More than being an alternative political force, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) offered the possibility of an entirely new political order for India. It surged to prominence last year by riding a wave of popular frustration over endemic institutional corruption, recording surprisingly strong electoral results in Delhi. Given the great expectations invested in this new political project, could the AAP deliver on its promise? Sadly, the answer appears to be no.
AAP's founder Arvind Kejriwal resigned as chief minister of Delhi over the failure to have his anti-corruption bill (the Jan Lokpal Bill) introduced last Friday. By doing so, he not only let down the millions of people who voted him into government in the first place, but also demonstrated an apparent inability to handle the pressure of politics.
Mr Kejriwal has insisted that he resigned on principle. Nevertheless, it may be helpful to parse his decision. If the chief minister was serious about pushing through the bill, he simply had to get the requisite clearance from the lieutenant governor, Najeeb Jung, who would have surely found it difficult to halt a piece of legislation aimed at combating corruption. Was he in such a hurry to get things done that he could not wait for that moment?
One imagines that he surely could, which is why his decision increasingly appears to be a cold and calculated move. Many think that by resigning from office now, Mr Kejriwal frees himself to start campaigning across the country in the forthcoming national elections, where the AAP plans to field multiple candidates.
If so, this only brings Mr Kejriwal’s political deficiencies more sharply into focus, not the least of which being his difficulty making what would appear to be cogent decisions or to consult with those more experienced. By his actions – viewed by many as arrogant and even reckless – he has shown an apparent inability to understand the ramifications his decisions have on the “common man” who elected him.
If Mr Kejriwal sees a bigger political role for himself in the future, he might want to remember that no institution is sustainable if it abandons its aims as soon as it encounters its first obstacle. Politics is difficult, and idealism needs to be tempered with an appreciation of process.
