Congress and Democracy in India

A perceptive article from the Telegraph, Kolkata, May 19

The Congress needs internal democracy and a stated ideology

S.L. Rao

The United Progressive Alliance coalition was an innovative separation of powers between the Congress president and the prime minister, with outside support from an ideology-based Left Front. The Left probably deliberately weakened the coalition from the beginning by its aggressive and interventionist opposition to government initiatives and policies.
Ministerial and cabinet positions were decided by the Congress leadership, not by the prime minister, and on considerations of loyalty rather than ability. The prime minister was weakened by the separation of powers. Several times, the party leader did not publicly support him against unruly ministers. This led to increasing indiscipline among ministers. In contrast, the previous National Democratic Alliance coalition government was more harmonious.
The chief minister of West Bengal, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, finds the prime minister weak, indecisive, lacking in leadership and a political failure because the Congress has lost so many elections during his tenure. In fact, the Congress president took all critical decisions and, with her son, spearheaded the elections. Arjun Singh, the old First Family loyalist and bête noire of the prime minister, has now discovered flaws in the leadership of Sonia Gandhi and the prime minister.
The UPA’s ministerial appointments were decided by the Congress president.
Natwar Singh was made external affairs minister because of his closeness to Sonia Gandhi. He publicly differed with the prime minister by persisting with an anti-US policy, banking on communist support. He persisted with non-alignment, despite the end of the Cold War. He tried to reverse the foreign policy direction initiated by the NDA government and continued by Manmohan Singh. He was dropped only when his Iraqgate connections were exposed by the United Nations.
Arjun Singh, in the cabinet because of his loyalty to the First Family, has been an embarrassment as minister for human resources. Interfering in appointments in the Indian institutes of management, pushing for reservation for other backward classes without infrastructure or faculty, not effective in programmes like education for all, he introduced divisive policy initiatives.
Mani Shankar Aiyar asked his leader for a cabinet position. He became petroleum minister by accident and encroached on other ministerial turfs. The home minister demonstrated incompetence in handling terrorism, Naxalites, Taslima Nasreen, and many other subjects that needed decisive action. He was protected by the First Family.
The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s health minister took ill-advised initiatives and squabbled with the director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
The DMK’s surface transport minister caused an uproar in Parliament and the country with an ill-considered affidavit insulting Hindu faith on the Ram Setu and later, with his nepotism. The commerce minister kept pushing the special economic zone policy despite widespread protests that it was a land grab.
The prime minister could take no action against any of them.
The authority of the Congress president, her family and confidantes, was always respected. Often, she did not discipline her loyal ministers even when they contradicted government policies and the prime minister.
The ministers could ignore the prime minister as long as they enjoyed the protection of the First Family. Aiyar lost his portfolio when he lost this protection, as will Arjun Singh soon.
The Left forced vast expenditures on subsidies, pushing up deficits, stopped all privatization, even disinvestment of shares, and much foreign direct investment. To bolster foreign exchange reserves, the finance minister was encouraged to put the country’s financial system at risk by making foreign institutional investment easy, even anonymous and highly volatile by exempting it from short-term capital gains tax.
The Left’s anti-Americanism is losing India the opportunity to move forward with its nuclear energy programme. Its silence on aggravations from China have also silenced the necessary strident government responses. The Left emasculated the unique three-man reforming team of ministers into becoming uncoordinated reformers.
Still, the Left also brought balance to reforms that, till this government came, had primarily opened up financial and industrial sectors to private and foreign investors. The Left forced programmes for the poor. The “aam admi” programme became a reality because of it. It did this through the National Advisory Council, the supra-coordination body chaired by the Congress president.
This also diminished the prime minister’s authority. Credit was given to Rahul Gandhi when the national rural employment guarantee scheme was extended nationally. The government was dancing to the Family song.
Manmohan Singh as a social scientist and thinker might have taken many economic and foreign policy initiatives. Communist outside support to the government and political authority resting with the Congress president have stifled him. While she may have meant to support the prime minister, many times when he should have got public support from her, she did not give it.
In contrast, wily P.V. Narasimha Rao marginalized Sonia Gandhi from the outset and was able to move India to a growth path by opening up the economy. He did not win elections, but Sonia Gandhi and her son have lost many in the last four years.
The Congress is in power not because of spectacular election results in 2004 but by recognizing that power would come only with a coalition.
Coalitions between opposing parties are not uncommon. Our short-lived coalitions under Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, H.D. Deve Gowda, Inder Gujral, all had opposing parties as members. Their only ideology was power. They achieved little and had few policy differences.
The communists exercise control on the UPA by micro-managing their opposition to specific government initiatives. They kept the Bharatiya Janata Party out, but weakened the government and specially the prime minister.
The NDA coalition radically shifted India’s policies, especially foreign and security policies. The NDA’s economic policies introduced privatization, ushered in the telecommunications revolution, invested massively in roads, and established independent regulatory frameworks. Vajpayee persisted with ‘confidence building measures’ with Pakistan during Pervez Musharraf’s dictatorship despite the downturn in relations after the Kargil war and Musharraf’s later walk-out from the Agra summit. These measures have sharply reduced 60-year-old tensions between India and Pakistan. Vajpayee as prime minister was also the unquestioned leader of the BJP, and very adept at managing the contradictions in such a coalition.
In the UPA, this job should have been performed by the Congress political leadership. It has failed in this and in maintaining discipline among ministers from its own and other parties.
Coalition governments at the Centre prevent extremism from dominant parties. To work effectively, coalitions must be led by a national party with more seats than the other parties. The national party should have an ideology. (The Congress’s only ideology is to unite around the First Family.
Apart from Hindutva, moderated by coalition partners, the BJP ideology is reforms.
The Left is anti-US, pro-China, industrial and government employees.
The Congress, to run effective coalitions should have inner-party democracy and an honest statement of its ideology.
Outside support by a large political group is dangerous when it has a strongly motivated ideology. The coalition should have an agreed common programme and a coordination mechanism. The programme must be seen as a whole and not just in its parts and permit flexibility to the government in a changing foreign affairs scenario. There must be no separation between the political leadership of the principal party and its prime minister.
Demo-narchy of India @ http://indiaview.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/de%e2%80%99mo-narchy-of-democratic-india/

Congress Dynasty @ http://indiasecular.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/congress-dynasty-matrix