Apparently US President Barack Obama has gone a little overboard in praising Indian Premier Narendra Modi for making it to Time magazine’s list of 100 most influential people for this year. Modi has yet to complete a year in office as India’s prime minister. There is no major development to his credit. What exactly prompted Obama to call him “India reformer-in-chief” remains a mystery?
It is not without reason that Modi tweeted thanks to Obama, expressing that his words for him were “touching” and “inspiring.”
The hype raised about Obama’s appreciation for Modi in Indian circles prompts deliberation on how well does the former really knows the latter? True, Obama was the first US president to visit India as chief guest on the country’s Republic Day celebrations.
Earlier, while receiving him at the airport, Modi exceeded his diplomatic code of ethics by giving him literally a bear hug. Later, during one-on-one talks Modi poured tea for Obama. Would it be fair to assume that the US president reciprocated the gesture by writing 166 words of appreciation for him?
As a matter of fact, Obama commented on Modi because he was asked by Time magazine to do so. The magazine apparently asked Obama to write note on Modi, as he also rose to the top after facing hardships during early part of his life. Not surprisingly, Obama’s note on Modi begins with how he began in life by helping his father at a teashop. Modi’s rise, according to Obama, reflects the dynamism and potential of India’s rise. Does it really?
However, in India people don’t feel much inspired by their own premier mainly due to his dark communal past and the Gujarat pogrom during his tenure as the state chief minister. Truth be told, Modi has yet to achieve something significant to stand tall in the Indian political arena and to help people forget about his communal politics of the past.
Not surprisingly, political and media pundits are questioning as to why Modi has been labeled as the reformer-in-chief. They view Modi as a “de-reformer.”
Obama’s praising comments are beyond comprehension and mean little to the majority of Indian’s poverty-stricken and illiterate population. Besides, while using his pen, Obama apparently gave little importance to the impact that his words might have in India. Perhaps, the US president wanted to woo the Indian-American voters.
Statistics show that the population of Indian-Americans has increased by 76 percent, from 1.9 million to 3.34 million during the first 12 years of the 21st century. Indian-Americans constitute the third largest Asian-American group in the US, with Chinese-Americans (4.1 million) ranking first and Filipino-Americans (3.59 million) the second. Between 1990 and 2000, the Indian population in the US grew by 130 percent, 10 times the national average of 13 percent, according to US Census Bureau.
Of greater electoral significance is the political fact that voting age population of Indian-Americans has crossed one million. It increased by 100 percent from 2000, when it was 576,000 to 1.15 million in 2010. Though Indian-Americans comprise less than a percentage of population in the United States, during elections, even swing of a few hundred votes can change the result.
Obama is well aware of the popularity Modi enjoys among Indian-Americans. However, at this point it would be difficult to ascertain whether Obama’s indulgence in this Machiavellian-strategy, where ends justify the means, will help his party or not.
