THE UNITED PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE GOVERNMENT AND

THE EMERGING PROBLEMS OF THE INDIAN PEOPLE

* By Renuka Devi
Research Scholar, Dept. of Political Science, Gulbarga University, Gulbarga
India is going through its worst political crisis as a state and as a
nation. The present period is marked by misgovernance, nepotism and
anarchy, with the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government under the
leadership o the !ongress being a mute spectator to the wanton attacks on
the "indi#speaking populace in $umbai, and placating the eudal desires and
values o $ayawati in Uttar Pradesh. %n the oreign policy ront the
government has displayed similar tendencies, which have resulted in an
erosion o our autonomy and acilitated the increase o U.&. inluence and
hegemony in &outh Asia
'
.
The UPA has merely (oined the bandwagon with groups making un(ust
and unconstitutional demands, in the hope that it will etch political dividends
through unair means. This is clear rom the actions o the !ongress#
)ationalist !ongress Party government in $aharashtra, where arsonists and
parochial groups were given a ree run or around two weeks and
subse*uently a sae passage. $eanwhile, the &ama(wadi Party, which stood
or the rights o the "indi#speaking people, was unduly bracketed with the
$aharashtra )avnirman &ena ($)&)
+
.
These developments raise serious *uestions about internal security,
governance and constitutional norms concerning the rights o citi,ens to take
up employment and to settle down in any part o the country. The linguistic
reorganisation o the &tates has not put any restrictions on the movement o
people across the country. The only e-ceptions relate to the rontier regions,
special ,ones and areas under terrorist attack.
The !ongress#led !entral government, along with the .ahu(an &ama(
Party government led by $s $ayawati in Uttar Pradesh, is presenting a
vested agenda to remain in power at all costs. The two are overlooking each
other/s track record o omissions and commissions. This is evident in the
hand#in# glove treatment practised by the !ongress in the wake o $s
$ayawati/s actions against police personnel recruited during the &ama(wadi
Party#led government. $s $ayawati/s actions indicate a eudal mindset. &he
is bent on creating a chaotic model o governance wherein governance and
public policies are getting highly personalised. .oth the bureaucracy and the
state machinery are at the service o her autocratic attitude and both are
scouting to cater to her political and personal agendas
0
.
The !ongress desperately wants to improve on its negligible presence
in Uttar Pradesh by pandering to the political and personal demands o $s
$ayawati, ignoring the disastrous implications such moves hold or
governance and security. It has permitted the rise o a caste bogey in order to
settle political scores, and has turned a )elson/s eye to the large#scale
corruption and nepotism practised by the .&P government in the name o
social (ustice and the rights o the marginalised sections
1
.
2hile ood grain productivity is already on the decline and the 3reen
4evolution areas are acing serious bottlenecks to growth and productivity, it
is the inancially weak armers who are at the receiving end o both nature/s
ury and the government/s apathy. The spate o armer suicides, which go on
unabated, has orced Prime $inister $anmohan &ingh to admit to the
magnitude o the agrarian crisis. 5espite the government/s pro(ections, the
act remains that the ma(ority o armers are keen to abandon agriculture and
move to urban centres looking or (obs, however menial they may be. In the
cities they are conined to the slums. To add to their agony, their very
presence is resented by the same government, which perceives them as
eyesores to the inrastructure development pro(ects in the cities. Ironically,
rural inrastructure is in a pathetic state6 the roads are in bad shape, there are
re*uent power cuts, the unavailability o drinking water is widespread, and
sanitation is poor.
.ut this does not seem to be on the list o concerns o $inister or
Agriculture &harad Pawar, who is busy with his pet pro(ect o selling the sport
o cricket and the players to the largest bidder. "is pro(ect has certainly added
to the coers o the .oard o !ontrol or !ricket in India (.!!I). $eanwhile, in
the countryside our armers look with muted anger or some respite and hope
rom the UPA government to ight ever#increasing indebtedness, endemic
hunger, e-tensive under#nutrition, illiteracy, ab(ect poverty and deprivation.
$r. Pawar has the lu-ury o reusing to acknowledge the harsh realities
that conront the armers, by means o his attempts to vulgarise and
commercialise the game o cricket. "e has clearly displayed his indierence
to the agrarian crisis by trying to create a make#believe world or the common
masses, while ignoring the pitiable plight o the marginalised sections and
poor armers in the rural areas, who are not only vulnerable but are heading
towards a catastrophic situation. %ne survey said $r. Pawar has travelled
around ',77,708 km or the promotion o cricket. .ut he has hardly
undertaken any signiicant visit to address the problems o armers in Akola in
9idharbha. $r. Pawar can do a great service to the nation, the way he has
stood or the cause o :cricket/, by being magnanimous enough to *uit as
$inister or Agriculture. The UPA government can appoint him as $inister or
&ports to manage ;cricket and its commerce.<
8

