Tag: congress next president

With Rahul’s Resignation, Will Congress Finally Extricate Itself From the Gandhis?

Day-to-day party affairs may be left to a non-Gandhi party president, but he/she would hardly be able to decide on fundamental issues – especially those connected with the party ideology or electoral strategy.

That the Nehru-Gandhi family completely dominates the Congress party is indisputable.

That position is not going to change with Rahul Gandhi owning responsibility for the party’s crushing 2019 Lok Sabha electoral defeat and giving up its presidency. Sonia Gandhi’s election as the Congress parliamentary party chairperson, Priyanka Gandhi’s continuance as a party general secretary and, finally, Rahul Gandhi himself making it clear in his resignation letter that he will continue to be an active party member all show that the party will remain family controlled.

Thus, will Rahul’s successor be expected to perform the same role for the family that Manmohan Singh did as prime minister leading the UPA government – manage affairs but accept the family’s primacy and its intervention whenever and wherever on whatever issue it choses?

Viewed in this light, there would be ‘accountabilities’ of different kinds for different sets of party persons. Rahul Gandhi would lose party presidency but not his determinant, if for some time maybe recessed, influence in party affairs.

However, if the chief ministers of the three states – Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh – give up their offices and senior party persons give up their party posts, their influence will drastically decline.

All this can be ascribed to the basic nature of the party in its present avatar and this itself can be traced back to five decades ago – to the tumultuous year of 1969 when the Congress party split.

Also read: Rahul’s Exit is a Historic Opportunity for the Congress, and its Members

Indira Gandhi was expelled by party veterans but she succeeded in projecting her group as the true Congress, the vehicle of the National Movement which, after independence, under Jawaharlal Nehru, laid the foundations of modern India.

Indira Gandhi also gradually made it a completely family centric organisation. During the Emergency, she allowed Sanjay Gandhi to play a pivotal role in party affairs and also intervene in government processes at will.

It is true that lobbying for children began much earlier; Motilal Nehru proposed to Mahatma Gandhi that Jawaharlal Nehru should be considered to preside over the Lahore Congress session in 1929. That session became historic for the party adopted the Purna Swaraj resolution under Jawaharlal’s leadership and inspiration.

Like his father before him, Jawaharlal agreed to make Indira Gandhi the president of the Congress. She became head of the party in 1959. This was a time when there were innumerable party veterans who could have been accorded the distinction of leading the party.

Certainly, Jawaharlal was the tallest leader of the party yet it did not then become an entirely family centric affair for then there were leaders who had gone through the baptism of the national movement and had large followings and national status because of their political work.

Thus, at Nehru’s death the party chose Lal Bahadur Shastri as prime minister. The decision to make Indira Gandhi prime minister after Shastri’s death in 1966 was determined more by a desire of party veterans to keep Morarji Desai out then get Nehru’s daughter in.

The situation became completely different after the party split in 1969. The majority of the group that remained with Indira Gandhi became her personal loyalists and after the 1971 election victory no one came forward to credibly challenge her. The imposition of the Emergency too witnessed no opposition from within the party and even senior leaders let Sanjay Gandhi ride roughshod over them.

It was only after the declaration of the 1977 elections that Jagjivan Ram and Hemavati Bahuguna among others revolted that the situation changed. They had read the writing on the wall regarding the popular revulsion in the north against emergency excesses.

Also read: Rahul Gandhi Does Not Have the Luxury of Simply Walking Away

Some Congress members left the party when Indira Gandhi was in the wilderness after her defeat in 1977 but she continued to be its leader as did Sanjay Gandhi. The party returned to power in January 1980.

When Rajiv Gandhi filled the vacuum left by Sanjay’s sudden death in an airplane crash that year the party demonstrated that it had become a total family centric affair. After the reverses of the 1989 election Rajiv Gandhi did not leave the field. He did not accept responsibility the way Rahul is doing now.

What happened after Rajiv’s death is fresh in popular memory to need to be recalled. The significant lesson that emerges is that the party continued to centre around the family legacy even if Sonia Gandhi had distanced herself.

