It may seem like a controversial thing to say, but the future of internal security reform lies squarely with the constituency of the English speaking, affluent, upper, upper middle, and middle classes in India’s big cities — that is, we the elite: this columnist and his readers among others.

Some may say that the elite are a small minority and in an electoral democracy have little influence on political outcomes. That may indeed be the correct assumption while predicting electoral outcomes. A lot of us don’t even go to vote, judging by lower turnouts in urban areas. However, it isn’t the correct assumption when analysing the policy agenda of incumbent governments. We, the Indian elite, exercise extraordinary power in setting the agenda for governance, something we do not always realise. Some of this has to do with the economics of politics — some in the elite fund all major political parties. This obviously buys influence, some legitimate, some illegitimate. Then there is the sociological interaction between the elite and leading politicians and decision-makers, which lends us ears in government. Also, politicians in India are mostly from the upper middle classes, or if from other strata, aspire to reach there through politics. So there is a certain embededness of politics/governance in the elite. And then there are us in the English-language media, who often voice the opinions, and express the concerns, of our exclusive group.

If you don’t buy this at a hypothetical level, consider the best example of the power we have in shaping the political agenda — economic reform. A relatively small (at least electorally) coalition has pushed and sustained the agenda for economic reform over the last two decades without any obvious majority (of the voting population) backing the process. We have had every possible political formation governing at the Centre — Congress-led, BJP-led, Third Front — and yet economic policy has remained consistently reformist. Even if the process has slowed at times, even if governments have been voted out by a dissatisfied, silent majority, the reform process has never been reversed. It’s particularly ironical and indeed noteworthy that a controversial process like economic reform — more controversial one would think than internal security — has sustained itself through a period of deeply fractured and bitterly partisan politics. The elite constituency — all of us — has managed to unite a divided polity on at least this one issue. And arguably for the greater good. Can we now do the same for internal security reform? Perhaps, but first one must examine why such reform has never been on our wishlist, until perhaps now.

... contd.