may also be the origin of the 'foreign hand' so beloved of Indian Government agencies.

In the aftermath of independence our fledgling country was influenced and governed by Western Educated, Socialist Leaders. In the 20s and 30s when Nehru, Jinnah, Mahatma Gandhi and many other Indian leaders were educated in England socialist ideas held sway. Those were the heady days of the rise of the Soviet Union and it was by no means certain that Western Democracy would prevail over socialist thinking. In addition liberal notions of the equality of all men (and women) and the separation of religion from the state were prevalent and respected by the western educated elite. In this context, two things happened in independent India:

1. State control over production and resources was the logical and pragmatic course of action given that private capital and entrepreneurship was in its infancy. The setting up of the Public Sector, Institutes of Higher Learning, National laboratories and so on was all part of this process. Much of this has been reviled and criticized in later years but if one was to step back in time to when these decisions were taken it is difficult to envisage what else could have been done.
2. Western ideas of the way democracy would function (the Parliamentary Format) and the separation of religion from the state were implemented. It is interesting that Jinnah like his earlier comrades from the Congress started with similar objectives for Pakistan. It is a different matter that Pakistan changed course much earlier. In India today we are beginning to witness a revolt of sorts against many of these ideas as we will discuss later.

As time has gone on and as India has progressed there has been a lot of change in India as well as the world. The purpose of this blog is not to recount these changes. It is to see whether pragmatism and common sense can still mould the 'Idea of India' as it is today and what it will be like in future. In this context, there are a few trends that have a bearing on what is happening in India today:

1. The rise of the rural and semi urban population has led to shifting political alignments and changes in national priorities. It has also led to regional satraps who have a significant say on government policy. The Central Government has steadily lost power as it has had to accommodate regional aspirations. Today a Jayalalitha in Tamil Nadu or a Mamta Banerjee in West Bengal have far more traction in their states than the central leadership.
2. Perhaps related to Point 1, there is a shift in attitudes such as a resurgence of overt religious practices and beliefs. The westernised middle class tends to downplay religion whereas the burgeoning rural and semi urban masses see it is a very real part of their lives. One sees this in attempts to prove the historicity of  epics like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata and the attempts to rescue Indian history from the clutches of Marxist Historians. It is also reflected in the rise of politicians like Asauddin Owaisi who have come to represent the views of underprivileged Muslims.
3. Parlimentary Democracy has become dysfunctional in all but name. I had earlier written about this phenomenon and had tried to establish that one of the reasons for this was the changing character of our parliamentarians. From suave Oxford and Cambridge educated gentlemen to a much more grassroots politician who has little time and patience for civilised debate.
4. It may be argued that the Media has started driving public discourse to an unprecedented extent. Certainly even the mainstream parties are wary of the power that the media represents and treat some of the prima donnas with kid gloves.

All in all it is fair to say that the India of today is not the India of the freedom struggle, or even the India over which Manmohan Singh presided over as Prime Minister in the recent past. There is a feeling that positions are hardening and that there is an unprecedented intolerance in public discourse. The space for dissent and debate seems to have narrowed and there is only 'my way or the highway' Protests by the FTII students and the Sahitya Akademi award winners indicate that cultural freedoms are under threat.

Against all this there is a feeling that India is finally gaining its place in the sun. Our position in the global economy is steadily improving and with it the respect that we command. Our economy is growing steadily as millions are uplifted from poverty.

So what would be a possible outcome? Will the 'Idea of India' thrive and grow or will it wither in the corrosive stream of fascism? I for one, am very optimistic. Our ancient civilization has a habit of correcting itself. It has a habit of rejecting extremism and of building accommodation with the most diverse of ideologies. It would take far more than the provocations that we have seen in the recent past to derail India.

In some ways we are too big to fail.

Parliamentary Democracy and India

I am going to approach this topic from first principles without getting lost in legal definitions and various interpretations that people use.

In my view in its most pristine form, democracy refers to 'the will of the people' This is of course at a very high level and various questions immediately arise such as:

1. Who are 'the people?' - India has defined it's electorate as all adults over 18. However at various points in time this was not the definition. In Athens, for example, where democracy is supposed to have originated the electorate included male adults only. It excluded women and slaves. In other societies there have been restrictions based on level of education and so on. Is the current definition of the Indian electorate appropriate for our needs? 
2. What is the will of the people and how is is determined? Again various methods can be and have been used in the past. Referendum has usually been employed when there is a binary decision to be made. For more complex, subjective and longer lasting issues democracy has relied on voting that elects representatives who would implement the will of the people. Underlying assumptions are a) that elected representatives will adequately understand and implement the will of the people b) the representatives will not harbour personal ambitions and motives that will detract from their role.
3. Finally, democracy needs a structure in which it will function. Democratic institutions such as a Constitution, Parliament, Judiciary, Law Enforcement and so on are required in order to implement the will of the people. Too often, democracy is confused with democratic institutions. The former is sacrosanct, the latter are not. For example, the Indian constitution has been amended 90 times since independence. 

