(Kumar Ketkar is a senior journalist, political commentator, globe trotter and author. He has covered all Indian elections since 1971 and significant international events. He is a frequent participant on TV debates.)
The triumphalism of Narendra Modi is marching forward like the mythical 'Ashwamedh', virtually unchallenged by the Congress. It seems his march can be stopped now only by the BJP and the RSS. But were they the prime movers in the BJP's landslide victory in the May election? At least veteran leader LK Advani does not think so. He has repeatedly said that the Congress, by its misrule, by its indifference and by unchecked corruption, played the biggest role in helping Modi win.
Supporters of Modi, spread out globally, believe that his demagogic oratorical performances moved the masses so deeply that they voted for him almost like in the American style presidential election contest. The contest itself was imaginary. Modi's think tank and the media made it look like a free-style boxing fight between him and Rahul Gandhi. For nearly six months in that virtual reality contest, Rahul was punched on the nose and chin, was driven to the ring, bleeding profusely and finally beaten to the floor. The referee banged the floor and called mandated ten numbers. Rahul did not rise, did not even move.
The Congress, in general, and Rahul, in particular, do not seem to have recovered from the concussion they suffered. The party had expected the defeat, but not decimation. Rahul, in fact, had theorized that unless the decadent and corrupt leadership of the party is purged by the electorate, it would not be possible to reinvigorate and reemerge. He was quoted as saying that the party must sit in the opposition for a full term and start from ground zero. But it was supposed to be Ground Zero, not journey to the center of the earth. Rahul and Sonia Gandhi were all set for about 120 seats; they got just 44.
The same evening, on May 16, that is exactly three months ago, Sonia and Rahul told the media that they take the responsibility for the rout. Later they resigned from their respective posts of President and Vice President. This meant that they took moral and political responsibility of the defeat. The media instantly reacted by saying that it was mere tokenism. The party would not accept the resignations and in fact again repose faith in their leadership. Exactly that happened. Therefore the Anthony Committee Report, not fully and officially released yet (and unlikely to be ) that acquits Sonia and Rahul from responsibility for the debacle is hardly a surprise.
But let it also be stated that the media had condemned Rahul to the political dustbin even before the campaign had peaked, and in the same breath coronated Narendra Modi to the post of Prime Minister. Almost a month before the results, Modi's cabinet list of who's who was published by the media. So whatever the numbers, 100 or 140, Rahul was scheduled to be guillotined, if not Sonia too. So the Anthony Committee was a formality for the party as well as the media. But the bigger point is: suppose the fact-finding committee had blamed Sonia and Rahul for the catastrophe, what would have happened?
Who else would be acceptable to the all-India party? Kamal Nath or Jyotiraditya Shinde as President and Vice President? Or Anthony and Sushilkumar Shinde? Or Ambika Sonia and Gulam Nabi Azad? We can go back in history. Did the party hold Indira Gandhi responsible in 1977? Those who did exited the party and Indira Gandhi had a sensational comeback in 1980. Did the party hold Rajiv responsible in 1989? Within just 18 months, Rajiv became its PM candidate. He was killed before the elections were over. Did the party hold Sonia responsible for the defeat in 1998 and again in 1999? It was her leadership that brought the party to power in 2004 and 2009. So the party can wait for 2019 or even 2024!
But why does the media not demand Prakash Karat's head for the utterly miserable performance of the CPM? Why they do not laugh at comrades reposing faith in him again? Similarly, why do neither the NCP rank and file nor the media question Sharad Pawar's leadership? He has been failing ever since he formed his party in1999. He had to eat humble pie and accept the leadership of Sonia in the UPA. He had even accepted her as a potential Prime Minister, after having challenged her so-called foreign origin. That she refused to accept the post does not change the facts. Well, did the BJP throw out Atal Bihari Vajpayee or LK Advani in 1985, when the party could win just two seats? Neither the AIADMK nor the DMK axed their leaders, Jayalalithaa or Karunanidhi, when they suffered routs in the last 20 years.
Who decides who is indispensable? And who can say who was really responsible for such a disastrous defeat? If the High Command has failed in providing leadership, then how would the critics explain victories in 2004 and 2009? And then each Congress activist and minister, local and national leader of the party will have to provide an account of his work in the party. The fact of the matter is that the party had suffered a kind of political arthritis and did not even fight, locally or nationally. The party was not defeated, because it never fought. It surrendered to Modi's 'Ashwamedh'. Modi will not be defeated by the Congress. With the Sangh Parivar as his friend, he does not need enemy!
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. NDTV is not responsible for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information on this article. All information is provided on an as-is basis. The information, facts or opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.