UPA 2 failed and hard to convince in 2014 General Elections
Congress winning the elections in 2009 and UPA 2 formed a Government which led by Congress party under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. People voted for Congress in 2009 Elections with a Satisfactory Result of UPA 1. UPA 2 is considered as one of the worst Government in India’s 67 Years of Independence. There were several reasons that might go against Congress and UPA in 2014 Elections.
- First and foremost Inflation remains a key issue, which can go against the Congress.
- Rupee is touching all-time high, 61 rupees per 1$. This has happen after a very long time.
- Natural Gases price hike, Diesel, Petrol, Gas prices are continuing to remain higher.
- Scams under UPA 2, which animosity and anger amongst Citizens of India.
- There are several more issues which may lead to downfall of UPA in 2014 General Elections. Such as: – Terrorism, Naxalism, Several Bills which has to pass but delayed, Poverty etc.
Certainly, the above mentioned reasons are the key which may lead to the downfall of UPA. There are many more important points which I like to mention in this blog about UPA.
Politics cannot be separated from government:
The fundamental cause of UPA-1 and UPA-2’s failures is that Sonia Gandhi kept charge of politics while leaving government to Manmohan Singh.
Since cabinet ministers owed their jobs to Sonia Gandhi or were — like Sharad Pawar — laws unto themselves, the prime minister had no control over government or decision making. If Manmohan Singh had vision, it could not be translated into policy. He tried to operate via the bureaucracy but faced impenetrable political walls. Example: the 2G scam.
On the other hand, Sonia has been failing on the political front. The scion, Rahul Gandhi, does not measure up. Failing politics and unbridled corruption have added to the PM’s miseries and sunk UPA-2.
Politics cannot be separated from economics:
Politics mediates all fields of public affairs, especially economics. Just like a war cannot be left to generals, economic policies must pass political scrutiny. Central bureaucrats say government policies in an earlier time were framed around Gandhi’s key parameter for development: how they affect the poor.
If UPA-2 had been true to that, it would have been saved the scandal of the planning commission’s Rs32-per-day definition of urban poverty or Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s exultation over sharp petrol price hikes. UPA-2 would have been altogether more sensitive about runaway prices.
If the Reserve Bank of India had not intervened to try to control inflation (and failing so far), UPA-2 would have led the country to an ironic situation of destructive growth. That danger persists with a technocrat as PM.
The PM must be from the Lok Sabha:
While an Indian prime minister can no longer enjoy the luxury of being continuously connected with the masses, the necessity of winning elections every five years would force a political PM to engage the grassroots periodically.
Nursing a constituency is a good way of remaining connected. It brings a reality check to implemented policies and those being contemplated. It humanises and grounds the PM.
Certainly, India is too vast for a PM to learn everything from his/her constituency. But it is a start. And not being from the Lok Sabha leaves a PM politically blind.
An elected PM wins the natural respect of other elected politicians. Both sides speak the language of politics. This settles political questions that much quicker and assists in the seamless mediation of societal, economic, military, foreign policy and other issues.
The bureaucracy also respects elected PMs more than others because it fits the lexicon of power. If Manmohan Singh had been an elected MP, he would have led from the front. He would have headed a more united UPA-2. And it may not have carried the stink of failure.
Pre-poll alliance superior to post-election arrangement: It is axiomatic that political partners who go to the polls with a robust common minimum programme have a better chance to provide a good government.
UPA-1 was mismatched with the Congress and Left pulling in opposite directions. And similar internal contradictions have scuppered UPA-2.
Sometimes, a post-poll arrangement becomes unavoidable. But that should not preclude attempts at a genuine pre-poll alliance (and not merely opportunistic seat adjustments). That is the best way to bring stability to fraught coalition politics.
Anna Hazare Movement:
Government will be cursing Anna Hazare, for his Anti-Corruption Stand against Government. This movement of him certainly open the eyes of Common Man. Nevertheless with some Government strategy Anna Hazare Movement failed to flourish. But The Movement affect has been a praiseworthy and results of it we can see in 2014 General Elections.
Vote bank politics:
This ultimately hurts government, governance and the people. Majority and minority both equally and unfailing polarise the country and governance suffers.
Every citizen must have an equal stake in getting a good government. If security fears drive one community to a particular political party, it will be exploited. A government that thrives on votebank politics will lose its competitive edge, blame the opposition for its problems, hurt all sections, and finally fail, as UPA-2 has.
The legacy of a polarised country is, of course, harder to overcome. And such a crisis consumes India.