FEATURES

Democracy's ResilienceTradition, Modernity, and Hybridity in India

Indian democracy is puzzling. Many democracyadvocates and human rights acdvists around theworld—and in India itself—find it hard to reconcilethe country's democratic achievements with itstragic failures. India's democradc success makes the

country appear deviant when contrasted to the regularitywith which post-colonial democracies fail. At the sametime, India's failures undermine the country's claim to bethe world's largest democracy. With such contradictoryfeatures, India can be viewed as a counter-factualchallenge to general models of democradc transidon andconsolidadon. WTiat makes Indian democracy work, andwhy does it fail somedmes? What significance does India'scounter-factual democracy hold for general theories ofdemocracy transidon and consolidadon?

The Context of a Counter-Factual DemocracyThe simultaneity of democradc success and failure in

India is not an essendal feature of the country's specificculture and context. Instead, both are the outcome of acombinadon of India's specific circumstances and adroitstrategic choices by polidcs-sawy, elected elites, many of

SUBRATA K. MITRA

SUBRATA K. MITRA serves as Professor ofPolitical Science of South Asia at the Univer-sity of Heidelberg. His research and publishedworks focus on democratization in South Asia,identity and religion in Indian politics, and theevolution of Indian political parties.

whom have risen from the ranks. Working closely witha professional bureaucracy, army, and judiciary, India'snew political elites have created a hybrid polidcal systemthat has become a vital, robust, and fiexible hinge hold-ing the modem state and tradidonal society together. Itis an ongoing process that has not yet spread across thewhole country.

India's democradc record is mixed. Over the years,sporadic but terrible attacks on members of religiousminorities have put a question mark on the quality ofIndian democracy. India's democradc image has taken afurther battering with the desecration of places of wor-ship, pogroms—somedmes in collusion with employees of

HARVARD INTERNATIONAL RE VI EW • Winter 2011

FEATURES

the state—and the persistence of deep pockets of poverty.Violent separatist movements in Jammu and Kashmir andparts of northeastern India are further challenges to thecredibility and effectiveness of Indian democracy. How-ever, irrefutable indicators of a vibrant democratic processoff-set these negative images, balancing the failures ofIndia's democracy. Elections have been held almost con-tinuously since independence in 1947, leading to majorpolitical changes. Vigorous parliamentary debate, an activecivil society, and an alert media have generally kept thegovernment accountable. Efforts have also increased toexpand democracy down to the level of the localized villagecommunity through several innovative constitutional andlegislative measures. These measures promote the upwardmobility of the lower social classes and women.

The resihence of Indian democracy appears to beat thetrend of other transitional societies. In comparison to thevast majority of young democracies emerging from Britishcolonial rule, such as Pakistan, which fell by the waysidein the 1950s, India has kept its course. In addition, India'stransition into democracy was different than that of othernations. Modern democratic societies emerged within theWestern world after violent transitions from feudalismto industrial nations. India, in contrast, sought to do thisthe other way around. In 1947, newly independent Indiaemerged from over a century of British colonial rule undera largely peaceful anti-colonial movement, after which thedeparting British handed power to the leaders of the IndianNational Congress, led by Jawaharlal Nehru.

With a stagnant economy, mass poverty, and a deeplyembedded social hierarchy, one wonders why Indiandemocracy did not meet the same tragic fate as Pakistan,with which the country shared similar points of departure.An overwhelmingly large percentage of its population—illiterate, poor, and steeped in subsistence agriculture—^wassuddenly catapulted to the world of modern competitivepolitics. India, despite such conditions, nevertheless soughtdemocratic consolidation and industrialization. Given theconditions of India at the time, one is hard put to under-stand why the transition worked at all.

