Narendra Modi’s party is on a roll in India
The BJP has beaten a bad ruler in West Bengal. But India must not become a de facto one-party state
NO ONE SHOULD mourn the exit of Mamata Banerjee, ejected by voters in West Bengal, India’s fourth-most-populous state. For 15 years she presided over failure. Though the economy booms nationally, for the 100m people in her state it stagnates. An average Bengali now has an income just half of someone’s in Gujarat, the home of Narendra Modi, the prime minister. Just as bad were Ms Banerjee’s thuggish tendencies. She silenced critics and jailed opponents. Her party ran extortion rackets. Allegedly, its goons sometimes got away with rape. Businesses were forced to pay bungs for land and licences. No wonder many left.
In an ungracious last act, Ms Banerjee indicated she is refusing to step down, saying the other side cheated. She must go. Mr Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) won, and is set to run West Bengal for the first time. The vote was part of a wave that toppled incumbents in various states. In Kerala the communist rulers were sent packing. In Tamil Nadu an action-movie-star-turned-politician, the mononymous Vijay, swept away an old dynasty. All this is evidence that Indian democracy works, albeit imperfectly. Election results broadly reflect the voters’ will.
The results also confirm that Mr Modi’s party remains strong, despite electoral wobbles in the dozen years since he won national office. The BJP is better organised than its rivals. And it promotes ideology—mixing Hindu nationalism and promises of growth—far more skilfully. With allies, it now runs over two-thirds of India’s states and territories, home to 80% of its population. Even the once-hostile south is warming somewhat to the prime minister.
Nonetheless, there are reasons to worry. To keep democracy healthy, the BJP must keep its ambitions and tactics within bounds. At times it does not. Even if the final result in West Bengal was correct, some of Ms Banerjee’s complaints of unfairness are justified. The national government deployed almost a quarter of a million armed police to oversee voting there. A heavyhanded process of revising electoral rolls disfranchised millions of voters, many of whom got no chance to appeal. The Election Commission, which has been supervising this, is in theory an impartial referee. Under Mr Modi’s prime ministership, it looks increasingly supine.
Politics risks becoming narrower and uglier. Parties too often aim to split voters along religious lines. In both West Bengal and Assam the BJP won a big share of Hindu voters in part by stirring up fear of Muslims. The party may say that its opponents should try harder—they have largely failed to produce either credible leaders or a compelling response to its Hindu-nationalist agenda. Yet Mr Modi’s government has also hobbled them with criminal investigations, twisted party-financing rules in its own favour and co-opted much of the media.
Mr Modi will be tempted to ignore such criticisms. After all, his strident version of politics is working pretty well for him. But it is in tension with his other source of electoral success: a vibrant economy, bolstered by his own willingness to push through welcome reforms. That economic tailwind may now be dying. Rising energy costs will hurt consumers in the months ahead and could turn some of those voters against him. He may try to compensate by doubling down on divisiveness. Yet that would be bad for India—and perhaps for Mr Modi, too. The country’s long-term economic success depends on stability and the rule of law, both of which could be undermined by an overmighty and aggressive ruling party. In victory, Mr Modi should show restraint. ■