Caste, Charisma and Rahul Gandhi

Caste is a trump card. People will reveal it at an appropriate time and place. Rahul Gandhi understands this and takes it seriously. His hurricane visits without adequate information to the local police invites the media spotlight and appreciation even from his political adversaries. From Shaturgun Sinha in BJP to Jayaprada in SP all are singing Rahul praises. But Mayawati is shaky over Rahul's poaching into her Dalit base. If she is genuine about Dalit welfare, why should she be afraid? After spending all the time in building statues she don't have time for dalits leave alone the state in total.

Although Rahul ideas are good for the long-term prospects of Congress party he needs to eliminate the chamchagiri, sycophancy and corruption in the party. Without doing this he cannot ensure the all round growth of Congress which is vital for the national growth. He must weed out the non performing elements who are totally anti-antithetical to the very foundational principle of the Grand Old Party. If he is aware of this mission in his efforts then he is leading the Congress to the greatest time in the history of India.

Wishing Rahul Gandhi all the success to take Congress and India to the top of the world where there is less corruption, sycophancy and chamchagiri.

The Times of India writes (10 October 2009)

It was bound to happen. The Nehru-Gandhi scion's visits to poor households in poverty-stricken villages have come under fire from opponents for
being political stunts exploiting caste sentiments. Given the jaded grammar of politics in our country, it is not difficult to see why they would think so when the households that Rahul visited happened to be Dalit. But he has defended himself vigorously, stating that he does not believe in the caste system, and that he sees the issue from the perspective of economic deprivation. This is a necessary move, which has been supported by some of the UPA government's initiatives. Caste needs to be de-emphasised in the country's political discourse.

Granted, caste issues are a reality in rural areas. But, while the perception of caste does exist in urban areas as well, it's economic issues which hold the key there. And a look at population projections reveals that the share of the urban population in India is expected to reach 40 per cent by 2021. By as early as 2011, urban areas could contribute around 65 per cent of GDP. This is why it becomes necessary to frame the question of poverty and social backwardness in economic rather than caste terms. Given the overlap between economic backwardness and caste in rural areas, focusing on the former will chip away at the foundations of discrimination based on the latter as well.

Whatever one might feel about the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme launched by the UPA government, one of its virtues is that it breaks free from the obsession with caste. But while the political strategy of the Congress's main opponent in UP, Mayawati, is based on caste, Rahul's efforts have been based within an economic framework. Identity politics may have run its course, and caste-based social engineering is likely to yield diminishing returns at the political box office. Perhaps the cynicism prevalent in our political system makes it difficult to believe a genuine attempt to break away from caste politics. But Rahul deserves the right to make new political experiments.
_________________________________
COUNTER VIEW
Accept that caste can't be ignored
Amrith Lal10 October 2009, 12:00am IST
Print Email Discuss Bookmark/Share Save Comment Text Size: |
Rahul Gandhi's attempt to explain his visits to Dalit homes in UP in class terms is least surprising. Most of our political parties claim that
their politics override caste and similar identities but formulate tactics, especially during elections, by working out the caste arithmetic. This duplicity is, perhaps, a leftover of the dominant political paradigm of the Nehruvian era that refused to recognise that caste was the primary marker of social identity in Indian society.

In some cases, the preference for this paradigm is due to ideological reasons, as in the case of communist parties. They argue that caste can be explained in class terms. But many others refuse to admit the presence of caste as the most important category in determining political power because such an admission would inevitably force them to confront existing social hierarchies. It is impossible to admit the influence of caste and argue for a status quo in power relations. One way to preserve social privileges determined by caste is to argue that economic factors alone are responsible for an unjust social order. However, it's no more possible for political parties to argue this line. Since the Mandal revolution, caste has emerged as the main instrument for political mobilisation.

