NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTION 99
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search Rediff

The Rediff Interview/ Vasant Sathe

'This is not the time to indulge in manipulative politics'

Congress president Sonia Gandhi's charms appear to be wearing thin. Congressmen, out of power since 1996, and despairing of first P V Narasimha Rao and then Sitaram Kesri's inability to return them to power, virtually dragged her out of 10, Janpath in the hope that the Nehru-Gandhi family magic may work once again with the voters of India.

But their hopes were dashed when the Congress scored an all-time low of just 112 seats in the Lok Sabha last October. They now see the futility of being led by Sonia and have started expressing their disenchantment with her leadership. The same men, who till the other day were vying with each other to swear their loyalty to the Nehru-Gandhi family, have now started saying that the Congress will end up nowhere under her leadership.

Some of these on whom wisdom recently dawned, like former party spokesman Vithal N Gadgil, candidly admit that they were the ones who cajoled Sonia to assume the leadership. Others like the party journal, Congress Sandesh, are desperately appealing to partymen to 'utilise the uniting factor of Sonia Gandhi' and somehow ensure a return to power.

Vasant Sathe, who assumed prominence in the Congress after Indira Gandhi split the party a second time in 1978, was on the sidelines for nearly a decade till Sonia appointed him editor of Sandesh. But even he has despaired of the 'depression and confusion in the party.' In the latest Sandesh, Sathe's editorial, supposedly written to boost the morale of the Congress rank and file, actually demonstrates that even he has no faith left in Sonia's ability to deliver the party to power.

In the latest issue, distributed to the media at the party's daily briefing on May 16, Sathe commented that Sonia's 'shy nature was a great handicap with the media and the intellectual elite.' He also laments, 'not that there are no more brilliant and seasoned leaders in the Congress. But the glaring truth is that there is no single person who can command popular appeal in majority of states and in all parts of India. Even if some one personality is projected, there are others who would pull him down. The crab culture is well known in the Congress. It is because of this great handicap that all leaders find a common acceptable uniting point in the Nehru-Gandhi family.'

Sathe discussed Sonia's leadership with Faraz Ahmad.

Mr Sathe, you have mentioned depression and confusion among Congressmen in your recent editorial. Would you like to elaborate?

The process began after the last general election. Though in terms of percentage, the Congress secured higher votes than other parties, the seat tally, you can say, came down. Then a process of depression began. The high command even set up a committee (the Antony committee) to introspect. But then the Rajya Sabha polls came and there was cross-voting.

Then in Delhi senior Congressmen openly rebelled against the Delhi chief minister, the same in Madhya Pradesh and then in Rajasthan. All this is disheartening the Congress rank and file and creates an atmosphere of lack of confidence in the Congress leadership.

So I thought it should not demoralise the party cadre. Then on many important issues -- such as the nuclear question and subsidies and the suggestions made by the Election Commission on the demand for women's reservation or disallowing chargesheeted men from participating in the electoral process -- there is confusion. The party is not taking any clear stand. So naturally if there is confusion in the mind of the leadership, then there will be confusion in the rank and file.

When we were out of power in 1977-80 we knew what efforts to make to come back in less than two-and-a-half years. Therefore, with that background I said the conditions are even better now. While in the Opposition, the frontline leadership should do something. Those who have crossed 70 cannot do much leg work. The all round responsibility is now on those younger leaders to work as a team for revival of the party, taking advantage of the uniting factor of the leadership of Soniaji instead of quarrelling among themselves.

This is not the time to indulge in the luxury of leg pulling and manipulative politics which I called the crab culture in my editorial. It is only in the Opposition that you get time to organise the party. Once in the government there is very little time to spare. So while in the Opposition, the leadership must concentrate on the task of cadre building right from the block level in the villages to ward level in the towns and cities.

I am giving special emphasis on cadre building because today there is a big vacuum of dedicated cadre at the grass-root level mainly because the cadre that was built under Gandhiji during the freedom struggle in each village and ward, that cadre, with the passage of time, has more or less disappeared. A new cadre, which came during Indiraji's time, has now become power-oriented and many of them like me middle-aged.

The youth, between the ages of 18 and 36 who constitute nearly 60 per cent of the voters, are today not involved in day-to-day activities of the Congress party and there is a gap between the leadership and this new generation.

The hopes and aspirations of this new generation are vastly different. Rajivji understood the aspirations of this younger generation. He had a vision about their future and they also had great confidence in him.

What about Sonia Gandhi?

I believe Soniaji also shares this vision since she has been closely associated with Rajivji. And for the last two years, since she took over the presidency, her major energy has been directed in this direction, in spite of her natural hurdles, natural and circumstantial. There are some natural, inherent hurdles she faces like a. lack of political background; b. lack of knowledge about the Congress who's who and also Congress policies; c. her lack of command of Hindi and also English and d. her complete lack of contact with the people in the media and her natural reticence about publicity and getting in the public eye.

Circumstantially, the biggest hurdle was the campaign launched against her foreign origin by the BJP and other Opposition parties as well as important elements in the party like Sharad Pawar and P A Sangma. It is to her credit, and I consider this an amazing achievement on her part, to a. acquire mastery over Hindi. She can now deliver speeches in Hindi and read the Devnagiri script, which requires a big effort and her capacity to even make effective interventions in the Lok Sabha.

Having done this she has tried to reorganise the party, shunning her privacy, and even encouraged democracy and independent thinking. This introduction of democratic thinking and action process is to her credit.

Isn't she taking a bit too long to learn for the leader of the Opposition position that she occupies?

On the contrary, my reading is the opposite. It is very difficult to acquire proficiency in languages. As for not speaking much in the House, Indiraji did not utter a word for two years after becoming the prime minister and Ram Manohar Lohia used to call her 'goongi gudiya (dumb doll).' It takes time for anybody to speak in the House. There are any number of MPs who do not utter a word throughout their full term. The effort she (Sonia) has made to understand the procedures and the functioning of Parliament is remarkable.

