Tag: rahul gandhi resigns

Ahead of Monday CWC Meet, Sonia Gandhi Tells Congress to Find a New Chief

The news comes in the wake of a letter signed by 23 leaders which questions the party’s leadership. Meanwhile, several other senior leaders have come out in support of the Gandhi family continuing to helm the party.

New Delhi: Following a letter written to Sonia Gandhi by at least 23 party leaders regarding leadership issues within the Congress and the need for an overhaul to counter the ruling Bhartiya Panata Party at the Centre, the interim party president has reportedly decided to step down from the position.

According to reports, Gandhi has said that she no longer wants to continue as the interim president. “She has asked to communicate to the Congress Working Committee (CWC) members that she doesn’t want to continue and is stepping down,” The Print reported a source as saying.

The news comes just a day before the CWC meeting scheduled of Monday. The Hindu reported that Gandhi has asked her colleagues to find a new party chief.

Chief party spokesperson Randeep Surjewala, however, has said that Gandhi has not spoken to anyone about any such decision.

Also read: Sonia Gandhi to Remain Interim Prez Till ‘Proper Procedure’ to Elect Party Chief Is Implemented

The letter – whose signatories include senior leaders Kapil Sibal, Shashi Tharoor, Ghulam Nabi Azad, Prithviraj Chavan, Bhupinder Singh Hooda, Veerappa Moily and Anand Sharma – calls for a “full time and effective leadership”, elections to the Congress Working Committee (CWC) and the establishment of an “institutional leadership mechanism” in the face of the “gravest political, social and economic challenges since Independence”.

In response to the letter, other senior party leaders have come out in support of the Gandhi family, including Punjab chief minister Amarinder Singh, Puducherry chief minister V. Narayanasamy, Chhattisgarh chief minister Bhupesh Baghel and former external affairs minister Salman Khurshid.

“The move by these Congress leaders to demand [an overhaul] of the party at this critical juncture would be detrimental to its interests, and the interests of the nation,” Singh said.

“What the Congress needs is a leadership that is acceptable not just to a few but to the entire party, through its rank and file, and the nation at large,” he said. “Sonia Gandhi should continue to helm the Congress as long as she wants,” he said, adding that Rahul Gandhi should thereafter take over.

“I have said very clearly that the Gandhis are leaders of the Congress. Nobody can deny this, even the opposition cannot deny this. I am quite happy having a leader, I don’t worry about whether or not we have a president, we have a leader (in Rahul Gandhi) and that is comforting for me,” Khurshid told PTI in an interview.

After the Congress was defeated in the last national elections, Rahul Gandhi had resigned from the position of president. It was only after much persuasion – and a hiatus of several months in which the party was effectively headless – that Sonia Gandhi accepted the post of interim chief. At the time, the one condition she had laid down was that the Congress look for another leader to take on the mantle as soon as possible.

According to an aide of a senior Congress leader, Sonia Gandhi is expected to resign ahead of the CWC meeting on Monday. However, if Congress leaders insist she continue in her position, she may give the CWC a deadline to find a permanent president.

She has reportedly already conveyed her decision to K.C. Venugopal, the party’s general secretary (organisation). Sonia Gandhi, the aide said, decided to resign as the letter dated August 7 became public a day ahead of the CWC meeting in which she had planned to address the concerns raised by the 23 senior leaders.

The last time Sonia Gandhi had resigned in a huff was in 1999, when Sharad Pawar, P.A. Sangma and Tariq Anwar had revolted against her leadership in a CWC meeting. However, she continued in her position after most senior leaders thought it was best that the party be steered by her at that moment. Pawar, Sangma, and Anwar were subsequently expelled from the party. However, her decision to resign in the current circumstances may be firmer as it is well known that she has not been keeping good health and has spoken about her reluctance to continue as president multiple times in party forums.

Meanwhile, Rahul Gandhi is reportedly reluctant to step up and take over the party president’s position. Priyanka Gandhi, currently one of the general secretaries of the party, too, has refused to take up any bigger role. This may mean that the party is headed for an election, as demanded by the 23 leaders in the letter to Sonia Gandhi. The last few intra-party elections in the Congress have been messy affairs, with rival camps attacking each other in the open.

