Congress Dilemma: Neither Ekla Chalo, Nor Whole Heartedly
In Coalition
Saeed Naqvi
By announcing
her own candidature from Rae Bareli, has Sonia Gandhi grounded Priyanka Gandhi
quite as abruptly as she had taken off? Or, is it a function of post Pulwama
demoralization that is causing the leadership to scale down aspirations? Is the
Robert Vadra investigations beginning to tell?
Pulwama or no
Pulwama, my impression is that the Congress was never in the fight full
throttle. Basically the Congress is all at sea, balancing its self-interest against
the larger interest – that of the coalition and the nation.
The Congress President
is failing Guru Dronacharya’s fish eye test. Unlike Arjuna who focused on the
fish eye, Rahul is scattering his vision. He is not focusing on the only target
the coalition had set for itself – the removal of Narendra Modi. Rahul’s
cohorts have burdened him with the task of ensuring Congress gains while waging
battle with the coalition against Modi. Sonia Gandhi and Priyanka are even more
direct: they would go flat out if, at the end of the day, the Prime Ministerial
crown were Rahul’s and not someone else’s.
Coalition partners
would exert every muscle in the regions of their strength for a unified
gameplan. But they will not buy into any guarantees for the Congress. Balance of
forces, after votes have been counted, must determine the next phase. Surely,
Congress numbers will matter. But bereft of a coherent leadership, the party is
creating confusion by pulling its horses in UP, Delhi and West Bengal. It is
not focused on the eye of the fish; it is contemplating its navel.
Rahul has been
as aggressive as he can be on Rafael and “chowkidar chor hai”, the watchman
(Modi) is a thief, and so on! But he would be out of character to take on Modi’s
gangster vocabulary, snarling at Pakistan to summon up the nation’s blood. Mamata
Banerjee, unlike Rahul, can be a street fighter, a fiery Durga when required. She
raised issues of security lapse at Pulwama. How did hundreds of kgs of RDX
reach a misguided 20 year old in a state saturated with surveillance? Above all,
the lies about numbers killed at Balakot. The world media, taken to the spot,
has reported zero casualties.
Last week
party enthusiasts were putting together a meeting at Delhi’s Ram Lila maidan
where all the coalition leaders will raise the issues Mamata has been dwelling
on. The platform might provide Priyanka another occasion to jump-start her campaign.
Someone at the meeting produced a Washington Post headline: “After Pulwama, The
Indian Media Proves It Is The BJP’s Propaganda Machine”. This prompted another
suggestion: which party is capable of mobilizing “Demonstrations for Truth” outside
media establishments?
By a singular
lack of leadership, is Rahul helping Narendra Modi once again? The state units
of the Congress are being allowed to get away with their caprice, provided they
throw a ginger fit. Exactly as Sheila Dikshit has done in Delhi.
In Congress
culture, regional leaders were always cut down to size. Is Sheila Dikshit in
the process of reversing the trend? Is she cutting the leadership down to size?
Congress will come third in all seven seats, if that indeed is what she wants
in Delhi. Is she piqued that AAP has fielded its strongest candidate, Atishi
Marlena, the education whiz kid, from East Delhi which Sheila’s son, Sandeep
Dikshit, had been salivating on?
Since it is
universally accepted by folks in the Congress that results in Delhi are not
likely to flatter, why is this adventure being permitted? Because Dikshit has
been able to persuade Sonia Gandhi, Rahul and Priyanka that for the party to
“revive” it cannot afford to be a cypher in the capital city? In brief, defeating
Narendra Modi has been deprioritized. Not for the first time, the Congress is
thinking “long term”, exactly as it thought in 2013-14. In April 2013, Rahul
told the Confederation of Indian Industry that he would first build grassroots
democracy in the party. Remember, Election Commissioner K.J. Rao was brought in
to set up a system of primaries?
The muddled
thinking on show today was available then too. The then party General
Secretary, Janardan Dwivedi, volunteered the thought just before the 2014
elections that the Congress should have occupied the opposition benches after
the 2009 elections. What kind of thinking did the statement represent? Since
1991, the Congress had never won more seats than the 209 seats it won in 2009.
Why should it then have sat on opposition benches? Because the party had not
won an absolute majority. Dwivedi was trying to place a premium on “ahuti”
(sacrifice) which he persuaded Rahul was the trick for absolute majority.
In other
words, had the Congress shunned power because it was short of numbers, the
electorate would have rewarded the party with an absolute majority in 2014.
Full marks for Dwivedi’s electoral anticipation. Congress won 44 seats, a tally
so low that it would require courage of a very high order to even dream of meaningful
revival. At the moment the Congress is neither ekla-chalo, nor whole heartedly in
the coalition, but in between, clearly not the posture of potential victors.
If in Delhi it
was Sheila Dikshit’s soaring vision to be accommodated, in Kolkata, CPM General
Secretary Sitaram Yechury’s yen to rediscover Jyoti Basu’s golden period for
the Left is being indulged. Mamata, focused on the fish-eye, has been quite
sporting about the combine. By remaining in play, the Congress may cushion some
anti-incumbency vote which may have drifted towards the BJP. She is politically
sound.
The Congress
understanding of Mayawati in UP deserves to be spelt out. “With the Enforcement
Directorate constantly hovering over her, there is no certainty on her future behavior.”
By placing its
money both ways in three states the Congress may well have forfeited some of
its claim, should the cookie crumble the coalition’s way after the vote is
counted.
# # # #
No comments:
Post a Comment