Making Democracy Work: Political CapitalWe learn from Robert Putnam's social capital theory

that the necessary ingredients for liberal democracy aresocial attributes such as high interpersonal trust, voluntarysocial networks, and norms that are shared across socialgroups. Caste-bound, hierarchy-ridden traditional societyhardly meets these requirements. However, democracyin India has succeeded despite the absence of these andother classic pre-conditions such as mass literacy, egalitar-ian society, and social cohesion that was seen in westerndemocracies at their formative stages. India's anomalousdemocratic transition can be explained by the country'spolitical capital more than social capital. India's politicalsystem rather than its social structure has become the mainagent of change.

This rather novel concept subsumes a number of fac-

tors such as elections, modem political institutions, andtheir interaction with traditional society, that create levelplaying fields, strategic social and economic reform, ac-countability, and India's multi-layered citizenship. Thesedemocratic, capital-generating institutions and processesare briefly described in the sections that follow.

Electoral Mobilization and Public PolicyRegular and effective elections, based on universal

adult franchise, for all important offices and institutionsat the central, regional, and local levels of the politicalsystem, are one of the most significant factors to explainthe success of India's democracy. An independent electioncommission oversees elections in India. It is ably supportedby an independent judicial system that is pro-active in thedefense of human rights and marginal social groups. Elec-tions have helped induct new social elites into positions ofpower and replace hereditary social notables. The electoralprocess from its early beginnings about six decades beforeindependence has grown enormously, involving a massiveelectorate of about 600 million men and women, of whom,roughly sixty percent take part in the polls. The fact thatan election could be held in Kashmir in 2008, in spite ofterrorist attacks and insurgency, speaks to the strength ofIndia's democratic electoral processes.

While the constitutional structure of India's electionshas remained more or less constant over the past six de-cades, the electoral process—evidence of the dynamism ofsocial empowerment—has undergone significant changes.The general elections of the 1950s were dominated bytraditional leaders of high castes. However, as the logicof competitive elections sank in, cross-caste coalitionsreplaced "vote banks" that were based on vertical mobiliza-tion, where dominant castes dictated lower social groups."Differential" mobilization of voters, which refers to thecoming together of people ftom different status groups,and "horizontal" mobilization, in which people of the samestatus group coalesce around a collective political objective,have knocked vertical social linkages out of the electoralarena. Today, sophisticated electoral choices based oncalculations that yield the best results for individuals andgroups are the rule. Electoral empowerment has broughttribes and religions in all social strata into the electoral fi-ay.The government of Uttar Pradesh led by Ms. Mayawati,one of the most important states of the Indian federation,is a good example of the empowerment of marginal socialgroups. Born into an untouchable family, Ms. Mayawati,who leads the Bahujan Samaj Party, has skillfully drawnsupport fi-om dalits (former tintouchables whose practice ofuntouchability is now forbidden by law), the upper Hinducastes, and Muslims.

Differential and horizontal electoral mobilization ofsocially marginal groups has resulted in policy changesthat further demonstrate the deepening of democracy inIndia. Successive governments have introduced laws topromote social integration, welfare, agrarian relations,and social empowerment. Over the past two decades.

Photos Courtesy Reuters Winter 2011 »HARVARD INTERNATIONAL REVIEW

FEATURES

broad-based political coalitions have forced more extremeforms of Indian politics, such as the champions of Hindu,Sikh, Muslim, or for that matter, linguistic and regionalinterests, to moderate their stance. As a result, India hasachieved a minimum of welfare and food security. Infla-tion and explosive population growth have been tamed.The economy has grown steadily since its liberalizationin 1991. The percentage of people under the poverty linehas decreased from nearly half of the population in the1960s to a littie over a quarter during the past decade.International business confidence in India remains high,particularly in view ofthe ability ofthe economy to resistthe impact ofthe global economic crisis. The govemmenthas managed to maintain the pace ofthe liberalization ofthe economy, globalization, dialogue with Pakistan, andnuclearization.