The Congress was the biggest loser as ground rules of politics, particularly in northern India, changed in 1990s. It is now in the process of rebuilding the social coalition that helped the party dominate Indian politics for decades. This coalition, in the party's heyday, included many upper castes as well as Dalits and tribals. But to attract them back to the Congress, the party has to look beyond old forms of patronage politics where the leader gave some sops and got back loyalty to the party in return. Rahul Gandhi's trips to meet and dine with Dalits are clearly part of a concerted effort to regain the trust of erstwhile loyal and now estranged social groups. It is more than a coincidence that most of the poor he is meeting are also Dalits. There's nothing wrong with all this. The point is to admit that caste is at the centre of all such political strategies. And, that's only being honest about the Indian reality.
TIMES VIEW: Welcome shift from identity politics

Unbreakable Manmohan Sonia Bondage

The Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and the Congress party Sonia Gandhi are in the same wavelength. Both are cool headed and no knee jerk reacting people/ Despite the attempts by opposition and party to drive between them Manmohan and Sonia have maintained their relationship. This is extremely good for the developing country like India which is deliberately looking for political stability. The compulsions of coalition politics are preventing both from weeding out corrupt elements from the government. Whatever the media writes or the opposition shouts, the pair is strong enough to let down the coolness and surrender to the noise.

Rajeev Deshpande writes in The Times of India (2 August 2009)


On his return from Egypt in the early hours of July 17, a day after meeting his Pakistani counterpart Yousuf Gilani, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
received a low-profile but important visitor. It was Ahmed Patel, political secretary to Congress chief Sonia Gandhi. Patel came calling even as storm clouds were darkening Delhi's skyline.

By the time Singh's aircraft touched down, the morning papers had begun to shrill a growing sense of shock and disbelief at the PM's delinking of terrorism from the composite dialogue with Pakistan, as well as the shock insertion of Balochistan into India-Pak bilaterals. The big question was: Why had the PM done the unthinkable?

Patel possibly briefed Singh about the reaction generated by the India-Pakistan joint statement inked in Sharm el-Sheikh. He would certainly have noted Singh's take on developments. Even as the Congress leadership treaded gingerly over the political thin ice in the next few days, Singh reached Parliament where he responded to the Opposition's belligerence by baldly reiterating the delinking of terror from talks. Both Houses heard him out but it was a deceptive calm.

After the July 18-19 weekend — during which Sonia met Singh — curiosity grew about whether or not Congress would now endorse the Singh-Gilani statement. Congress pointedly refused to do so, arguing it was for the government to offer explanations. The pot really began to boil because the commentariat had already slammed the PM for being either too naive or simply letting his guard slip.

The Singh-Sonia power equation has worn well since Congress's shock win in 2004. During the release of the 2009 manifesto, she firmly quelled speculation over Rahul Gandhi being a prime ministerial hopeful. And when she welcomed Singh to her home, 10 Janpath, on May 16, after the poll results showed a big Congress win, it was as a proud guardian would greet a bright ward.

Singh has never lost sight of that essential dynamic. He knows that it is Sonia who powers the party and government. His success in delivering on welfare schemes, driven by Sonia's aam aadmi convictions, was seen to have helped Congress retain power. It cemented his position as Mr Reliable. The events at Sharm el-Sheikh are the first bump on the smooth path trod by these partners.

Just what was it that Singh tried in his talks with Gilani? Did he fail to anticipate a disjunct with his party on the issue? Those with access to Singh point to parallels with the saffron storm over BJP veteran L K Advani's "Jinnah-was-secular" remark. The Congress faithful, outraged that 26/11 is being "forgotten", led the revolt just as Advani was set upon by his own partymen. Efforts to break the mould are often seen as heretical.

The trouble began, sources admitted, with the Pakistani press at Sharm el-Sheikh swiftly telegraphing the de-bracketing of terror and inclusion of Balochistan as major victories for Gilani. The initial mood was set, only to gather momentum and result in a media frenzy that ended up obscuring the true nature of the initiative.