The letter by 23 senior leaders has sparked a row within the party already, with most elected state-level leaders – especially Amarinder Singh and Baghel, and former Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah – denouncing the idea of intra-party elections. They have come out in support of Sonia Gandhi and have said she should continue as the party president for as long as she wants.

Political observers interpreted the letter to Sonia Gandhi as a rebellion against the Gandhi family and its supporters within the party – a preemptive move to quell the possibility of Rahul Gandhi’s automatic promotion to the post of party president. In a clear signal that they may not be content working under the sole leadership of Gandhi family, the leaders floated the idea of “collective leadership”. They wrote, “The Gandhis will always continue to be a part of the collective leadership of the party.”

However, Rahul Gandhi’s own reluctance to lead the party indicates that the move may only result in splitting the party down the middle.

In a way, the letter by the 23 leaders is a continuation of the arguments between top leaders of the Congress in the CWC meeting last month. Rahul Gandhi’s supporters – mostly Young Turks of the party – had severely criticised the senior leaders for the massive decline of the party since 2014. Many of the senior leaders who had to face the wrath of the younger leaders are signatories to the letter to Sonia Gandhi.

Against this backdrop, it appears that by letting their letter go public, the senior leaders have attempted to set the agenda for Monday’s CWC meeting on their own terms. Or, given the Congress’s Machiavellian ways, the family itself may have engineered the leak in order to drum up support for itself ahead of the CWC meet.

A Year After Winning Three States, Congress Has Quit Politicking

Rahul Gandhi was credited as the architect of the success – he chose the chief ministers – and has now withdrawn himself, throwing the party’s cadre into disarray.

There are several people who believe Sonia Gandhi’s softer stand on the Shiv Sena – as opposed to Rahul’s rigidity – is the need of the hour for the Congress. What lies forgotten is that it was Rahul’s policies that brought a clear victory in three large states in 2018 and actually revived the sunken Congress.

His grave miscalculation in the general elections that followed and his dependence on operators like Prashant Kishore and Praveen Chakraborty undid all that good work. If his plans are not carried through the Congress may, in fact, end up losing all three states in the future.

The process of reconstruction of the inner party infrastructure had started with Gujarat and, slowly, the old guard had been weeded out. New faces and new methods of candidate selection had been ushered and in its initial burst yielded the desired results, clubbed with the anti-incumbency which was working against the BJP in these central Indian states.

Rahul relied on his team, his digital feedback and his own instincts and took instant decisions. He chose to ignore the claims of Sachin Pilot and relied on Ashok Gehlot, who had impressed him in Gujarat with his patient planning and ability to talk to and dissuade rebels. In hindsight, it has worked well in Rajasthan.

In Madhya Pradesh, he let the old guard of Digvijay Singh and Kamal Nath have their way, primarily because the results were two short of a majority and his instinct told him that the other claimant, Jyotiraditya Scindia, would not be able to take everyone along or could falter in the face of a Modi-Shah onslaught.

In Chhattisgarh, he came up with a formula of 2.5 years each for T.S. Singhdeo and Bhupesh Baghel who had worked in tandem during electioneering against the Raman Singh regime. His original choice of veteran leader Tamradhwaj Sahu was unacceptable to almost all regional leaders a year ago, but now there are many who believe he would have worked better.

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

Nevertheless, his sudden resignation and the drama of Sonia’s return has ensured that these states, which were supposed to work according to a “Rahul Plan” post elections, are suddenly rudderless. Corruption allegations are back and so are the old-timers. A well-won victory is being squandered for lack of direction.

All three states, for instance, were committed to waiving farm loans. Chhattisgarh did it entirely and within the time limit specified by Rahul. Kamal Nath is still struggling with the issue as initially loans up to Rs 2 lakh were waived but there have been complaints regarding that as well. There have been similar issues in Rajasthan. With Rahul no longer taking a direct call, things have slipped further.

