Why PM Narendra Modi Remains Silent on Lalit Modi Brawl: A Strategy or Indifference?

In the fast-paced world of Indian politics, the silence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the Lalit Modi brawl seems to be more than mere omission. While it's tempting to interpret this silence as a strategic move, considering the public's short memory and the potential for media interest to wane in a few weeks, it's also crucial to delve deeper into the dynamics at play.

The Time-Buying Strategy

Given that the public's attention span is notoriously short, the media's focus is likely to dwindle in a matter of weeks. In a context where high-profile controversies like the one involving Lalit Modi can quickly fade from public consciousness, this silence could be seen as a strategic move. However, it's imperative to ask: is it merely a time-buying strategy, or does it indicate a deeper calculation?

Media and Public Perception

It's essential to recognize that in any self-aware society, it would be impossible for Modi to declare his female ministers innocent of corruption crimes while simultaneously justifying the actions of his own Ministry of Finance against Lalit Modi. This political calculus means that any statement on the innocence of the female ministers would inevitably provoke questions about the Ministry of Finance's own actions. In Indian journalism, it's highly probable that any counter-question would be met with swift retaliation from Modi.

Alleviating Controversy or Indifference?

The saying, “the dogs bark but the caravan keeps on,” aptly captures the essence of the current situation. Despite the ongoing controversy, it's clear that there are numerous pressing issues the government needs to address. The media and opposition play a critical role in criticizing the government, pulling down Modi's leg, as they see it. However, this relentless scrutiny is a double-edged sword. When it comes to Modi, even silence can be seen as a form of criticism.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Modi speaks on the controversy, distancing himself and his government from it, the media and opposition will likely interpret this as a sign of his susceptibility to controversies. This, as Manoj Bajpayee once stated in Rajneeti, mirrors the political strategy of keeping the dead alive to raise them again at the opportune moment. Here, the opposition will be waiting to excavate another controversy and force Modi to respond, ensuring constant scrutiny rather than allowing the government to focus on welfare initiatives.

The Consequences of Speaking or Not Speaking

The silence, or any statement on this issue, will come with significant consequences. Speaking about Lalit Modi would mean that Modi will be bound to address all forthcoming controversies. This would essentially mean that the government might spend more time defending itself than tackling pressing issues that require immediate attention. The irony is that even the presence of a dead mosquito in the Prime Minister's official residence serves as a metaphor for the ongoing scrutiny, where any silence is interpreted as a sign of guilt or evasion.

The question remains: is PM Modi's silence a strategic move or an indication of indifference? The answer lies in the ongoing balance between public scrutiny, media influence, and the government's ability to manage its image effectively.

Conclusion

The dynamics of political controversy in India are complex, and the silent treatment of such high-profile issues as the Lalit Modi brawl is no exception. Whether Modi remains silent or chooses to speak, the impact on his government's image and effectiveness will undoubtedly be significant. As the saying goes, "the caravan keeps on," and so will the scrutiny, until the next controversy rises.