The philosophical choice that Singh presented: Could India and Pakistan break away from their hawkish stance? Could India shed its sense of victimhood, genuinely de-hyphenating itself from Pakistan? When the big powers were prepared to look at India in its own right, where was the profit in bringing up Pakistan at every turn? Singh also told the Lok Sabha on July 29 that in the absence of the option of war, dialogue was the only way out. His vision of a "shared future and common prosperity" is anchored in the belief that it is time to break out of mutually hostile silos.

It all sounded fine as a doctrine. But it left the Prime Minister's party cold mainly because the Sharm el-Sheikh joint statement was seen to leave India's flanks exposed. Doubts lingered over Gilani's views. Did the Pakistan prime minister fully share Singh's genuine desire for peace? Or was he merely looking to ease ties with India because of Pakistan's reluctant offensive against the Taliban?

Congress leaders are unreconciled to the Balochistan reference even though the official camp argued this gave India as much leeway to comment on the Pakistani province as it did to Islamabad to rake up the "Indian hand". Party sceptics feel this gave BJP the upper hand and needlessly embarrassed India's security establishment. Like the "Pakistan-is-a-victim-of-terror" formulation, Balochistan is seen falsely to equate Islamabad's jihad policy in Kashmir with India's alleged interference.

As his subsequent clarification showed, when he virtually ruled out the quick resumption of talks, the PM has understood his moves might have been mistimed or at least poorly communicated. And Sonia's backing, this time round, has been carefully conditional. In saying Pakistan has to deliver on its pledges, she has drawn a clear red line — out-of-the-box thinking on Pakistan was a fraught project.

As Congressmen mulled over a confusing week, the big question remained. And it was not about whether Singh overstepped his brief. But did he forget his basic instincts as Congressman and member of Sonia's party?
________________________________________________________________________________
Chandan Mitra writes in The Times of India (2 August 2009)

It pays Sonia Gandhi to keep Manmohan Singh weak, while he benefits by happily staying weak. This ensures she can comfortably mother him, bail him
out of traps he frequently falls into but never remotely emerges as a political threat to the dynasty. At times, though, it is impossible not to wonder if Manmohan Singh consciously dons the "bechara" mantle. Apart from pleasing Sonia Gandhi, it also helps him garner unprecedented support from sections of the media and bleeding heart liberals who, unfortunately, constitute a powerful opinion-making class. But the Prime Minister's latest surrender at Sharm el-Sheikh doesn't fall into the category of calculated projection of weakness. It is proof, if proof were ever needed, that Manmohan Singh's capacity to withstand Washington's pressure or Islamabad's charm offensive is pathetically low.

This time though, Sonia Gandhi has been less than fulsome in her support to the man she depends upon to keep the seat warm for her son. Her speech at the Congress Parliamentary Party meeting last Thursday in which she defended his clarification on Sharm el-Sheikh in Parliament but stopped well short of endorsing the joint statement with Pakistan, suggested a subtle expression of displeasure. Manmohan's "weakness" is a virtue in domestic politics but not in the conduct of international diplomacy especially on a subject as sensitive as Pakistan. The Prime Minister's Hindi-Paki bhai-bhai approach at Sharm el-Sheikh was not only reminiscent of the naivete of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty's founder with regard to China, but yet another example of his abject surrender to American foreign policy goals in the sub-continent.

Possessing an astute political mind, comparable only to her mother-in-law's, Sonia Gandhi knows that Manmohan Singh is far from an instinctive politician. She, therefore, protects him from political and organisational complexities, depending instead on trusted associates like Ahmed Patel for strategic inputs and Pranab Mukherjee to run political as well as administrative matters. That has left the Prime Minister only one arena in which he can function with some measure of autonomy, namely, foreign policy. Admittedly, she has built a support system that is enviable by political standards because the Byzantine web of diffused responsibilities keeps her out of the line of fire. But only when she throws her weight behind Manmohan Singh's ardent desires does it become policy. For instance, she was initially unsure of going ahead with the nuclear deal and forced her handpicked Prime Minister to publicly declare that he was ready to live with disappointments. When she subsequently changed her mind, it was left to her political managers to sew up a deal with the Samajwadi Party before she came out in his defence thereby allowing Manmohan Singh to craft a maddeningly one-sided agreement. The deal, however, was sold most effectively as a panacea for India's energy crisis by the Congress's spin-doctors! Manmohan Singh was weak enough to first agree to drop it and then resurrect it once she decided to back him.

