Sonia Gandhi

Latest from Sonia Gandhi

An enforced silence cannot solve India’s problems

The vaccination milestone and a distant goal

The distress sale of national assets is unwise

Stop the dismantling of environmental rules

Women as Agents of Change -- Sonia Gandhi's Commonwealth Lecture

From Pachmarhi to Srinagar

REWORKING ITS approach to alliances at the national level, the Congress appears to have begun to come to terms with the need to agree on sharing power at the Centre with smaller parties before building a broad secular coalition against the BJP. At the Srinagar conclave of Congress Chief Ministers, the AICC president, Sonia Gandhi, expressed a readiness to align with like-minded parties both at the Centre and in the States to take on the multiparty National Democratic Alliance led by the BJP. Although the Congress is part of coalition governments in Kerala, Maharashtra, Bihar and Jammu and Kashmir, until now the 1998 Pachmarhi conclave of the party, which viewed coalition politics at the Centre as a transitory phase, was the reference point in all discussions of national-level pre-poll alliances. Without doubt, the new line would make the Congress a more attractive ally for parties such as the Samajwadi Party and the Rashtriya Janata Dal. In Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, the SP and the RJD have emerged as the principal opposition to the BJP-led alliance, and an overbearing attitude would have fetched the Congress no political dividends. The Left parties, too, would be more comfortable with a Congress that sends out accommodative signals. Although the Congress is still the main opposition to the Left parties in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura, there is scope for coordination at the national level as both the CPI (M) and the CPI recognise the need for a secular alternative to the BJP. Even in Tamil Nadu, where the two major regional parties, DMK and AIADMK, have been included in the Union Council of Ministers by the BJP at different times, the Congress could use the carrot of coalition to reach advantageous electoral agreements. In effect, the "yes-to-alliances" line helps the Congress upgrade itself from the third or worse position in some States and directly mount a nationwide challenge to the BJP.

AICC's manoeuvres in Rajasthan

SANCTIONING THE appointment of two Deputy Chief Ministers in Rajasthan, the Congress high command seems to have "settled" the trouble brewing in the party's State unit. The Chief Minister, Ashok Gehlot, who was under pressure during the past few weeks might sense some reprieve in that the high command's decision to undertake some window dressing at this stage should clearly be a signal that the AICC establishment does not favour a change of guard in the State at least for now. There were doubts over Mr. Gehlot continuing as Chief Minister (in the immediate aftermath of the Gujarat poll verdict that went against the Congress) and the spurt in dissident activities did appear serious. The Congress high command's decision to post Sushil Kumar Shinde as Chief Minister in Maharashtra (in place of Vilasrao Deshmukh) and the fact that Mr. Gehlot had to make at least a couple of trips to Delhi to meet the Congress president (it is another matter that Mr. Gehlot chose to describe the visits as "courtesy calls") did reflect some kind of support from the high command to the dissidents within the Rajasthan unit. The decision now that Mr. Gehlot shall have two Deputy Chief Ministers seems to confirm that the campaign against the Chief Minister from within the State unit was supported (if not orchestrated) by influential sections in the AICC establishment. There could be no other rationale behind imposing such changes on the State Government when Mr. Gehlot was allowed a free run in Rajasthan ever since he was chosen as Chief Minister in October 1998 by Sonia Gandhi.

Change of guard in Maharashtra

EFFECTING A change of guard in Maharashtra, at a time when elections to the State Assembly are due in less than a couple of years, the Congress high command has indeed taken a calculated risk. The anointment of Sushil Kumar Shinde as Chief Minister in place of Vilasrao Deshmukh might appear at first sight to be a response to the demand from within the Maharashtra unit of the party rather than another instance of the command mode coming into play. But then the pace at which the process was carried out — the central party observers had several rounds of talks with the party MLAs as well as with the leaders of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) within a couple of days of Mr. Deshmukh being told to step down by the party president, Sonia Gandhi, in New Delhi on January 13 — is sufficient evidence that the factors leading to the change of guard were not merely those confined to the Maharashtra State unit. Instead, it emerges clearly that Mr. Deshmukh had to go only because the high command wanted it that way. Dissidence within the State unit against him is certainly not a development of the past few weeks. Mr. Deshmukh was even forced into convening a special session of the State Assembly a few months ago when a handful of Congress MLAs went so far as to inform the Governor that they were withdrawing support to the Government. Mr. Deshmukh did continue as Chief Minister even after that because he enjoyed the confidence of the party high command at that stage. Now when the party's central command decided otherwise, he had to go.

A diversionary issue

RAISING THE issue of Sonia Gandhi's Italian origins, once again, the AIADMK chief, Jayalalithaa, has only found a pretext to settle scores with the Congress' Tamil Nadu unit. After the rhetoric indulged in by the partymen in Madurai (when the TMC finally merged into the Congress) and the endorsement of sorts by Ms. Gandhi of the State unit's project of restoring "Kamaraj" rule, the AIADMK leader seems to have been waiting for the right time to strike. She could not have chosen a better occasion to snipe at the Congress than during her visit to Delhi and the target could not have been anyone other than Ms. Gandhi. The Congress president's foreign origin is indeed a factor that will find resonance as a slogan in the political discourse notwithstanding the fact that her eligibility to occupy positions in the Government has been settled beyond dispute in the legal Constitutional sense. Ms. Jayalalithaa, indeed, cannot be faulted for having raised this issue — as indeed others have done — in the content of a political and campaign discourse. She did not, however, stop with this.