Institutional Arrangement and Opposing ForcesIndia's record at successful state formation, and more

recently, the progressive retreat of the state from controlofthe economy without the ensuing chaos of many transi-tional societies in similar situations, speak positively of itsinstitutional arrangement and political processes. Theseinstitutional mechanisms are based on constitutional miesthat allow for elections at all possible levels and areas ofgovernance, and therefore promote, articulate, and ag-gregate individual choice within India's federal politicalsystem. Since the major amendment ofthe constitution in1993 that created an intricate quota system, India's 600,000villages have become the lowest tier ofthe federal system,bringing direct democracy to the door step of ordinaryvillagers and guaranteeing the representation of women,former Untouchables, and forest-dwelling Tribals.

The juxtaposition of the division and separation of

Mayawati (center), President ofthe Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Chief Ministerof Uttar Pradesh, is presented with a garland during her party's campaign for thestate assembly elections in jammu on December 10,2008.

powers, the fiercely independent media and alert civilrights groups, and a pro-active judiciary has produced alevel playing field to facilitate democratic politics. Manyof these are colonial transplants that have been adaptedby repeated use and re-use to local custom and need. Itis significant to note that India's main political parties donot question the legitimacy of India's modern institu-tions. Although they differ radically in their ideologicalviewpoints, parties such as the Communist Party, Hindunationalist parties like the Shiv Sena, the Bharatiya JanataParty, and more all share the norms of democracy. Noteven parties that draw their strength from mobilizingreligious cleavages or class conflict issues object to democ-racy. Therefore, the right to democratic participation isno longer considered an exotic idea.

Balancing National Unity and Regional AiversityIndia's federation has simultaneously succeeded in

differentiating the political and administrative landscapeof India, while holding on tightiy to the unity and integrityofthe state as a whole. The boundaries ofthe federal stateshave been redrawn by the lines of the mother tongue,making regions coherent cultural and political units.Within this reorganization, a "three-language-formula"has emerged under which the bulk of regional governanceis done in the local language, though Hindi and Englishare retained as link languages. This helps to generate sup-port for the national principle of "unity in diversity." Thefears of "balkanization" that marked the rise of languagemovements in the 1950s have not borne out. Meanwhilethe economy and the development of political coalitionsthat strive to accommodate small political groups havehelped to promote national unity. The liberalization oftheeconomy in 1991 and the gradual opening ofthe Indian

market to international investorshave given the states the incen-tive to emerge as promoters ofregional interests.

Simultaneously, regionshave also emerged as sites ofgovernance in their own rightby the transformation of regionalmovements into parties of power.Coalitions have transformedrebels into stakeholders, easingtheir transition from the jungleto high office. Many partners inthe National Democratic Alli-ance (NDA), which is currentlythe opposition coalition at thecenter, form ruling parties inIndia's regions. Consequently,the NDA has become a "loyalopposition" committed to theconstitution and responsiblefor reining in the anti-systemtendencies of some of its more

HARVARD INTERNATIONAL R EV I EW » Winter 2011

FEATURES

ardent elements. Similarly, the ruling United ProgressiveAlliance (UPA) coalition in Delhi has learned to workwith the opposition to gain its support for many of theUPA's state allies.

The Indian state has devised an ingenious systemof enhancing stability of the political system through aremarkable scheme of federalization. By creating newregional and sub-regional governments, federal units canbe rearranged. Short-term, constitutionally-permitted,central, or even army rule can substitute for representativegovernment when the regional political system is unable tosustain orderly rule. Such emergency rule at the regionallevel is usually withdrawn when the need for suspension ofthe normal functions of parliamentary politics is no longertenable. The legal responsibility for law and order restsprimarily with the regional government, but is under thewatchful eye of the center. While the state governmentscontrol the regional police, the Constitution of Indiaprovides for their superseding by direct rule from Delhi ifthey fail to maintain lawful governance. In reality, however,the maintenance of law and order has become more of ajoint venture between Delhi and the federal states. Afterthe "one dominant party system"—under which the In-

regular and paramilitary troops help local and regionalgovernments to maintain orderly rule and the respect fordue process. The induction of local elites through elec-tions and co-option into the structure of governance hasstrengthened the linkage of India's traditional society withmodern institutions.

