Author: Balbir K Punj
Publication: The New Indian Express
Date: May 26, 2004
Sonia Gandhi employed most charitable
terms to explain her abrupt disengagement from Prime Ministerial race.
Yet, she stopped short of providing any precise or objective reason. She
avowedly never had a fascination for that august office; and now abided
by her ``inner voice'' or ``voice of conscience'' to stand apart. She made
it clear that this decision was final and unalterable. Yet, she patiently
kept on listening for hours to the entreaties CPP members to reverse her
decision!
So why Sonia who along with her
acolytes had sat outside the Rashtrapati Bhawan in May 1999 hoping to muster
a magic figure of 272 or who till the other day was busy securing support
letters from her allies should suddenly heard an `inner voice'? What was
the precise reason or anticipation behind Sonia's turnabout? Sonia was
welcome to attribute her decision to agitations against her, rightly or
wrongly, on account of `foreign origin.' She could have said that she wanted
to respect rather than hurt public sentiments. Alternatively, she should
have admitted that technicalities of a Prime Minister's job were beyond
her aptitude. Her obvious failure would have spoilt the prospects of her
children.
Closely brushing shoulders with
the `inner voice' is `mortal threat' theory. We are informed, albeit through
comrades Jyoti Basu and Somnath Chatterjee, that her children sense a threat
on her life if she became Prime Minister. One doesn't know whether the
information was genuine or foisted by the Marxists. With terrorists of
various hues all around, no one in public life is immune from threat. Atal
Behari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani top the list of politicians in danger.
Indira Gandhi fell a victim to assassins' bullets whereas Rajiv Gandhi
exploded into a more macabre death. Yet, nothing links two events up, being
products of two insurgency movements separated by distances of sub-continental
proportions.
Sonia Gandhi never uttered `politics'
for full seven years after Rajiv assassination, till she was invited by
loyal Congressmen. Wasn't the threat perception there before - and why
it resurfaced on the eve of proposed swearing-in ? It is not necessary
to become a Prime Minister to be a mortal victim of violence; candidature
for a College General Secretary post will suffice. Gandhiji never held
any constitutional post yet he was assassinated, in the Netherlands a Prime
Minister hopeful was shot dead while campaigning. If there's at all a threat,
it must apply not just to Sonia but Rahul and Priyanka as well, and may
not altogether disappear with their departure from active politics. But
it means there was another factor apart from `inner voice' contesting for
credibility.
Resignation or boycott threats from
NDA camp were quite predictable reactions. They should have agitated her
the lest. Did she expect BJP and allied nationalist minded people to welcome
the elevation of a woman of foreign origin, conditional citizenship, mysterious
past and shady connections to Prime Minister's post? But if she could have
been unhinged by anything, it's not these agitations but severity of things
to come. Her foreign origin would have kept her on defensive in taking
important decision in foreign and defence policies. Rightly or wrongly,
even those today indifferent about her foreign origin would be prejudiced
against her. People would start saying, ``O, after all she is an Italian.''
But Manmohan Singh is immune to this vulnerability.
It's a gross misrepresentation of
people's verdict that a majority in the country has endorsed Sonia's Prime
Ministership. Sonia Gandhi was never projected as the Prime Ministerial
face. There can be no question of endorsement or rejection of what was
never projected. Congress on its own fought in 417 seats out of which it
won only in 145 constituencies; a poor success rate of 35 per cent. Can't
we then conclude that 65 per cent of people also rejected Sonia? With 145
seats on its own, a wafer thin buffer separates Congress from BJP that
won 138 seats.
The United Progressive Alliance
has 220 seats and critically dependent on support of Left. Herein lies
the biggest deception played on the electorate. Such unprincipled alliance
make a mockery of democracy. The bulk of seats won by the left came from
defeating Congress in a two-cornered fight. The manifestos of both Communist
parties are critical of Congress and even dubbed its `secularism' false.
In her scathing remark against Left in West Bengal Sonia Gandhi described
Marxist regime as a monarchy that has no place for democracy. But after
elections Sonia curried favour most with the Left. At one time it seemed
that the country was going to be handed over to the Left mafia. Since Left's
contest is directly with Congress in Kerala, West Bengal and Tripura their
voters are mutually antagonistic. Hence Sonia and Left's transferring their
mandate to each other is tantamount to betrayal of the electorate. In Uttar
Pradesh, the Samajwadi Party and Bahujan Samaj Party having post-poll alliance
with Congress is equivalent to betrayal of their respective voters. In
fact, Uttar Pradesh Congress activists are dead against SP being included
in the Congress ministry since they have used all terror techniques against
Congressmen in Uttar Pradesh.
Congressmen might have a legitimate
fear of a `Congress-led Third Front Government.' The so-called Mandate
in favour of Sonia is nothing but largely a post-poll manipulation.
The writer, a Rajya Sabha MP and
Convener of BJP's Think Tank.
