[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: Rahul Gandhi‘s political style and strategy have been polarising factors for Congress factions ever since he ascended the leadership position, and has turned into a sharper point of discord post the party’s second successive Lok Sabha poll defeat in 2019.
The leader’s handling of party issues has riled the old guard the most, who have been unable to strike a rapport with him and feel he is insular in his approach, relying on a small group which does not provide the political feedback the party needs.
The Congress Working Committee meeting in which he resigned as party president immediately after the Lok Sabha debacle in May 2019 and the one this June where some members tried to persuade him to take back the reins of the organisation had a telling common thread. On both occasions, he told Congress veterans that they were reluctant and afraid of attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The remark has, in effect, defined a style that has run afoul of several leaders who claim that there is no reality check on a political strategy after repeated failures against the Modi-led BJP since 2014. They point to a dogged refusal to accept that the personalised attacks on Modi have failed and alleged scams like Rafale did not take off. They have been urging “nuance” instead of an all-out, impulsive attacking style.
However, Rahul been firm in his belief that his strategy is the best, captured in the manner he has persistently spoken about the Rafale deal and now the Covid-19 pandemic, economic slowdown and Chinese intrusion. His critics say there is no evidence any of this is working even as a string of influential leaders, Jyotiraditya Scindia the most prominent of them, have left.
According to a few senior leaders loyal to the Gandhi family, a major source of confusion has emerged since Rahul’s resignation in 2019. They say while he has stopped meeting them for discussions on the ground that he was no longer the chief, he continues to shape the party agenda with tweets and statements while his fingerprints are evident in organisational appointments. Party functionaries, all known to be his loyalists, publicly pitching for his return as party president are not restrained either. These leaders argue it has resulted in confusion among members while leaving veterans clueless and snubbed.
The leader’s handling of party issues has riled the old guard the most, who have been unable to strike a rapport with him and feel he is insular in his approach, relying on a small group which does not provide the political feedback the party needs.
The Congress Working Committee meeting in which he resigned as party president immediately after the Lok Sabha debacle in May 2019 and the one this June where some members tried to persuade him to take back the reins of the organisation had a telling common thread. On both occasions, he told Congress veterans that they were reluctant and afraid of attacking Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The remark has, in effect, defined a style that has run afoul of several leaders who claim that there is no reality check on a political strategy after repeated failures against the Modi-led BJP since 2014. They point to a dogged refusal to accept that the personalised attacks on Modi have failed and alleged scams like Rafale did not take off. They have been urging “nuance” instead of an all-out, impulsive attacking style.
However, Rahul been firm in his belief that his strategy is the best, captured in the manner he has persistently spoken about the Rafale deal and now the Covid-19 pandemic, economic slowdown and Chinese intrusion. His critics say there is no evidence any of this is working even as a string of influential leaders, Jyotiraditya Scindia the most prominent of them, have left.
According to a few senior leaders loyal to the Gandhi family, a major source of confusion has emerged since Rahul’s resignation in 2019. They say while he has stopped meeting them for discussions on the ground that he was no longer the chief, he continues to shape the party agenda with tweets and statements while his fingerprints are evident in organisational appointments. Party functionaries, all known to be his loyalists, publicly pitching for his return as party president are not restrained either. These leaders argue it has resulted in confusion among members while leaving veterans clueless and snubbed.
[ad_2]
Source link