There is intense irony in the claims made on Gujarat?s economic performance by the state?s chief minister, Narendra Modi, in an exclusive interview to this newspaper. As is his wont, he takes direct credit for the economic development of Gujarat during his phase of governance, which began in October 2001. The state domestic product, he boasts, is now running in double digits?over 10% is his cited figure?for the first time, and industrial and construction activity are at a peak. Even without examining the state?s financials, visitors to Gujarat would be able to corroborate his account of the new infrastructure (the roads are markedly better, for example), and businessmen would agree that business conditions have improved. The state?s emphasis on special economic zones and enhanced power generation, as also its initiative on private ports, have been extolled from many a business platform. Whether one looks at the statistics or bustling shops, the economic scorecard of Gujarat is indeed impressive.
It is not that simple, however. In a place where business has been mostly ?freed??in itself a controversial provision in Gujarat?s case for its identity-based selectivity?from state dependence, the credit for any economic surge must surely go to its entrepreneurs and their own business acumen, and not to the state. Gujarat, India?s main entrepot before Bombay and Calcutta attained ascendancy under the British Raj, has always had a vibrant trading culture and zest for entrepreneurship. Given that India?s economic reforms have unshackled these latent energies, and interest rates have fallen sharply since 2001, it is hardly a surprise that Gujarat has been a major beneficiary. There is a good chance that this would have been so under any other chief minister. What makes Modi?s governance of the state stand out so starkly is his role in the bloody anti-minority pogrom of 2002, which he shall never be able to live down, regardless of the state?s growth rate. This event is related to the economy to the extent that the carnage involved the targeted devastation of livelihood sources and business assets belonging to ?the other? (rivals). The fundamental right to life and livelihood/business freedom, it would thus seem, is only selectively protected by the state apparatus. The theory that economic growth secularises social faultlines has been severely tested in Gujarat. It now faces the electoral test.