Regional interest vs national interest: Story of a rollback and a vote

India today voted for the US-sponsored UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka for war crimes. The geopolitical implication of the act is huge. India might have ceded whatever diplomatic elbow room it had with the island nation to China, the regional superpower keen on enhancing its military presence in the sub-continent. It has also risked losing an important ally in regional and international fora. China voted against the resolution. Why did the UPA government vote for something so potentially damaging to the interest of the nation? Well, it had to buy peace with DMK, an important constituent of the ruling political formation. The DMK—which has 18 MPs—had threatened drastic action if India did not vote for the resolution which accused Sri Lanka of atrocities against Tamils. The DMK’s stand was dictated by its political compulsions at home. Thus, it was local politics impacting India’s long-term diplomatic interests.[caption id=“attachment_253072” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Keeping the Centre on its toes. Image courtesy PIB”]  [/caption] In another development, new Railway Minister Mukul Roy reversed the fare hike announced by his predecessor Dinesh Trivedi. The latter was forced to quit after his party, the Trinamool Congress, took offence to the hike, claiming it was against the party’s philosophy. The fare hike, though a marginal one, was a brave move from Trivedi. It was applauded across the board, even the railway trade unions, as progressive. The hike would have given the much-needed revenue boost to the railways to go ahead with its proposed maintenance and safety initiatives. However, it was against Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee’s populist brand of politics. She does not want to give rival CPM in West Bengal an issue to go public with. So the hike had to be rolled back, against the interest of the railways. Her message: when political interests are paramount, safety is a minor concern. The safety of Indians travelling on trains is a non-issue. It was local politics influencing the national interest in a negative way. Welcome to the regionalised polity of India, where limited, selfish interests of political players confined to states could leave national and global interests of the country in jeopardy. With the power to bring down the government at the centre, powerful regional players could run the country from state capitals. It is a curious situation the country will soon need to find an answer to. Before we go deeper into the story, here’s a word of caution. Both the instances mentioned above are not cases of anti-national politics. It is just that these are not tandem with the country’s interests and the damage done is not irreversible – the first one could be handled with good diplomacy and the other with a little bit of additional effort to persuade Mamata to have a re-look at her stand. State-based parties getting stronger is not necessarily a negative trend. States have for long been robbed off their due by the Centre and relegated to a status of insignificance. The growth of local parties with strong regional agenda is a consequence of the malicious brand of politics pursued at the Centre. It is good if they utilise their clout—even blackmail the Central government—to extract financial benefits for the state. But where does the limited interests of the states, more specifically of regional political parties, end and national interests begin? There has to be a thick line dividing the two. For long we seen national parties lacking a mindset that emphasises on the betterment of states. We cannot have another situation where states ignore the interests of the country. This is certainly more dangerous. This is not to say that all regional parties and leaders are oblivious to the interests of the nation. But in a hypothetical situation—which might turn real given the acrimonious adversarial politics of today—where state-based parties give primacy to local agenda over issues of national import, things become difficult for the nation. Who draws the line? Well, it is not clear yet but there has to be one. The political parties must develop a consensus on basic important issues and create ’no-go’ areas. It appears impossible given the current political situation but parties might be driven to it in case of a grave crisis.