PM Modi's band of boys: Where are all the (promised) dream jobs?

Jobs-for-the-boys is an occupational hazard for all newly-elected presidents and prime ministers, especially those like Narendra Modi who relied so heavily, for their victory, on a tight network of ideological soulmates, aka cronies, fellow travellers, and bandwagoneers.

All those post-dated IOUs, so generously dispensed on the campaign trail, have a habit of turning up after the event demanding payment for all that cheerleading, and those crucial interventions. Not surprisingly, claimants are coming out of the woodwork waving their IOUs, and some are clearly getting impatient.

Remember Jagdish Bhagwati, the distinguished Columbia University economist - “the most eminent living economist never to win a Nobel Prize’’ - who famously picked a fight with Amartya Sen on Modi’s behalf and became one of his most enthusiastic cheerleaders in the run-up to the elections? His intervention lent much needed intellectual heft and credibility to Modi’s campaign, particularly his fuzzy economic agenda, and was privately hailed by Team Modi as a coup sparking speculation about a possible role for him in the government, if the BJP won.

There were reports that he could be appointed special economic adviser to the prime minister. Some of these reports were floated by Bhagwati himself by talking up his enthusiasm for Modi’s free-market approach, and how he would love to play a part in helping him implement it in government.

Weeks before the polling day, as Modi appeared headed for a victory, Reuters quoted Bhagwati as saying that “he saw himself on an external council advising the prime minister."

“I’d be glad to chair something like that, and I think that’s what they might do,” Bhagwati said. Not only that. He had also chalked out a role for his protégé, Arvind Panagariya, telling Reuters in the same interview that Panagariya was “a strong candidate for the more hands-on role of chief economist to the prime minister, if Modi is elected."

“The kind of person they would want, and I think correctly, as a chief economist would be my co-author, who is about 60 compared to my 80. I don’t have that kind of energy any more,” Bhagwati said, adding, according to the news agency, that “people close to Modi had approached him to ask about Panagariya’s suitability for the role."

Well, he has been waiting for an audition ever since, but back at South Block or Race Course Road - wherever they take such decisions - they seem to have clean forgotten him. And Panagariya.

Tired of the long wait, Bhagwati recently wrote an article in The Hindu (“Scaling Up the Gujarat Model”) which has been widely interpreted as a cringing job application. Or a reminder that he is still available. Fondly addressing the prime minister as “Narendrabhai Modi” - followed by a long explanation of the term “bhai’s” secular origins (something to do with Turkish “Bey” though others have questioned his claim) - Bhagwati went on to hail him as “the most remarkable Prime Minister we have had since the days of Jawaharlal Nehru"; praise him for his “unerring" political instincts; his “uncanny ability to connect with people"; and his “remarkable” track record on governance. Which he likened - hold your breath - to that of “Queen Elizabeth the Great who was known to be at work with her secretaries before daylight". Like her, Modi made his “ministers and top bureaucrats work — not just pretend to work — from morning till dusk, making files move when they often gathered dust" in the past.

Were it not for his bye-line, the article could have been easily mistaken for a BJP press release. Except that even the BJP would have hesitated to go so far as to make claims about Modi’s “accessibility to the public and the media’’. In fact, his inaccessibility is a sore point even with his admirers in the media.

Coming from an eminent economist, this was pathetic stuff. Readers mocked him for an “overtly trite and trivial treatise”, as one put it; and for his foray into etymology.

“Prof Bhagwati is a well-known expert of economics - but he should keep his expertise confined to economics only and shouldn’t stray into Etymology. The word Bhai seems cognate with Sanskrit Bhrata, and probably derived from it. To postulate that it is derived from Turkish Bey is certainly far-fetched and un-scholarly,’’ wrote one.

Meanwhile, MK Narayanan has set tongues wagging with a hardline speech on radicalisation of Indian Muslims. Speaking at the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) in London, he warned of a “jihadi wave" in India, which he added, was achieving “new heights".

A former national security adviser, Narayanan was West Bengal governor until June this year when he resigned after being questioned by CBI in connection with the controversial AugustaWestland deal. Although he prospered under the UPA government, he has been accused in the past of being soft on Hindutva groups.

His Wikipedia entry notes that “according to Outlook magazine, he asked investigative agencies to go slow when they zeroed-in on Hindutva organizations for Samjhauta Express bombings 2007."

His London remarks have been widely reported in India and though there is no suggestion that he meant them to be a job pitch, some have commented on their tone, and the timing of his intervention. So who knows?

But there’s certainly no doubt about the wannabe status of Arun Shourie. Hewas thought to be in the running for a high-profile economic portfolio in the cabinet, and during the campaign he made it a point to keep himself visible via television appearances and public statements. But four months later, he is still waiting.

Then there is Swapan Dasgupta who was seen as a shoo-in as Modi’s media adviser. But, apparently, Modi had other ideas, though it is not known whether he has other plans for Dasgupta. Meanwhile, his name keeps popping up, including as a potential candidate to be the next high commissioner to the UK.

There is a long cast of characters - journalists, diplomats, civil servants, academics, social activists, economists - who assumed or were given to understand that they would be rewarded for their loyalty, and are now sulking as their dream job still eludes them.

To be honest, Modi deserves credit that so far he has been extremely cautious in doling out jobs to the boys. In fact, it is one of the more positive featuresof his administration which, curiously, appears to have gone unnoticed even in the more fawning sections of the media. Modi’s 100-plus days have been dogged by many controversies both in relation to his policies, his ideological musings and his “strong man”/authoritarian style but there has been no stink of cronyism with no plum jobs for high-profile old chums. At least, so far.

But how long will he be able to hold out without alienating those to whom he owes his own job?