Leadership Crisis in Congress

In the wake of the crushing defeat in the 2019 general elections, the refrain in the Congress Party is, yet again, that the Nehru-Gandhi family is the ‘glue’ that holds the party together, and that the party would splinter without them. Even though the country could not have more forcefully sent a message that it is not a weak adhesive for ill-fitting pieces that it is looking for. It is real leadership. And the stakes now are significantly higher than simply whether the Congress survives or not. At stake might very well be about the survival of a democracy in India, a system of checks and balances that can rein in the BJP’s worst tendencies, a strong opposition that can provide a counterweight and a credible alternative.

In the overwhelming mandate won by the BJP, many see signs of the country entering into an era of majoritarian excesses, marginalization of minorities, institutional atrophy, and closing of the space for dissent, essentially a fundamental disjuncture from the inclusive, liberal, secular democracy that has been the hallmark of post-Independence India (barring, of course, one aberration).

Even if the worst of these fears prove to be exaggerated, the shrinking of democratic space is a very distinct possibility with the consolidation of power by the BJP, and the further weakening of the opposition. And the Congress must shoulder much of the culpability for this. Confronted with quite alarming implications for the country, the party continues to dither, unable to put forward credible leadership, and to unrelentingly stay tethered to its first family. They seem happy to lay obeisance at the feet of the family, but cannot fathom being answerable to any other leader, even if chosen through a fair democratic process. If BJP is driven by the dangerous ideology in its will to power, Congress leaders — caustically termed durbaris(courtiers) by some — seem to be driven by nothing more than petty instincts for personal survival.

Despite a disastrous showing in 2014 under his de facto leadership, the Congress Party elevated Rahul Gandhi, expecting that things would turn around. And indeed, in 2019, the situation seemed conducive, if not for an outright Congress victory, certainly for its resurgence as a potent political entity. There was no anti-incumbency to worry about. The memories of scams that marred its last two tenures had faded. And, most importantly, the famed ‘Modi mystique’ had been dented by an ill-thought out demonetization policy, a floundering economy, high unemployment, rural distress, suspicions of corrupt cronyism, and displays of camera-focused narcissism.

Modi has of course, transformed the electoral process into a presidential-style leadership contest. So, despite his government’s failings, the question writ large over these elections was still — ‘if not Modi, who?’ Although Rahul Gandhi deflected the issue several times, in effect, the elections essentially came down to a choice between him and Modi. And on that, the people of this country have made as strong a statement as was possible.

Some see in the victory of the BJP, a saffronization of India, a ‘hijacking of the Hindu mind’ as it were. Certainly extreme right forces have been colossally emboldened under the current disposition. But there is little evidence to suggest that Modi’s victory is reflective of rabid bigotry sweeping across the vast gamut of the country, or its Hindu population, rather than just a will to choose the most confidence-inspiring of available options.

Certainly, Gandhi, to a significant extent, was able to transcend the puerile image many years of unintelligible statements and political immaturity had created. And, he worked hard, engaging seamlessly with crowds in his crumpled kurtas, joining off-the-cuff tete-a-tetes, and projecting an easy accessibility that was a sharp contrast to Modi’s designer ensembles, regal posture, scripted interviews, and a hard-won distance from the sweaty masses. But, in the end, the Indian electorate made it patently clear that it is not likeability, or even sincerity, they care about. It is a projection of toughness, and on that it was a no-contest.

Neither could Gandhi win the backing of ideologically compatible regional parties, a workable coalition of whom could have proved an effective counterweight to Modi. Instead, many a regional leader saw in Gandhi’s limitations an opportunity to indulge their own ambitions, banking on a fractured mandate that would give them power through arithmetic leverage and deal-making. But whatever the challenges of Modi’s first term might have been, they were clearly not egregious enough for voters to return such a chaotic mandate.

There are four possible scenarios that might emerge from the period of churning that the Congress is currently going through. One, that it continues under the leadership of Rahul Gandhi, as a low-impact national entity, even as the the rest of the Opposition remains fractured, and the BJP further consolidates power.

No Congress leader can seriously or sincerely believe, that another five years, and Gandhi will miraculously become more appealing, enough to either mount a serious challenge to Modi, or forge a viable Opposition coalition. Even without Modi, the BJP has become far too disciplined and efficiently-run a party to put forward any candidate as politically vulnerable as Rahul Gandhi.

Such a scenario will no doubt create multiple faultlines, and have implications for regional dynamics as well, as centrifugal regional forces react to the BJP’s centralizing agenda. This is already being seen in most recently in the draft New Education Policy and the protests against what is seen as its attempts at ‘Hindi imposition.’

Alternatively, Priyanka Gandhi could take over the the reins of the party from her brother. In her public appearances, she has displayed a grit and a feistiness that could perhaps be a match for Modi in a head-to-head contest. Chants of ‘Priyanka lao, Congress bachao‘ (Bring Priyanka, Save Congress), have been doing the rounds since 2014. This, of course, is anathema to those democratically inclined, who believe that problems created by dynastic succession, cannot be solved by dynastic succession. It might be a short term fix, but in the long run, will keep the party stuck in the same rut.

The third scenario is that the Gandhis step back, now or at a later date, but internecine conflicts ensue within the Congress, leading to further splits, and even its obsolescence as a national party. Such an outcome might not be so bad, if there were other forces to fill the vacuum. But unlike, for instance, in European countries, where more stridently ideological parties have rushed in to take the place of weakened centrist parties (the recent European Union elections are one example), there does not seem to be even the seed of such a force in India. The Aam Aadmi Party was, for a short time, the great white hope for liberal Indians looking for an alternative to a scam-ridden Congress. But it has been reduced to a faint shadow of the promise it once represented, and demonstrates how difficult it is for a new political entity to gain space in India, especially at the national level.

The most optimal scenario, of course, is a rejuvenated, robust Congress that is able to create a degree of consensus, and a strong coalition among center and left parties, one that can provide real alternative to the BJP. This could only happen if it is led by someone of the kind of stature, charisma, and strength that Gandhi clearly does not project. It would require its cohorts to relinquish the short term benefits of being attached to the coattails of power, create an internal democratic process, and finally start behaving like a modern political party.

Forty-five years ago, creeping authoritarianism and the absence of a strong Opposition led to the imposition of the Emergency, a painful and dark chapter of modern India, although it did trigger the emergence of competitive political forces. With a majoritarian party at the helm, unchecked power might lead to worse outcomes, and the Congress party’s failure to step up will also be culpable for it, this time, a sin of omission.

Related posts:

Art is a vast subject with so many different forms that each have their own effects on the viewer. Some are similar however some are vastly different in their effects. The traditional painting…

RSA was named after Rivest, Shamir and Adleman, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). It is an exponential cryptosystem based on concepts from Number Theory: modular arithmetic and…