The symptoms of what ails the Congress are obvious enough. But there are no signs yet if the leadership has diagnosed the ailments, let alone remedies to cure them. Whether Rahul Gandhi pondered over them during his decidedly curious and prolonged sabbatical will be known soon. So prudence would be in order. Perhaps the only hypothesis one can advance right now is that the scion of the Gandhi family would need to propose a bitter medicine with miraculous properties – one that cheers his flock, confounds its adversaries and reluctant allies and bewilders his critics in the media. That, however, is, to put it as mildly as possible, a tall order.
Never before in its history has the party been so bruised and battered, so demoralised and divided, so rudderless and lacking in self-esteem. Never before has it been so bereft of ideas, policies and programmes to rejuvenate itself. The party has faced several crisis in the past but it managed to overcome them without too much damage to its overall clout.
Soon after independence, for example, many socialists quit the Congress to form a separate political outfit. So did many right-wing elements led by Acharya Kripalini. All the same, a substantial number of individuals of both persuasions continued to remain in the party partly because they could still make their presence felt in decision-making bodies and partly because of Jawaharlal Nehru’s unequalled charisma. While the organisation was able to accommodate diverse view-points, Nehru was able to chart a middle course that was acceptable, despite reservations, to all ideological factions within the fold. Moreover, he respected Congress regional leaders who, in turn, acknowledged his leadership.
The Congress organisation underwent a sea-change with the advent of Indira Gandhi. Once she split the party in 1969, she went about concentrating power in her own hands. Regional leaders were cut down to size. Those loyal to her were promoted. Their lack of a popular base was not a disqualification – quite to the contrary. The cult of personality reached its apogee after she imposed a state of emergency in June 1975. That was the start of a ‘committed’ bureaucracy, judiciary and media. The Congress was booted out in the 1977 general elections. But two years later it was back in harness. That success must be attributed to Indira Gandhi’s strong, never-say-die personality and to her unabashed deployment of populist politics.
How much Nehru was responsible for the growth of dynastic politics is still a matter of debate. But that was not the case with Indira Gandhi. Once her younger son, Sanjay, who emerged as the real face of the emergency regime, was killed in an aviation accident, she promoted her older son, Rajiv, to succeed her. He took over as Prime Minister after she was assassinated in 1984. Until then he had no direct experience of politics. No matter. And when he, in turn, fell victim to an assassination, it was only a matter of time before his widow, Sonia, began to call the shots in the party.
She was biding her time during P.V. Narasimha Rao’s tenure and that of Vajpayee’s tenure. But it is she who campaigned hard to take the Congress to victory twice in succession. The decade-long rule of the UPA under Dr. Manmohan Singh would not have been possible but for her firm control over the Congress and, as many suspect, her control over the government. But she also prepared the ground for Rahul Gandhi’s ascension in the party fold.
And this is where things began to unravel. Rahul made no mark as a parliamentarian. His electioneering proved to be disastrous not just in the 2014 general elections but in subsequent elections to several state assemblies. He was simply incapable of matching Narendra Modi’s oratorical skills, use of social media or his appeal to an increasingly young electorate.
No comments:
Post a Comment