Rahul Gandhi with MP Congress leaders Kamal Nath and Jyotiraditya Scindia during a public meeting at Ujjain’s Dussehra Maidan. Photo: PTI

Bhupesh Baghel has been promoting his own Narwa Ghurwa back to the basics scheme without much visible success. There has been no central monitoring of his scheme by anyone from Delhi and he does not have any reasonably qualified local people on his team to understand or advise on the utility or futility of his plans. Baghel also increasingly tends to lose track of governance in his pursuit of cases against the Raman Singh regime. Several cases have also piled up in the high court and the Supreme Court with no end in sight to the bickering.

Every senior Congress leader from Madhya Pradesh has been complaining that the general secretary in charge of the state Bavaria has not been responsive to their political needs. In the absence of Rahul, the general secretaries have appropriated, for themselves, responsibilities which normally a strong Congress high command does not easily allow.

Deepak Bavaria, for instance, has so far not cleared any list for appointments to any of the boards and corporations in the state. The second line of leadership is now restless as, even after a year of return to power after a 15-year long wait, they have not been accommodated. P.L. Puniya is doing the same in Chhattisgarh. Politically, the situation is decaying as appointments to even local college boards have not yet cleared by Delhi because the general secretaries are either ignoring them or are themselves being ignored by the Ahmed Patel-led dispensation at 10 Janpath.

Also read: The Bogus Nature of Congress’ Farm Loan Waiver Promises

While Rahul delivered the states through some detailed election planning, he is no longer taking any interest in the implementation of manifesto promises. Baghel has been campaigning hard for his paddy procurement price of Rs 2,500 per quintal – something that was the core of Congress campaign in 2018 – without much success because the AICC is not taking the issue up at all and neither is the Congress parliamentary party in the absence of Rahul’s voice.

Rahul had personally made promises to several leaders in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh that they would be taken care of or would be accommodated elsewhere when they could not be given tickets or had lost by a margin. Now no one is sure who will deliver on that promise.

Amit Shah, who is bitter from the BJP’s loss in the Maharashtra fiasco, would find the perfect salve for his wounds if he manages to snatch any of these states from right under the Sonia Gandhi’s nose. Rahul, who has taken to campaigning in Jharkhand, will quickly have to take to running and advising the states that he had won only last year.

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.

Sonia Gandhi Elected Leader of Congress Parliamentary Party

She urged the Congress MPs to play the role of an effective opposition and ensure better cooperation with like-minded parties.

New Delhi: UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi on Saturday said several “decisive measures” were being mulled to strengthen the party after being re-elected as the leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party (CPP).

Addressing the newly-elected MPs at the CPP meeting in the central hall of parliament here, she lauded party president Rahul Gandhi for his “fearless leadership” by taking on the Modi government and for his “valiant and relentless campaign” during the Lok Sabha polls. She also asked party MPs not to let their guard down.

Sonia Gandhi urged them to play the role of an effective opposition and ensure better coordination and cooperation with like-minded parties in Rajya Sabha, where the government is challenging its numbers.

She told the members that the issues they raise in parliament must resonate in the minds of party workers and with the public.

She said the party will play a constructive role in supporting the government in reform measures, but will oppose its “divisive and regressive actions”.

The meeting was attended by the party’s 52 newly-elected Lok Sabha MPs and Rajya Sabha members, besides the Congress Working Committee (CWC) members and other leaders.

Sonia Gandhi represents Uttar Pradesh’s Rae Bareli in the Lok Sabha.

Sources said the Congress Parliamentary Party authorised the UPA chairperson to pick the party’s leader in Lok Sabha. She later met senior leaders and discussed the issue.

“In this time of crisis, we must acknowledge the numerous challenges confronting the Congress party. The CWC met a few days ago to deliberate the next steps and the way forward for us. Several decisive measures to strengthen the party are being discussed,” she told party MPs and leaders while hinting at changes in the Congress in the offing.

Rahul Gandhi had pushed for his resignation even though the CWC rejected it and passed a resolution authorising him to bring structural changes in the party at all levels.

Sources say the party is discussing several proposals, including installing a non-Gandhi as party chief and a body of senior leaders to act as a guiding force to new president.