The purpose of this post is not to comment on the relative merits of democracy per se. Rather the focus is on the way that India has chosen to implement it.

For better or for worse, India has chosen Parliamentary democracy for implementing the will of the people. In general, we have followed the British pattern while modelling the way that Parliament is structured and the way that it should function. Indian politicians before independence and immediately afterwards (exemplified by Nehru and also Jinnah) were educated in England and modeled themselves on British norms of behavior and speech. There value systems were largely liberal and democratic and ideas such as secularism and equality were central to their creed. They were also personally incorruptible and the fell hand of venality was yet to descend on our political apparatus. As time elapsed the British educated elite has given way to a more mass based political class. Verbal sophistry and elegant turns of phrase are no longer the stock in trade of the Indian politician. Their behaviour in their own constituencies is more akin to ruling potentates than elected representatives of the people. They are used to lording it over other elements of the system riding rough shod over any one who dares to oppose them. Such people can hardly be expected to observe the decencies of debate or to adopt a conscience based stand on any issue.

The other critical point in the past was that a strong opposition party was yet to emerge. Political differences had been subsumed in the overarching quest for independence and while the Hindu parties opposed the formation of Pakistan there did not appear to be an unbridgeable chasm on other issues. As we all know, these differences have widened as time has gone on. A bitterness has crept into our political discourse that precludes any accommodation of any sort. There is also a tinge of corruption and venality that colours motivations and actions. Virtually no political personality or entity is free from this miasma. The net result is that personal and financial motivations tend to override what is best for society and the country.

The last point I wish to make is a more general one related to the nature of Indian society. Since birth an average Indian is part of a family whose structure can hardly be termed democratic. There is usually a father figure whose word is law and it is not really possible for anyone to oppose him. School is hardly different with teachers and perhaps a principal replacing the autocratic father figure. When he starts work, either in the private sector, government or armed forces the situation is no different. Democracy is hardly the norm in any of these institutions. Indians are generally conditioned to believe in authority and not to question the decisions of people in power. I may be stretching a point here but I do believe that when faced with a truly democratic environment most Indians are uncomfortable as they appear to be in Parliament. It would be fair to say that we react better to an autocracy or strong presidential forms of government. We tend to put our trust in individuals rather than institutions or systems that have failed us in the past.

What does all this add upto? The ruckus we see in Parliament has been going on for a long time now. The UPA blamed its inability to deliver on the disruption caused by the NDA and now the boot is on the other foot. Maybe it is time to reconsider whether Parliamentary democracy in it's present form is indeed the best political system for India. Our people deserve better than the unedifying spectacle that we are subjected to on a daily basis.
 

A Footnote in History

The ongoing tussle between the Lt. Governor of Delhi, Najeeb Jung and Arvind Kejriwal has all the elements of tragedy and farce.

The tragedy is that while the people of Delhi elected Kejriwal with an unprecedented mandate he has not been allowed to function by a stultifying political ploy. Clearly the will of the people was in full display in the Delhi election - the AAP and their leader was what the people wanted. That is the real meaning of democracy. Unfortunately the farce that is being played out as we speak by Najeeb Jung at the behest of his political masters makes a mockery of democracy and the will of the people.

Much has been made of the legal and constitutional provisions that govern the moth eaten state of Delhi. Legal luminaries have expressed contrary opinions only pointing to an urgent need to clarify and simplify our archaic legal system. The fact that such contradictions exist and can be used to stymie the workings of a duly elected government is proof enough of our inept system - legal, bureaucratic and political.

For any system to work efficiently it is necessary for a leader to be able to choose his team. There must be cohesiveness and a shared sense of purpose. Any organisation that has a team that is not chosen by the leader and is in fact thrust upon him in-spite of his objections is doomed to fail. Shiela Dixit says that the CM should not be confrontational, rather he should attempt to build consensus and harmony. In other words, wag your tail and feed on the scraps that the system will allow you. Kejriwal was not elected for compromise and being co-opted by the system. If he does that he would have failed to live up to the expectations of the people who elected him. Sometimes the only way forward is confrontation. There has to be a stand on some issues and this is one of them. The sad part is that the BJP who had espoused the case for full statehood of Delhi has now made another U turn (people have lost count of the number of U turns that they have made in the last year that they have been in power)

As for Najeeb Jung after his brief moment in the sun he will fade out as people like him invariably do. At best he will be a footnote in the history of Delhi. The will of the people will prevail.  

Curtains for the AAP?

The cacophony around the AAP has become deafening. As the Hindustan Times cartoon depicts so tellingly the people of Delhi who had presented a whole bunch of Jhadoos to the AAP are now finding that party members are using them to fight each other rather than cleaning up (literally and metaphorically) the city.

