Modi cannot lead India effectively: NYT editorial board
The editorial, published yesterday, also questioned Modi's economic track record in Gujarat.
NEW YORK: Narendra Modi, BJP's prime ministerial candidate, cannot hope to lead India effectively if he inspires "fear" and "antipathy" among many of its people, New York Times has commented in an unusual move.
"Mr Modi has shown no ability to work with opposition parties or tolerate dissent," the editorial board of New York Times said in a stinging editorial on the 63-year-old BJP leader.
The editorial said that Modi has already "alienated" BJP's political partners when Janata Dal (United), an important regional party broke off its 17-year alliance with the "party because it found Mr Modi unacceptable."
India was a country with multiple religions and "Mr Modi cannot hope to lead it effectively if he inspires fear and antipathy among many of its people," it said while recalling that nearly 1,000 people died in the 2002 riots in Gujarat.
The editorial, published yesterday, also questioned Modi's economic track record in Gujarat.
The "economic record in Gujarat is not entirely admirable, either," it said.
"Muslims in Gujarat, for instance, are much more likely to be poor than Muslims in India as a whole, even though the state has a lower poverty rate than the country," the editorial said.
"His rise to power is deeply troubling to many Indians, especially the country's 138 million Muslims and its many other minorities," said the 19-member editorial board, headed by India-born Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor of New York Times.
"Mr Modi has shown no ability to work with opposition parties or tolerate dissent," the editorial board of New York Times said in a stinging editorial on the 63-year-old BJP leader.
The editorial said that Modi has already "alienated" BJP's political partners when Janata Dal (United), an important regional party broke off its 17-year alliance with the "party because it found Mr Modi unacceptable."
India was a country with multiple religions and "Mr Modi cannot hope to lead it effectively if he inspires fear and antipathy among many of its people," it said while recalling that nearly 1,000 people died in the 2002 riots in Gujarat.
The editorial, published yesterday, also questioned Modi's economic track record in Gujarat.
The "economic record in Gujarat is not entirely admirable, either," it said.
"Muslims in Gujarat, for instance, are much more likely to be poor than Muslims in India as a whole, even though the state has a lower poverty rate than the country," the editorial said.
"His rise to power is deeply troubling to many Indians, especially the country's 138 million Muslims and its many other minorities," said the 19-member editorial board, headed by India-born Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor of New York Times.
Narendra Modi’s Rise in India
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Published: October 26, 2013
In 2002, rioters in the western Indian state of Gujarat savagely killed nearly 1,000 people, most of whom were part of the Muslim minority. Now, barely a decade later, Narendra Modi, who was the chief minister of Gujarat at the time and still holds the office, is aleading candidate to become prime minister of India.
Today's Editorials
Editorial: Bill de Blasio for Mayor (October 27, 2013)
Editorial: What the Pollen Says(October 27, 2013)
Editorial | Notebook: An Optimistic Investment (October 27, 2013)
Editorial | Notebook: The A Train to Autumn (October 27, 2013)
Mr. Modi, a star of India’s main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, would become prime minister if the party won enough seats in parliamentary elections next summer with support from its political allies. His rise to power is deeply troubling to many Indians, especially the country’s 138 million Muslims and its many other minorities. They worry he would exacerbate sectarian tensions that have subsided somewhat in the last decade.
Supporters of Mr. Modi argue that an investigation commissioned by India’s Supreme Court cleared him of wrongdoing in the riots. And they insist that Mr. Modi, who is widely admired by middle-class Indians for making Gujarat one of India’s fastest-growing states, can revive the economy, which has been weakened by a decade of mismanagement by the coalition government headed by the Indian National Congress Party.
There is no question that the Congress Party has failed to capitalize on the economic growth of recent years to invest in infrastructure, education and public institutions like the judiciary. And instead of trying to revive itself with new ideas and leaders, it is likely to beled in the coming election by Rahul Gandhi, the inexperienced scion of the Nehru-Gandhi family.
But Mr. Modi’s strident Hindu nationalism has fueled public outrage. When Reuters asked him earlier this year if he regretted the killings in 2002, he said, if “someone else is driving a car and we’re sitting behind, even then if a puppy comes under the wheel, will it be painful or not? Of course it is.” That incendiary response created a political uproar and demands for an apology.
Mr. Modi has shown no ability to work with opposition parties or tolerate dissent. And he has already alienated political partners; this summer, an important regional party broke off its 17-year alliance with the B.J.P. because it found Mr. Modi unacceptable.
His economic record in Gujarat is not entirely admirable, either. Muslims in Gujarat, for instance, were much more likely to be poor than Muslims in India as a whole in 2009 and 2010, according to a government report, though new data has shown a big improvement in the last two years.
India is a country with multiple religions, more than a dozen major languages and numerous ethnic groups and tribes. Mr. Modi cannot hope to lead it effectively if he inspires fear and antipathy among many of its people.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: October 28, 2013
An earlier version of this editorial relied on a 2012 Indian government report on poverty rates, which included the rate for Muslims in Gujarat in 2009 and 2010. Newer data shows that poverty among that group has declined substantially in the last two years.
No comments:
Post a Comment