In contrast with the early post-independence yearswhen the Union government, presided over byjawaharlalNehru, held all the political cards in its tight grip, regionalleaders today have emerged as free-wheeling politicianswith independent social bases. They are keen promotersof regional interests and crucial building blocks of govern-ment and opposition coalitions in India's national politics.In keeping pace with these changes, regional markets havebecome increasingly attractive for the service industry,business processing, the cultivation and export of cashcrops, agri-business, and inter-generational renewal of thepolitical class. The regional states, which are currently ex-periencing a veritable renaissance of regional language andculture thanks to networking with the Indian Diaspora,have become a major conduit for local aspirants eager tomove up to the pan-Indian arena and beyond. This hasaccelerated the process of both national integration and

"Simultaneously, regions have also emerged as sites of gov-ernance in their own right by the transformation of regional

movements into parties of power."

dian National Congress (INC) ruled both at the center aswell as in the states—came to an end in 1967, states haveincreasingly acquired autonomy and an authentic politicalvoice in conjunction with Delhi. Successive elections haveconsolidated India's transition to a multi-party democracy,national unity, and political stability.

Within the framework of a national constitution, theIndian political system has managed to safeguard regionalidentity. The process of regional differentiation is, how-ever, far from over. In view of the difference in time periodand in context of their formation, regions experience theproblem of governance in different ways. Caste and classconfiict challenge orderly rule in Bihar and Jharkhand,for example. There is agitation to create a separate stateof Telegana in Andhra Pradesh, and there are secessionistmovements in the northeast regions. However, India hasevolved a process of center-state cooperation to resolvesuch conflicts. Many of these regional specificities andvulnerabilities are protected by the constitution of India.Tribal land, for example, cannot easily be transferredto people of non-tribal origin. Special representationis provided to tribal populations and former "untouch-ables." Backward regions are allocated extra recoursesby the national Einance Commission for their economicadvancement. National planning and the deployment of

regional differentiation.In brief, the successful transformation of a colonized

population into citizens of a secular, democratic repub-lic has contributed to the sustainability of democracy.The main strategy has consisted of encouraging rebels,the alienated, and the indifferent to become nationalstakeholders. The strategy's components include: India'sinstitutional arrangement (the constitution); laws meantto implement the egalitarian social visions underlyingthis constitution; the double role of the state as a neutralenforcer and as a partisan supporting vulnerable socialgroups in producing a level playing field; the empower-ment of minorities through law and political practice;and, finally, judicialization that safeguards individual andgroup rights.

When Democracy FailsEvidence of the empowerment of former untouch-

ables, religious minorities, and women, and the recruit-ment of new local elites into mainstream politics, as wellas positive evidence of surveys on legitimacy, efficacy,and trust from national attitudinal surveys all indicate thestrength of democractic forces in India. The marketplaceof pohtics continues to operate as an efficient arbiter ofthe contradictory values of the dignity of the individual

Wmter2011 «HARVARD INTERNATIONAL REVIEW

FEATURES

and the identity of the group. Competitive politics andredistributive social policies help negotiate the terms ofIndia's integration with the international political econ-omy, while at the same time maintaining India's culturaldistinctiveness.

However, these images of successful democratictransition and consolidation are contested by some highlypublicized cases of violent disaffection of parts of thepopulation. One can see this in inter-community violenceand local support for terrorist groups. This questionsthe firm belief in the steady, incremental diffusion of thenorms of democracy and citizenship that is considered tounderpin the Indian state. In considering why democracyin India sometimes fails, it is instructive to document a

Police confront a Kashmiri man during an anti-India protestin Srinagar on November 7, 2010. India has not seen pro-testing of this magnitude since revolt broke out in 1989.

few exemplary incidents to analyze the patterns that causetheir outbreak, and the coping mechanisms that India hasdrawn on in response.