Among the Prime Minister's most defining characteristics is his unnatural absence of ego. This time too, when he discovered Sonia Gandhi was unhappy with his concessions to Pakistan on Balochistan and delinking cross-border terrorism from normalisation of relations, he quickly somersaulted. A junior minister was told to dismiss the joint statement as a mere "diplomatic paper" while the foreign secretary (who was elevated to this position by superseding 17 seniors) attributed it to "bad drafting". And in Parliament, he tried his best to pretend he had stuck to traditional policy parameters. Sonia Gandhi was mollified and rose to his defence next morning.

This sums up the sorry tale of India's power balance shifting out of South Block to the residence of the Congress president. And this is how a "weak" Manmohan Singh will ensure continuance in office — not at the pleasure of the President as the Constitution enjoins, but at the sufferance of his supreme leader.

Congress Under Attack

The poor Grand Old Party, Congress is under attack from every quarter. Surprisingly the criticism about the internal matter of the party comes from its opponents and allies. Left and right are ruthless in condemning the election management abilities of the party under the command of Sonia Gandhi. With the straight fifth loss in the state assemblies, she is charged with directionless leadership. Punjab, Uttaranchal, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh have fallen for the opposition camps. In these big battles, BJP is the big gainer by winning three states and its ally Akali Dal triumphing in Punjab.

A forthright introspection of the Congress misdeeds will point finger in many directions. Let us see the vital gaps in the party.

1. The local elections are managed from the centre
2. No space and scope for the state leaders
3. Too much of corruption, cronyism and casual attitude at the centre
4. Sycophancy is at the peak
5. Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi are misguided by the central leaders
6. The blame game after the defeat should be stopped. When the party wins, the credit is given to Gandhis and when it gets defeated the buck is passed on to the grassroots failures. This silly kiddish behaviour of the responsible leaders must stop immediately
7. Various election coordination points are working at cross purposes
8. Truly there is no internal democracy. Some of the leaders responsible for internal elections are highly corrupt. The posts are sold for highest bribe payer.
9. All the frontal organizations are sleeping. Especially the youth wing is silent when it is supposed to act and react.
10.The young MPs are busy playing polo and disco dancing than seriously strategising for party's development. Give more autonomus responsibility and make them accountable
11. Only sincere and proven leaders should be given crucial tasks
12. Disciplinary actions are must against those who violate the party norms. Hariprasad who abused Modi personally in Gujarat and Dr. Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy who mudslinged Chandrababu Naide were left scot free. This kind of encouragement for below standard politics puts the party in the same line with other third grade ones in the country
13. Congress cannot beat at both sides. One end arguing for secularism and the other end allocating money for Madrasas to celebrate national days like 15 August
14. With the rising tide of BSP and various Muslim parties around the nation, Congress party's weaker section votebank is under severe threat
15. Organise booth level meetings and highlight people's problems in all states
16. Activities should be throughout the year rather than election oriented paraphernalia
17. Hardworking cadres should be taken care. They should be rewarded suitably with jobs and adequate incentives. If there is no regular connection between the cadres and leaders, the party machinery gets defunct during needy hours
18. Use technology and the latest means to develop the party base
19. Party and government management should be clearly demarcated
20. Sonia Gandhi should interact with grassroot cadres regularly to infuse interests in the party's mobility

