Not Rajiv's Congress

Weekend Ruminations

The more one thinks about it, the more it seems obvious that Rajiv Gandhi was right in almost everything that he wanted to do, and lost out only because, as a 40-year-old prime minister with neither administrative experience nor political seasoning, he did not have what it took to translate sensible propositions into reality.

Think for a moment about the issues that he brought to the front pages: computerisation, for a start. He insisted that all senior government officers should have computers on their desks, and in one election campaign began to feed into computers the background and track record of all aspiring candidates, to fit them with constituency profiles "" precisely the kind of thing for which Pramod Mahajan is getting praise today. Rajiv was only hooted at for being naïve enough to think that Indian politics would be rationalised into a computer box.

Again, it was Rajiv who began the telecom revolution by introducing telephone booths across the country, investing in the C-Dot effort to develop cheap telecom switches, and beginning the corporatisation of telecom services (MTNL was born under him).

And in his first interview after he won the 1984 election as prime minister, he talked of the importance of a road programme and asked how long we would be happy to bump along on such poor quality roads.

He fixed with great accuracy on the essential issues while shaping his technology missions: things like water and oilseeds. And he tried novel experiments with the government machinery: not just the technology missions but also the emphasis on re-training and refresher courses for government officials.

He was alive to environmental issues, seeking to clean India's rivers and setting up a wasteland board. And he was of course responsible for the fundamental change that has been wrought in governance through the legislation on panchayati raj, while talking constantly of the need to ready for the 21st century. It was an impressive range to straddle.

In foreign policy, he was the first prime minister to realise that you needed to reach out to the US, and mend fences with China "" becoming the first prime minister to visit Beijing after the 1962 war.

He brokered a peace package for Sri Lanka that the LTTE must recognise with hindsight it would have been wise to accept, because it will get nothing better. And when it came to internal security challenges, he took bold initiatives on everything from Kashmir to Punjab and Assam.

The first didn't deliver the expected results, and the second seemed to come unstuck with Longowal's murder, but the long view must be that it marked the beginning of the road back to normalcy in the state. And of course the Assam accord ended the turmoil there and co-opted the agitators into the political mainstream.

He made mistakes too, of course. He was impetuous, his judgement was often shaky, and his personal style (holidays in the Andamans with foreign friends, rash driving in expensive cars) alienated many.

More substantively, he erred in undoing the effect of the Shah Bano judgement, not realising that this would give the BJP the ammunition with which to shoot its way into power. And of course he hopelessly mishandled the Bofors affair.

But when he lost office following the 1989 elections, he did not retreat into sullen silence, instead he set about working out a blueprint for what would need to be done when he returned to office, a blueprint that became the 1991 party manifesto.

This is not to attempt revisionism on an airline pilot who found himself as prime minister and whom many have dismissed as someone who was simply out of his depth, but to underline the contrast with today's Congress.

Rajiv wanted to change things, and he was full of energy and optimism. He was willing to experiment, and understood the potential of new technologies. In other words, he set the agenda.

In contrast today, what the party seems to lack is a rudder. There is no over-arching vision, no central message, only a set of confused responses on agendas set by someone else.

Sonia Gandhi is keen to wipe the stain of corruption from her husband's reputation, why isn't she as keen to adopt his vision of 21st century India, and to make that the talisman for her party?