Eor many analysts of Indian politics, Hindu-Muslimconflict is the issue of primary importance. The destructionof the Babri Mosque in the North Indian city of Ayodhyain 1992 and the outbreak of Hindu-Mushm conflict in2002 following the fire-bombing of a train that killedabout sixty Hindu religious activists at Godhra railwaystation in Gujarat are both frequently cited to exemplifyHindu-Muslim conflicts. The long simmering secessionistmovement in Kashmir, which recently burst into a spateof street protests violently quelled by the army and thepolice, is yet another instance of the Indian state suppress-ing a Muslim-majority region. Similarly, many attacks on

Christian missionaries in various parts of India have takenplace. Restrictive legislation was used against Christianmissionaries' attempts to convert tribes living deep inforests of central and eastern India. Military campaignshave been employed against the secessionist movements inthe northeastern states, many of them with large Christianpopulations. Such aggression is seen as yet another facet ofa state that is putatively secular, but is actually synonymouswith a resurgent Hindu majority. Although each of theseconflicts has its own genealogy and singular narrative, thereligious dimension that underhes them all exemplifiesthe late surge in left-wing extremism, known under theIndian name of Naxalites. They are heavily armed andorganized along military lines, and tap into the cleavagesof economic classes.

The general Indian response to these problems hasbeen, in the words of a leading American expert of Indianpolitics, to "first hit them hard over the head, and thento teach them how to play the piano." It involves sendingout troops to contain the insurgency, and then to preparethe conditions for a pohtical solution, including the hold-ing of free and fair elections under the supervision of theElection Commission.

In response to such cases, three points deserve par-ticular attention. Eirst, so far India has been generally suc-cessful in containing, if not solving, such protracted issuesas the secessionist movements in many of India's regions,including Jammu and Kashmir, within the structure ofthe democratic constitution. Secondly, the cleavages andconflicts tend to be local and regional rather than national.They also tend to be cross-cutting where those who areopposed to one another on one cleavage might find them-selves in alliance on a different issue, rather than cumula-tive, where advantages as well as disadvantages cumulate inspecific social groups. Einally, the rhetoric of the leaders ofsuch movements, even when radical and strident, is deeplyensconced within the conceptual framework of liberal andsecular democracy. Rather than leaning towards religiousfundamentalism, they point more towards power-sharing,in sharp contrast to millenarian-totalitarian movementssuch as Afghanistan's Taliban or Sri Lanka's LiberationTigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

The final point shows that the universal significanceof the Indian experiment lies in potential for democracywhen it is developed both from above by democracy-inducing institutional arrangements, and below throughsocial movements and elections. Despite mass povertyor the exogenous provenance of the concepts of libertyand individual rights, when a democratic constitution iscombined with representative political institutions and tiedto pohtical competition and social reform, it can produceresults that support and promote democratic transition andconsolidation. At the same time, it is important to note thatlocal and regional conflicts are a necessary part of India'sdemocratic unfolding. While crucial to the functioningof the Indian system, empowerment of marginal socialgroups is, in India as in everywhere in the world, contested

HARVARD INTERNATIONAL REVIEW» Winter 2011

FEATURES

by established social groups. But the commitment ofIndia's key insdtudons, such as the judiciary, parliament,media, the army, and the nadonal and regional leaders todemocracy and secularism remains steadfast. The Indiancase shows how, as Nobel prize-winning VS. Naipaul putsit, its "million mudnies" ensconced in a responsive statewith elites well-versed in the art and science of compromiseand governance can pave the way for liberal democracydespite predicdons to the contrary.

