Cong losing out to BJP

I wish I could agree with Congress president Sonia Gandhi that compassion was the distinctive character of her mother-in-law, Indira Gandhi. A person without an iota of consideration for individual freedom would not have detained 1,00,000 people without trial as she did during Emergency in 1975. Not only that, she also gagged the press and moulded the society in such a way that it had no hesitation to cross the thin line between right and wrong, moral and immoral.

True, Indira Gandhi did help the people of then East Pakistan in their struggle to free themselves from the distant Rawalpindi and the atrocities which the army committed against the Bangla-deshis. Sonia Gandhi tells in a television interview with Rajdeep Sardesai that the then prime minister would tell them at the dining table how the Punjabi army was killing the people in Bangladesh intentionally, without remorse.

Probably, the liberation of Bangladesh was her finest hour and the then opposition leader A B Vajpayee hailed her as Goddess Durga for having divided Pakistan. This obviated the danger of attack on India from the eastern side. However, the fact remains that the Partition form-ula which recognised the two parts of Pa-kistan, East and West, was not followed.

Pakistan never forgave India for the separation although the Hamoodar Rahman Commission report on the Bangladesh war blames people in West Pakistan for treating the Bangladeshis as second class citizens. This may be the real reason why the Bangladeshis rose against Rawalpindi and freed themselves from its clutches.
During the birth centenary of Indira Gandhi, which is being currently celebrated, two things will be remembered, one commendable and another condemnable. The first relates to the liberation of Bangladesh and the second is connected with the Emergency.

As was probably agreed to before the interview, Rajdeep does not ask Sonia Gandhi any question about Emergency. Once he tries to bring in Sanjay Gandhi but she corrects him that the interview was on Indira. Sonia Gandhi refuses to compare Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Indira Gandhi. She merely says that they were two different people. She refuses to elucidate even though the question was repeated.

At one time, I too was on personal terms with Indira Gandhi. I met her when the then home minister Lal Bahadur Shastri was a member of the Citizens Committee which Jawaharlal Nehru had constituted under her to reinvigorate the people who felt dejected after the debacle against China in 1962.

Although I was a mere information officer, she had no qualms about treating people on a par. Despite our good relations, she had no compunction in detaining me during Emergency. We never met after the detention although there were feelers from her side expressing her desire to meet me. I was too bitter to entertain the idea.

It was said about her that she was the only ‘man’ in the cabinet. She was assertive and clear in the orders she gave. The Emergency, however, was thrust upon her by Sanjay Gandhi and his cohort Siddhartha Shankar Ray, then West Bengal chief minister. Probably, she too realised that it was her only chance to wriggle herself out of the Allahabad High Court verdict which had unseated her. Indeed, it was a hard punishment for a poll indiscretion.

But it was a judgment which had to be respected. She not only suspended the constitution to do away with the judgment but also introduced authoritarianism which was not a part of the democratic governance. Entire Parliament caved in and the members, because of fear, endorsed Emergency without a whimper. They, otherwise, would criticise in private what she did.

Most pathetic was the role of the media. I recall that when Emergency was imposed, there was anger and more than a hundred journalists assembled at the Press Club at my bidding to condemn her act. But when I tried to pick up the thread after my detention for three months, there was hardly anyone to support me. Indira Gandhi had created so much of fear in the minds of journalists that they were more worried about their jobs than not the concept of the freedom of the press, which they otherwise cherished.

Dynastic dependence
The problem with the Congress today is that it has not gone beyond the dynastic dependence. And, somehow, the people are not enamoured of the dynasty anymore. Rahul Gandhi doesn’t sell although he passionately and honestly pursues the Congress principles laid down by his great grandfather Nehru.

Priyanka, Sonia Gandhi’s daughter, goes down well with the masses. This is probably because she reminds them of Indira Gandhi, who still enjoys pre-eminence in their thoughts.

All this is true, yet the Congress has lost its relevance and the party has to work hard to make people believe that it can provide an alternative. Modi is still acceptable in spite of steps like demonetisation. People believe that it was all for their good even though they have to face inconvenience.

It is a long haul for the Congress to push the BJP out of power. The biggest problem is that secularism is not a concept as attractive as it used to be once. The people themselves have been influenced by Hindutva thoughts. In fact, there is a soft-Hindutva in the country today.

How to resell the idea of India, that is democratic and secular polity, is the arduous task which the Congress is facing today. That was probably the reason
why Sonia Gandhi talked in terms of compassion. In a way, she has chalked out the programme of the Congress on the eve of elections in UP. Much will depend on how the various parties fare in the state polls.

That may influence the parliamentary election in 2019 and give direction to the country, including the Congress. The party’s problem is that it has not won any election so far since the advent of Modi. Even in the Maharashtra civic polls, the BJP is ahead of the Congress. Gujarat has gone completely to the BJP. This should worry the secular, liberal forces. The BJP is entrenching itself and the Congress is going down.