A Team beats B Team

The Congress deliberately betrayed the secular plank and fell right into the Moditva trap

Hardnews Bureau Ahmedabad/Delhi

It is not funny for a doctor to go wrong on diagnosis after studying the symptoms. The plight of journalists trying to predict electoral outcomes in a highly charged political environment is no different. When we visited Gujarat in November, Chief Minister Narendra Modi looked vulnerable and in a state of panic. But as we had pointed out, Modi had it in him to prove everyone wrong and get out of the corner. True to his grain, he proved them wrong and won the assembly elections resoundingly.

However, not everything has gone the Modi way. The  Congress has got 42 per cent votes. The latest report states that in Gujarat’s capital, Gandhinagar (LK Advani’s constituency), the BJP polled  81,864 votes and won the  seat. But the catch is that 78,116 votes were polled against the BJP. Atleast in 33 constituencies the BJP has won with very close margins including by 631 and 677 votes ,as in Rajpipla and Mandal, with the BSP playing spoiler in many places. The BJP lost decisively in central Gujarat. If anything it proves two things: that, as usual, the Congress did not push too hard, and five crore Gujaratis are not with Modi as he repeatedly claims.

Did Modi win because communal politics still works in Gujarat, or was it over development issues? The truth lies in the way the Congress approached the elections.

Those opposed to Modi had hoped that five years after the riots in 2002, the polity in Gujarat would return to normal elections based on bread and butter issues. This belief shaped the Congress strategy. Congress managers like Ahmed Patel thought that by joining hands with BJP dissidents like Keshubhai Patel, Sureshbhai Mehta and Gordhan Zadaphia, they could put together a winning strategy. In other words, they would have created another 'soft Hindutva' mirror-image of the BJP without the domineering presence of Modi. A chimera was created that the VHP and RSS may dump their own child, Narendra Modi, in favour of the dissidents. Congress, in its desperation to come to power, had walked into a well-laid trap.

Besides, much was expected from the Congress-led UPA in terms of justice after the Gujarat genocide. But its utter insensitivity and inaction has yet again proved that democracy and secular electoral mandates can often prove totally incapable of providing justice.

The BJP dissidents decided on the Congress policy and their list of candidates. Traditional secular Congressmen were dropped in favour of those who still swore by Hindutva. The Congress leadership also responded to a strongly held view among the Hindu-minded political class that tickets should not be given to Muslims as they might antagonise the majority community. As a result, only six Muslims were given tickets in a list of 182. For a better part of the campaign, the Congress did not utter a word about the 2002 riots. They scrupulously chose to confine themselves to development issues. They left the task of criticising Modi to the BJP dissidents.

In short, media space was occupied either by Modi or by BJP dissidents. The Congress did not represent any alternative vision. This view was buttressed by the fact that Uma Bharti fielded her own candidate and refused to back off even after she was persuaded to side with the BJP. The Sadhu Samaj, another player in the last elections, announced their intentions to oppose the BJP.

Congress managers did not realise that their positive outlook was cleverly orchestrated by those who wanted the elections to remain within the Hindutva framework. The ground was prepared for a Congress defeat if the basis that was providing them optimism went back to its moorings — communal politics.

Sonia Gandhi has been blamed for reconfiguring Gujarat Congress's carefully crafted strategy to pander to soft Hindutva by calling Modi a “merchant of death”. This remark of hers is believed to have provoked Modi into owning up the encounter of Sohrabuddin (his wife and witness Tulsiram Prajapati were also killed), inviting action from the Supreme Court and a rap on the knuckles from the Election Commission. Uma Bharti, in a TV channel, claimed that the Congress would have won if Sonia Gandhi had not made the 'merchant of death' remark or Manmohan Singh had not promised to reopen many of the 2002 riot cases if the Congress came to power. In her reckoning, this changed the course of the elections as many of those who were backing the Congress — BJP dissidents who had actively participated in the riots — withdrew. Bharti is, at best, partially correct.

The real truth lies in the inability of the Congress to stick to its core values and how it progressively deserted social constituencies — minorities, tribals and intermediate castes — that had sustained it politically in the past. The formidable social compact of Kshatriya, Harijan, adivasi, Muslim (KHAM) was allowed to wither away due to the politics of opportunism and economic policies that bred alienation and exclusion. There is another important lesson from the result: the Congress cannot compromise on its secular values or allow the RSS to sneakily run their affairs. If Congress would have won in Gujarat then it would have resulted in this experiment being replicated in other states like Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

After all, the 2004 Lok Sabha elections provided ample evidence that the Congress's traditional constituencies were coming back when the party attacked BJP and Modi's conduct during the Gujarat killlings. It was ahead in 90 odd assembly constituencies in the state.

The Congress gave up on these policies to reposition itself as the 'B team' of the BJP. Not surprisingly, the voters of Gujarat decided to vote for the 'A team' of the BJP rather than the charlatans. What was worse was the tendency of Congress managers to ensure that no one of any substance campaigned in Gujarat other than Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. “It is ridiculous to concentrate all the campaigning around Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. So much money is spent in trying to make their rallies look well-attended and attractive. Why were more central Congress leaders not allowed to work in Gujarat,” questioned a senior Congress minister.

There is a lot of anger welling up within the Congress against the caucus around the Congress president and how it is making the party effete. “If the party has to come back to power than they will have to draft Priyanka Gandhi in the Congress,” said an angry Gujarat Congress leader. During the campaign there were more requests for Priyanka Gandhi than for any other leader.

It is not clear whether such tinkering at the margin would have worked for the Congress against an astute Modi. Cranking his election machine to perfection, he conveyed to his followers that the interest of Gujarat was well served under his leadership. “He has raised the profile of Gujarat. Besides, he is not corrupt,” said a follower. Even his detractors admit that Modi had been charismatic and obsessed about bringing development to Gujarat. What also worked for him was the fact that during his six year term, there was no drought or any other calamity like a cyclone or an earthquake.

What does Modi's victory really mean for the Indian polity? At the face of it, all the secular parties would once again close ranks. For them Modi and a resurgent Hindutva presents a greater danger than the nuclear deal. Do we see Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi smiling?

Although this is a terrible loss of face, it represents a big opportunity for the Congress leadership to create and sustain a solid, principled and secular political-ideological platform based on genuine equity and social justice — even as Modi's shadow begins to fall on Delhi. The fact that the Muslims, the poor and adivasis voted in big numbers for the Congress in Gujarat would reinforce such a view.

What happens to the nuclear deal? Singh would have less courage to push such a deal now then he had in the past. The Gujarat results would bring an extremely populist budget and also force Sonia Gandhi to reshuffle the cabinet to bring in MPs who represent Lok Sabha rather than Rajya Sabha.

Would Gujarat lead to early elections? Before Gujarat gave its thumbs for the BJP, the party was in a bad shape. It was losing ground in Madhya Pradesh, where it lost crucial by-polls, and in Rajasthan. Victory in Ahmedabad could force them to reorient their policies around Modi's plank and get ready to face the elections. The Congress leadership's dilemma would be that if they do not have elections soon enough it would enable the BJP to get its act together. LK Advani, to build on the Gujarat victory, is going on a rathyatra again.

The Gujarat election results are a watershed in the sense that it might force the Congress to return to its core values. It may also contribute in forcing UPA allies to close ranks and take on the challenge of the BJP together. This turning point is both an opportunity and a major threat to the Congress.