As Congress (I) president, Mrs. Gandhi could not have acted differently from the way she has in Gujarat. She was naturally keen to avoid a split in the party unit in the state and did all she possibly could to prevent it.But she could not have yielded to the dissidents and removed the chief minister, Mr. Madhavsinh Solanki. In the given circumstances, that would have weakened her own authority and encouraged defiance in other states, including Andhra and Karnataka which are going to the polls early next month. She could not have taken such a risk since her party faces a tough challenge in Andhra, so far one of her strongholds. On this count, if on no other, the dissidents chose a very wrong time to force the issue. It is difficult to say why they chose this particular time to precipitate matters, whether they have acted in concert with dissidents in other states, and whether they have something more dramatic up their sleeve. But as experienced politicians, they should have known that Mrs. Gandhi could not concede their demand at this stage even if she had been so inclined. Perhaps they knew this to be the case. Perhaps they have concluded that this is an appropriate time to raise the banner of revolt against Mrs. Gandhi herself. For their protestations of the high regard they have for her notwithstanding, they are defying her. They are no longer merely protesting against the conduct of the chief minister.
The Congress party in Gujarat has been plagued by bitter factional infighting for as long as one can remember. The position has been particularly bad since 1974 when Mr. Chimanbhai Patel and Mr. Ghanshyam Oza were forced to resign partly as a result of the machinations of their opponents within the organisation. The Congress (I) is heir to that difficult legacy. For it is the same party with an additional bracket. So it was a foregone conclusion that whoever the chief minister and whatever the size of the party’s majority in the legislature and his support in it, he would face endless trouble from his colleagues. Mr. Solanki could not have avoided it however well he might have conducted himself. Perhaps he could have been more tactful, perhaps he could have been less partisan in the selection of his Cabinet colleagues; perhaps he could have been more accommodating towards his critics. But dissidence would have surfaced on one count or another. In fact, the surprise, if any, is that the number of would-be defectors is so small. Apparently, this is a tribute to Mrs. Gandhi. Apparently, she inspires enough respect and fear among the Congress (I) members to make them think twice before they go over the brink. But despite all this, the development in Gujarat provides another confirmation of the fact that the Congress (I) is not in good shape. It is also a warning that Mrs. Gandhi does not have too much time to try to give it a reasonably sound organizational structure with a reasonably clear chain of command.