By Atul Cowshish New Delhi (Syndicate Features): Despite fairly regular if somewhat abridged reports in the Indian media on the pyrotechnics on display in the US for the party nominations in the Presidential race, most Indians seem to have only a limited interest in the ‘heats’ before the actual thing this coming autumn. Arguably, Hillary Clinton’s presence in the race is a matter of some interest in India. Though it may not be very accurate, most Indians are led to believe that the Clintons, Hillary and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, are quite fond of India. In the US, the Clintons do appear to be the favourite of many rich and influential Americans of Indian origin who support them and their Democratic Party with hefty cash donations that raise some eyebrows.
Much to the disappointment of many Indians her chances of winning her party’s nomination receded every passing day. Most Indians are not sure if Barack Obama, the man who is likely to win the Democratic nomination, reacts to India the way she does.
But there is something else that arouses some interest in India. It is something that both intrigues and fascinates many Indians. No, it has nothing to do with the fact that the eight-year-old Bush era, marred by controversies but also notable for significantly upgrading Indo-US relations, is about to end.
The interest in India centres round the contest within the Democrats and the intense manner in which the two main aspirants of the party have fought each other. Even a cursory interest in the process of selection of the Democratic Party candidate will suggest that neither candidate has hesitated from adopting ‘dirty tricks’ in their campaigns. But then the department of ‘dirty tricks’ has become a distasteful yet a somewhat essential part of politics in both the world’s oldest and the largest democracies.
What may be baffling politicians here is that unlike India there is no inevitability of a permanent scar from all the tons of muck that is thrown at each other by party colleagues in the US. If Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were India politicians the way they have fought each other during their nomination campaign would have meant that they end up being eternal enemies, with the possibility that the loser quits the party to join a rival camp or start his own political venture.
The sparring within the Democratic camp has led some sceptics to fear that the war between Clinton and Obama could end in wasting an easy opportunity to defeat the Republican in the race for the White House. But that kind of consequence is more likely in India where politicians are totally blinded by rage and mutual dislike than the US where politicians are more careful in safeguarding the interests of their party.
Take the talk of Clinton and Obama working as a team, post the Presidential poll. It will seem incredible in India that Democrats can float the idea of Clinton and Obama quickly erasing the memories of their bitter fight and form a composite team, one as President and the other as the Vice President.
Maybe, there is a tendency in the US to forget political rancour quicker than is true of India. It may have something to do with the question of ‘internal democracy’. Political parties in democratic India are peculiarly allergic to encouraging any form of internal democracy that calls for genuine intra-party contests—usually dubious ‘unanimous’ selections eliminate the need for polls.
In the rare event of an internal poll, the two rivals cannot be expected to stay as friends. The loser will be overcome by a long lasting bitterness that, however, can dissolve in a jiffy if loser somehow finds himself or herself back in the mother party.
Clinton and Obama may not have been friends and may stay that way but there is no current indication or past precedent to suggest that one of them, the one who loses the party nomination, will quit the party in a trail of bitterness and wailing. On the other hand chances are that the loser will work for the victory of the party nominee with sincerity. In India, the loser, if still in the party, will certainly try to internally sabotage the winning chances of the candidate who has defeated him/ her.
Consider some of the ‘issues’, allegations, innuendoes and insinuation heard in the campaign of the two stalwarts of the Democratic Party. The soft underbelly of mighty America was exposed right at the beginning of the campaign when whispers began to float about the Americans’ discomfort at having to choose between a coloured and a female candidate as President. This was something like the right wing in India having to choose between a Muslim and a Christian (especially a Catholic of Italian origin!) candidate for prime ministership. The discomfort in India might even force a change of the candidates. In the US, there is now no escape from choosing either a coloured or a woman President.
Both Clinton and Obama have faced attacks of personal nature, relating to their beliefs, the sources of their funds, their ability to lead the nation and so on. Clinton has been accused of being more aggressive of the two in her campaign. The Obama camp thought one way to halt her would be to expose the ‘skeletons’ in her cupboard, especially the extent of her wealth.
Obama was deeply embarrassed when his pastor of over 20 years, Rev Jeremiah Wright, was shown as somewhat racist in belief, airing views that could only help spread hate. Obama also had to live with the allegation of his association with a Chicago property dealer who is being tried on corruption charges.
Hillary Clinton was accused of working to fulfil her husband’s alleged wish of a further lease on the White House while Obama’s ability to handle sensitive national security issues has often come into question. A question directed at him was how he will react if there was an emergency security call at the White House at 3 a.m.
None of these questions are likely to weigh with the voters who will elect the next President of the United States. In India, any of these issues would have severely affected the chances of the candidate; perhaps the candidate would have been forced to retire from the contest.
With the two Democratic aspirants being in near tie it is not surprising to see them engage in an endless brawl. Their tactics have been denounced as negative and unethical. But at the end of the day, when it comes to crunch, there is no doubt that the Democratic Party will expect both of them join for a common cause—the end of the Republican era at the White House.
Politics in the US may have an ugly side, but at least it is not as fragile as in India where ‘non-issues’ often decide the fate of politicians. (Syndicate Features)
