Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery of Alamein (which is how he referred to himself, even on books he wrote) was a vain man. The soldier was a minor figure in the Second World War, pitted against a relatively small detachment of Germans in North Africa, while most of the fighting happened in Europe.
His actions and his importance were amplified by the fact that the real victors of the war, the Russians, shut themselves out from the Western world after 1945. This gave the opportunity to the allies, particularly the British, to make outlandish claims of their achievements, which were actually quite miniscule. But even those who know this, and have studied the war, accept that Montgomery had a quality which many other allied generals did not. This quality was “grip”.
Knowing what the situation was and having the capacity to move the forces under him in the way he wanted. You might think this is a fundamental quality, but it is surprising how many people even in the military lack it. Narendra Modi has this quality. Rahul Gandhi doesn’t. Nothing about the Congress suggests that Rahul (referring to him as Gandhi seems wrong) has any control over his troops or over the situation.
Mr Modi, on the other hand, has such grip that events he participates in rarely stray from the script. This is as true for the larger things, the manner in which he ran his superb campaign, as for the smaller ones, such as the handing over of power to his successor. It was done so flawlessly, and with such lack of friction that it could not be imagined how much jostling there had been for power just before.
Mr Modi brings the same quality to the Prime Minister’s Office. My complaint about him has been that he does not engage with issues intellectually. He does not read files, as he confessed in his interview to Madhu Kishwar, and depends on his officers to read out and summarise their contents. His exact words are that he cannot govern through academic studies. This is a flaw and we may pay for it dearly when it comes to complex issues such as strategic affairs. Such things are not understood in simple terms and cannot be approached with the sort of certitude Mr Modi has.
But even if this is so, it cannot be denied that the things Mr Modi is in charge of, he has great control over. If he wants something done in a particular way, that is how it will usually be executed, and that is what grip is. We could argue about what the Gujarat model is and how it affected the fortunes of Gujaratis, but we cannot argue about how much control Mr Modi exercised over his government. It was absolute.
What Mr Modi needs to be able to act in this way, which comes instinctively to him, is freedom. That he has received in ample measure by the clear mandate.
What we will see in his government will be the execution of high quality because of his grip and his insistence on control. Montgomery’s qualities helped reduce allied casualties in Africa. It is when he entered the theatre in Europe that his rigid insistence combined with his grip failed him and his Army. He sent his forces into Belgium with a bold paratrooper drop that did not anticipate the levels of resistance the Germans put up. The disaster visited upon Montgomery’s forces was depicted in the movie A Bridge Too Far.
Grip is a good thing and all leaders should have it. It is not, however, the only thing that is needed in the recipe for success.
Aakar Patel is a writer and columnist
