The Nehru-Gandhis’ vice-like grip on the Congress has cut the party’s lifeblood supply. Devoid of fresh talent and able leadership, and rejected by a new India that isn’t swayed by dynastic charisma, the grand old party is rotting
Congress vice president Mr Rahul Gandhi, as expected, has declined to lead his decimated party in Parliament. He wants to devote himself to strengthening the party organisation. The Congress has suffered its most humiliating electoral defeat and its strength in Parliament has shrunk to 44 members, its lowest tally ever.
Mr Mallikarjun Kharge, a Gandhi family loyalist, has been chosen by party president Sonia Gandhi as the leader of the Congress in Parliament. Mr Kharge is a senior leader but not an inspiring parliamentarian. Yet, he has been preferred over younger members.
In private, Congress leaders express their anger and disillusionment at the quality of leadership provided by Mr Gandhi. Former Congress Minister TH Mustafa lost his primary membership of the party after he called Mr Gandhi a “joker”. Another Congress leader from Madhya Pradesh gave vent to similar sentiments, with similar consequence. Many Congress leaders are also critical of the domination of apolitical personalities in Mr Gandhi’s coterie.
It is clear that the party president is unwilling to loosen the family’s stranglehold over the party. Consequently, India’s grand old party is now hostage by one family. This is a crowning pity.
However, many Congress leaders and workers genuinely feel that Nehru-Gandhi family provides the glue that holds the party together and without the members of the first family, the party will disintegrate. When the Congress was on the verge of collapse after the Babri Masjid demolition, the wily Arjun Singh mounted a flank attack against then Prime Minster PV Narasimha Rao. A reluctant dynast, Ms Gandhi played a key role from behind the curtains in undermining the authority of the Prime Minister.
Not only Congressmen but many Indians too genuinely feel that there is nothing wrong with dynastic rule. This may be the result of the old feudal culture, but the fact is that people find nothing wrong in power passing from father to son. Journalist Inder Malhotra in his book, Dynasties of India and Beyond, posited that the Indian elite’s vocal denunciation of dynasties is out of sync with the basic reflex of the silent majority.
looking beyond India, one sees that dynastic rule is common in many Asian countries. Singapore, lauded for its economic progress and stability, is effectively run by the lee family. In Bangladesh, two formidable women dynasts are call the shots — Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is the daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rehman, hero of Bangladesh’s liberation war, while Opposition leader Khaleda Zia is the widow of the assassinated leader Ziaur-Rehman. In Pakistan, Mr Bilawal Bhutto, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s son, leads the Pakistan Peoples Party and safeguards the dynasty founded by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
Some have argued that dynasticism should not be pooh-poohed as a throwback to old feudal systems. According to Mr Mark Thompson, a professor of Hong Kong University, dynasticism works because it appeals to the notion of “inherited charisma”, helps legitimise leadership succession and prevents organisational divisions.
Powerful regional dynasts are also dominating the political scene in different Indian States. Uttar Pradesh’s Samajwadi Party is controlled by the family of Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav. His son Akhilesh is now Chief Minister and the SP chief wants him to inherit the leadership of the party. In Tamil Nadu, even a cadre-based outfit like the DMK, is now controlled by the family of party patriarch M Karunanidhi. He wants to pass on the mantle to his son MK Stalin, triggering a succession war against his other son MK Alagiri.
But dynastic rule in the Congress is an issue of greater national concern. Former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi is normally held responsible for converting the party into a family business. But many feel that the process started with her father Jawaharlal Nehru, who wanted her to succeed him. Kuldip Nayar has written that former Prime Minister lal Bahadur Shastri had told him that Nehru had dynastic ambitions.
later, his daughter also made clear that she wanted her sons, first Sanjay and then Rajiv, to lead the party and the country. Notably, she did not allow regional dynasts to emerge within the party as they could pose a challenge to the authority to the Nehru-Gandhis. The present Congress president has also followed the same tradition. As a result, the Congress, unlike the BJP, is now without effective local leaders who enjoy support and confidence at the grassroots level
The question that now looms large is if the severe drubbing in the election marks the beginning of the end of the Nehru-Gandhi dynastic rule in the Congress. For the nonce, the answer is in the negative. Sonia Gandhi is in no mood to relinquish her vice-like control over the organization but India has profoundly changed. It has become an aspirational society where dynastic charisma no longer sways them.
(The writer is a former Director General of the National Human Rights Commission and former Director of National Police Academy)