AFTER P.V. Narasimha Rao's dramatic exit as Congress Parliamentary Party (CPP) leader on December 19, minutes before the 4 o'clock deadline set by Sitaram Kesri, the Congress president's problems seemed to have just begun. For, Kesri gradually realised that building a consensus around himself would be even more difficult than securing Rao's resignation.
As the race for the next CPP leader hotted up and two prominent leaders—Sharad Pawar and Rajesh Pilot—prepared to battle it out, Kesri's only option was to buy time. So while Rao resigned on December 19, the Congress president declared that the election for the new leader would be held a fortnight later—on January 3—ostensibly because Congress members from the Northeast were busy celebrating Christmas.
In the meantime, Congress Working Committee (CWC) members tried to bring around Pawar and Pilot to support Kesri as a consensus candidate—a move which did not fructify. Both made their intentions clear: they wanted to contest the election.
This, after even Rao bowed to Kesri's wishes and resigned, silently admitting that he was aware who was calling the shots in the Congress. The only noticeable reservation expressed in Rao's favour was not on his ouster, but on the manner in which it was scripted.
"The CPP executive did not have the power to remove Rao. He erred in stepping down. But what is more humiliating is the manner in which the party president gave him the notice. Not even a class IV employee is sacked on a few hours notice," fumed Jagannath Mishra, Rajya Sabha MP from Bihar.
But Mishra was alone, and he opposed Kesri with one eye on Bihar politics—back in their home state, they are in opposite camps. As Rao attended the meeting to thank the CPP which unanimously elected him leader twice, first in June 1991 and then in May 1996, he fought hard to hide the humiliation. "My resignation is not the termination point of my active political career. I will continue to work actively for the party," he said.
After his resignation, Rao ceased to be a CWC member, and chose not to attend the meeting called by Kesri to discuss post-Rao alignments—this despite a special request from the Congress president that he should guide the CWC in finding his successor. A veteran Congressman, Rao knew perfectly well that once he gave up the post, he would have few par-tymen by his side. He hung on to the position till the last possible minute, and even at his thanksgiving speech, he harped on the point that he was down but certainly not out.
With a rapidly thinning support base, Rao will find it quite a task to build up his camp. Over the past few weeks, even the handful of supporters switched sides. G. Venkataswamy, a much-pampered Rao follower, and Kumari Selja were the last to leave the Rao camp, even joining the rebels to push him into a corner. Said Venkataswamy: "I am going to join the race if Kesri is not the unanimous choice." The point is, if more aspirants join the fray, it will improve Kesri's chances.
In fact, the move to prop up Kesri as consensus candidate would have worked out on December 20 itself, given the Congress tradition that the party president usually takes over as CPP leader. But both Pawar and Pilot told the CWC that an election would not weaken the party. "The Congress did not get weaker because of a contest in 1966 when Indira Gandhi defeated Morarji Desai," said Pilot, decrying the move to prop up certain individuals instead of letting members choose their leader. While Pilot announced his candidature at the CWC meet, Pawar declared his intention after holding a series of meetings with Kesri and Rao—separately—to solicit support. Kesri simply told Pawar to ascertain the mood of his party mates.
In true Kesri fashion, he reiterated that he was not in the race "unless there is a consensus on my candidature". Toeing the Kesri tactic, his camp followers harped on the need for a consensus. Said A.K. Antony, a key player: "The election should be avoided. Congress tradition favours a consensus." K. Karunakaran and Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy—aspirants for the post on the theory that since Kesri is from the North, the CPP leader should hail from the South—have indicated their preference for Kesri over either Pawar or Pilot. Youth Congress President Satyajit Gaekwad, a Kesri recruit, and Ramesh Chennithala have also been canvassing for Kesri.
Pawar has about a dozen supporters on his side, led by the vocal Priya Ranjan Das Munshi. But his detractors far outnumber his supporters. A.R. Antulay, V.N. Gadgil, S.B. Chavan and Suresh Kalmadi have resolved to go to any extent to defeat Pawar in case of a contest. "I know Pawar, he will not contest until he is sure of victory. Only Pilot could confront Kesri," says a party general secretary. Pilot insists he is "very much in the race".
The Kesri camp is now using the fortnight to cut into Pilot's base, that comprises backward castes and minorities, who have veered towards Kesri after he apologised for the Babri Masjid demolition. Earlier, Kesri handedout key posts to three prominent Muslim leaders—Ahmed Patel (treasurer), Ghulam Nabi Azad (general secretary) and Tariq Anwar (political secretary). Besides, two prominent Congress leaders from Rajasthan (Pilot's home state), state chief Ashok Gehlot and Nawal Kishore Sharma are Kesri supporters and they claim the backing of 12 more MPs from there.
Senior leaders Madhavsinh Solanki and Ahmed Patel are lobbying for Kesri with Gujarat MPs. Madhavrao Scindia, who was readmitted to the party in early November, hosted a dinner for MPs on December 19, to garner support for Kesri.
But uppermost in Kesri's mind is stopping the possible transfer of Pawar support to the Pilot camp if Pawar backs out of the election at the last minute—some leaders claim this is a likely scenario. Rao could influence some Andhra MPs to go against Kesri, but Orissa Chief Minister J.B. Patnaik has assured the Congress president of the support of all party MPs from his state. If Rao had his reasons to delay his resignation, Kesri has all the more need to stake claim to the CPP post. For, a CPP leader is also the prime minister-in-waiting if the Congress stakes claim to form the government at the Centre.
THE squabbling in the CPP is not a new phenomenon. Way back in 1952, Jawaharlal Nehru insisted on having certain people included in the CWC when Purushottam Das Tandon was the party president. Tandon asserted that it was the Congress president's prerogative to decide who should be nominated to the CWC, but quit the post since he considered Nehru his leader. The whole idea behind Tandon's resignation was not to have two parallel power centres.
While Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi (till 1971) continued the practice of having two posts for the Congress hierarchy, they did not face any problems, given their towering personality. But Indira Gandhi usurped both the CPP and Congress president's post, a trend followed by Rajiv Gandhi and Rao. In 1987, a CWC resolution to institute a one-man-one-post criterion made an exception to the Congress president's post. In fact, Pawar and Kesri foiled the demand of Arjun Singh and N.D. Tiwari for a one-man-one-post rule, which if implemented would have required Rao to give up one post at the AICC's Surajkund conference in March 1993. But the election of the CPP leader from Nehru to Rao has all along been through consensus.
And that is Kesri's biggest advantage. In a party which rests on tradition, there is little likelihood of opposition against him—at least not on this round of power transfer.
Tags