Asked about Rahul’s resignation, party chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said Rahul Gandhi is the Congress chief and there are no two opinions about it.

“I would request all the naysayers to hold their breath; the Congress Working Committee has authorised Rahul Gandhi to do a complete overhaul of the organisation from top to bottom…I would request all my friends in the media to wait for a while rather than fall prey to speculation,” he said.

Sonia said though Congress had 44 MPs in the last Lok Sabha and 55 in Rajya Sabha, under Rahul’s leadership the party fought bravely to expose the government’s “misdeeds”.

Congress president Rahul Gandhi. Credit: PTI

“We were in the forefront of ensuring that some of the UPA’s historic Acts were not diluted. At the same time, we cooperated with the government on a series of reforms with constructive suggestions. This time too, we will support progressive and inclusive policies, but oppose the government strongly whenever they undertake divisive and regressive actions,” she said.

While thanking the 12.3 crore people who voted for the Congress, Sonia Gandhi said, “Your vote to the Congress party is a vote for safeguarding our Constitution, a vote for economic and social progress, a vote for liberty, and for social justice.”

Lauding Rahul Gandhi’s role as party chief, she said, “I also take this opportunity to whole-heartedly thank Rahul Ji for his valiant and relentless campaign. As Congress president, he has given his all and toiled night and day for the Congress party.”

She said he demonstrated his “fearless leadership” by taking on the Modi government and highlighted the “injustices” carried out against farmers, workers, traders and small businesses, youth, women and the marginalised.

She also said Rahul has rejuvenated the Congress organisation in many states, and most recently led the party to victory in Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

“As Congress president, he earned the respect and love of every worker and crores of voters across the length and breadth of our country. Even as I speak, emotional messages are coming from all corners, vindicating his leadership. We all express our gratitude to him for his sincerity of purpose, relentless effort, hard work and leadership,” she said.

Sonia Gandhi’s name was proposed by former prime minister Manmohan Singh and all party MPs endorsed it.

Meanwhile, Rahul congratulated the newly-elected leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party.

“Congratulations to Smt Sonia Gandhi on being elected Leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party. Under her leadership, the Congress will prove to be a strong and effective opposition party that will fight to defend the Constitution of India,” he said.

The Congress chief said the party’s newly-elected 52 MPs will fight every inch of the way like “a pride of brave-hearted lions” to protect the Constitution and the country’s institutions and there will be no walkover for the BJP.

This was the first official meet attended by Rahul after the May 25 meeting of the party’s working committee, where he had offered to quit as Congress chief.

Watch | Can the Congress Sustain Itself Without Rahul Gandhi at the Helm?

Congress president Rahul Gandhi has insisted on resigning as party president.

After losing the Congress stronghold of Amethi and winning just 52 parliamentary seats for the party in the 2019 elections, Congress president Rahul Gandhi has insisted on resigning as party president. Congress party leaders, however, say they will not accept his resignation and even the UPA’s coalition partners are anxious of the party’s future. The Wire’s senior editor Arfa Khanum Sherwani raises questions on the survival strategy of India’s oldest party.

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

Lalu Prasad Yadav said Gandhi’s decision would be “suicidal” not just for the Congress but all “social and political forces battling against the Sangh parivar”.

New Delhi: On Tuesday, one of the key leaders of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA), Lalu Prasad Yadav of the Rashtriya Janata Dal, told The Telegraph that Rahul Gandhi should not resign from the Congress party’s president post.

Despite the “unanimous rejection” of his resignation at the Congress Working Committee meeting on May 25, Rahul Gandhi is reported to be insistent on his decision to quit within a month. He has also reportedly asked senior party functionaries Ahmed Patel and K.C. Venugopal to find a suitable leader to fill in for him.

According to a few reports, Gandhi is upset with senior state leaders for not putting in enough hard work during the election campaign. He told the Congress Working Committee that he was not abandoning the party, but would ideally want to fight the Hindu nationalist agenda of the BJP aggressively if relieved of his administrative job.

