|
| Surjit S Bhalla: Conflicted and confused | | Pity the poor Congress party politicians - the signals are so confusing that they do not know which way the wind is blowing |
| Surjit S Bhalla / New Delhi Jun 12, 2010, 00:30 IST |
|
It is not easy being a Congressman these days. In the good old days, the commands to be followed flew from one source. Genuflection was easy. Today, there are at least two major sources of political power in India, mother Sonia Gandhi and son Rahul Gandhi. Sometimes, to add to the confusion if not much else, there is a third source — the prime minister, Manmohan Singh.
The divergent sources of power can provide a perspective on the strange goings-on in the Congress community. We have been mute witness to the duality of the stand against the Maoists-Naxalites-terrorists. There is Sonia Gandhi guiding us with platitudes of love, concern, and development. We cannot hope to win the battle unless we win the hearts and minds of those wanting to desperately help the poor. Before generals go to battle, they send soldiers; two leading Congress politicians Digvijay Singh and Mani Shankar Aiyar had echoed (drafted?) the same sentiment just weeks earlier. The home minister, P Chidambaram, believes that he is not being allowed to do his job effectively. Does Rahul privately support the home minister? Two interpretations are possible — fractious Indian politicians slugging it out in public, to the obvious detriment of the country, or Congress people not knowing what lead to follow, also to the detriment of the country.
Another example: Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh and his ruminations to the press. Again, one interpretation is that Jairam, speaking way out of turn in Beijing (and co-incidentally lecturing Chidambaram on how to do his job), was only upholding the best traditions of the Congress party. The Congress strongly believes in democracy, and openness begins at home, and, therefore, it allowed Ramesh to criticise his own government on its policies and attitudes towards China and that also in China as part of an official visit to China — well, how much more democratic you want the Congress to be? They should be awarded a prize in the form of a majority in the next general election. But then, how does this openness square off with the hatchet the Congress hatchetmen swing at anybody who dares to question the Congress party leaders — no, correct that to dares to question Congress’s first family. (You can criticise Congress’ own PM as much as you want; indeed, you will most likely be rewarded for doing so!) Lines are crossed, books are banned, movies are censored, all in the name of allowing people to express their opinions.
One can add many more instances of strange and confusing Congress behaviour. For example, the once in four years press conference that never really happened. If that was a press conference, then I am a Congress apologist. And if Jairam was just shooting his mouth off in Beijing, then we did have a press conference. A necessary part of democracy is checks and balances; an important aspect of modern democracy, especially in contrast to feudal democracy, is communication, and yes, cross-questioning by the people. Why is it that there is no demand from the “open to dissent” Congress that the PM, whoever he or she might be, give not just one press conference in four years but one every four months? And why is there not a demand that the supreme leaders of a political party, especially the ruling party, give at least one press conference in 10 years, let alone once every four years? Indians like to think of themselves as being part of an important democracy; indeed, the Congress party keeps reminding us that it gifted us democracy in 1947. So how dare the peasants, instead of being thankful, demand accountability and press conferences?
There are many more examples of the new “confused” Congress. Most of the surprise is in actions of the Congress that were unthinkable with previous Congress leaders. For example, which Congress leader of yesterday would be on the same side as the narrow domain of the 15th century Khap panchayats? Who would stoop to (seemingly) give in to the demands for caste in census? Who would advocate the give me glory and give me the reactionary reservation Women’s Bill, especially on International Women’s Day; who would arrogantly not consider more progressive policies on women in politics? Who would condone the abundant corruption within the government and offer as an explanation: corruption cannot occur on our watch because it is us who have placed the honest and upright Manmohan Singh as prime minister? And so on and so on and…
It must be confusing for Rahul Gandhi. Mother a knee-jerk socialist, with a profound belief in “in the name of the poor” policies; his father, a non-socialist capitalist who was bold enough to call the bluff on government’s anti-poverty programmes, arguing that less than 15 per cent of the money in the government welfare programmes reached the poor. Sonia Gandhi has done everything possible to blindly expand these very same welfare programmes, thereby not only ignoring, but strongly rejecting Rajiv’s wise empirical observation. What is poor Rahul to do?
A consistent and plausible explanation to the actions of Congressmen in the last few months is that there are mixed signals emanating from the high command(s). Rahul Gandhi is the heir apparent; young and with an ideology much like his father, and much unlike his grandmother. His mother has an ideology much unlike her husband but much like her mother-in-law and idol, Indira Gandhi. There is also the obvious conflict of age. It is only to be expected that parent and child have different views on various subjects; have different ideologies, have different benchmarks. All parents recognise this, so why should the First Family be different?
If I am a Congress person, and I want to get ahead, which ideology do I cater to, and who do I dare displease? One game theory recommendation would be to mix and match — sometimes cater to one, and sometimes satisfy the other. All this makes for great drama, and even better TV, but it comes at a cost to the public, and the nation.
The author is chairman of Oxus Investments, an emerging market advisory and fund management firm. Please visit www.oxusinvestments.com for an archive of articles etc; comments welcome at surjit.bhalla@oxusinvestments.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
