It is a welcome development that a number of Congress MPs have written to the Prime Minister apparently expressing concern over the state of the party for which he, as the leader, cannot avoid responsibility. The discontent is not new. It was quite palpable in the summer of 1987, when the Bofors payoff scandal broke and Mr VP Singh and some of his associates were put out of the organisation. Indeed, the expression of that concern is also not new. Eleven Jan Morcha leaders are still members of the Congress parliamentary party. But this is perhaps the first time in years that as many as 30 Congress MPs have written to the leader to voice their unhappiness over the manner in which the affairs of the party are being managed under his stewardship. This is an indication that there are still Congressmen who are willing to speak out and accept the risk that is supposed to go with it. This augurs well for the future of the Congress. For the presence of dissent in it, especially ona substantial scale, speaks of the inherent health of the organisation and of its capacity for recuperation. We hope Mr Rajiv Gandhi would see the development in this light. It would have been a different matter for him if they were challenging his leadership. But they are doing nothing of the kind. On the contrary, they are reported to have reaffirmed their faith in his leadership. And if they have expressed reservations about his style of functioning, even his firmest supporters cannot possibly fault them for it. Mr Rajiv Gandhi’s leadership style leaves much to be desired.
There can be no question that the Prime Minister lives and operates from behind security arrangements, which cannot but isolate him. The security arrangements would do a dictator proud. These must gravely handicap a leader in a democracy, especially in our case, where direct access to the leader is so important to almost everyone, in psychological terms. And, to be candid, the physical is not the only barrier Congress MPs and even ministers have to contend with. The Prime Minister is just accessible to them as freely and as frequently as he should be, if they are to feel that they have a share in the governance of the country. In Mrs Indira Gandhi’s case, there were at least identifiable intermediaries such as Mr Dinesh Singh and Mr Inder Gujral to begin with, and then Mr Uma Shankar Dixit and later Mr Pranab Mukherjee (and, of course, Mr R.K. Dhavan) who could and did act as bridges between her and other ministers and MPs. In Mr Rajiv Gandhi’s case, there are no such identifiable confidants who can act on his behalf and maintain communication with Congressmen, including chief ministers, ministers and party organizers in the states. Indeed, it is virtually impossible to describe the decision making process under him, and to say how precisely he has reached a specific policy or organizational decision. Congressmen would have lived with this reality if the party’s fortunes had not nosedived in the past one year or so. But they have. Which is what makes a large number of Congressmen restless throughout the country. The 30-odd MPs have spoken for these Congressmen. It would be unfortunate if Mr Rajiv Gandhi fails to recognise this fact.
Beyond the Prime Minister’s leadership style, however, lie larger issues of policy. Many of the so-called policy issues are, of course, problems of management. The presence or absence of a competent minister or organiser could make a world of difference. It would be invidious to name names, and it is not even necessary. The relative calibre of men in Mr Rajiv Gandhi’s team in New Delhi and among his appointees in the states is widely known. But there are issues relating to the economy and foreign relations which call for political decisions of a kind which the Congress culture, at it has developed, does not normally favour. The world, and with it India, has changed a great deal since Mr Nehru laid down the framework within which the Congress has functioned in terms of its general approach for four long decades. Those parameters are no longer adequate. In some ways, Mr Rajiv Gandhi’s approach is more appropriate to today’s India and world. Liberalization of the economy, for instance. But even in those areas, he has to carry his party with him. Or else he will be building on flimsy foundations.