原文：https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/05/25/the-modi-mystery/

穆迪之謎 The Modi Mystery #

Sumit Ganguly, Himanshu Jha, Rahul Mukherji

By many measures, Narendra Modi shouldn’t have won another term as prime minister. Based on leaked data, India’s unemployment rate is as high as 6.1. (Modi has refused to release the official figures.) An abrupt demonetization in 2016 took as much as 86 percent of all currency out of circulation, causing extraordinary hardship for the vast majority of the population. And a goods and services tax that the government haphazardly rolled out in 2017 wreaked havoc on small businesses.

納倫德拉·莫迪（Narendra Modi）的許多政策，使他不應該再連任總理一職。根據外流的資料顯示，印度的失業率高達 6.1%（但莫迪拒絕公布官方數字）。以及在2016年突然的廢鈔事件中，將近86%的貨幣失去流通能力，使絕大多數的民眾陷入困境。此外印度政府在2017年隨意開徵的貨物與服務稅（goods and services tax），亦對中小企業造成浩劫。

Yet citizens nevertheless voted in droves to given Modi another term—a victory made all the more remarkable by the fact that, in India, incumbent governments typically lose. In the absence of robust exit polling data, it is only possible to speculate about the reasons for this surprising electoral outcome. However, available data provides some useful clues.

然而選民仍然蜂擁地投票給予莫迪新的任期，使這次勝選結果備受關注，畢竟在印度通常現任政府都會敗選。而在沒有可信的出口民調數據下，此次令人驚訝的選舉結果原因，僅可能用猜測來推得。幸好現行的資料仍提供了部分有用的線索。

Before this year, turnout for most Indian national elections hovered around 60 percent or slightly less. On this occasion, turnout was as high as 67.11 percent of 900 million eligible voters. Of that, Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) garnered around 37.4 percent of the vote—better than its showing in the last national election—and won an absolute majority of seats in Parliament. In contrast, the main opposition party, the Indian National Congress, received a mere 19.5 percent of the votes. This marks its lowest showing in a national election in the last two decades.

往年以來，印度全國大選投票率，大多遊走在60%左右或更低。而這次的選舉投票率，在9億的選舉人中，則高達67.11%。在此之中，莫迪所在的印度人民黨（Bharatiya Janata Party, BJP），比起上一次的全國大選表現更好，獲得大約37.4%的選票，以及在國會中取得絕對多數的席次。反之主要的反對黨——印度國民大會黨（Indian National Congress），則僅取得19.5%選票。這是在過去二十年來中表現最差的一次。

These numbers point to a deft, but potentially dangerous, electoral strategy. Almost immediately after winning the election, Modi, in a nationally televised speech, made it abundantly clear that secularism as an idea had become irrelevant. During his campaign, Modi had tapped into anxieties among much of the population about illegal immigration, national security, and terrorism. By all appearances, it worked.

這些數字都指向一種靈活但具有潛在危險性的選舉策略。在勝選後，穆迪幾乎是立刻在一次全國性電視談話中，十分清楚地表明：世俗主義作為一種意識形態（secularism as an idea）已無足輕重。在這場選戰中，穆迪已對大多數的人民，喚起他們對於非法移民、國家安全以及恐怖主義的擔憂。並且從各種跡象看來，這的確有效。

For its part, the Congress party’s electoral strategy had three fatal flaws. First, it failed to proffer a viable alternative leader. Its choice, Rahul Gandhi, a member of the Nehru-Gandhi family, lacked political savvy and charisma. Second, the party had trouble forging a viable alliance with smaller regional parties that could have won it greater vote share. For example, the Congress party never joined hands with the Aam Aadmi Party in New Delhi, and it spurned opportunities to partner with the Samajwadi Party or the Bahujan Samaj Party in India’s most populous state, Uttar Pradesh. Finally, the party ignored two states, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, where it had enjoyed recent electoral successes and believed its standing was secure. It wasn’t—Congress faced an electoral rout in both states, as well as in New Delhi.

至於對印度國民大會黨而言，他的選舉策略則有三個致命缺陷。第一，他未能提供一個可選的領導人。他們派出一位欠缺政治歷練以及個人魅力的候選人——來自尼赫魯-甘地家族（Nehru-Gandhi family）的拉胡爾·甘地（Rahul Gandhi）。第二，該黨難以與較小的地方政黨組成可行的聯盟，即使這可以讓他們取得更多的票源。例如，他們從未與新德里的印度平民黨（Aam Aadmi Party）攜手合作，以及拒絕與印度最多人口的北方邦（Uttar Pradesh）中的印度社會黨（Samajwadi Party）或印度大眾社會黨（Bahujan Samaj Party）一同合作。最後，他們忽視了印度的兩個邦，拉賈斯坦邦（Rajasthan）以及中央邦（Madhya Pradesh），因為他們沈浸在該地區最近一次大選的成功，並且相信他們仍有著穩固地位。事實不然，國民大會黨在這兩個邦以及新德里，均遭遇選舉潰敗。

Beyond those failings, the Congress party failed to come up with a compelling answer to Modi’s brand of charisma, his skillful use of social media, and his nationalist appeals, which turned the tide against Congress’s vision of a pluralistic and secular India. Indian secularism, unlike the Western variant, has never required a strict separation between the state and religion. Instead it has been based on the principle of equal respect for all faiths.

