Delhi's farcical crisis

No politician emerges unsullied while commoners suffer

The whole of India is transfixed by happenings in Delhi, which threaten to reconfigure political equations and even those between politicians and bureaucrats all over the country. It is an unedifying spectacle. Arvind Kejriwal, the chief minister of Delhi, has claimed that the state's bureaucrats are not allowing the government to function, and is leading a sit-in at the premises of Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal in protest. Civil servants hotly contest this charge, and have taken to social media to combat it — they have even held a press conference to cast doubts on Mr Kejriwal’s claims. Many Opposition leaders see this as a federalism-related issue but Mr Baijal has denied four chief ministers a meeting with Mr Kejriwal. Meanwhile, questions are being asked about the Congress' position in all this — has it forfeited leadership of an Opposition front in order to weaken Mr Kejriwal's position in the former Congress bastion of Delhi? Even the courts have become involved — they have been forced to remind a chief minister that he cannot hold a strike in someone else's house. 

This problem has been bubbling under the surface for some time before reaching this farcical turn. By some telling, the situation took a turn for the worse after a mysterious and disputed midnight meeting between Delhi's top bureaucrat and the state's political leadership, after which the state’s chief secretary complained he had been assaulted. In response, bureaucrats have been going slow with work and meetings, claiming concern over their personal security. The chief minister has clearly not done enough to reassure them. On the other hand, a deeper analysis of the dynamics at play in Delhi does support a view that the bureaucrats are being used as unwilling or willing pawns of the central government.  

Nobody thus emerges clean from this muck. In some ways, it is the bureaucrats who have done worse, for they have the most to lose. A signal that the all-India services are not at the service of the elected leader of their state would be very dangerous for stable governance and for the future of the services themselves. Mr Kejriwal, meanwhile, has clearly not managed to move beyond his penchant for headline-grabbing crises. The impression has been created that he would prefer to make political hay from a confrontation than seek a via media with his opponents that would be in the best interest of the citizens of Delhi. Finally, the Centre must be held to account for not doing anything to resolve the problem faced by the legitimate government of Delhi. This is why the other state chief ministers are feeling concerned. 

Cooler heads must prevail. The Centre has to take the lead in breaking the deadlock between its nominee and the elected Delhi leadership. Mr Kejriwal meanwhile, must recognise that the question of full statehood for Delhi is a fraught one with no simple answers, and a way forward must emerge through diplomacy and negotiation with political opponents. Finally, the bureaucrats must spell out reasonable assurances they need — and return to regular work.