Politics at the Kumbh Mela

DECIDING TO be there at the Kumbh Mela and have a `darshan' of a section of the sadhus (those outside the Sangh Parivar fold), the Congress president, Ms. Sonia Gandhi, may have triggered off a debate with political overtones. It may be true that Ms. Gandhi's visit as such was not the only basis to the Kumbh Mela assuming some political colour. The `dharam sansad' (clearly a political event rather than having anything to do with the religion) that the Sangh Parivar associates had organised alongside the `sangam' and the discussion on the Ayodhya issue as well as the display at the mela grounds of a miniature model of the proposed temple had, even otherwise, introduced a political element. The VHP and the other associates of the Sangh Parivar were, indeed, responsible for this. The Kumbh is an occasion for the devout and a dip at the `sangam' (confluence of the Ganga, the Yamuna and the mythical Saraswati) during the Kumbh is considered by them as a means to salvation; the Kumbh is also an occasion for the Hindu religious heads from various parts of the country, including the Naga sadhus, to congregate. But then, the event this time was made use of by the Sangh Parivar to revive its sectarian and revanchist campaign and the attempt was to appropriate the religious sentiments towards this agenda. Ms. Gandhi's visit to the mela grounds (apart from Anand Bhawan) at this time becomes a matter of political debate in this context.

An unwarranted spat

PLUNGING INTO a quarrel over who among them was best ``qualified'' to initiate an adjournment motion in the Lok Sabha last week on the crisis facing the farming community, the members of the Samajwadi Party and the Congress had only highlighted the weakness within the Opposition to the ruling BJP-led combine. Indeed, it was obvious even as the House proceedings were being disrupted that the Leader of the Opposition, Ms. Sonia Gandhi, would have preference over others to move such a motion. Even if the Rules of Procedure are silent on this, the convention is that the Leader of the Opposition has this privilege. Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, with years of experience in the legislature should have known this even while MPs belonging to his party rushed to the well of the House insisting that they were better qualified to initiate a debate on the plight of farmers than members of the Congress. In doing so, the issue as such got sidelined and the House was forced to adjourn for the day without transacting any business. That those in the Samajwadi Party spent all their energy in a confrontation with the Congress rather than challenging the treasury benches reflects their skewed political priorities.

The choice is limited

DECIDING TO contest Ms. Sonia Gandhi's claims to being the unanimous choice as president of the Congress, Mr. Jitendra Prasada is clearly signalling a challenge to the paramountcy given to the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty within the Congress. Indeed, the challenge, coming as it does from someone who had hitherto lent his skills to ``manage'' the affairs within the party on behalf of the high command, may lack the required credibility. Mr. Prasada's talk now of representing the voice of the ``ordinary'' worker of the party may not offer an effective rallying point.

A new president for WBPCC(I)

EFFECTING A change of guard in the West Bengal unit of her party - the appointment of Mr. Pranab Mukherjee as chief - the Congress(I) president, Ms. Sonia Gandhi, has, at long last, conveyed her disapproval of the line of the incumbent chief, Mr. A. B. A. Ghani Khan Chowdhary, that the party must align with the Trinamool Congress in the State. Notwithstanding the political correctness of the move, given the fact that it came so late, it cannot but be seen as just another formality. The sheer procrastination by the Congress(I) high command in even conveying to its State unit leaders that they must not be seen together with the Trinamool Congress as long as Ms. Mamata Banerjee remained part of the BJP-led NDA had even otherwise eroded its credibility. The delay had not just emboldened Mr. Chowdhary and his supporters in the Pradesh Congress(I) Committee to persist with the idea of a `mahajot' but had also paved the way for several of the party's MLAs in West Bengal to formally cross over to the Trinamool fold. Even while all these were taking place with Mr. Chowdhary as PCC(I) president virtually blessing such an exodus, Ms. Sonia Gandhi and her aides were seen convincing themselves and others that all was well in their party in West Bengal. All that they did was to send an emissary to Calcutta to reason things out with the State unit leaders or ``summon'' Mr. Chowdhary to Delhi for counselling.

Panskura seat and the 'mahajot'

DECIDING TO field its own nominee, Mr. Subhankar Sarkar, in the by-election for the Panskura Lok Sabha seat, the Congress(I) high command may have succeeded in registering its opposition to the ``mahajot'' idea mooted by influential sections in the party's West Bengal unit. But the reluctance shown by the enthusiasts of the grand-alliance-against-the-CPI(M) idea in the State unit of the party to take the contest in real earnest is something that the high command cannot gloss over. Apart from the fact of the Pradesh Congress(I) Committee president, Mr. A. B. A. Ghani Khan Choudhury's ``inability'' to show himself up with Mr. Sarkar when he went to file his nomination, the other important leader in the State unit, Mr. Somen Mitra, has declared that he will not be campaigning for the party nominee. Hence, Ms. Sonia Gandhi had to rely on the working president of the State unit, Mr. P. R. Das Munshi, to ensure that Mr. Sarkar filed his papers. There is no way that the Congress(I) high command can rest assured that the party ranks will be mobilised in strength for the campaign. All that the Congress(I) president could do is to avert a showdown with the recalcitrant sections in the State unit in the immediate context.