Rahul Gandhi’s test
There may be need to rethink idea of Rahul as party’s future, but it can't be done on the basis of an imagined result.
The writer is a columnist. He is also a former editor of the Mumbai-based English newspaper Mid Day and the Gujarati paper Divya Bhaskar aakar.patel@tribune.com.pk
The important fact of the 2014 contest is that the excitement the Bharatiya Janata Party is able to create around its prime ministerial candidate is missing in the Congress. Narendra Modi is seen as a far more inspirational leader, and more effective communicator than Rahul Gandhi.
The reluctance or inability of the younger man to deploy his charisma — by making heroic or lyrical speeches — also hurts his party.
Political dynasties survive on the back of such loudness of character and self-referencing, and every South Asian family politician knows this. Though he is self-made, Modi has the confidence and quality to produce this charisma and he is a ‘known’ commodity for his potential voters, even though he has no dynastic past.
The strongman from Gujarat also has the advantage of a record in governance and growth that Rahul Gandhi personally lacks. The Congress heir does not own the successes and failures of the Union government, and it is his mother and Manmohan Singh who are seen as its masters.
Even so far as the party goes, there is a division of power between mother and son. The extent to which Rahul has independence in directing Congress strategy is unclear. Though his interventions have sometimes resulted in the party changing direction, he is still the deputy leader of the Congress and subordinate to his mother.
This is quite different from Modi, who is undisputed leader of his party, and in total control of his campaign.
In the Congress, there is a large section, particularly in the lower ranks, that would like Priyanka Vadra to bring the spark that Rahul is unable to kindle. Election campaigns need personality and colour, and this is absent in the Congress, and acknowledged by many within it. Where will it come from?
Priyanka, on the limited evidence of her public outings and media interactions, is more magnetic a figure than her brother. The mischief of her husband, and the awful public image he has built, has also not rubbed off on her, and this has in part to do with her independent personality. She is likeable and attractive.
This is why many in the Congress believe the entry of Priyanka would help the party fight back against Modi, its toughest opponent in decades.
The other way of looking at it is to say that Rahul ought to be given a chance to fail first before being sidelined in favour of his sister. A move to bring in Priyanka at this stage would mean an acknowledgment of Rahul’s failure and defeat in 2014. But that defeat hasn’t yet come.
It well might, and there may be a need to rethink the idea of Rahul as the party’s future, but it cannot be done on the basis of an imagined result.
Since taking over as Congress president, Sonia improved on the party’s electoral performance (in terms of the number of seats) in three consecutive general elections. The Congress has gone from having 114 seats in 1998 to over 200 in 2009. She has unquestionably revived the party. Rahul’s job was to rejuvenate it and he hasn’t done that.
It is probable that this year, the sequence will end and the party tally will drop. If this happens, it will be seen as Rahul’s failure, given the focus on him.
Sonia enjoys a much better reputation as a leader than her son, at least with the media. It is quite remarkable that she personally has not come under the sort of attack that Rahul has, though she is the individual in charge of the party.
But she has been reluctant to be the face of the government, and now even of the party. And so, her son must show that he is capable of taking forward the most valuable political inheritance in the world.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 19th, 2014.
The reluctance or inability of the younger man to deploy his charisma — by making heroic or lyrical speeches — also hurts his party.
Political dynasties survive on the back of such loudness of character and self-referencing, and every South Asian family politician knows this. Though he is self-made, Modi has the confidence and quality to produce this charisma and he is a ‘known’ commodity for his potential voters, even though he has no dynastic past.
The strongman from Gujarat also has the advantage of a record in governance and growth that Rahul Gandhi personally lacks. The Congress heir does not own the successes and failures of the Union government, and it is his mother and Manmohan Singh who are seen as its masters.
Even so far as the party goes, there is a division of power between mother and son. The extent to which Rahul has independence in directing Congress strategy is unclear. Though his interventions have sometimes resulted in the party changing direction, he is still the deputy leader of the Congress and subordinate to his mother.
This is quite different from Modi, who is undisputed leader of his party, and in total control of his campaign.
In the Congress, there is a large section, particularly in the lower ranks, that would like Priyanka Vadra to bring the spark that Rahul is unable to kindle. Election campaigns need personality and colour, and this is absent in the Congress, and acknowledged by many within it. Where will it come from?
Priyanka, on the limited evidence of her public outings and media interactions, is more magnetic a figure than her brother. The mischief of her husband, and the awful public image he has built, has also not rubbed off on her, and this has in part to do with her independent personality. She is likeable and attractive.
This is why many in the Congress believe the entry of Priyanka would help the party fight back against Modi, its toughest opponent in decades.
The other way of looking at it is to say that Rahul ought to be given a chance to fail first before being sidelined in favour of his sister. A move to bring in Priyanka at this stage would mean an acknowledgment of Rahul’s failure and defeat in 2014. But that defeat hasn’t yet come.
It well might, and there may be a need to rethink the idea of Rahul as the party’s future, but it cannot be done on the basis of an imagined result.
Since taking over as Congress president, Sonia improved on the party’s electoral performance (in terms of the number of seats) in three consecutive general elections. The Congress has gone from having 114 seats in 1998 to over 200 in 2009. She has unquestionably revived the party. Rahul’s job was to rejuvenate it and he hasn’t done that.
It is probable that this year, the sequence will end and the party tally will drop. If this happens, it will be seen as Rahul’s failure, given the focus on him.
Sonia enjoys a much better reputation as a leader than her son, at least with the media. It is quite remarkable that she personally has not come under the sort of attack that Rahul has, though she is the individual in charge of the party.
But she has been reluctant to be the face of the government, and now even of the party. And so, her son must show that he is capable of taking forward the most valuable political inheritance in the world.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 19th, 2014.