#dnaEdit: Congress confounded

Congress general secretary (organisation) Janardhan Dwivedi has always been cautious and clever, someone who relied a little too much on his skills of casuistry. He had outfoxed the media over the years much to the frustration of journalists. It seems he has at last trapped himself in his own web of words. Whatever he had meant to convey, he ended up giving the impression in an interview to a news agency correspondent that ‘Bhartiyata’ or Índianness was what had helped Narendra Modi win the 2014 Lok Sabha election. It implied a tacit approval and acknowledgment that Modi had communicated better with the people, and that the Congress had failed to do so. Now, that is a slightly convoluted way of saying things. The swift reaction of the usually soporific Congress was indeed surprising. Ajay Maken, who heads the party’s media and communication wing, which was once headed by Dwivedi, came out with a rebuttal which amounted to a public snub to Dwivedi. 

Maken had dug up the archives and retrieved a speech that Indira Gandhi, the original czarina of the party, had delivered at the ultra-conservative Kashi Vidyapeeth, in 1970, to convey the Congress exegesis of the word, ‘Bhartiyata’. The Congress has always taken pride in the fact that they do not indulge in empty intellectual fencing, that theirs is a party dedicated to the practical goal of serving the poor people in the country, following in the footsteps of the ostensibly anti-intellectual Mahatma Gandhi. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) obviously has been unable to conceal its perverse glee over the latest row. The Union minister of state for commerce (independent charge) Nirmala Sitharaman derided the Congress’ dictatorial hierarchy, forgetting for a moment that when it comes to issues of choosing its Prime Minister, its president and its Chief Ministers, the party does not follow democratic norms. More important than what is not much of a counter from the BJP is the fact that Congress has been forced to fight on a BJP issue. It is the BJP which had harped on ‘Bhartiyata’ in contrast to the Congress’ clever ruse of secularism and socialism.  Dwivedi had unwittingly pulled the party into a maelstrom of ideas and definitions, and that too on terms set by the BJP. Congress is not accustomed to serious debates. The party relies on the charisma, perceived or otherwise, of the leader and the slogans the leader provides. 

It is not crucial whether Dwivedi remains in the party, retains his proximity to party president Sonia Gandhi, or whether he gets an official rap on the knuckles. He is not a big enough leader to be expelled. The speculation is that Dwivedi represents the old guard and that his remark was an expression of intra-party dissatisfaction with party vice president Rahul Gandhi, who is supposed to represent the younger vanguard. The fact is Dwivedi represents no one in the party except himself. He does not have political roots in his home state of Uttar Pradesh to qualify as a faction leader, let alone a powerful one. It is true that there are many who are unhappy with Rahul Gandhi. But Dwivedi is not the rallying point for the disaffected. The old guard is presented by leaders like AK Antony, and before he became president, Pranab Mukherjee. And it is a very adaptive one. It veers towards whichever is the power centre. The problem lies in the fact Rahul Gandhi has not emerged as one. The Congress is in disarray, and so are the vanguard and the old guard.