ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

World Cup, what?

One of the unhappiest memories of my life is of the time I spent in the United States when the football World Cup was going on. Americans had barely heard of the sport, meaning the television networks didn't broadcast the matches. Well, it is World Cup time again, and yet again I find myself in a sea of bored disinterest.

I would have expected that in the United States, where cricket is even more of a rarity than soccer. But lack of excitement in England, the birthplace of the game?

Just days before the World Cup starts, there are tickets going a begging even for matches where England is one of the competing teams. Frankly, I cannot imagine such a state of affairs in any other cricket-playing nation. So what was the hot topic in England?

There was some talk of royal weddings -- royalty both of the old-fashioned, blue-blooded type and of the sporting-singing variety. But the biggest cultural shock was that Britons were actually talking of politics rather than the World Cup.

That is quite a change from India where everybody is turning with immense relief from Sonia Gandhi's antics to the exploits (one hopes!) of Sachin Tendulkar.

We often speak of the United Kingdom as a paradigm of a two-party parliamentary democracy. But each of those once-sacred assumptions is being questioned anew. Is it still the United Kingdom -- or a collection of different nations called England, Scotland, Wales, and North Ireland?

Is it fair to describe it as a two-party system, when the Liberals consistently win roughly 20 per cent of the vote, a clear sign of dissatisfaction with Conservatives and Labour? Finally, is Westminster still a hallmark of parliamentary norms when most decisions are being taken by the cabinet and then rammed through both houses?

In India, all of us have got used to thinking of our country in terms of a union of states. But in the United Kingdom -- the very name indicates different territorial units that have come together -- the concept has been forgotten.

Wales and England were joined seven centuries ago, the Scottish legislature was merged in the beginning of the eighteenth century, and the Irish Parliament was abolished a hundred years later. Today, England -- larger and more prosperous than all the others put together -- is shocked to realise that Scottish, Welsh, and Irish nationalism are still alive.

Labour had promised to revive the Scottish and Welsh legislatures if it came to power. It has kept its word, but the results are surprising. The nationalists -- those advocating independence from England -- did remarkably well.

It has been a chastening experience for the Labour Party, still the largest party but one without an absolute majority. Labour's origins were in the mines of Wales and Scotland; it is humbling to realise that its hold is beginning to weaken.

To Indians, the results seem oddly familiar. The fractured mandate in Scotland means Labour is now negotiating with smaller parties to build a stable coalition. There are allegations of bribery and even of ''migratory birds'' who are willing to cross the floor.

Constitutional experts are pondering today over the ethics of pre- and post-poll alliances. Questions are being asked about who should be invited to form the government.

I remember there used to be a time when Englishmen lectured their former colonies on the proper methods of dealing with sub-nationalism. Labour members were particularly notorious for this. (Remember Robin Cookıs idiotic ramblings just last year?) Now, at least some of them are not so cocksure.

As Englishmen begin to come to terms with the fact that democracy is a terribly messy system, there could be some lessons for us as well. First, I think all of us need to realise that a single party cannot win an absolute majority; it needs to win power as part of a front.

If the people of tiny Scotland and Wales couldn't agree on a single party, how can India with all its diversity do so?

Second, in principle and in practice, pre-poll alliances tend to work better than anything cobbled up after the elections -- so it is a question of deciding which large party is best suited to run a coalition.

Right now, I think that is quite enough of politics. For the next five weeks or so, I propose to spend as much time as possible watching cricket. I still think the general election could have been held earlier, but the cricket-fan in me is rather thankful that nothing is coming between me and the World Cup!

T V R Shenoy