The other Covid crisis — India caught between a charismatic PM and servile bureaucrats

The tragedy of the Indian leadership during the coronavirus pandemic is that we are caught between a ruler who rules through charisma and oratory and officials who excel in unaccountable obfuscation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s charisma continues to dominate during the Covid-19 crisis. But will he be able to negotiate the new challenges with his persona or transition into a rational-legal leader?

Sociologist Max Weber had said there are three types of authority — traditional, charismatic and legal (rational and dependent on modern law, state and bureaucracy).

The problem with the coronavirus is that charismatic leaders are not proving quite successful in controlling or dealing with it. Or at least they are no better than other leaders, in this regard. It seems that this pandemic is creating immense chaos and disruptions, and dealing with it requires corresponding robustness in organisational and bureaucratic structures.

A charismatic leader like Modi is no exception. The bureaucracy he has enlisted to manage the Covid-19 crisis lacks the rational-legal authority. No one knows how Modi selects officers for the PMO. They draw power and authority from the charisma of Modi and by being loyal to him. This may work fine in ordinary times. But in extraordinary times like a pandemic, the lack of rational-legal authority of the bureaucracy may lead to chaotic situations and disruptions.

A pandemic of this scale can’t be handled by servile paper-pushing bureaucrats with no stakes on the ground and who can’t talk back to Modi.

A better feedback system

Ever since the Covid-19 pandemic hit India, it has been clear that the bureaucratic structure Modi built over the years is not delivering or delivering only half-baked solutions. Sometimes, the bureaucracy is becoming part of the problem. Both the Centre and the states have so far given 4,147 orders on Covid-19 and the lockdown. Many of these orders are so confusing that the ministries have had to issue clarifications. Sometimes these clarifications have to be clarified again. The situation is so Kafka-esque that it is as if the entire population is going through The Trial and ending up like a dog, running for food, walking miles and miles, ending up being beaten and chased by police, hounded by fellow citizens.

This is more evident in the case of migrant labourers. The government did not even expect that millions of labourers will head home on foot or cycles after the lockdown. Perhaps, the Modi government assumed everyone would obey the lockdown orders as if it was another round of taalis and thaalis.

What would the scenario have been if Modi had also consulted the political class, instead of only bureaucrats, before taking such monumental decisions? Would it be a wise decision for Modi to form an all-party advisory group to deliberate on the Covid-19 crisis? We do not know for sure, but we may assume that politicians, by virtue of their profession, are connected to ground realities more than bureaucrats and would have provided the government better insight.

They might have advised that because India does not have enough Covid-19 testing kits, it will be an exercise in futility to go for a whole hog lockdown. Only containment and no testing is not going to help much. At least the political class and members of the opposition would have provided Modi contrarian views. Such exchange of ideas can also be achieved by having a bureaucracy that draws their legitimacy from rationality and the legal framework of the state. For such decision making, strong and robust mechanism of institutions is required. In that scenario, different institutions like the judiciary, Parliament, mass media, CAG, investigating agencies, different commissions and regulators and even civil society organisations would function in an autonomous and synchronised way. That would have created a Habermasian public sphere, where discussions related to public welfare can take place in a democratic manner.

Modi’s charisma

What does this mean for India? We are actually talking about and wishing for a charismatic leader with a rational-legal organisation.

Charismatic leaders are not known to have rational arrangements. Not because they cannot have such organisation and bureaucracy, not because they don’t want to, but because it will erode their charisma and he/she will not be an all-powerful omnipresent entity. That will be the end of the charismatic leader. Such metamorphosis will make him/her a rational-legal leader in the Weber sense.

In the past, Modi did not have any reason or purpose to shed his charismatic leadership. He has fought many battles and emerged victorious many times. He has not seen any great reversals in the last 20 years. Such a grand success rate has ossified Modi’s working style and his persona. Why he should go for catharsis when his charisma and working style keep on delivering desired results for him?

Will COVID-19 be such a big challenge that he will be forced to press the refresh button on his persona?

The author is the former managing editor of India Today Hindi magazine, and has authored books on media and sociology. Views are personal.

ThePrint is now on Telegram. For the best reports & opinion on politics, governance and more, subscribe to ThePrint on Telegram.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel.