Will AAP fizzle? It may have misunderstood its mandate

By Siddharth Shekhar Singh

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) is at a critical juncture. The media is gushing at their sincerity. After all, they have fulfilled some key promises in record time. They have proven that they are different from other parties, and stand for the common citizen. AAP is proudly proclaiming that they will prove their detractors wrong once again by demonstrating that they can govern effectively.

At first glance, everything seems to be on track for AAP to become a successful national party. So, what is the problem? The party has to make a choice now that will define whether it will fizzle out or become a major force in Indian politics. And it seems to be making the wrong one. It seems that either  AAP has misunderstood its mandate or its mandate is being hijacked by vested interests.

AAP member Arvind Kejriwal. Firstpost

AAP was formed on the basis of the anti-corruption movement led by Anna. It started as a one-trick pony that caught the imagination of the people. The Delhi elections happened soon, and AAP rode the tide to near-victory. Normally, a new political formation would be critically examined by one and all. People would then decide their support.

However, our context is anything but normal. In the excitement for quick change and fresh faces, propelled by the immense dissatisfaction with the Congress, AAP was not examined critically. Issues other than corruption were largely ignored. This suited AAP since they needed the support of multiple segments of people. This could also explain their initial reluctance to form the government in Delhi. Too much scrutiny before the national elections could complicate matters for them.

The problems of AAP

Many people who supported AAP assumed that it is a simple party of common people that is against corruption and for better governance. This meant progressive and growth-oriented policies without corruption. This meant creating opportunities and helping the underprivileged in our society. However, this is not what AAP has done so far. Their actions have raised two issues - one about their ideology and the other about their honesty.

The way the first two decisions about water and power were made AAP has raised serious issues about its ideology and politics. AAP has done what the time tested communist and socialist parties would do. They have simply taken money from one set of people and distributed it among others. Anyone can do that. The traditional political parties are masters of such populist measures.  Why is AAP different? If corruption is the only issue, why have many others who are yet untainted by corruption failed to generate the same level of enthusiasm as AAP? Clearly, there is more to the underlying expectations of voters than corruption. Good governance through sound policies is equally important, if not more.

Let us visit the issue of honesty. In their quest to go national and win elections, AAP quickly and partially fulfilled some of their promises in letter, but not in spirit. They resorted to populism with a vague promise to do more in the future. Had they been truly different, they would have started the process of evaluating water and power supply in Delhi in a transparent and time-bound manner before making any decision. They would have justified their decision based on sound economics and public welfare. However, they succumbed to populism for winning elections. Isn't this what all other parties do? Many voters in Delhi would be feeling cheated now. They did not vote for a left-leaning populist tax-and-spend government in the guise of AAP.

Many people voted for AAP because they want real change. They do not want one more name in our ever-changing list of socialist parties. Honesty does not give anyone the birth-right to rule. In the case of AAP, it has provided a window of opportunity for the party to show that it has a vision for India and prove its capability to achieve that vision through good governance. AAP is riding on the shoulders of our new middle class. This class does not want a clone of the left, as already proven in scores of elections. The popularity of Narendra Modi across the country even among AAP voters underscores this point.

What can AAP do?

AAP must first sort out their internal ideological confusion quickly and speak in one voice. It does not help the party when Yogendra Yadav conveys a message of pragmatism while Prashant Bhushan actively pursues fringe elements with a specific agenda. They must not confuse the strong desire of the people for corruption-free government as a desire against good economics and growth. AAP can either choose to be on the far left or it can occupy the space that the Congress is fast losing.

India needs a strong, principled, progressive, growth-oriented, truly secular, and slightly left-of-centre political party. AAP can be this party with an aim to meet the aspirations of mainstream India. Or it can jostle for a part of the staunch left-leaning votes. If it chooses to be the former, it can be a strong player in Indian politics. If it chooses to be on the far left, it will fizzle out because most of the new middle class that supported AAP so enthusiastically would not support it. So far, it seems to be making the wrong choice.

Dr Siddharth Shekhar Singh is an Associate Professor of Marketing and Director of the Fellow Programme in Management at the Indian School of Business. He can be reached at Siddharth_singh@isb.edu.