Conventional wisdom says that the AAP infighting has damaged them and their image very badly. Men and women of repute no longer want to be associated with them and are leaving in droves. They are wasting time and the tax payers money while they fight each other in a painfully public way. However, conventional wisdom has not been very effective in forecasting what the AAP is doing and whether it will be successful. The first bunch of nay sayers ran away when Kejriwal quit as Delhi CM the first time. Then there was the fiasco of the Lok Sabha elections. And yet the party swept the Delhi Assembly in an unprecedented fashion. Clearly political pundits and the western media have a habit of getting things wrong as far as the AAP is concerned. Other political parties, notably the BJP have been wrong as well. I think this may be the reason that gloating voices are a bit more muted this time. Nobody would like to be proved wrong four times in a row!

Harsh reality says that there can only be one leader, whether it is of a political party, a corporation, a cricket team or whatever. While there can be room for dissent and debate it cannot be allowed to overwhelm the organisation. Consider the facts about the AAP. The one and only vote catcher is Kejriwal. The others are 'ideologues', 'conscience keepers' 'lok pals' etc etc. In other words, none of them have anything to contribute to the actual business of running a political party or winning elections. As far as the Bhushans are concerned the writing was on the wall when Shanti Bhushan said that Bedi would be a better candidate than Kejriwal for CM Delhi. A comment singularly lacking in sense is what I say and what the Delhi public realised quite quickly. The Bhushan family seems to be congenital obstructionists if that is the correct phrase. They will willfully oppose anything that appears to be progressing in the right direction. I think they would have actually been happier if the AAP had lost in Delhi so that they would still have a role in a sort of constant work in progress as it were. Yogendra Yadav is a different cup of tea. My reading of him is that he is a sincere intellectual who was tempted to chance his hand in the rough and tumble of politics. When the results finally emerged it became progressively apparent that there was no real role for him in Delhi. He was more closely allied to Haryana and Kejriwal made it quite clear (and rightly so) that the AAP would not be looking at expansion into the State assemblies anytime soon. That put paid to Yadav's ambitions and I think he rolled his dice in the wrong direction.

The strange thing is that all the events of the last year have only led to progressively strengthening the AAP and specifically Kejriwal. I think by now internal dissent has been substantially doused. There is a cadre who firmly believes in Kejriwal and who will not oppose him too easily. Synergistic thought is a prerequisite for growth. It has been a hard fought battle for Kejriwal but I think he has emerged stronger at the end of it. Delhi will benefit from the clarity of vision and single-minded focus on execution that the new and energised AAP will bring to the table.

Imagining the AAP

Now that the battle for Delhi is over and Arvind Kejriwal is on his way to becoming the next Chief Minister of Delhi, it is time to take a step back to see what may lie ahead. As I see it, the following things are going to be critical in the next weeks and months to follow:

1. The BJP is not going to lie back and play dead in Delhi. BJP Street fighters will continue to make wild accusations and spread disinformation at all points. Their propaganda machinery starting with TV spokespersons will raise the shrillness of the debate and they will be supported by the Central Government machinery. In short, life will not be easy for the fledgling state government. In this charged scenario, the new government will be hard pressed to deliver on its poll promises. The AAP has done well to keep its cool during the hard fought election. In fact it was the BJP whose nerves appeared to be on edge. This is a wise policy that the AAP would be well advised to maintain going forward. Dignified behaviour is always appreciated. Secondly, factual analysis and communication is important rather than rumours and innuendo. For example, while the AAP does have a credible method by which they propose to bring down electricity bills, they need to share this is a simple way with the public at large. They cannot be seen as populist vote gatherers now that they have come to power. This is another way to resist the BJP juggernaut. The third way is to look at issue based support. Nobody can really argue with the Swach Bharat campaign for example. The AAP is equally concerned about sanitation. Rather than oppose for the sake of opposing it would be better to adopt some of these programs and make them successful in Delhi. Clearly, the AAP needs to adopt a balanced, mature and nuanced approach in the coming weeks and months.
   
2. It is critical that the AAP does not succumb to overconfidence again. Expansion beyond Delhi needs to be carefully calibrated. Now that the Lok Sabha elections are over there is thankfully no temptation to aspire for a National Role too early. This was one of the key mistakes made by the AAP last year. As far as the State Assemblies are concerned the party needs to pick its battles with care. Other states are not like Delhi. Physical area, population, local issues, media coverage are all very different from a city state like Delhi. Local parties are also well entrenched in some states unlike Delhi where it was essentially a triangular contest. It is more important for the AAP to successfully manage Delhi and demonstrate its capabilities rather than spread its resources too thinly. I would even go so far as to suggest that the AAP should declare a one year moratorium on future elections and focus on Delhi. Such a strategy will pay them rich dividends in future as they will have a demonstrable track record of success.
   