That family centeredness has only increased in the past two decades. It will not go away unless the Gandhi family completely disassociates itself from the party, indeed, from politics itself.

Even if some party members were to revolt or leave, as some are currently doing, it will not change the family’s position.

Also read: How Vivek Tankha, a Little-Known Congressman, Set Off a Domino Effect of Resignations

Rahul Gandhi has eloquently stated his commitment to the party’s ideology and his determination to carry on the struggle against the political principles of the BJP and the Sangh parivar.

Will his resignation assist the party in this struggle?

This is unlikely for the party will still look to the Gandhis, especially Rahul for final signals on all significant matters. The family will have to decide on the manner of how to take on the government. Yes, day-to-day party affairs may be left to a non-Gandhi party president but he/she would hardly be able to decide on fundamental issues – especially those connected with the party ideology or electoral strategy.

Will Rahul be able to bring in a culture of accountability by resigning himself? The people will remain sceptical for they would feel that his stepping down is a formality and that he will retain the substance of authority even if he gives up the position of party president.

Does all this place Rahul Gandhi in a difficult situation? The answer is in the affirmative. But then this situation itself is inherent in the nature of all family centric enterprises. Rahul Gandhi wants the party to radically transform itself. But the question is: has Rahul Gandhi thought through all aspects of his resignation especially if his resignation would assist the party’s transformation.

It does not appear to be so.

The great reverse of 2019 provides him an opportunity to show that the transformation in his political persona is not illusory.

Vivek Katju is a former Indian diplomat who served as India’s ambassador to Afghanistan and Myanmar, and as secretary, Ministry of External Affairs.

What Explains the Appointment of Mohan Markam as Congress’s Chief in Chhattisgarh?

The party appears to worried about its tribal vote bank slipping away – as it has observed in Odisha and Jharkhand.

On May 23, Rahul Gandhi offered to resign as Congress president. Subsequently, all notifications issued by K.C. Venugopal, general secretary (administration), were in the name of All India Congress Committee (AICC).

However, on June 28, more than a month after Rahul first made the offer and a day after Vivek Tankha caused a domino effect of resignations, Mohan Markam was appointed the president of Chhattisgarh Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC), replacing the sitting chief minister Bhupesh Baghel who had held the dual charge.

This time, the letter was issued in the name of AICC president.

Can a Congress president who has sent in his resignation appoint a state unit president? How is the president’s resignation accepted and by whom? Does the resignation of Congress president entail that the organisation’s general secretary becomes the temporary head till fresh elections take place – and if that is the case, then can he issue appointment letters in the name of AICC or party president?

These questions can only be answered by the Congress Working Committee. If someone were to approach the Election Commission or challenge Markam’s appointment in court, it could then result in a closer examination of the Congress constitution.

Markam’s appointment, however, also raises questions of a deep political nature. While most observers interpreted Markam’s letter as a sign that Rahul might continue as the party president despite his insistence on resignation, less than a week later, he made his resignation letter public by tweeting its entire content. In it, he lamented that he had had to fight the 2019 general elections on his own steam and that not many within the Congress had come forward to support him, especially the senior leaders. He was also despondent that no one had taken responsibility and chosen to resign like him.

Also read: How Vivek Tankha, a Little-Known Congressman, Set Off a Domino Effect of Resignations

Neither had Baghel sent in his resignation and nor was Rahul attending office, so what was the urgency in appointing Markam? And why was Markam chosen for the post? Why is he important? Equally significantly, Chhattisgarh is the only Congress-ruled state where has Rahul approved a cabinet expansion through the swearing in of Amarjeet Bhagat on June 29 itself.

There are no easy answers, but it appears Congress is now worried about its tribal vote bank slipping away – as it has observed in Odisha and Jharkhand. It thus wants tribal PCC presidents in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh.

Also, Bastar has completely slipped out of Congress’s hands, at least that’s what the Lok Sabha results showed. Congress had won 11 out of 12 assembly seats in Bastar in December 2018, but it managed to win by a narrow margin only one out of the two Lok Sabha seats six months later.

