The Singur drama has finally come to a close with the exit of Tata Motors. It is now time for the ?what ifs? and the apportionment of blame. Ratan Tata has?with the graphic metaphor of Mamata Bannerjee pulling the trigger?identified the proximate cause of the death of the Nano venture at Singur. However, it would be an error to stop just here, without making an attempt to unfold the combination of forces that led to the final demise, lest wrong lessons be drawn from the Singur saga.

The business media and the chambers of commerce have been quick to paint the picture in terms of ?politicians versus progress?. This is both an incomplete and inaccurate characterisation. Firstly, no large business in India functions or can function without close contact with the politicos, so blaming politicians as a class is hardly fair. Most of today?s major business houses have prospered largely by manipulating the political system both during the license-permit raj as well as today?s SEZ-raj. ?Progress? is fine for politicians, as long as it serves their self-interest?just as it is for the business houses in India. No complaints, that?s how both capitalism and democracy are supposed to work, but let?s drop the ?above politics? pretensions of India Inc.

Now consider this. The Left Front has been in power for over a record three decades in West Bengal. Every public organisation, from the auto-rickshaw union to the professors association in Bengal is infiltrated and controlled by party cadres. The Big Brother?s hold on the legislative assembly as well as in local bodies is near-absolute. In this situation, if an opposition party can sustain a high-pitched campaign for close to two years, there must be genuine and serious grass-root discontent that fuels it. No amount of political manipulations can pull this off.

Which brings us to the next layer?farmers of Singur, at least the agitating ones, have been adequately compensated and do not know what is in their interest. Far away from the media glare on Singur, and perhaps drawing on the experience there, a referendum of sorts was recently held at Pen, Maharashtra for Mukesh Ambani?s proposed mega SEZ, about 70 times the size of Singur in investments. The SEZ proposal was defeated by participants from the 22 villages. So, it is not about just the Singur farmers. Nor is West Bengal the first state where the Tatas have found themselves ?unwanted?. Tata group projects have had to be scrapped on popular protests in several states like Tamil Nadu and Orissa. We, the armchair capitalists, may remain amazed at why farmers should be reluctant to move their home, hearth and livelihood when offered a few thousands more, but let?s face it?the ignorance is ours, not theirs.

It is this lack of understanding, together with complete arrogance that comes from the intoxication of continued power, and a serious underestimation of Mamata?s political abilities that led the Bengal government to embark on its high-handed path of acquisition at Singur, without consultation at the grass-root level and scoffing at all protests since 2006.

The Tatas have, correctly, pointed out the possibility of violence as the reason for their exit. Indeed violence has been the most sordid part of this story, not just the recent heckling of factory guards by protestors, but also that associated the use of Section 144 at Singur and the macabre rape and murder of a dissenter?s teenage daughter by CPM-sponsored goons.

The political fall-out of the Singur fracas is still uncertain. Buddhababu and the Left Front are sure to be among the losers?indeed the debacle is big enough to raise calls for the CM?s resignation within the party. As for Mamata, only time and elections can tell if her image as the crusader of farmers? rights will triumph over the label of a ?progress-blocker?. Mind you, the rural vote is still the defining factor in Bengal elections.

Politics apart, the Tata exit is indeed bad news for West Bengal, particularly for people at Singur?farmers, promoters, labour alike?who would be left high and dry after the media and politicians decamp in a few weeks. But it is, by no means, the end of the road for industrialisation in West Bengal. Particularly if the right lessons are drawn from this saga.

What are these lessons? For one, to industrialise the state, build infrastructure to connect the relatively barren West, where there is significant government land and it would be easier to acquire the remainder. Second, a deal with the government is no substitute for grass-root ?buy in? for such projects. The Salboni steel mills project by the Jindals stands testimony to both. Doubtless, all this is very bothersome for India Inc., but that?s the price we pay for living in a democracy.

?The author teaches finance at the Indian School of Business, Hyderabad