In his book Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China, Ezra Vogel of Harvard University concludes that no 20th century leader has done more than Deng to improve the lives of so many, or has had such a large and lasting influence on world history. After Mao Zedong's death in 1976 - while China was still undergoing the after-shocks of the Cultural Revolution - Deng Xiaoping became its leader in 1978. He remained at the helm for over 17 years as the "paramount leader" of China. When Deng passed away in 1997, China's gross domestic product (GDP) had almost quadrupled from 216.8 billion renminbi in 1978 to 860.8 billion renminbi in 1996. China, with more than a billion people, stood radically transformed.
Famous for having said "It doesn't matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice," Deng was an inveterate pragmatist. With little faith in ideological dogmas, he steered China towards neither Soviet-style communism, nor democracy, but socialist economics, politics and culture with Chinese characteristics. He dismantled the agricultural collectives and gave land to the peasants, actively encouraged private enterprise, including foreign ones, and opened up the economy to foreign trade.
Many seriously doubt the prospects for communism in China, after Deng's reforms. Happily for Deng though, his "communism with Chinese characteristics" has been endorsed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist). According to the party's "Resolution on Ideological Issues, 20th Congress," adopted in April 2012 at Kozhikode, China is in a primary stage of socialism, and reforms are aimed at attaining conformity between "the levels of productive forces and the relations of production under socialism."
Deng's admirers abound all over the world. In India, there are many others, not just the CPI(M). The former prime minister, P V Narasimha Rao, famous for the reforms in 1991, was one of them. He was reportedly rather miffed when, in December 1988, prime minister Rajiv Gandhi went to Beijing and did not take Rao, his external affairs minister, along.
Jairam Ramesh in his book To the Brink and Back has described Narasimha Rao as India's Deng Xiaoping. Prime Minister Rao, along with his finance minister, Manmohan Singh, undoubtedly will be remembered for the 1991 reforms. But, Rao's tenure, and hence his contribution, as a star reformer in India was limited compared to Deng's in China. Of indifferent health when he became prime minister, at the age of almost 70, he ruled for only five years, and faded away after demitting office.
Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram has compared Dr Singh of India with Deng Xiaoping of China. Deng ruled China continuously for over 17 years. He resigned from his official posts in 1992, but was de facto leader until his death in 1997. Manmohan Singh was out of power between 1996 and early 2004. For 2004-2014, when he was the prime minister, doubts have been raised not only about the extent of the reforms but also his "real" powers. Perhaps India still has not had its own Deng Xiaoping.
What about Prime Minister Narendra Modi? Too early to pass a judgement. But there are similarities.
Deng's famous statement "development is the main principle" resonates with Mr Modi's emphasis on "Vikas" or development. The focused initiatives such as Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor have the same flavour as Deng's 1980 special economic zone initiatives in the southern and coastal Guangdong and Fujian provinces of China. Like Deng in China during 1979-1997, Mr Modi is the paramount leader of the ruling party at least since 2014.
The responsibility for the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, when he was in power, continues to haunt Deng's memory. In power after an intense power struggle within his party, Deng, like Mr Modi, has controversies from his earlier years: for example, the 1957 "anti-rightist campaign" against half a million intellectual critics and destroying many of China's best scientific and technical minds. Fingers continue to be pointed at Mr Modi, even after judicial acquittal, for the 2002 riots following the Godhra train arson.
But, can any prime minister turn himself or herself into India's Deng? There are some obvious impediments. First and foremost, the requirement of a long uninterrupted tenure as Deng's of over a decade and a half. Deng had to manage his Communist Party. But, that may have been a bit easier in a totalitarian system than winning three successive Lok Sabha elections.
After Pandit Nehru, no prime minister in India has led his/her party to victory in three successive elections. Not impossible, but a demanding task. Reforms often involve losers, such as project-displaced people, or retrenched employees of a loss-making public enterprise. Through sustained reforms, growth and employment will have to be promoted in line with rising popular aspirations, while compensating the losers from the reform process and managing expectations.
Second, he/she has to remain within the boundaries of the Indian Constitution and laws. Even the Unique Identification (UID) system or Aadhaar has faced legal challenges in recent times. In China, hukou - a system of household registration for availing grain rations, housing, and health and education facilities - has been effectively used to manage the rural-urban migration process and avoid unplanned urbanisation. Hukou in India stretches the imagination.
Third, an Indian prime minister will need the cooperation of the states to implement many of the reforms, especially at the ground level. It is unlikely that a single party will be in power in all the 29 states in the near future. Centre-state coordination is considerably more difficult in India than in one-party-ruled China.
Does all this mean that Indian democracy is an impediment to India producing its own Deng Xiaoping and hence growing fast? No, it does not. It means that India's Deng will face a unique set of challenges that China's Deng did not. Deng Xiaoping had his own bag of challenges, and managed them successfully. India's Deng will have to manage his/her own.
The writer is an economist
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
