By Col Mukesh Pokhriyal (Retd)
In a multipolar world, where India aspires to be a force to reckon with, the demand for ethical and capable leadership has never been greater. And yet, the erstwhile UP hills that came into being as the state of Uttarakhand on 9 November 2000, prized for its integrity and spirituality, has largely overlooked the structural development of its politics.
The new year has rung in the Silver Jubilee Year of the state. A look at the past twenty-five years causes numerous questions to abound in the mind! The pertinent one is, whether the complex woven tapestry of politics and governance has delivered what aligns with the aspirations of the masses, or the concoction itself has been threatened and tarnished by nepotism, corruption and inefficient leadership. Has the politics of the state been able to bridge the gap between the state and its citizens ensuring governance is more inclusive and transparent? Are the sons of the soil politicians equipped to handle a complexity that transcends traditional governance paradigms? Do our state’s politicians inspire confidence amongst the informed masses?
The twenty-five years of the state’s political history suggests something very depressing though! Instead of socially conscious leaders, community organisers dedicated to the cause of addressing the persistent challenges of caste based politics, growing social-economic divides, health and education, leaders requiring a nuanced understanding of public administration and emerging global issues such as climate change and technological disruptions, the state gave birth to Political Opportunists!
Political opportunism has been the trademark politics of the state. The major part of these twenty-five years have gone by in maximizing political influence at any cost, compromising principles for power and exploiting situations for personal gain. The political malnourishment of the state was evident in the first two years of statehood itself, when the newborn state was left like a rudderless ship. What followed in the subsequent years was a political conundrum, marked by series of on camera/off camera stings, intrigues and conspiracies – the damning tales of one-upmanship.
The citizens of the state, with an infantry doggedness did everything under their command to strengthen the democratic institution of the state by electing an absolute majority government, with a hope of stable, effective and progressive governance, but in vain. It is the irony of the times, that the state had to see three CMs in a span of five years and, overall, thirteen CMs in twenty-five years of statehood! The political harakiri has failed the citizens, so far.
This gets us to the next echelon of redressals – how best can we, the citizens and the politicians, treat this political malignancy in the state? It calls for a two-pronged strategy. One at the level of RSS in consultation with diverse commoners across the state. The other through the institutional mechanism, recognising the need to equip the politicians with skills necessary for governance. And that requires political education in the country, more so, for infant politicians of a newborn state.
