So, it's quite clear that the story of Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi sulking was a set up to prepare the ground for his elevation in the party. Indirectly supporting the story, senior leader Digvijaya Singh, who almost always speaks for Rahul, had said that the latter was upset that his plans for a leadership transformation in the party were met with resistance. It appeared that Rahul was fighting a lonely battle for fostering internal democracy and Sonia Gandhi and the old guard weren't paying heed.
The reality, as it turned out by Friday, is that Rahul was not sulking and is really on "leave" because preparations are underway for his ascension to the top post in the party. The Economic Times reported that the forthcoming AICC session in Bangalore will be where the prince will become the king. The dynasty will go on. It doesn't matter that Rahul is "reflecting" away from Delhi, where he was expected to lead a protest against Modi government's changes to the Land Acquisition Act, which in fact was his baby.
Rahul Gandhi in a file photo. PTI
Rahul's leave of absence in apparent protest and the subsequent indications that he will soon be the president of the party smacks of the working of the dynasty. Except in Rajiv Gandhi's case, there had always been some drama, mostly staged by the loyalists of the times, for the smooth transfer of power to the next generation within the Gandhi family. In 1966, loyalists led by Kamaraj chose Indira Gandhi as the Congress Parliamentary Party leader over senior leader Morarji Desai when the then Congress Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri suddenly died.
In 1998, a similar operation by leaders such as Madhav Rao Scindia, ND Tiwari and Rajesh Pilot brought an apparently reluctant Sonia Gandhi into the leadership when the party's prospects were nose-diving. She went on to become the longest serving president of the Congress although she never became the prime minister.
The Congress is in doldrums yet again and the present clique of loyalists wants the next generation of the dynasty to take over. Seemingly, Digvijaya Singh is the visible face of the pro-Rahul chorus and he will surely succeed. As in the case of Indira Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi, there will be dissent and it will be ticked off. Indira's control of the Congress had led to a split in the party and Sonia's rise to leadership saw the exit of senior leaders such as Sharad Pawar.
Sonia's reluctance to come to the party’s rescue after Rajiv's assassination was perhaps the best opportunity for the Congress to democratise the party and end its reliance on the dynasty. After Rajiv's death, the party did persist with leaders such as PV Narasimha Rao and Sitaram Kesri, but when its fortunes tumbled, its elite leaders became nervous and fell at Sonia's feet.
Had Sonia truly believed in democracy and the future of the Congress, as she pretends to be, she could have spearheaded the transformation of the party. She could have begun the process of democratisation and slowly dismantled the "high command" that centralised all powers, including the decision of district level leaders, in Delhi or rather within the family. During her four terms, she could have encouraged a new breed of leaders, decentralised the party and allowed bottom-up internal democracy to flourish.
Instead, under her, the party became more dynastic, sold only on the charisma of the Gandhis, and more centralised. More over, for absolute control, she brought in a strange diarchy in which the Prime Minister was a mere proxy. And they lived in their ivory towers.
State level leaders were helpless as the "high command" foisted their favourites on them, thereby disrupting the progress made by local leaders. For even silly local decisions, they had to camp in Delhi waiting for an appointment with Sonia. It was rather strange that a person who openly decried politics and refused to be dragged in went on to become the longest serving symbol of the dynasty.
Now, she has set the stage for Rahul. As in the past, a clique is at work and it will surely succeed. Rahul does profess change, but the prospect of a literal wipe-out will ensure that the rule of dynasty will continue because that is the essential role of the loyalists.
A few weeks ago, when former Tamil Nadu Congress leader Jayanthi Natarajan, incidentally one of the leaders who clamoured for Sonia’s leadership in the late 1990s, resigned from the party, her main grouse was the shabby treatment she received from the mother-son duo. The party is at its lowest ebb under their leadership. Strangely, the Congress still feels that its only hope for survival is the same dynasty, which in fact has done the biggest disservice to Indian democracy and the party by sustaining itself. Since he seems to be last link, unless sister Priyanka Gandhi or her children show interest, will he at least begin to make the Congress a truly democratic party?
0 comments:
Post a Comment