Lalu’s analysis

However, Lalu Yadav thought that Rahul’s decision would be “suicidal” not only for the Congress but all “social and political forces battling against the Sangh parivar“. He said that his resignation would be like falling into the “BJP’s trap”.

“The moment someone else beyond the Gandhi-Nehru family replaces Rahul, the Narendra Modi-Amit Shah brigade will paint the new leader as a “puppet” remote-controlled by Rahul and Sonia Gandhi. This will play on it till the next general election,” he said, while urging Rahul not to give such an opportunity to his “political detractors”.

Yadav said that the BJP’s victory in the general election highlights that the saffron party has succeeded in presenting a national vision with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at its centre. Opposition parties, he said, failed to deliver an unambiguous political message. “…they (opposition parties) should not have done the strategic blunder of not projecting someone who has a national perspective as the Prime Minister candidate,” he said.

Also Read: Rahul Gandhi Determined to Quit as Congress President, Asks Party to Find Replacement: Reports

He said while the Congress focussed its attention on livelihood issues with a clear anti-BJP agenda, it “failed to get the appropriate backing from the disoriented Opposition parties that signalled they were looking at their own survival (in their respective states) rather than taking on the BJP head on.”

“It was not the battle of Modi versus Mamata Didi or Modi versus Mayawati and Akhilesh Yadav or Modi versus Tejashwi Yadav. It was the battle between a fascist order and the marginalised people, unemployed youths, distressed farmers and persecuted minorities all across India. The disoriented Opposition parties failed to give a convincing platform to the people to express themselves in a united manner.”

He further said that a single electoral outcome, the composite culture of India will remain. “Prime Ministers and chief ministers will keep on coming and going. But this nation will live and survive with its multi-cultural ethos. It is foolhardy to interpret the electoral success of a party — which has failed on all fronts of education, unemployment, poverty and deprivation — as something like drastic change in the social and political behaviour of the people.”

He urged all anti-BJP forces to step out of their “comfort zones” and “hit the streets living with the pains and agonies of the people in the Indian hinterland.”

“The tables will be turned sooner than later,” he said.

File photo of RJD leader Lalu Prasad. Credit: PTI

Political anxiety within UPA?

Yet, in New Delhi, Rahul’s decision to leave the party’s top post has had many senior leaders of the UPA worried. The Congress functions as the anchor of the UPA. Many leaders say that devoid of a leader from the Nehru-Gandhi family at the helm of affairs, the grand old party has never kept its flock intact and runs the risk of disintegration.

D.P. Tripathi, a senior leader of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), told The Wire, “The NCP has already said that Rahul’s resignation is an internal matter of the Congress party. But my opinion is that he should not resign.”

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam spokesperson Manu Sundaram said, “It is an internal matter of the Congress party – entirely their prerogative. It makes no difference to us. For us, it is important to be a part of a secular-progressive alliance. UPA is an electoral alliance. In Tamil Nadu, the Congress and the two communist parties fought under the leadership of the DMK in the 2019 elections. That is very much intact.”

Another senior UPA leader, who did not want to be named, said, “Centrist parties like the Congress have evolved in India to become heavily centralised organisations. Most leaders, including Sonia Gandhi destroyed the party system and personalised and centralised the Congress. The other allies of the Congress also followed suit. What is NCP without Sharad Pawar? Or what will DMK be without Stalin? The same is the case with other regional parties too.”

Given Rahul’s dissent against allegedly self-serving leaders in the party, he recalled that the Congress’s structure allows for such leaders to bloom.

“In fact, in the speech that Rahul’s father Rajiv Gandhi delivered in the 1985 party centenary celebrations in Bombay, he had said that the Congress is now full of sycophants and mercenaries. He said that while the Congress workers are enthusiastic about the party’s programme of social transformation, they are handicapped as the power brokers who dispense patronage have converted a great mass movement (that Congress was) into a feudal oligarchy. That system has only deepened within the party.”

If Rahul resigns, as he has indicated, and focuses on reviving the organisation, he will have a Herculean task ahead – to overturn what is currently a “feudal oligarchy” into some form of “mass movement”.