Why Rahul Gandhi needs to get angrier and show it

In the fading light that was the 'criminal netas' ordinance -- a friend called it ordinonense -- the tallest shadow remains that of Rahul Gandhi. 

He intervened to get scrapped a completely anachronistic and contrary-to-the-mood-of-the-people piece of legislation that the government tried to push through, assisted by friends and foes who turn friends in such situations. 

Leave aside the conspiracy theories of this being an orchestrated political move, that the President was hesitant to sign and so on. What's the worst criticism that Rahul has faced with his ordinance outburst? That he was "rude" and that he undermined the prime minister and his office as well as the cabinet and why did be not speak up earlier. In short, Rahul Gandhi told the entire government: this is where you get off on this one. No please, no thank you and a supposed sorry in private. 

Look at these two criticisms separately. Maybe Rahul was rude, his language intemperate, unparliamentary and other such euphemisms usually used by people to say that they are too classy and well brought up to say it the way he did. That is a load of bollocks, but let’s let that pass for the moment. The point here is that Rahul Gandhi took charge of the situation, got out there and vocalised his opposition to an ordinance that most if not all of us thought was despicable. Surely it can’t be worse that he was brash? So rough on the PM that that even Narendra Modi had to put an arm around the PM’s shoulder and damned Rahul for not respecting his won “buzurg” leader?  This is the same Modi who had not problems ditching the very “buzurg” who had propped him at his worst times.

This is the young, new, aspirational, get-there-already India that demands change, wants it quickly and wants it now. Sometimes, it gets rough around the edges. If Rahul Gandhi thinks that the Cabinet and the Prime Minister were wrong about this ordinance and he got it scrapped, I think that’s good for us and good for him as well. And let’s also admit that he knew even before he spoke that what he says, goes. If he screwed over the PMO and Cabinet, it’s because he knows he can. And, unlike us who have to wait in line for every five years to come up, he can do it whenever he wants. So, Rahul, get angry, do it more frequently.

But that is where I have a problem. If this ordinonsense makes him angry, then there is a whole lot more to get angry about. For instance, is he angry with FDI, capital punishment, Telangana, Pakistan?

                                                                          

No one has really heard Rahul’s position on FDI. Is he fully in favour? Does he want small shopkeepers to be protected? What does he think about the local sourcing matter? Take Telangana. A state that most unexpectedly contributed to the UPA’s return in 2009 has been split into two after decades of waiting. Is Rahul ok with that? Would he back the split of Uttar Pradesh into three, as Mayawati has suggested several times? Maharashtra? What are his views on smaller states in general? Or capital punishment, given the number of hangings in the past few months, including those of Kasab and Afzal Guru. Or Pakistan: is he in favour of talks or of a pause given the border situation? Should the PM have met Nawaz in New York? Why was not angry with the government’s handling of the December 2012 protests outside Parliament? All these are issues similar to the criminal netas ordinance, because all of them in the past couple of years and even last few days have been in the public mindspace, just like the scrapped ordinance. We need to know what he thinks about these as well.

As for the second criticism that Rahul Gandhi “undermined” the position of the PM, his office and Cabinet, this not the the first time that Rahul Gandhi has taken a different path from the government. In Niyamgiri, he sided with the tribals who were fighting an MNC from taking over their land. During the Lokpal debate that this government flubbed so badly, he said in Lok Sabha that the Lokpal should be a statutory body accountable to Parliament, even though that came to naught. The PMO, and its very clear, didn’t need Rahul Gandhi to undermine it. People within the government was doing a fine job of that. Oddly enough, every one of those – whether in government, party, media or opposition -- who had left no opportunity pass to show down the prime minister’s office were all out in force to protect its honour after this perceived “slight”.

Did he belittle the prime minister personally? In the best tradition of our country, he did speak out of turn and embarrass an elder. But to me, the choice in this matter is pretty clear: I would rather this tradition be broken than perpetuate one where the politician can get away with anything and everything because no one got angry enough to do anything about it.

The Congress' polarisation and Rahul's ordinance outburst

A lot of analysis that is leading up to the big fight next year has centred around Modi and his ability to polarise the voter. Riding on that perception, even the violence in Uttar Pradesh's Muzaffarnagar was blamed at Modi, despite there being nothing more than perception to link the two. But a less perceptible 'polarisation' is also happening: between the rich and the poor.

This polarisation is largely the result of the Congress' campaign for the general elections (and the smaller battles in the next month), which focuses almost entirely on the poor. The slogan "Aapka Paisa Aapke Haath" makes that clear: the poor need entitlements that the government will give. The Food Security Bill, which the BJP first ridiculed and then helped pass in Parliament, is going to cost the government a lot of money that many calculate it might not have, but Sonia Gandhi in her defence of the Bill in Lok Sabha said that the money "must be found".

This is making the middle class resentful of the Congress focusing on the poor, if not the poor themselves, because they say that the money will come out of their pockets.  Having tasted the good life because of high growth, an open economy and the money to take advantage of it, the current slowdown is making them insecure, with rising prices and the growing reality of job losses. This government has tasted that middle class anger already, during the Anna Hazara protest and the December 26 demonstrations that almost breached the seat of government in New Delhi. The middle class raged against what it saw as a corrupt and deaf government.

The BJP is focussing on this anger and quite successfully too, when measured in terms of turnout and response at Narendra Modi's rallies, most of which are in urban areas till now. The party had also succeeded in sending the bill to protect convicted netas into cold storage, otherwise known as a standing committee of Parliament. Going against the public mood about politicians and corruption, the government decided to bring in that protection through the backdoor. In the battle of perception, the BJP looked like it was winning.

Rahul Gandhi's public rant against the ordinance, however late and loaded with implications, can be seen as an acknowledgement of that growing polarisation, which is sending the urban voter to Modi's rallies. Ask a young MP and he or she will tell you that the rural voter doesn't care much about this ordinance and about high level corruption that is sends urban India into the throes of protests. Their problems are very different, which the government and the Congress are addressing, at least in their campaign material. There is also a growing feeling that the good monsoon will also help boost rural growth, so there will be less of a problem there for the Congress (and UPA).

But the urban voter is obviously different. Which is why the first signs that the ordinance could well be on its way out came from Milind Deora, minister of state. This was followed by Delhi chief minister Shiela Dikshit and her son and Congress spokesperson Sandeep Dikshit, who is an MP from Delhi. All three of them have to defend urban constituencies, one of them in the Delhi assembly elections in November. The Congress can't surely forget that the UPA came to power in 2009 having won 92 (or more than half) urban constituencies. These now could well be rooting for the BJP under Modi.

Rahul's rant against the ordinance has been interpreted to have several impacts and implications, mostly about the future of the Prime Minister, though this is hardly the first time he has gone against the government. The main criticism has been that instead of being discreet he chose the worst possible place to take on the government: the Press Club of India  -- news can't spread any faster from any other place than that.

And exactly because of that, it looked like it was be design to send out Rahul Gandhi's message to the urban middle class that they counted and his party was listening.