除了上述缺陷外，對於穆迪以他的個人品牌魅力、熟練操作社群媒體以及其對於民族主義的呼籲，使他得以翻轉情勢對抗國民大會黨對於多元主義以及印度世俗化的觀點，但對此國民大會黨未能提出有力的回應。印度世俗主義（Indian secularism），不同於西方的世俗主義型態，它從不要求嚴格的政教分離（a strict separation between the state and religion）。相反的，它則基於平等尊重各種信仰之原則。

The BJP, however, reflects a very different understanding of the relationship between religion and the state. Under Modi’s tutelage, the party has come to embrace a parochial vision of Hinduism. In this vision, Muslims are considered only quasi-citizens, since they have putative homes in the Muslim-majority nations of Bangladesh and Pakistan.

可是印度人民黨，對於國家與宗教之間的關係，卻表現出一種奇特的認知。在穆迪的指導下，他們開始擁抱一種印度教的狹隘觀點。在這種觀點之中，穆斯林僅被視為準公民（quasi-citizens），因為他們具有以穆斯林為主的孟加拉以及巴基斯坦此種穆斯林國家，使他們在這些地方具有假定的家園。

Mohan Bhagwat, the head of the party’s ideological wing, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, has said citizens of India are, by definition, Hindu. And the BJP using an ordinance of the census, the National Register of Citizens, excluded significant numbers of minorities from the electoral rolls in the border state of Assam. Such moves are indicative of the BJP’s exclusionary national vision.

該黨的意識形態宗派國民志願服務團（Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh）負責人莫漢·巴格瓦特（Mohan Bhagwat）曾表示，根據定義，印度公民是印度教徒。此外印度人民黨現施行的人口普查法令，即國家公民登記處（National Register of Citizens），在邊境的阿薩姆邦（Assam）中的選舉名冊中，排除為數眾多的少數民族。這些舉動都顯露出該黨的排他性民族主義觀點。

Other episodes underscored the BJP’s anti-Muslim outlook as well. In February, a Kashmiri Muslim was implicated in a Pakistan-based terrorist attack on Pulwama in the Indian-controlled portion of Jammu and Kashmir. A number of vigilante attacks on Kashmiri Muslims in other parts of India followed. Modi maintained a deafening silence about these incidents.

其他事件也加深了該黨反穆斯的面貌。在二月時，一位喀什米爾穆斯林被捲入到恐怖攻擊事件當中，發生在巴基斯坦對印度控制的查謨-喀什米爾邦（Jammu and Kashmir）中普爾瓦馬地區。而隨後在印度其他地方，開始發生一些志願者對喀什米爾穆斯林的攻擊事件。而穆迪則對這些事件裝聾作啞保持沈默。

The BJP’s electoral strategy resonated with substantial portions of the electorate. For example, in the state of West Bengal, the BJP won as many as 18 seats. It took substantial support away from a dominant regional party, the All India Trinamool Congress, by hammering away at the issue of illegal immigration from Bangladesh. The Trinamool Congress had been mostly in denial about the vexing question of illegal immigration. Meanwhile, the Trinamool chief minister, Mamata Banerjee, did little to curb the activities of the more radical Muslim leaders within her party, some of whom are believed to have transnational Islamist ties.

該黨的選舉策略亦引起大部分選民的迴響。例如在西孟加拉邦（West Bengal），他們取得多達18個席次。他們藉由抨擊孟加拉非法移民問題，從當地具有優勢地位的地方政黨草根國大黨（All India Trinamool Congress），從中獲得大量支持。草根國大黨大多否認棘手的非法移民問題。同時，當地草根國大黨身份的首席部長瑪瑪塔·班納吉（Mamata Banerjee）幾乎沒有阻止黨內激進穆斯林領導人活動，他們當中一些人被認為具有跨國性伊斯蘭主義者關係（transnational Islamist ties）。

Over the next few years, with a majority in Parliament and facing a fractured opposition, the BJP may seek to institutionalize its vision of Hindu nationalism. Whether the Indian public embraces the BJP’s ideology will determine the fate of the country’s democracy, unless a new leadership emerges that might offer a pathway back to India’s commitment to pluralism.

後續幾年內，印度人民黨佔據國會多數以及面對分歧的反對派，他們可能會試著制度化他們對印度民族主義的觀點。但無論印度民眾是否接受該黨意識形態，這都將影響他們國家民主的命運，直到有一位或許能提出一條讓印度得以回到多元主義路線的新領袖出現。

練習翻譯，歡迎指正