It has been proved that the swelling stock markets, the strengthening o
the rupee and increasing oreign institutional investment will hardly touch the
lives o our armers = the people who eed us. )early '87,777 Indian armers
have committed suicide during the period '>>?#+778, while one in two Indian
rural children under the age o three goes hungry. According to the @ood and
Agriculture %rganisation (@A%), India is home to the largest share o the
world/s undernourished population, and more than +77 million Indian children,
women and men eat less than the daily minimum calorie re*uirement or a
human being.
A

Bvidence suggests that over the '>>7s concentration o land
ownership increased, with many more households becoming landless and
dependent on casual agricultural labour (18 per cent o households).
$oreover, since the late '>>7s, it has been reported that at least
A7,777 workers have lost their (obs as the international price o tea has allen.
$illions o others ace wage cuts, more insecure contracts and rising
malnutrition that include cases o starvation. Alarmingly, they orm the ma(ority
o the country/s population. &uch deprivation means a deep divide, causing
economic and social disturbances and loss o peace. .ut the UPA
government seems to be unconcerned about the suerings o armers, their
pain and miseries. It is happy counting the rising &ense- points
?
.
There is an urgent need to integrate rural India with the overall
economic growth o our country. The shine o corporate India can never cover
up the poverty and struggle o rural India. The investments o oreign
institutions cannot replace the indebtedness o the small armer who has
taken one more loan rom the village moneylender ater mortgaging his small
piece o land.
The United )ational Progressive Alliance (U)PA) has tried to draw the
attention o the UPA government to the clear and present danger o ignoring
the agrarian crisis. This crisis is a national calamity in the making, given the
apathetic attitude o the !ongress leadership and its spin doctors. The U)PA
has staged rallies across the country to mobilise the armers and the common
people to air their voice to make the government accountable and respond to
their problems
C
.
Enormous response
4ecently a U)PA rally generated an enormous response across the
nation, and it got a shot in the arm with support rom the leadership o its
traditional allies on the Det, which (oined the rally to address the armers/
problems in one voice. This has a signiicant impact in terms o attempts to
establish a non#!ongress and non#.EP secular and socialist alternative to
strengthen the crumbling ediice o democracy and governance under the
regime headed by the !ongress.
&imilarly, on the oreign policy ront the UPA#led government seems to
pursue lopsided ob(ectives with its growing submission to the un(ust pressures
o the .ush regime. It has severely damaged the national consensus on
oreign policy by its blind obsession with the India#U.&. nuclear deal. The
opposition parties are being kept in the dark about the implications o the deal
or national security and the level o autonomy o India/s oreign policy. 2hat
is more ironical is that the !ongress is issuing statements repeatedly that the
nuclear deal will be approved by the UPA government, notwithstanding the
act that the government does not represent the ma(ority view on this issue in
both "ouses o Parliament. Is the government planning to disregard
Parliament and get the deal approved by subverting the will o the ma(orityF
>

The present hobnobbing with the United &tates has not only blatantly
damaged the national consensus on oreign policy but has given rise to
legitimate ears about the unilateralism o the U.&. in dictating terms to the
Indian state. In the bargain, we also seem to have lost interest in managing
good relations with our neighbours and traditional riends. %ur response to the
Iran#Pakistan# India gas pipeline is ambiguous. India has maintained a stoic
silence on the U.&. imperial games in Ira*, notwithstanding the act that India
has an important role to play in the present world order.
In this conte-t, the rise o the U)PA is complemented by a variety o
actors. Its credibility comes rom the *uest o its leaders who represent
various &tates across the political landscape to have a common platorm to
promote a secular and pro#armer socio#political order. They have unanimity
in terms o empowerment o the marginali,ed sections and armers, and a
*uest to have an autonomous oreign policy G which are being relegated by
the !ongress government by the lopsided models o economic
development
'7
.
NOTES & REFERENCES
'. $ansergh, ).H Dumby, B. 2. 4.H and $oon, Pondered eds. India6 The
Transer o Power '>1+#' >1?. '+ vols. Dondon6 II$&%, '>?7# '> C0.
$enon, 9. P. The Transer o Power in India. .ombay6 %rient ongman,
'>8?.
+. $oon, Penderel. 5ivide and Iuit. 5elhi6 %-ord UP. '>>C J'>A'K.
0. $oore, 4. E. Bscape rom Bmpire6 The Alice 3overnment and the
Indian Problem. %-ord6 %-ord UP, '>C+.
1. $osley, Deonard. The Dast 5ays o the 4a(. Dondon, '>A'.
8. )aim, !. $., ed. I*bal, Einnah and Pakistan6 The 9ision and the
4eality. &yracuse6 &yraAuse UP, '>?>.
A. Pandey, .. ). The .reak#up o .ritish India. Dondon6 $acmillan, '>A>.
?. Philips, !. ". and 2ainwright, $. 5., eds. The Partition o India6
C. Policies and Perspectives '>08#1?. Dondon6 Allen and Unwin, '>?7.
>. &adullah, $ian $uhammad, compiler. The Partition o the Pun(ab
'>1?.
'7. Dahore6 )ational 5ocumentation !entre, '>C0.