Now, this is the kind of commentary that I was looking forward to read. Analytical, realistic and unbiased, Rajdeep Sardesai's article gives us a clear perspective on the Prime Minister Renunciation episode.
While bringing to light the pragmatism that went behind Sonia's decision and the foolishness of people fabricating the President's intervention as a reason, he also remarks that, no matter what the practical reasons might be, renouncing Prime Ministership (one two occasions) demands a good amount of conviction and thus an "undeniable idealistic core".
However, I have a minor disagreement - not with his opinions on the issue - but rather with what can be called his "hopes for the future".
Rajdeep writes,
So has Sonia now silenced her critics once and for all? Not yet. In a sense, Sonia’s real test comes now. Having anointed Dr Manmohan Singh as the prime minister, she now faces the challenge of letting him function as an effective prime minister. If she allows power to be centered around 10 Janpath and not the prime minister’s residence, she will be open to the charge of having allowed two power centers to emerge.
She will then be accused of being the remote control, who in Bal Thackeray-style has power without the responsibility of office. The last thing this country needs is a parallel authority at the very top of the executive chain. In this era of coalition politics, there will be enough that Dr Manmohan Singh will have to manage without having to look over his shoulder as to who is doing the backseat driving.
It would create a calamitous situation if on every single issue, Dr Singh has to turn to Sonia Gandhi as the ultimate arbiter. Or worse, if Sonia Gandhi ends up pushing Rahul Gandhi as the next Congress leader, and treats Dr Singh as only an interim arrangement.
Which is why if Sonia Gandhi’s remarkable act of turning down the prime ministership is to have a lasting impact on Indian politics, then she must be prepared to withdraw from the process of governance. That’s when her decision will have true meaning because it will suggest a genuine desire not to be trapped in the power game. Then, Sonia Gandhi may well find herself on the path to political sainthood as a leader who really made a difference
Even though, in principle, one has to agree with what Rajdeep says, what he is hoping for just about crosses the line of practicality. If we agree that Sonia's decision was more of a political move rather than an altruistic one, then it is obvious that she will logically extend it to gain more political clout and mileage.
Of course, if in future, as Rajdeep fears, there comes a situation where Dr. Singh has to turn to Sonia on every single issue, it will be unfortunate for India. But we have to understand that it is natural to expect decisions made by Sonia as Congress party leader invariably affect the decisions of the Government.
Even though we can dream to have the Government (under Dr. Singh) seperated from the Party (under Sonia) and hope that there is no mix of one on the other, from a practical point of view, this is close to impossible. In fact, this too, can be viewed as leading to two power centers and in turn to conflict.
As party leader, Sonia is going to have sufficient powers to force decisions on the Government and it is not natural to hope it would be otherwise. We can only probably hope the interference is of minimal impact. As leader, she will be under pressure to dictate; and to hope that she will have to "withdraw from the process of governance" goes against the nature of party politics. Seperating governance from the party is something like keeping religion out of our social behaviour. Even though we wish that was true, that will never be.
So Rajdeep's hope, though idealistic, inherently contradicts party politics.
