It’s a week now since Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi spoke at the University of California at Berkeley and the buzz and counter-buzz haven’t faded yet. It seems the faltering Mr Gandhi, often described as a “misfit” in politics, and blamed for his reluctance to shoulder the responsibility of the Congress, the country’s oldest political party, seems to have at last found his voice, and in a way has got his act together. This is one time the ruling BJP has found it difficult to laugh him out of court.
BJP president Amit Shah countered Mr Gandhi’s charge that there has been no economic growth in the three years since Prime Minister Narendra Modi entered office by asking the Congress leader to explain what his family had done for the country. It was clearly a bad one from Mr Shah. He should have asked about the Congress’ contribution to development in 50 years, instead he pointed a finger at Mr Gandhi’s great-grandfather Jawaharlal Nehru, grandmother Indira Gandhi and father Rajiv Gandhi. It became personalised, and it revealed that somewhere Mr Gandhi’s words touched a raw nerve in Mr Shah. The BJP president soon recovered his poise and told the media in Jharkhand that he wouldn’t respond to Rahul Gandhi’s speeches.
Information and broadcasting minister Smriti Irani, who had contested against Mr Gandhi in Amethi and who appears confident of dislodging him in the next election, mounted a counter-attack, calling Rahul Gandhi a “failed dynast” and described his career in politics as a failed political journey. There was also the taunt that Mr Gandhi chose a foreign locale to criticise the Narendra Modi government, and she implied Mr Gandhi and his party didn’t have ground to stand on in the country. The political crossfire is in order. But there’s a clear indication that it has gone beyond the predictable rapier thrusts.
It seems that Mr Gandhi had not only expressed his own assessment and his own opinion of the situation in the country with disarming candour — at one point he acknowledged that Mr Modi was a better communicator than him — but he has also echoed the rising tide of public dissatisfaction with three years of the Modi government. It’s the convergence of Mr Gandhi’s personal view and general opinion in the country that makes the Berkeley speech a turning point as it were in the nation’s shoptalk.
When Mr Modi campaigned in 2014 against the ineffective and effete Manmohan Singh government, he was voicing his personal view but he also echoed general opinion. After three years in power, it appears that the tables have turned, and the Modi government is in the line of fire. That Mr Gandhi fired the salvo could be explained away as a coincidence but it will not change the fact that there is a change in the nation’s mood.
His level-headed, calm and critical assessment of the Modi government’s performance is far superior to the throwaway line of “suit-boot ki sarkar” in an earlier Lok Sabha speech.
His critics and detractors, and there are legions of them in the party and outside, in the BJP and in the media, have suddenly found themselves face to face with a man who cannot any more be lampooned. There might be occasion in the future when he might make himself a ready target of scorn, but this is his moment.
However, it would be far too premature to declare that this could be the beginning of the end for the Modi government and the BJP’s impressive series of electoral wins from 2014 onwards. What is clear is that the people are now asking questions, and the BJP is forced to give answers. For example, Mr Shah had to acknowledge that economic growth has slowed down due to “technical reasons”. He couldn’t any more contemptuously brush aside the question.
The Berkeley speech can be described as a green shoot of political dissent in the country, that can either gain strength or wither away. Even those who have been impressed with Mr Gandhi’s newfound gravity are doubtful whether he can carry it through as that involves activating the fractious Congress Party, striking alliances with other parties and reaching out to people at large with something more substantial than the litany of the Modi government’s policy blunders. He has less than two years to work out the alternative to the BJP. Even this wouldn’t ensure success. Because ultimately, the people remain to be convinced. What Mr Gandhi has achieved post-Berkeley is that people across the country, contrary to Ms Irani’s claims, are willing to give a hearing to Mr Gandhi, to the Congress and to other Opposition parties. That is what is worrying the BJP.
It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the Modi government is losing its 2014 sheen, and the Prime Minister’s charisma is showing signs of wear and tear. The media in 2014 pitted the political virility of Mr Modi against a “namby-pamby” Rahul Gandhi, and it seemed natural that Mr Gandhi didn’t stand a chance. It is also forgotten that after a decade of Congress-led UPA rule, the people looked for a change. It was not entirely Mr Gandhi’s fault that he looked a greenhorn in comparison to Mr Modi. In 2017, the situation is slightly different. Prime Minister Modi is not all that strong any more, and Mr Gandhi isn’t exactly a novice. But the scales in a Modi-Gandhi contest are still in favour of Mr Modi. But people may want to vote out the BJP more than Mr Modi, and they may opt for a Congress-led coalition more than Mr Gandhi. It changes equations altogether.
The BJP might well believe Prime Minister Modi is their Sachin Tendulkar, but it’s a fact India lost many a match despite Tendulkar. This should be a moment of reflection for the BJP more than for the Congress. The political Opposition that was nearly decimated in 2014 is back in the reckoning. Mr Gandhi has merely made it clear that the Opposition is back.
