Opposition parties monitoring and protesting the mistakes of the government constitutes the very essence of democracy. It should be acceptable even if in the process occasionally there is some exaggeration. At the same time care should be taken not to allow the gulf between the government and the opposition to become too wide, to reach a point of no return, to create a highly undesirable and harmful situation in which it is not possible to create a consensus or cooperation even on matters of urgent national interest. The responsibility of not allowing the gulf to become so wide as to be harmful to the wider national interest rests with both the opposition parties and the government, but the higher responsibility lies with the stronger side, the ruling one. We only have to look next door to realize how much a country can suffer, how much the national interests can be harmed if this gulf between the government and the opposition becomes too wide. This can be seen from the example of Bangladesh, a country which has several credible achievements but has faltered in this respect.

This can also be seen increasingly in Pakistan. India must avoid this path. India has a very healthy past in this context from which we can still learn much. Jawaharlal Nehru won his elections with big margins and the ruling party – the Indian National Congress was very strong. But Nehru was generally tolerant of the criticism of opposition parties and leaders, even feeling happy when some new opposition leaders showed exceptional eloquence or oratorical skills in Parliament (as in the case of the young Jana Sangh MP Atal Bihari Vajpayee). The opposition often managed to punch above its weight, which was good for democracy as they did not have adequate numbers in Parliament. Strong critics like Ram Manohar Lohia could sometimes be more bitter against Nehru than was warranted, and less mindful of his many virtues, but Nehru could not think of being vindictive towards such opposition leaders.

He recognized Lohia as a leader of many-sided abilities and let the matter rest there. On the other hand, when Nehru died a shattered man, some of the most touching, heartfelt tributes came from opposition leaders, among them Vajpayee. When India faced its toughest post-independence challenge in the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1970- 71, on the whole there was significant support from the opposition, although the Jan Sangh initially made the mistake of exerting pressure for very early action before our armed forces were ready for it, as communicated clearly by the brilliant General Sam Manekshaw.

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi did well to resist this pressure, while at the same time trying to create broad national consensus. Senior national leaders like Jayaprakash Narayan contributed significantly to India’s already strong moral strength before the international community. This national consensus and strong support helped Mrs. Gandhi and her close colleagues to achieve India’s biggest success in the post-independence period in a war which can be genuinely credited with saving several hundred thousand human lives in the then East Pakistan. As this success was achieved, one of the most eloquent tributes to the Prime Minister was paid by an opposition leader – Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Unfortunately, these healthy traditions were disrupted very badly during the emergency which lasted for less than two years. On the whole India has rich traditions of opposition and the government cooperation for wider national interest. In more recent times India has moved away from this healthy trend. The gulf between the government and several opposition parties has been increasing rapidly and has already become too wide. It is time to warn – no further. This is urgently needed to ensure that we do not reach a point of no return. With responsibility on both parts, it is still possible to step back and avoid the danger zone.

Both sides have made mistakes, but clearly the greater responsibility lies with the more powerful side, the ruling one. It was clearly a mistake for some senior leaders of the BJP to give the slogan of ‘Congress Mukt Bharat’ or a country entirely devoid of the leading opposition party. When a strong opposition is regarded widely to be so important for the health of democracy, how could senior leaders of the ruling party voice such a slogan and encourage its spread? What is more, this was followed by some equally objectionable remarks against not just the present Congress leaders but even against the rich Nehruvian legacy. On its part the Congress should have been more appreciative of the efforts of the Modi Government in particular its ability to protect India’s critical interests in the difficult situations created by the worsening Ukraine crisis. These have been sensitive times of big challenges for our diplomats and on the whole, they have performed creditably in protecting national interests in some important contexts. There should be a more balanced outlook towards the Congress as well as other opposition parties on the part of the ruling party and the opposition parties should respond to this in equal measure.

It is highly desirable that efforts to create some sort of a national consensus are made with continuity on issues like foreign policy and maintaining inter-faith harmony. Even sections of the ruling party have started realising that some corrective action on the second aspect is urgently needed, and if the government shows signs of this, the opposition should support and encourage it. Another step forward for the ruling side would be to stop taking vindictive actions against its political opponents. Anti-corruption actions are most welcome, but these should not be colored by political bias, sparing some and targeting others. The approaching 75th anniversary of Independence can be a good time to initiate some action for a better political climate and make a new beginning.