Markam, 51, was a shiksha karmi in Bastar and later became an insurance agent when Chhattisgarh came into existence in 2000. Around 6-7 years later, he met Ajit Jogi, who, impressed with his ability to take up public causes, drafted him into Congress. He was later twice elected as an MLA from Kondagaon. At present, he is a sitting MLA. This still does not explain his elevation to PCC president.

Amarjeet Bhaga, a four-time MLA from Surguja, and Manoj Mandavi, a three-time MLA from Bastar, had both been ignored for a cabinet berth by Baghel.

Also read: Rahul’s Exit is a Historic Opportunity for the Congress, and its Members

While Delhi was witnessing the resignation drama, a sub-plot seems to have been playing out in Chhattisgarh. Baghel’s rival claimant for the chief ministerial post, T.S. Singh Deo, did not want Amarjeet Bhagat – who represents Sitapur in Surguja as PCC president – after initially having blocked his entry into the cabinet in December. Baghel had cleverly kept a spot vacant for Bhagat. So before push came to shove, Baghel took in Bhagat and opted for low-profile Markam over Mandavi.

So, was it Baghel who was able to convince Rahul to make this one last appointment? It must have been, because Baghel was in-charge of the Lok Sabha campaign and its costs in Amethi and UP while Rahul campaigned all over the country and in Wayanad. He did not want to risk someone else taking over as Congress president and wanted to make changes according to his will. Baghel was helped in this endeavours by P.L. Punia.

What they failed to do, however, was to get a list of chairmen for various boards and corporations in time. This will soon lead to acrimony between various factions.

Markam has declared that his first priority is to win the two seats in Bastar that are to go to polls, and then prepare for the forthcoming municipal and panchayat elections at the end of the year. He has also declared that he will be leading agitations against the Central government. What all issues will be covered still isn’t certain. Meanwhile, he has an able challenger in fellow Bastariya Vikram Usendi, who heads the BJP state unit.

How Vivek Tankha, a Little-Known Congressman, Set Off a Domino Effect of Resignations

Over the years, the former additional solicitor general of India and advocate general of Madhya Pradesh has emerged as a reliable legal luminary-turned-politician.

After facing a catastrophic defeat at the hands of the BJP in the 2019 general election, Rahul Gandhi offered to resign as Congress president on May 23.

But over a month later, no one followed suit barring a few here and there in Uttar Pradesh.

Three days later, the Gandhi scion had also blamed Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Gehlot and Madhya Pradesh chief minister Kamal Nath for promoting their sons at the cost of the party.

Finally, on June 27, Vivek Tankha resigned as head of the legal and RTI cell of the All India Congress Committee.

This launched a domino effect of resignations.

Tankha may seem like an odd choice to have kickstarted said resignations considering lawyers Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and P. Chidambaram have been around for far longer.

But over the past couple of years, the Gandhis have come to rely on Tankha equally for their court cases.

Over the years, the former additional solicitor general of India and advocate general of Madhya Pradesh has emerged as a reliable legal luminary-turned-politician. He was generally known as an advisor to leaders from his home state – cutting across party lines till he unsuccessfully contested the 2012 Rajya Sabha elections as an independent backed by the Congress.

Back then, it was thought that chief minister Shivraj Singh, whom he considered a friend, could have lent his support to Tankha during in the election. He didn’t and Tankha fell short by two votes as the third candidate.

Also read: Rahul Says He’s No Longer Congress President, Takes Responsibility for 2019 Loss

The defeat may have hardened Tankha’s resolve to align his ship with the Congress where he held the trust of Nath, Jyotiraditya Scindia, Digvijay Singh and the rest. Despite having been Digvijay Singh’s advocate general, he managed cultivated an image of neutrality through his social work and legal demeanour.

But after 2015, the Gandhis had more reasons to be in touch with him. A soft-spoken Kashmiri Pandit with impeccable manners, he impressed the family as someone who could be trusted. But his own reticence in hogging limelight has kept his public profile under par so far.

After losing the 2012 Rajya Sabha polls, Tankha was persuaded to contest the 2014 Lok Sabha from Jabalpur, which he lost to Rakesh Singh as the Modi wave swept the country.

