Opinion: There's Something Different About Rahul Gandhi

The government and the opposition, particularly the Congress, are not on good terms. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's parliament speech is Exhibit A.

In a mature democracy, the government and the opposition should have healthy respect for each other, regardless of their differences. Democracy can't function to its fullest strength if goodwill is missing. If both are paranoid about being undermined, it's the death of democracy. Unfortunately, the relationship between our government and the opposition is such that hatred, not respect, is the defining emotion.

This is new normal in Indian politics. Yes, there were bitter exchanges in the past. Barbs were flung across the floor. Sarcasm was couched in poetry. But it was never below the belt. And the acrimony stayed within the House and was never carried home. 

Even at the height of Emergency and Bofors, communication was never broken. 

Today, we can hardly say that about the BJP and the Congress and other parties in opposition. 

Against this backdrop, Rahul Gandhi has to reconstruct his politics and recast the Congress, India's oldest party.

Unlike his predecessors in the Nehru-Gandhi family, Rahul Gandhi inherited a party with fundamental weaknesses. 

Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi were giants among their peers. Rajiv Gandhi was a good person, but naive. He took over a Congress that needed reorientation, but he was betrayed by his own friends, and paid the price in 1989. PV Narasimha Rao and Sitaram Kesri were no match for the Congress's first family in "vote catching abilities". They were insecure men. 

Unlike her husband Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi was shrewd, but she was a stopgap despite a nearly two-decade stint. She had no solution to the party's problems. She did not realise that the Congress, to regain its hegemonic status, had to reinvent itself and acclimatise to the changing political climate of the country. She was supposed to act like a leader, but she turned out to be a great manager. The people who surrounded her were also like her. 

In 2014, the Congress was a sitting duck. Victory was a cakewalk for Modi. But he did not become Prime Minister because he led some great movement or caused a tectonic shift in the system; he won because the Congress was too weak as a political conglomerate and teeming with darbari parasites masquerading as leaders. 

Most of those who went on to hold high posts in the party and the government were men with no social base. They were simply in the good graces of the Family.

The Family can't absolve itself as it promoted brazen opportunists and people who were in it for power more than to serve society. 

After becoming Prime Minister, Modi transformed the BJP and changed the power dynamics. Yet for years, it did not strike the Congress that it was no longer the default choice of the people. Its leaders were too busy with sabotage and conspiracies. The party was destined to perform badly, and it did. 

By 2019, it dawned on Rahul Gandhi that shortcuts and cosmetic changes would not do the party any good. Long-term planning and a complete overhaul was in order. His resignation as Congress president after the debacle of 2019 should be seen in this context. One can debate the merits of the decision, but one can't fault Rahul Gandhi for leading by example. A leader has to take responsibility.

Rahul Gandhi also ensured proper elections for the post of Congress president, firmly keeping his family out of the race. Mallikarjun Kharge's emergence as the party president is a healthy sign for the party. 

But Rahul Gandhi's most audacious project was his long march from Kanyakumari to Kashmir. Many parties, intellectuals and journalists were sceptical to begin with. A few were derisive. The BJP went out of its way to ridicule the Congress MP, but soon realised the stance could boomerang. So, the ruling party backed up a bit.

Rahul Gandhi's walk drew big crowds, from south to north, and for the first time since 2014, the Congress set the agenda and steered the narrative, while the BJP and the government reacted. Throughout the Yatra, Rahul Gandhi tried not only to reconnect with the ideology of the Congress party and its grand legacy in Indian politics but also tried to tailor it to fit changing times.

Instead of simply criticising the Modi government on policies and its deliverables, Rahul Gandhi struck at the core of the BJP, which is RSS and its Hindutva. If Hindutva is the BJP's strongest mobilising weapon, then it is also its weakest shield. It has too many chinks.

The absence of the RSS in the freedom movement, the arrest of its top ideologue in Gandhi's assassination, the initial disrespect to the Constitution and the national flag, calling Muslims and Christians enemies, the demolition of the Babri Mosque and the Gujarat riots are serious questions that need clear answers.

The list of awkward questions runs long. What does it mean by Hindu Rashtra? Does it really want to turn India into a theocratic state and kill multiculturalism like Pakistan and Iran did, where minorities will be treated like second grade citizens? Rahul Gandhi's attack on Savarkar while walking in Maharashtra is a pointer too. He also linked Hindutva with crony capitalism. Rahul Gandhi has not minced his words while frequently taking the names of Adani and Ambani. It was no surprise when he launched a blistering attack on Modi on the issue of Adani and the Hindenburg report.

It may still be open to debate whether Rahul's latest endeavour will fetch votes for the party and reinstall the party in the driver's seat. But it cannot be denied that Rahul Gandhi has finally grasped what his party needs.

Unfortunately, he is trying to play the same game as Modi, in which there is no space for grey. Everything is black or white. Modi is the inventor of this game in Indian politics.

His predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee, despite being an RSS volunteer, was inclusive in his approach. He respected diversity and imbibed the democratic ethos with human vulnerabilities. For Vajpayee, the government and the opposition were two important pillars of the parliamentary system and dialogue between the two was imperative for the health of the democracy. For Modi, however, dialogue is meaningless if one is not in sync with him. Rahul Gandhi has also realised that no dialogue is possible with the Prime Minister, and attack is the only option. 

While speaking in parliament, Rahul Gandhi was focused. He knew that the Adani episode is the weak link in Modi's scheme of things. His incessant hammering unnerved the Prime Minister. The PM neither took Rahul Gandhi's name, nor talked about Adani, but the whole world knows which ghost he was trying to kick off his shoulder. Rahul Gandhi has come of age. But he has taken a tiny step - a giant leap is still far away. 

(Ashutosh is author of 'Hindu Rashtra' and Editor, satyahindi.com.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.