Congress needs to come to terms with itself

For the group of 23 senior Congress leaders to call for a ‘full-time’ and ‘available’ party president — in a note to Sonia Gandhi — was hardly an unreasonable demand. The Congress cannot afford to be a rudderless ship, given the grave challenges that face it. Though Rahul Gandhi questioned the timing of the letter, it is 15 months — not 15 days — since he quit as party chief. Sonia Gandhi continues as a stop-gap arrangement, and has not been keeping well. The 23 leaders resorted to a missive because they could not get access to the Congress president, or to Rahul Gandhi.

Advertisement

The Congress Working Committee (CWC) promised to call the AICC to initiate the process of selecting a party president, but the resolution did not mention any timeline.

Sonia Gandhi struck a conciliatory note at the end of the seven-hour-long meet, but actions that followed have only ‘snubbed’ the so-called dissenters, such as the constitution of the Congress parliamentary committees, or the demand by the Lakhimpur Kheri party unit calling for disciplinary action against Jitin Prasada, one of the signatories whose constituency falls in the district. The idea is to prevent the rebellion from gathering momentum by sending a tough message to the rest of the party.

Though the Monday CWC followed the same script as it did when Sharad Pawar had questioned Sonia Gandhi’s foreign origins, 2020 was not 1999. This time, it was not a powerful state satrap trying to capture the party or effect split.

This time, it was a marta kya na karta response by senior party leaders to a dismal situation that the Congress finds itself in. None of the ‘23’ is in a position to lead a revolt or form one’s own party. They have gone out of their way to emphasise that they are loyal Congressmen seeking reforms.

These were leaders whose loyalty and contribution to the party has been unquestioned over decades, be it Ghulam Nabi Azad — he is, after all, the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha — Anand Sharma, Kapil Sibal or Bhupinder Singh Hooda; or Shashi Tharoor and Manish Tewari, articulating the party’s views in Parliament; or former Maharashtra CM Prithviraj Chavan whose family members have been Gandhi loyalists for four decades; or the real surprise in the pack, Mukul Wasnik, the quintessential insider. All who appended their signature to the note took a huge risk. Congressmen are usually not known to rock the boat easily. If it was only to bargain for a Rajya Sabha seat or a position in the parliamentary party, it was hardly the way to go about it.

Surely, they deserved to be heard with respect. Instead, they were dubbed as the villain of the piece, accused of helping the BJP (If truth be told, it is those who choose to bury their heads in the sand today who will be helping the BJP).

Since the note had called for a collective leadership, of which the Gandhis would be an integral part, it was seen as an attack on the leadership of the Gandhis. This was not really about Sonia Gandhi’s leadership. The letter had more to do with Rahul Gandhi.

He quit as party chief after the Congress’ rout in May 2019 but did not want to come back unless given a free hand to fashion the party. In the last year, while Sonia Gandhi helmed the party as an ‘interim’ chief, he continued to make decisions without having to lead from the front.

There has been growing disquiet in the party about Rahul Gandhi’s style of functioning. On the one hand, it is Rahul, more than any other Opposition leader, who has taken on Narendra Modi frontally, be it on Covid, China or the economy. But his failure to connect at the popular level has meant Advantage Modi in 2014 and 2019 (PV Narasimha Rao was shown the door in 1996 for much less).

Admittedly, from ‘shehzada’ to ‘Pappu’, Rahul has had to contend with systematic rubbishing by the BJP. But it is his own whimsical style of decision making which party leaders find problematic. Tearing up the ordinance when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was in the United States to meet its President is only one example. Or going solo and taking far reaching decisions! Was ‘Chowkidar chor hai’, which flopped in 2019, taken up as the party’s plank after due deliberations? Should morning tweets by Rahul become a policy of the party? Then, there is his antipathy to the old guard, his strong personal likes and dislikes, his bhasha ka lafrah, as a rustic follower described his non-nuanced articulations; and above all, his political judgement.

While Sonia Gandhi is viewed as a unifier, a consensus builder, Rahul is increasingly coming across as the leader of a faction in the party.

As things stand, Sonia Gandhi would like only Rahul Gandhi to succeed her. Till that happens, a stop-gap arrangement is likely to continue. Had Mrs Gandhi considered someone other than Rahul, she would have explored that possibility in May 2019 itself, or in August 2020.

With cries going up at the CWC meeting that it had to be either Sonia or Rahul, the efforts to ‘bring around’ Rahul will intensify in the coming six months, and in all probability, he will take over at some point. But it is amazing that a national party like the Congress should have to mark time just because Rahul is taking his own time deciding whether or not he wants to be a ‘full-time’ president.

Many have talked about the desirability of a non-Gandhi as party chief, even for a spell, given the growing sentiment against the politics of entitlement in the country. Theoretically speaking, this may be desirable. And there is no dearth of talent and experience in the Congress. But given the way the party is structured, this can only work if the Gandhis back the person. Otherwise, it will divide the party. So, Rahul is a name most Congress leaders come back to.

When the 23 leaders flagged the need for collective leadership, it was an attempt to widen the decision-making base of the party and circumscribe what has come to be seen as Rahul Gandhi’s ‘unfettered’ powers, without 24×7 responsibility. And also because at the end of the day, the party will have to showcase ‘Brand Congress’, rather than an individual leader, to take on Modi.