Surjit S Bhalla: Congress: Perform or perish

IT DOESN'T MATTER

The only escape for the Congress, from the end of the long rope it finds itself in, is to allow its two leaders to function.

The Congress party of India could do a lot worse than the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) of Mexico. The history of the PRI is almost identical to that of the Congress. Both were founding parties (the PRI was founded in 1929), and both held near dictatorial powers during their early years in power. And both started declining at about the same time""the Indira Gandhi-led Congress in the mid-seventies, and the Lopez Portillo-led PRI (1976-82) in the late seventies. Interestingly, the beginning of the end of the PRI was due to corruption charges against Portillo.

In the just-concluded Mexican elections, you will find little mention of the PRI. The formerly there-is-no-alternative party of Mexico garnered only 20 per cent of the presidential vote, compared to about 36 per cent for each of two new political parties. The PRI vote share in 2006 is not far from the average vote share of each of the two major political parties in India in the last three elections""about 24 per cent for the BJP and 26 per cent for the Congress.

The world has changed dramatically in the last decade, and possibly changed most in India. A considerable part of the credit for our changed fortunes, apparent for all to see and benefit from, goes to the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh. He initiated major economic reforms in 1991, reforms which every subsequent government has continued. These reforms have transformed India, a transformation that even the left-ruled governments of West Bengal and Kerala not only applaud, but are now following in their respective states.

He is the Congress's most important asset, along with its president, Ms Sonia Gandhi. After the election results in 2004, the political and leadership stock of both these individuals increased dramatically. Ms Gandhi's, because of her relinquishing a prize political post, which was by right hers, and Dr Singh's, because he was asked to be PM. India was set to be on a new path, with one of its most able (and sincere and non-corrupt) individuals as the PM.

But the future was not to be. Dr Singh has not been allowed to function, and not even allowed to implement economic reforms, which his coalition allies, and the opposition are busy implementing in their respective states! In effect, the record of the Congress party in the last two years is one of ensuring a steady erosion of Dr Singh's credibility. This makes one wonder: Why should the party attempt to destroy its most important asset? Is it possible that the party does not realise that if it undercuts the PM, it would also be undercutting Ms Gandhi? Where would the liabilities like Mr Arjun Singh (a perennial and perennially unsuccessful Congress PM candidate) be if Ms Gandhi was seen as an ineffective leader?

The Congress is leading a coalition of parties, as did the BJP under Mr Vajpayee. Both the parties have to face the coalition music, the coalition dharmas. Constraints on leadership are expected, but what differentiates, and, indeed, defines leadership is an ability to act despite the pulls and counter-pulls of a coalition. And history is rapidly recording a by now obvious reality""Ms Gandhi, India knew an effective and popular coalition leader, Mr Vajpayee, and you ain't no Vajpayee. But you could have been; and would have been if you had been able to control the self-destructive elements within your own party.

The list of self-inflicted cuts by the Congress party in the last two years is long, and, by now, legion. One could argue that these wounds are because of coalition pressures, but one would be wrong. The hara-kari is most likely due to interest groups within the Congress party, most likely led by aging leaders with little else to live for than a 15-minute fame as a wannabe Prime Minister. The fact that the rot has been allowed to continue""political interference, introduction of populist measures that benefit only the Congress, destruction of institutions (is the Supreme Court next?), disregard for constitutional niceties""means ineffective leadership. This list of grotesque political mistakes does not even include the control-freak Broadcast Bill, which the Congress is bringing up for consideration. And someone should instruct the Congress spokesperson to not put the blame for the introduction of the Bill on the bureaucracy. We all know that if the latter had any backbone, India would have been walking, not crawling, for several generations.

The Congress party has achieved the PRI impossible""self-destruction. By not allowing Mr Singh to function, the Congress has exposed the ineffectiveness of Ms Gandhi herself. Two years ago, the two leaders were admired; regard for the two has fallen, and it is a moot question whether the speed of decline has been greater for the Congress or the BJP.

The Congress should take a rest from its activities and spend some time reading about that other Congress party, the Mexican PRI. It will learn about how, only six years after ruling Mexico for 70 years, the party has disappeared from memory. In order to not let history repeat itself, the Congress has only one choice""it should allow both its leaders to exercise leadership. If it does, success is not assured, but is at least probable. If it does not, then Lord Meghnad Desai will be eminently right: the two leading political parties of India, the Congress and the BJP, will have to unite in order not to go the PRI way.

ssbhalla@gmail.com