But the loss did not harm his image. In his home town, Tankha and his family are respected for reasons other than politics. His father late, R.K. Tankha, was a high court judge and his father-in law, late Colonel Ajay Narain Mushran, was the finance minister for ten years in Digvijay’s cabinet.

When Vivek Tankha started his legal career in 1979, he decided to plough his own furrow which over years has included immense amount of social work in education for children with special needs and free health camps for the blind as also free blood banks in at least four major district hospitals in MP. He has used his legal and rotary networks to keep his passion for social work properly funded.

As advocate general, he had made an impact on the Supreme Court. On suggestions from senior lawyers and judges, he decided to shift base to Delhi after 2004. His political connections also meant he got involved in the power circuit in the capital, which eventually led to his nomination as Rajya Sabha member from MP in 2016. But before that, he was an additional advocate general during the UPA II regime, handling matters relating to Reliance and the telecom sector amongst others.

What may brought him close to Sonia Gandhi was his single minded determination to pursue the Vyapam cases against the Shivraj government in the Supreme Court at a time when both the Centre and state had BJP governments and the investigating agencies were not at their cooperative best.

Also read: Rahul Gandhi’s Insistence to Step Down as Congress President Leaves UPA Leaders Anxious

So where is this present round of resignations headed as far as Tankha is concerned? He has certainly emerged as a key figure even while keeping his focus on MP politics – as can be seen by his recent tweets on Kamal Nath.

It’s a given that Rahul may not rock the boat too much and remove Nath and Gehlot unless he has some major assignment for them. There was some talk of Gehlot becoming working president of the AICC but that appears to be on the backburner for now. Nath’s rival for the chief ministerial post, Jyotiraditya Scindia, recently lost the Lok Sabha elections from his family seat. But that has not stopped his supporters from clamouring for him to be given charge of the PCC.

It’s not an election year in MP and Scindia, despite his media image, is not an acceptable figure outside the Gwalior region. He lacks a connect with the poor and carries too much baggage of the Raj parivar.

The Congress has tried almost all caste combinations in the MP unit, but without success in building an organisation. Many believe Tankha, with his clean image and work in tribal areas like Mandla, Jabalpur and Jhabua, may be an ideal choice to rebuild the party structure.

He certainly seems to share a good equation with Kamal Nath and Digvijaya Singh. The only hurdle seems to be his  own willingness to dive into the hurly burly of ground level politics outside the charmed circle of an established legal practise.

Or maybe Rahul has other plans for him in Delhi.

Rahul’s Exit is a Historic Opportunity for the Congress, and its Members

Rahul Gandhi’s unforced but much-needed departure from the office of party president has opened up possibilities of a new future, provided its leaders and rank-and-file are willing to seize the moment.

On January 31, 1959, Mahavir Tyagi, a senior Congressman and a member of parliament, gathered all his wits and courage to pen a letter to Jawaharlal Nehru, warning the prime minister that he was being increasingly surrounded by sycophants who were bringing a bad name to the party and the government, and that these very darbaris were now lobbying for Indira Gandhi as the next Congress president.

Nehru replied the very next day. The redoubtable leader rejected any suggestion of a Nehru court and feigned disinterestedness in an Indira Gandhi presidency, but insisted that if that was what “the party” wanted, he would abide by the decision, which was not without its cons and but had all its pros.  And, he ended his response to Tyagi with an expression of confidence and faith in India’s future.

In the event, Indira Gandhi did get elected as the Congress president, and Tyagi remained unmolested. He was not isolated; he was not made to feel a traitor. On the contrary, he got inducted into Nehru’s cabinet after 1962.

What this meant, quite simply, was that the Congress was still an institutionalised political formation, with established organisational norms and manners. It could easily take in its stride one presidential term of Indira Gandhi without establishing any precedent of entitlement. Because of a robust organisational culture, it could, when the time came, smoothly oversee two national successions, in 1964 and 1966; and, when needed, it could undergo internal turmoil, in 1969-70, to reinvent itself, rearrange its ideas and predispositions.

