India is the world’s largest democracy and the US the most powerful. One is a parliamentary democracy and the other presidential. We have a Westminster democracy with a first-past-the-post electoral system. Unlike the British, our democracy is a Union of states, like the US.

There are both similarities and differences in the organisation and functioning of the Indian and US democracies. The French Revolution’s slogan, “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”, became the foundational base of democracy. Abraham Lincoln aptly described democracy as the rule of the people, by the people and for the people. Democracy in the West was born through violence — revolution in France, civil war in Britain and the War of Independence followed by a civil war in the US. India’s democracy was established on the basis of non-violence and peace.
There is a view that for a country of continental or sub-continental size, presidential democracy is better. There is greater stability and the government can last its full term, unless it is terminated by impeachment, health, death or resignation. A governments falls in a parliamentary democracy when it loses its majority in the Lower House. This can happen frequently, as we saw our coalition governments fall in quick succession in the 1990s. Our elections are prone to influence by the unhealthy vote-bank considerations of caste, creed and region. Direct elections for the head of government will be less prone to such influence in a nationwide or statewide electoral constituency.
Parliamentary constituencies in the UK are very small. A candidate can campaign from door to door incurring minimum expenditure. India and the US, have jumbo-size constituencies. Our parliamentary constituencies have more than a million voters. The number of voters in state Assembly constituencies runs into lakhs. A candidate for Parliament or a state Assembly cannot cover his/her entire constituency door to door. During the early years of Independence, elections were won in the name of Mahatma Gandhi and the freedom struggle. There was no viable opposition. Electoral expenses were minimal. This has now radically changed. Nowadays electoral expense runs into hundreds of crores. How does a candidate or a party raise such huge funds without resorting to corruption?
Unfortunately, electoral reforms, long overdue because they can reduce corruption in elections, are still pending. Even in the US there are reports of corruption due to jumbo-size electoral constituencies. The US presidential system provides a nice mix of democracy and competence. The President chooses his Cabinet both from non-political professionals and politicians with required ability, from across the political spectrum. The appointment of key officials, too, has to be so ratified. In India almost invariably ministers are appointed wholly on the basis of political considerations. There have been criminal charges, including murder, against some Union Cabinet ministers. Key senior officials, like the CBI director or Chief Vigilance Commissioner, get appointed more on the basis of political acceptability and loyalty, subverting governance. The US has one individual as both head of state and of government. We have three individuals — a ceremonial head of state plus de jure and de facto heads of government. Dynasticism is a grave malady undermining our democracy. It has spread from the ruling family to other political parties, except the BJP and the Left. Dynasticism is the antithesis of democracy. It promotes a feudal mindset, corruption, inefficiency, courtier culture and arrogance of power. It also promotes slave mentality reminiscent of the Darshania Brahmins during the Mughal period — they would not have their meal till they had a glimpse of Emperor Akbar in his balcony.

An independent judiciary providing justice is the hallmark of a functioning democracy. Our judiciary generally measures up to this requirement, as in the US. In the US, Supreme Court judges are appointed for the rest of their life, subject to impeachment, health and death. This ensures total impartiality. In India, judges can earn favours like gubernatorial assignment with perquisites and the comfort of Raj Bhavan. Soon after Independence, a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, Sir Fazle Ali, was appointed governor of Assam. This later became a fairly common practice. Subsequently, former judges serving as governor have been arbitrarily removed with change of governments. Our judiciary is the most respected institution in the eyes of our people. However, delay in dispensing justice and the huge expense involved in seeking justice, torments the people.
Unlike the professionalism and neutrality of the bureaucracy in the US, Indian democracy gets compromised due to rank political nepotism, extension of service and immediate re-employment after retirement. In the US, a two year cooling period is prescribed for retiring bureaucrats before re-employment by the government.
The Indian police has become the handmaiden of the ruling political party and an active partner in its shenanigans. Repeated judgments of the Supreme Court on police reforms are ignored or bypassed. Corruption has peaked in the police. It continues with atrocities that were common during colonial rule and still are in dictatorships. The Delhi police lathicharged supporters of Baba Ramdev sleeping at the Ramlila Grounds. As a result a lady died. The Supreme Court passed strictures but they were ignored. The Delhi police again brutally lathicharged the young, peaceful students protesting the brutal and barbaric gangrape incident in New Delhi. The Chief Justice of India lamented, “I wish I had also been there but I can’t.” His nephew was beaten up. Could there be a greater indictment of the Delhi police? Could this have been allowed to happen in the US?
Like the US military, the Indian military is highly professional, disciplined and apolitical. However it is ignored for strategic planning. Six out of 23 national security advisers in the US have been military officers; in India no military officer has been so appointed. This has been the preserve of civil servants and intelligence officers. Supremacy of the civil over the military is duly accepted both in the US and in India. A legendary general like Douglas MacArthur and a successful one like Gen. Stanley McChrystal were sacked within hours of criticising their government’s policy. In India, Gen. V.K. Singh was allowed to give press interviews and appear on TV channels for months advocating his personal case. He even went to the Supreme Court seeking redress against the government’s decision. This made a mockery of Army discipline.
John Kenneth Galbraith, John F. Kennedy’s ambassador to India, described Indian democracy as a functioning anarchy. We must immediately set our house in order or run the risk of becoming a failed democracy.

The author, a retired lieutenant-general, was Vice-Chief of Army Staff and has served as governor of Assam and Jammu and Kashmir