If you want to acquit Sonia Gandhi of the responsibility for the sorry state of the Congress today, at whose doorstep will you heap the responsibility?

Soniaji did not have the background of the policies of the Congress party on many important issues. She would rely on senior members of the party, who have been in the governments of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, like Arjun Singh, Pranab Mukherjee, Natwar Singh and Narain Dutt Tiwari who know each subject thoroughly. Soniaji would naturally consult them. She is a good listener and then formulates her views. But if these people speak in two voices, what can be done?

For instance, Dr Manmohan Singh has a different thrust to curtail subsidies because the country does not have the resources, which he pointed out and the BJP is carrying out the programme first enunciated by him. Of course, the BJP has gone overboard. Manmohan Singh did not reduce subsidies in PDS, kerosene etc.

What is your view on subsidies?

I personally feel the subsidies on these items should not only continue but even be enhanced on certain items like fertilisers, specially now when under the World Trade Organisation agreement 1,429 items, including several agricultural items, will be freely imported, without restrictions. They protect their farmers thus. Any person who says subsidies should be withdrawn speaks against the Congress.

Are you saying Dr Manmohan Singh spoke against the party's line?

No, it is her greatness to allow such tremendous inner party democracy where everyone can express his views openly.

Don't you think when Dr Manmohan Singh speaks on the floor of the Rajya Sabha (suggesting curtailment of subsidies on non-merit items) he is speaking in the capacity of the leader of the Opposition in the Upper House and is therefore articulating the views of the Congress party?

In inner party democracy a person should be allowed to express his views wherever he can. Dr Manmohan Singh therefore gets such an opportunity. But if that opinion differs from the party then the matter will be discussed and sorted out. Discussions on wider issues is a desirable thing in a democracy.

Don't you think the proper forum to articulate different views is the party and not outside?

I think one has to find synthesis between two different views and this is not a matter on which we should put a lid. Let this be talked about and debated.

Similar confusion prevailed during the Clinton visit on the minimum nuclear deterrent question.

On the nuclear question Rajiv Gandhi's policy was not to go for nuclear weapons, but to keep the option open. He was for complete global nuclear disarmament. But the present government closed that option and now you have a bomb. Simultaneously, Pakistan also has a bomb. Under this existing scenario, can there be a half-hearted approach to nuclear deterrents and capacity? It is also important for India with whom to compare itself in building a nuclear capacity.

If you compare yourself with China, which is the natural capable power, where are you compared to China? China has at least 10 times a larger stockpile of nuclear weapons and as many delivery systems. So India having gone nuclear should be comparable to an equal power like China. What prevents this? a. Pressure from a superpower which wants us to sign the CTBT; and b. lack of resources. All these questions revolve round the question of resources.

So when Pranab Mukherjee stated yes minimum nuclear deterrent is required, can we go back to the Rajiv Gandhi position in this age and roll back the nuclear bomb that we have acquired?

Did Sonia Gandhi, in her conversation with Clinton, talk of the Rajiv Gandhi formula or the minimum nuclear deterrent?

She might have discussed the Rajiv Gandhi formula. But under the new situation, what can be the policy of the Congress party?

Hasn't there been confusion over what Clinton was actually told? And didn't the party make a mess of it by not coming out clean on this issue?

This cannot be hushed up. That this has not been discussed openly, that creates confusion. Then there is the question of issues raised by the Election Commission, a. allowing chargesheeted persons to continue in politics, b. making it compulsory for political parties to give reservations for women and c. that any person can get himself elected to the Rajya Sabha from anywhere. We must take a principled stand on some issues like women's reservation and say that we will give at least 20 per cent to women candidates. If other parties do not follow suit, they will be exposed.

Similarly, why say we will wait for a chargesheeted person to be convicted by the Supreme Court first? If a person has been chargesheeted and the charges framed by a court, should we not take a stand that we will not give such a person the party ticket? I feel such matters need to be discussed in a larger forum where all the MPs, MLAs and AICC and PCC members are present.

What do you say about people like A B A Ghani Khan Chaudhry and Somen Mitra who wish to break free from the party? What is your view on the proposed Mahajot with Mamta Banerjee's Trinamul Congress?

On principle, if we say that coalition politics is not desirable for democracy and stability of the country then we should stick to it under any circumstances. But the moment you compromise on the issue on mere pragmatic considerations at a local level, you are surrendering a valuable principle and losing your credibility, irrespective of whether you lose elections or win.

If you are for coalitions then go for it before the poll. But for pragmatic reasons you can't have a tie-up with the RJD to keep out the BJP. So if you have some understanding with Mamta and Trinamul, because much is common between them and us, then it is advisable to go to the polls together. The moment we say that so and so is a symbol of corruption -- whether it is a Jayalalitha in Tamil Nadu or a Laloo Yadav in Bihar -- we should keep away from them.

Don't you differ from the party line on these questions?

I have spoken out in the presence of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. If I could speak out then, I can speak out my mind now.

In that case, how are you any different from other recent dissenters like Kapil Sibal and Jairam Ramesh?

I can't comment on their statements because I have not directly seen or read their statements and I don't like commenting on reports that merely appear in newspapers.

In effect, you are saying Sonia Gandhi isn't quite Indira Gandhi or Rajiv Gandhi who could take the party to the seat of power once again.

That Sonia Gandhi is not Indira Gandhi is very well known and nobody doubts it. But what I am saying is that Sonia Gandhi can give the party the same advantage that we had under Indira Gandhi because of her popular appeal and her being a uniting force.

The Rediff Interviews

Tell us what you think of this interview