3. There are already overtures by various parties who have extended support to the AAP. This seems to be on the principal that an enemies enemy is a friend. The AAP would be well advised to steer clear of corrupt regional parties who are often caste based and not in conformity with the AAP's aims and objectives. Such alliances may appear attractive in the short term but as I have said in this pages before, Tagore's inspirational poem 'Ekla Chalo Re' could be a theme song for the party going forward. It may be a difficult path, but it will lead to victory in the future.

Having sounded a cautionary note, it is also appropriate to look at future possibilities. In my view there is one overriding objective that the AAP can aspire for. The decline in the Congress has left a major gap in India's politics. In most developed countries there are two main political parties. Republicans and Democrats in the USA, Labour and Conservative in the UK. There is a need for a left of centre party focused on the real Aam Aadmi. In its heyday the Congress had fulfilled this role. Early leaders like Mahatma Gandhi had learnt the art of listening to the masses well before Social Media made it an instantaneous affair. The symbolism of the Swadeshi movement and Quit India had a strong resonance with the people of India. So did the Garibi Hatao slogan of Indira Gandhi. It is this role at the National Level that the AAP can and should aspire too. The BJP is essentially a party that represents the interests of big business. They are also bound to listen to the diktats of their ideological masters, the RSS and the Hindutva Brigade. All this adds a colour to their policies that is distinctly unsettling for a pluralistic society like India. For India's sake we hope that a decent, honest and effective national party like the AAP emerges that has the interests of the common man at the heart of its policies.

Why the AAP should win in Delhi

It is truly commendable that in the face of the superbly orchestrated BJP juggernaut there is still an island of resistance in Delhi. Nothing exemplifies the divide between India and Bharat or between the fat cats and the common man more than the protagonists in the Delhi assembly elections. The AAP has come a long way since the euphoric days of the last Delhi poll. They were then lionised by the English media and the twitterati and even the middle class felt that they were knights in shining armour who had come to save them from the awful mess that the Congress had created. What bound them all together was a unipolar rejection of corruption as the most corrosive force in Indian politics. Unfortunately, that singular thought was the only cement that kept the AAP together. On all other issues and methods there was a sharp divergence between the middle class supporters of the AAP and the actual Aam Aadmi. The former were repelled by the tactics that the AAP employed. Sleeping on the pavement in freezing rain did not appeal to their delicate sensibilities and neither did the anarchist statements that Kejriwal was fond of issuing at regular intervals.

To understand the deep and fundamental divide between these two constituents of AAP supporters, past and present is to understand the realities that the poor of India face on a daily basis. Mayawati captures the angst of poor and dispossessed Indians who rebel against an oppressive religion and an establishment that seems to be geared only for exploitation of the poorest of the poor. Indians, specifically Hindus, need to ask themselves why there has been such large scale conversions to Islam and Christianity over the years. The fact is that Hinduism is a discriminatory religion. Caste is the most pernicious of all methods invented by man to divide and rule the ones who don't belong. In a similar vein and in fact derived from the influences of religion, the divide between India (the land of the haves) and Bharat (the land of the have nots) runs deep and strong. It is this divide that is being played out in the Delhi elections. The BJP and the Congress are essentially two sides of the same coin. The advantage that the former has is of decisive, strong and determined leadership at the top. Otherwise their chosen paths and end objectives are remarkably similar. It is a telling point that the political class closed ranks against the Lok Pal bill. Nobody really wanted crony capitalism, nepotism and corruption to actually be curbed. It only makes for good election speeches.

In the face of all this, Kejriwal and his band of determined, albeit motley men and women truly stand out. The common man in Delhi is really convinced that they are the only party that actually stands for them. Lofty promises, spectacular parades, good 'governance' at the national level and so and so forth make very little difference to the Aam Aadmi. He is concerned about Mohalla affairs, corruption at the transactional level, rising costs of daily necessities and utilities, safety of women, law and order and similar matters. The sad fact is that the neither of the national parties are capable or willing to address these issues at the grass roots level. In terms of numbers the real Aam Aadmi (blue collar workers, small businessmen, junior staff employed by Private Sector or Government) are solidly behind the AAP. With the decline in the Congress, the Muslim voter is also looking favourably at the AAP. It is only the English press and the middle and upper classes who have turned against them. While this segment is vocal and articulate, it forms a small fraction of Delhi. Ultimately Bharat is far bigger than India. Every time the English press attacks the AAP, the party gains as the underdog who has bravely fought a good fight. It would not be prudent to forecast the results of the Delhi elections but in a microcosm it is a fight for the underdog, a fight for the soul of India.

The AAP has already changed the tenor of public discourse in India. It would be great if they could form a stable government in Delhi and demonstrate how they could improve the lot of the common people of this great city.