NOW that he has been relieved of his responsibilities as prime minister, P.V. Narasimha Rao might ideally like to continue prevaricating on everything. But as his grip over the party organisation and new parliamentarians slackens, he badly needs to redefine his locus standi after playing the captain who led his ship to disaster. His Sphinx-like silence—audible to all who watched the televised ruckus in the Lok Sabha—may have outlived its utility as a shield. Doubts about his ability to lead and rejuvenate the Congress are growing. And the rank and file is getting increasingly impatient with his delaying tactics.
Take the Congress Working Committee meeting which he had annulled last month, using his "discretion" as party chief. Pressure from below has now forced him to reschedule it for June 13. The CWC, inter alia, is to go into the desirability of his holding two posts—that of party chief and parliamentary party leader—in view of the poll reverses the party suffered under him.
Rao-sceptics are already sharpening their knives. "Has there ever been a leader of Opposition in Parliament who keeps his mouth shut throughout a debate on a government's vote of confidence?" asks dissident leader K. Karunakaran, in a more strident tone than before. He contends that the party needs at least an effective working president. The idea is: if Rao insists on occupying the party chief's chair till next year's AICC session, till then someone should be entrusted with the job of projecting an aggressive, articulate image of a party on the rebound.
Rao did enough homework before giving in to the demand for a CWC meeting. For starters, he asked state units to prepare reports on the electoral debacle. Armed with reports that focus on local factors and blame the regional satraps for their role, he will be seeking to take the edge off the criticism against him. Of course, there are state leaders like Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Digvijay Singh who don't concur Gadgil (centre): no longer his master's voice? with such apportionment of blame. In a fit of retaliation, he passed the buck back to Rao, announcing publicly that the denial of tickets to those chargesheeted in the hawala case spelled doom for the Congress in his state. Punjab Chief Minister H.S. Brar, miffed at the constant sniping by Rao loyalist and Youth Congress president M.S. Bitta, too is in a defiant mood. Add to that the rumbling in the Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal units—the enforced ceasefire with their political rivals, brought about by the high command's support to the United Front Government, remains a brittle one.
"Rao has asked H.D. Deve Gowda to direct the Front constituents to go along with Congress units wherever the UF is ruling," says a senior Rao loyalist. Of course, UF leaders deny this vehemently. "There is no deal with Rao," asserts Janata Dal leader and Front spokesman S. Jaipal Reddy.
This has not convinced the state leaders, and they have their compulsions. Take Digvijay Singh. It may make sense for him to revolt against Rao now because a subservient posture—the normal survival strategy of all state leaders—may only work to his detriment. For, anti-Rao stalwarts like Arjun Singh, Madhavrao Scindia, Arvind Netam and Kamal Nath have closed ranks behind Singh and can bolster him as he redefines loyalties. Or else, together they have enough MLAs in the state to bring down his government.
Singh has also got an ideal opportunity to embarrass Rao. He can annul the Rao government's controversial decision to privatise the profit-earning Bailadila mines in Bastar district—that would bring him tremendous political dividends, and compound Rao's discomfiture.
Even party spokesman V.N. Gadgil, a loyalist, has suddenly recognised the need to do more than just speak for the silent boss. He wants the Congress to engage in an in-depth internal debate and redefine its "concept of secularism"—as the pattern of erosion in its vote-share indicated that both the majority and minority communities had misunderstood the party. His demand has generated interest in party fora but a sizeable section has questioned Gadgil's timing. In any case, this is an additional source of embarrassment, especially since partymen feel the question of "secularism" can't be delinked from the Rao regime's failure to stall the demolition in Ayodhya.
Responds Gadgil: "I'll elaborate my views on the issue in party fora. But we need to explain, now , in a convincing manner to the general public what secularism means for us. Hindus think we are pro-minorities and the minorities think we are close to the RSS." Gadgil also calls attention to the fact that the BJP won in a majority of the reserved constituencies.
A debate will have the potential to divide the party on the question of continuing its unconditional support to the UF Government. After all, it's the issue of secularism—the way it's being understood and practiced—that forms the basis of it. "This is a brahminical force acting up. Secularism is too clear a concept; it's inscribed in the Constitution and the Congress vision. It needs no debate. What is needed is a commitment to preach and practice it," says Tariq Anwar, an MP, who chairs the Congress Minority cell. "A section clearly wants to go along with the BJP," he adds, for good measure
With Rajesh Pilot, Ahmed Patel, Ashok Gehlot and nearly four dozen other MPs, Anwar wants the party to regain its "secular credentials". And, they say, continuing unconditional support to the UF Government from outside is the only cure for the loss of this image. They have roped in stalwarts like Karunakaran and K. Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy—both Rao's colleagues for decades and CWC members. Reddy gave vent to his feelings recently when he disapproved of Rao's series of "private meetings" with Prime Minister Gowda and wanted the CWC to be kept informed. The chorus of dissent is growing more voluble by the day and second-rung leaders in the Congress clearly see no point in showing excessive deference to the leader.
In his search for props, Rao has called a meeting of the extended working committee the day after the CWC meet—PCC chiefs, CLP leaders and "personal invitees" will attend, providing some firepower to Rao. But this is a weapon with limited uses—for, party rules state that the extended committee can't negate any formal decision by the CWC.
Significantly, the anti-Rao faction has decided to establish a direct rapport with the UF leadership. The idea is to convince them that it was the larger question of "secularism"—and not Rao's personal vision—that got it Congress support. "We won't mind Rao being tried without any leniency for corruption charges, including hawala, the Jharkhand bribery case and the St Kitt's case," a CWC member says.
But the Rao camp has its own assessment. AICC General Secretary Devendra Dwivedi, a "to go into the party's poll performance"—a clear bid to thwart the debate on the one-man-one-post issue. And in the run-up to what could be a decisive meeting, Rao met party leaders and MPs from different states to gauge the dissident mood. While the MPs refrained from making pointed demands for a leadership change, three divergent voices have emerged— that they should join the ruling coalition, that they should extend only conditional support ,and that they should oppose the UF Government, even if it means paving theway for a partnership with the B J P.
Rao obviously can't respond to these suggestions with silence. But some of his lieu -tenants— Bhuvanesh Chaturvedi, Dwivedi and S.S. Ahluwalia—have been selling the line that the Congress only has to mark time till the UF Government runs into problems of its own making. With revolts brewing in the Janata Dal in two states where it rules, Karnataka and Bihar, repercussions will be felt at the Centre. As the biggest ally, the Congress will hold the key, especially in view of the impending Budget session. "Disarray in the UF would make Rao the obvious choice of anti-BJP parties, even the communists, to form a govern-ment," a party general secretary says.
That, most agree, is a shade optimistic. Rao is under siege—his probity as primeminister and his leadership ability now, are both being questioned. He may retain the party chief's post till the AICC session but even to survive till then he will need a combination of aggression and stamina— not tactical silence. For, the enemy ranks are swelling by the day.