Divorce the immoral wife

The marriage between the Left and Congress is on turmoil. From the day one of the marriage proposal, it sounded as an inconvenient wedlock. Still Dr. Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and their Grand Old Party managed to lead a life. They postured in public decently and did not reveal the internal disruptions in the married life. After three and half years of this turbulent marriage, the greatest of all errors has occurred. An illicit affair of the Left with the opponents of the Congress is coming to the surface. Hob nobbing of the Left with Samajwadi Party, Telugu Desam, Indian National Lok Dal and Asom Gana Parsihad clearly states the dirty moral life lead by the Left. Although this may be politically correct for the Left’s future it violates the coalition dharma. Only for this kind of double standard life, the Left had opted for the support to the UPA government from outside. Calling the Prime Minister and his policies as futile and debunking all the programmes as anti people, the Left is in fact expressing in public about the fault lines in the marriage. The blame is put on the wrong side. Despite enjoying all the benefits of the marriage the Left is violating the minimum level of marital responsibility. Now it is high time for the Congress to divorce the Left and go for fresh elections. The Congress came close to this stage few weeks back. Sonia Gandhi’s public condemnation of the Left at a rally in Jhajhar after unveiling a power station gave the lead to the divorce. But the murmurs expressed by the allies of Congress like NCP, RJD and DMK stopped the break up in the UPA relations.

The Insurance Regulatory Authority Bill, SEZs, Foreign Universities Bill, Forests Act, the Indo US Nuclear Deal and almost all the constructive proposals mooted and put forward by the UPA government were blocked by the Left. While opposing these legal constitutional provisions and external collaborations at the pretext of the national interests, the Left had next government formation at its back of the mind. In every breadth of its opposition an image was created that the Left stands for the safeguard of Indian sovereignty. But the past record of the Communists does not have an inch of sovereignty safeguard credibility. It is the same old political force that opposed India’s freedom, supported Chinese aggression in the 60s and stood on the way to the nation’s march to modernity. After a complete public rebuttal in most parts of the country for its anti-development and anti-modern attitude of the Left it was lying low for few years. Now with the young and aggressive leaders in the forefront, the red shirt warriors are once again masquerading as the pro India development politicians.

It is the high time for Congress to take stock of the situation. An overall analysis of the coalition partners and their crucial role tells two important factors at this stage. The Congress is trying to cobble a coalition where the majority of the leaders have Prime Ministerial ambitions. This was expressed both directly and indirectly by the supporting heads of the parties. It is an open secret that Sharad Pawar and Lalu Prasad Yadav the regional leaders from states with big numbers of MPs have P.M chair occupying dreams. The DMK patriarch is nursing this dream as a closed secret after G.K. Moopanar’s very close reach to the P.M chair in 2006. The successful P.M crowning of Deve Gowda and I.K. Gujaral have sowed the P.M dream seeds in the minds of few numbers holding party leaders in the parliament. “Anything is possible” stage had arrived in the Indian central politics in the post liberalization phase. With this kind of immoral and backstabbing opportunists Congress cannot have a future. Either it will be permanently made as a dependable party on the regional forces to run a government at the centre or it will be wiped out as the pan Indian political entity. Currently the major parliamentary seats holding states are out of the Congress hands. Uttar Pradesh (80), Bihar (50), Maharashtra (48), West Bengal (42) and Tamil Nadu (39) tell us the inability of the Congress to work out permanent solutions to its problems. It is dependent on its allies for a sizeable share in these major states. With the miraculous victory of BSP in U.P assembly elections a new headache has started for the grand old party. Mayawati has vowed to introduce her victorious U.P experiment in other states. Even if she managed to win 20 parliamentary seats outside U.P the Congress will face a historical challenge to its political existence.

To take the party ship out of this perennial cyclone, the Congress should work out few long term fixations. It is not just enough to shout slogans like “Hamara hath aam aadmi ki saath”. The first step in this direction is to get rid of its sycophancy culture in the party management. There is a feeling of isolation among the hard working cadres and workers with strong ideological roots. A complete objective handling of the party is a must. The present party managers are too hierarchical and suspended from the ground realities. As long as this trend continues there is no hope for the Congress to come to the central power on its own.