The Lost Opportunity of India’s First Woman President

Her election in 2007 is regarded as the murkiest presidential polls in Indian

history with several corruption allegations cast against her. But the 72-year old,
unremarkable governor, Pratibha Patil, still managed to win. With International
Women’s Day around the corner, there is opportunity to reflect on
the implications of her election and to discuss how stronger
candidates can be attracted to such positions in the future.

In India, the President’s role is mostly ceremonial and has been

customarily bestowed on a member of a politically
underrepresented group. Patil’s predecessor Abul Kalam Azad fit the bill since
he was Muslim. But he was also well-qualified and engaged many with his vision for
India’s future. In contrast, Patil’s demeanor, speeches and actions have been
uninspiring. From a distance, Patil’s election may symbolize progress. President
Obama even remarked during his recent trip that India is doing well because of its
many women leaders. But when you look closer, you realize that her election
represents all that is wrong with Indian politics today.

It was widely presumed that Patil was chosen by the ruling United Progressive
Alliance (UPA) president Sonia Gandhi because of her loyalty to the dynastic family,
and so that she could favour the UPA forming the majority in the case of a hung
parliament after the coming elections. Sadly, not only is the outside world
unaware about Patil’s background but many Indians are also
ignorant or apathetic about this, since there isn’t much one can do
without a feasible option to the ruling UPA. The opposition National
Democratic Alliance (NDA) is backed by the Hindu nationalist BJP
which has fostered a spirit of hatred and communal violence against
Muslims and Christians for many years.

Should the women’s movement in India hail Patil’s election as progressive

just because she is a woman? Or would they have been better off with a more capable
President regardless of gender, who supports crucial pro-women policies? It is pitiful
that at a time when there are more concurrent women heads of state in
the world than ever before (as many as 25) and Indian women like Indira
Nooyi, CEO of Pepsico, run some of the biggest companies in the world, we could
not find a more qualified woman President.

C.S. Anuradha of Pondicherry University says South Asian women

political leaders have always drawn negative criticism when they have been
assertive and judged as unsuitable for leadership when they have been docile. Patil
certainly falls in the latter category, which may not bode well for future women
leaders. Considering India’s poor record of women’s participation in
politics, we needed a shining example of a leader to inspire a
growing trend of capable women decision makers. India has not had
a female prime minister since Indira Gandhi became India’s first PM
30 years ago and an equally charismatic woman President may
have diminished the memories of Indira Gandhi’s authoritarianism.

Interestingly, one of the few ways that Patil’s election has been a
positive development is the fact that she is the first female head of
state in South Asia without family connections to politics. Now if we
identify younger women with strong leadership potential and mentor them on their
path to greatness, we may not have to bestow any more honours on those
who are undeserving. We must change the perception of politics as
corrupt and eliminate the barriers women face while entering
politics, beginning with disseminating basic information of how to
start. Another way may be to support the only women's political party in the
world, the United Women’s Front, started by Suman Krishankant in India in 2007.
And finally, we must pressure the Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament) to pass the
Women’s Reservation Bill, which would reserve 33% of seats in parliament for
women, up from nine percent.

This is critical as India is projected to possess the fourth most capable concentration
of power by 2015, according to a CIA report. India ranks 10th in world military
expenditure, spending 18.6 % of our budget on defense while only 12.7 % is spent on
education and only 3.4 % is spent on health. Since women have different priorities
and may choose to invest more in education, health and peace, over the military, one
can only hope that more capable women leaders will decide India’s future.