'Entire political science' lesson: Peoples' power trumps people in power

Climb-down on the three controversial farm laws has broken the myth of invincibility that surrounds the government.

Prime Minister Modi, who was unbeatable in Parliament--and used his party’s brute majority to push through the farm laws without proper debate--has been subdued in the street by peoples’ power. The Central government’s climb-down on the three controversial farm laws is not the only achievement of the farmers. They have broken the myth of invincibility that surrounds the Narendra Modi government.

The farmers’ movement, the biggest of its kind in post-Independence India, fought charges of being separatist Khalistanis, of using ‘sinister toolkits’ to agitate, of being manipulated by the Opposition and by Communists, facilitated by hostile foreign powers, and being perpetual malcontents or andolanjeevis.

The farmers showed immense control against provocation when Haryana’s BJP chief Minister backed a baton-charge by the state police and the local superintendent of police ordered his men to “break heads” of the agitators. Khattar later himself urged civilians to raise a force of 1000 volunteers from across the state to beat the farmers. Reassurances were given that if they were arrested for their actions, “we will see (to) everything. … If you stay in jail for two months, you will become a big leader. Don’t worry about bail”. In Lakhimpur-Kheri in Uttar Pradesh, such vigilantism led to a minister’s car running down peaceful protestors, killing four farmers and injuring ten others. Shots were fired at the farmers from a gun belonging to the minister’s son, Ashish Misra. Provocative and threatening speeches by Minister for State for Home, Ajay Misra himself, had circulated before the incident. These actions by those holding power in the BJP dispensation proved that a violent mind-set had been created by the ruling party against the agitating farmers. The farmers’ greatest weapon against the State’s police and its ideological militia was non-violence.

There were some indications that the government was becoming uneasy with the continuing agitation. In the last few weeks it was rumoured that former Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh was trying to launch his new political party with a bang. A ragtag delegation from Punjab was readied to extract reassurances from the Union Home Minister Amit Shah on the disputed laws--apparently two were to be repealed and one sent to a Parliamentary Select Committee. Amarinder Singh would emerge as the hero who solved the farm laws tangle, and as a trade-off his new party would contest the Punjab elections as a BJP ally. However, the refusal of farmers’ leaders to cooperate ended hopes of such a stage-managed resolution.

For the BJP, the impending Uttar Pradesh elections, may have been a far more politically significant consideration than Punjab. Almost every political pundit has foretold a BJP victory in the state, but opinion polls from one month to the next indicated an erosion in seats. The possibility of a win with drastically reduced numbers or worse still, a hung assembly, was unacceptable for Prime Minister Modi. It would have negative consequences for his image and prospects in the 2024 general election.

The farmers were also poised to re-escalate the agitation with plans of despatching groups of 500 volunteers on tractor trolleys to protest in Delhi from November 29, when the winter session of parliament begins. They had threatened to continue this process till the winter session concluded. If stopped, they would strike camp wherever they were halted. The government therefore faced prospects of a revived agitation and possibly, violent confrontation.

The RSS was reportedly also worried about the growing distance between Hindus and Sikhs because of the farmers’ agitation adversely impacting ‘social cohesion’. It feared that growing unity between Sikhs (in Punjab and Uttarakhand) and Jats (of UP, Haryana and Rajasthan) against the BJP would undercut its bid to unite them under the Hindutva umbrella.

The BJP’s long-term strategy of Hindu consolidation would have also been hit by the growing Sikh-Muslim amity that developed as an offshoot of the anti-government agitation. Hindutva organisations count Sikhs as members of the larger Hindu religious fold and the display of amity with Muslims would send just the “wrong” kind of message. Already Sikh-Muslim amity was demonstrated during the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act agitation at Shaheen Bagh, where Sikhs from Punjab cooked and distributed free food (langar) at the protest site. Sikhs in BJP-ruled Haryana have responded to the recent organised hounding of Muslims offering namaz in public places, by offering to open up their Gurdwaras to Muslims for Friday congregational prayers. Last week the festivities for the birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Dev (Guru Purab) coincided with the Jumma or Friday prayers of Muslims. Right wing Hindu groups in Haryana went into overdrive to prevent Gurudwaras being opened up for Namaz on Guru Purab. The possibility of such goodwill between the Sikh and Muslim communities was clearly seen to be ominous for the BJP.

Whether the Modi government has managed to halt this tide of events remains to be seen. The farmers’ leaders have refused to take the prime minister at his word and want to see the laws repealed in Parliament. Other farmers’ issues remain to be discussed including a law for assured minimum support price (MSP) for all cash crops, an agreement on the calculation of MSP, the payment of pending dues to sugarcane farmers and mandi reforms. The momentum as of now is in favour of the farmers.

Prime Minister Modi was neither contrite nor gracious in retreat. His insistence that a section of farmers had failed to understand what was good for them made it clear that he still thinks he was right and his only failing was in adequately communicating a “truth” that to him was as clear, in his own words, as “the light of a lamp”. He remained as non-consultative in withdrawing the farm laws as he was when he forced them on the nation. No lessons were learnt.

The political lesson for the rest of us, however, is that it may be harder to defeat authoritarianism through the parliamentary process but a peaceful non-violent people’s movement can bring it to its knees.