Modi charisma may not work in a coalition govt

The world eagerly awaits the results of India's month-long national election process. With results to be announced today, India could have a new prime minister and government in just a matter of days.
While no one can credibly predict the outcome of an Indian election, most polls and pundits seem certain that Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party will emerge with the largest bloc, thereby installing him as prime minister. From sources as varied as the Financial Times and the Economic Times, this prospect is being welcomed as the "jolt" that India needs.
Modi is being hailed as a saviour who will finally focus on economic restructuring and drive India's growth back up into the double digits. You can almost hear the sighs of relief coming from all corners as the government of Manmohan Singh limps meekly to a close.
The only trouble with this picture, though, is that Modi will certainly not be the saviour whom everyone assumes. In fact, no matter how much he wants to be, no matter how aggressive or pragmatic he strives to be, once in office, he simply cannot be. Not because of Modi himself or his policies, but because of how Indian politics has evolved over the past 25 years.
Absent from much of the political discussion surrounding the election has been the fact that India's next prime minster (whoever wins) may head a coalition government. To be sure, coalition governments in New Delhi have become so commonplace now that they are hardly newsworthy. The last prime minister to hold office based on one-party rule was Rajiv Gandhi in the late 1980s, before the BJP was even regarded a legitimate national contender.
Since then, India has seen a proliferation of regional parties that began at the state level and slowly gained prominence until they became power players on the national scene. This splintering of the political landscape has been a positive development in many respects. However, it has also come at significant cost to progress at the national level.
Ruling parties now find themselves dependent on smaller parties to maintain their coalitions, and thus to stay in power. Accordingly, their focus has inevitably shifted from enacting broad-based reforms to managing intracoalition politics and rivalries. As a result, staying in power now takes more energy (and precedence) than actually wielding power, a deeply unfortunate circumstance.
Returning to the current election, many predict that the Trinamool Congress and AKDMK of Tamil Nadu will be the third and fourth largest party in the next parliament, making TMC leader Mamata Banerjee (her alliance with Modi-led BJP looks distant possibility now but certainly it is not out of question yet)  and Jayalalithaa potential "kingmakers." As result, both of them are now being courted by both Congress and the BJP. Given such a dynamic, should Modi come to power reliant on the TMC or AKDMK, Mamata and Jayalalithaa would wield disproportionate influence.
As the Communists were to Congress on nuclear issues, so the TMC could be to the BJP on economic ones. For example, the TMC's election manifesto states directly that it opposes the removal of agricultural subsidies, the introduction of foreign direct investment, and the establishment of special economic zones. All of these are structural reforms that the economic community is hoping Modi will push through. But inside a coalition, if Modi and Mamata were to disagree on economic policy, is there any doubt which policy would eventually win out?
This is just one of many theoretical scenarios that could play out under a BJP-led government, but it highlights how Modi would not necessarily have the free rein that he and his supporters desire and proclaim. Even in victory, Modi will face a tricky balancing act and may not wish to upset things too much, especially early in his term.