An unhappy departure

Unhappily, from the mid-1970s, the party became synonymous with the Nehru-Gandhi family, and, inevitably, an institutional degeneration set-in. From 1998, it firmly recast itself as a political tribe, owing its existence and its allegiance to the chief. The legitimacy of the leadership came to be derived from membership of the chief’s family.

In 2017, the Congress tribe rejoiced when the chief’s son was anointed as the new chief. Now, the chief has walked away, conceding that he has no shamanistic potency, no magic, no wizardry. A massive ten year investment has just gone bust.

Also Read: Rahul Says He’s No Longer Congress President, Takes Responsibility for 2019 Loss

As the hereditary chief, it was perfectly normal for Sonia Gandhi to want to ensure that her son became the new chief who, in good time, could lay claim to the king’s throne. But thanks to one of the tribe’s earlier ancestors, Jawaharlal Nehru, the royal crown was and is subject to democratic contestation and electoral ratifications.

A slight detraction may be permitted here.

In 1960, the billionaire Joseph Kennedy had ensured that the Democratic Party preferred his son, John, as its presidential nominee over a distinguished standard-bearer, Adlai Stevenson, who had twice unsuccessfully contested elections against the war-hero, General Dwight Eisenhower. Despite two defeats, Stevenson was still the most loved and most respected man in the Democratic Party. Before a “Kennedy Mystique” got manufactured, Senator Stevenson had warned that “though bright and able”, John Kennedy was “too young, too unseasoned” to be president and that he “lacked the wisdom of humility.” Stevenson was of the view that “both Kennedy and the nation would benefit from a postponement of his ambition.”

During a tour of the US, Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India, visited Madison, Wisconsin, in November, 1949. In this photo, Nehru is seen with Indira Gandhi and local officials. Photo: Indian Embassy Washington/Nov.49/Flickr

A postponement of ambition

In similar vein, it can be suggested that the Congress and the nation would stand to benefit from a postponement of Rahul Gandhi’s ambition. Perhaps Rahul Gandhi has done the Congress a seriously good turn by creating a historic opportunity for this oldest political formation in the country to reinvent itself as a modern political party, to unmoor itself from the anti-democratic notions of dynastic entitlements.

As the Congress members undertake this task, each one of them must be cognisant of this painful fact: for the first time since 1947, the Congress will be out of power for at least a decade. The very enormity of a decade without power at the Centre, without a voice in decision-making at the national level, enjoins them to be responsible, sincere and imaginative.

This can be daunting. The Gandhis have become a habit with the members of Congress, a safety valve, a totemic presence. The habit of ideas and ideology has been systematically discouraged; as long as the Gandhis could help them get into positions of power, these members were only too happy to render a kind of passionless loyalty to the family. Now, a decade without power means the Congress would need to understand how much of India has changed, and, then figure out for itself what kind of role it would have in this changed India. But the basic minimum of this churning has to be a new relationship between the leader and the led.

The dynasty model has failed. Yet, many Congress members are still psychologically unprepared to think beyond the Gandhis; many of them do not want to be in the position of an ahsaan faramosh, an ingrate, even though they deeply resented Rahul Gandhi’s entitled superciliousness. It is too disorienting for them to think that the Congress could be a formation other than a family outfit. They are too afraid to be reminded of their own history.

Also Read: When Jawaharlal Told People Not to Elect Him Congress President for Third Term

All organisations are built on fragile ties – of loyalty to the chief, ideological and intellectual commitments to the group; an esprit de corps, cultivated habits of working together, the joyfulness of collectively pursuing and achieving goals and ideals over and above individual ambitions. A political organisation has to have a sense of larger national vision, a greater public purpose, and a commensurate moral mission.

The Indian National Congress embodied, not long ago, all these traits. It can still boast of an enviable bench-strength; till five years back, these men and women were running the affairs of the Indian state.  Now, without the burden of factoring in the Gandhis’ convenience and calculations, these functionaries are surely capable of making the transition to a democratic future. All that is needed is for the honourable men and women to attend to this task honourably. The time for pettiness and intrigue is over.