The Distinctive Style of Indian DemocracyIndia's democracy is sdll wrapped in layers of tradidon-

al rituals and cultural symbols that invoke practices froma bygone feudal and colonial era. Those unfamiliar withIndian polidcs might find such rituals to be quaint, feudal,and democracy-diminishing. The condnuity of symbols oftradition in the midst of the modern, democratic state isdistinctive to India. Western liberal democratic states andChina have experienced large-scale dislocadon and discon-dnuity during their violent transidon from agrarian societyto the modern world. In contrast, India's modernizationhas entailed frequent reuse of the past, and consequentlythe emergence of a hybrid Indian modernity.

social context of ethnic and conflict-ridden diversity, anddeeply embedded inequalities based on caste, gender,religion, and tribe, India is difficult to comprehend andclassify. Some of its failings raise key questions for India'sfuture. How will India accommodate ethnic separadsmwithin the framework of its polidcal community, and howwill it protect the democratic political system from itsenemies, both indigenous and external? What does India'scollecdve idendty consist of and how might it be sustained?What responsibility must India's citizens bear in defenseof the Indian nation? Defining moments in India's post-independence politics such as the destruction of the BabriMosque and the anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat in 2002raise these core questions that call for urgent attentionfrom India's analysts and policy-makers.

By current reckoning, the likelihood of the collapse ofthe Indian state and its democratic polidcal system is slim.Indian democracy has become self-sustaining. Despiteshort-term, local difficuldes, as I have argued in my largerstudy Politics in India: Structure, Process and Policy, India'sdemocracy on the whole will continue to strengthen inthe foreseeable future. The main responsibihty for thecontinuity of this process rests with India's elites. Eor

"How will India accommodate ethnic separatism within...its po-litical community, and how will it protect the democratic politi-

cal system from its enemies, both indigenous and external?"

The collective memory of mythical events thus per-meates current polidcs. Eor example the Ram Templeof Ayodhya is still a current issue. Visitors to India areoften amazed at the apparent ease with which the pastand the present live side by side in cides, rural towns, andvillages. The Dak Bungalows, outposts of the British Rajin the countryside, are sdll given the same careful atten-don by the Public Works Department (PWD) as are thepost-independence guesthouses of the national and Stategovernments. The departments of religious property suchas the Devaswam boards, set up during Bridsh rule to regu-late religious property in the South and their equivalents inother parts of India, are sdll in charge of administradon oftemples. Government ministers of democratic India holdcourt much like their colonial and pre-colonial predeces-sors held durbar, and transact state business in a similarstyle of power display, privilege, pomp, and modey crowdsof visitors. Despite their outwardly non-democratic ap-pearance, many of these institutions, pardcularly whentied to competidve elections, actually enhance the senseof empowerment, endtlement, and enfranchisement andhelp give legitimacy to imported modern institudons.

The Path Ahead: Nation, Religion and ModernityWith its continental dimensions, massive elecdons.

the deepening and broadening of India's democracy, itis important that they pay attendon to the problem ofdisaffection. India needs to promote collecdve identity byreinvendng the fundamental basis of her nadonhood, andrenewing the polidcal consensus. The steps being takenby the government to achieve "inclusive development"—not merely as an electoral tacdc, but as an integral partof the 'Indian model'—need to be communicated to thepopuladon at home as well as the wider world.

The Indian example shows that strategic reform,accountability, and social policies that balance efficiencywith jusdce can sustain the progress in democracy anddevelopment in a post-colonial context. India's successfulconflict resolution, compared to other new democra-cies, has been immensely helped by the fact that socialgroups tend to overlap and that key intermediaries forconflict-resoludon, such as the judicial system and partypolidcs, have been available for a considerable length oftime prior to independence. India's social and economiccleavages sometimes manifest themselves in complexcombinations of ethnic conflict, secessionist movements,inter-community violence, and terrorist attacks. Studentsof comparadve polidcs, equipped with the knowledge thatcompetition over scarce resources usually underlies socialconflict, might look askance at India where such potendal

Winter 2011 »HARVARD INTERNATIONAL REVIEW

FEATURES

conflicts are articulated in a form and an idiom that aredeeply embedded in traditional culture. From their loca-tion in villages, urban localities, and peripheral regions,India's national, regional, and local elites, leaders of ethnicgroups, and all manners of social activists have masteredthe art of political manipulation and power-sharing.Through a deft combination of protest and participation,they have formulated political strategies that combinecultural, symbolic, and religious values with materialinterests.

