"Congress After Indira: Policy, Power, Political Change" by political scientist National Commission for Minorities member Zoya Hasan discusses the two power centres of the Congress and the division of power between the prime minister and party president under the United Progressive Alliance government.
Besides, it also talks about the Ayodhya and Shah Bano controversies, economic liberalisation, social inequalities, minority development, coalition government and the India-US nuclear deal among other issues.
"Overall, the dual power centre model worked under UPA-I for two important reasons. One was the aura surrounding Sonia Gandhi's renunciation; second, the Left's outside support and the National Common Minimum Programme which provided a measure of cohesion to the UPA," the book, published by Oxford University Press, says.
"In the final analysis, what held the party and the government together was the mutual understanding at the top. There was no public discord between the two leaders."
However, the writer is not very optimistic about this dualistic structure.
"In the longer run, however, the division between executive and political power was not a viable system of governance," she writes.
According to her, the decision to separate governance from political leadership, two equally important tasks, and placing each of them in a separate sphere ended the fusion of often competing imperatives of governance and political stewardship, which the centrally-driven Congress was prone to allow.
"One positive consequence of the division of powers was the return of the Congress party to the centre stage. Sonia Gandhi's decision to retain the party presidency enhanced the party