Modern India is a good example of how traditioncan adapt itself to modernity. Under the exotic-lookingIndian veneer, there is the same hard-nosed calculation ofinterests and political manipulation that one finds in anylarge, complex political system. Like all large and com-plex societies with a settied, continuous political processstretching over millennia, India has also developed somedistinctive features and a style specific to her. The insid-ers use this idiom as a code, as much to fend off intrusiveoutsiders as to conduct their internal transactions in aneffective way. Familiarity with this veneer of Indian poli-tics will help readers appreciate the complexity, vitality,and inner dynamics of the process of empowerment andaccountability that underpin India's democratic politicalsystem and process.

ConclusionDespite its periodic failures, India's democracy shines

on the whole in cross-national comparison. Innovativepolicy, hybrid institutions, and the re-use of traditionalpractices for modern functions explain the transforma-

Performers celebrate the 60th anniversary of Indian inde-pendence from British rule on August 15,2007, gathering inthe town of Mahesana for parades and demonstrations.

tion of this ancient civilization and its social hierarchyinto a level playing field. However, India's struggles arenot yet over. As one can see in the ongoing insurgency inKashmir and the Northeast, Maoist violence in central andeastern India, and sporadic Hindu-Muslim conflict, Indiastill faces the challenge of how to reconcile democracy,governance, and collective identity. To merely attributesuch democractic failures to the "misguided youth," orto assume that things will somehow work themselvesout, instead of focusing on the structural problems andinstitutional shortcomings that lead to them, would be, asBarrington Moore warned in his magisterial Social OriginsofDiaatorship and Democracy, the "acme of intellectual andmoral irresponsibility."

India's nation-building project is incomplete. Thesolutions to some of India's problems such as terrorismand secessionist movements lie beyond her borders. Jointsearch for solutions in collaboration with neighboringcountries is indispensable for domestic order and socialharmony. The muted response to the recent judicial deci-sion to award equal parts of the disputed land to the threeparties (one Muslim, the others two different Hindu sects)in the Ayodhya conflict is a hopeful sign. The national elitethat has evolved over the years has understood the benefitsof cooperation with all sections of the population. In con-sequence, conciliation has prevailed over conflict. India'sleaders of all political shades increasingly articulate theirconcerns about national security, unity, and prosperitywithin the framework of competitive national elections.

A democractic counter-factual, India stands aloneamong the major powers of the world as a country thathas made its change ft-om tradition to modernity withoutthe terrible cost in human lives that has generally markedthe violent history of modernization. India has achievedthis remarkable feat by strategically combining elementsof the three classic routes of transition from traditionto modernity—liberalism, socialism, and fascism—withits indigenous political culture and tradition. However,although democracy might offer the best solution to po-litical competition within India's political system, one stillneeds to consider whether it has the requisite strength toaddress the politics of the system, particularly of the corevalues and norms that underpin it. In other words, does thedemocratic process, particularly in a post-colonial context,have the historic depth and the strategic room to maneu-ver to reform the political system of which it is a part?What additional resources might India need to "repairthe ship, while keeping it afloat" as storm clouds gatherin the horizon? The enormous momentum necessary toeffectuate and maintain the pace of change is generated bythe dynamics of India's hybrid political structure and theelectoral process that underpins it. These are the motorsof India's multi-party democracy and sustained economicgrowth. The challenge is to stay the course and enhancethe capacity of the system by holding on to the rule of lawat home, and balancing an introverted national culturewith global ideals of equity and freedom. IB

HARVARD INTERNATIONAL R E VI E W • Winter 2011

Copyright of Harvard International Review is the property of Harvard International Review and its content may

not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.