Commentary/T V R Shenoy

A post-dated cheque drawn on a crashing bank

In December 1924, Mahatma Gandhi was elected to the presidency of the Congress. Jawaharlal Nehru laughed that it was "in the nature of an anticlimax for he had long been the permanent super-president!"

It is 1997, and posters are defacing half the walls in Delhi. They are welcoming the entry of Sonia Gandhi into politics. Frankly, my reaction mirrors that of her grandfather-in-law.

When was Sonia Gandhi not in the Congress? Ever since Rajiv Gandhi's death every Congressman has made it a point to pay homage to 10 Janpath (with the possible exception of Narasimha Rao).

But it isn't the fact of Sonia Gandhi's entry that is so intriguing. It is the secretive manner in which it became public.

When The Pioneer broke the news, the Pavlovian reaction was to deny it. Twenty-four hours later, it was officially confirmed. So why fib in the first place?

If you take a super-legalistic view, The Pioneer did get it wrong. The story claimed that Sonia Gandhi was an "active" member, whereas she is technically only a "primary" member.

But since when has the Congress displayed such regard for niceties? When, for instance, has the party referred to Sitaram Kesri as a "provisional" president (which is all he is)?

Half -truths aside, the simple fact is that Sonia Gandhi became a Congress member on March 21, the day of the summer solstice. Very fitting, one assumes, since it marked the day on which the heat was turned up on H D Deve Gowda.

There is every reason to believe that Sonia Gandhi was a very "active" member of the party between the time she signed up and the day Kesri withdrew support. But a veil was cast over the facts. It is only now that the truth is emerging.

On March 23, just two days after Sonia Gandhi signed up, a meeting of Gandhi loyalists was held in Makhan Lal Fotedar's bungalow. It was there that the decision was taken to unseat the prime minister.

Could there be any reason other than Bofors? Deve Gowda had consistently refused to interfere with the investigations. As a result, the probe made more headway in his ten-month regime than in the five years of the last Congress government. With even the Swiss agreeing to open up their files, there was a very real danger that the true masterminds would be unmasked.

Every effort was made to keep the conclave at Fotedar's house a secret, even -- or especially -- from senior Congressmen. But it is now being said that there were others who knew what was in the wind.

On March 28, Govindaswamy Karuppiah Moopanar, president of the Tamil Maanila Congress, obtained the darshan of Sonia Gandhi herself. Congress insiders say Moopanar was told of the coming withdrawal of support.

One day later, on March 29, "provisional" Congress president and the "permanent super-president" met at 10 Janpath. It was at this meeting that Sitaram Kesri received the green signal.

(Of course, Kesri wouldn't have objected even if he dared to disobey a member of the "family". The taxmen were sniffing into the party's account-books. He himself was at the receiving end of a probe. And, if nothing else, the turmoil would ensure that the Congress's organisational polls would be delayed!)

But the hamhanded way in which the carpet was pulled from under Deve Gowda unleashed a wave of disgust. (Aided, I must say, by Sitaram Kesri's vulgar abuse.) Under the circumstances, keeping her membership secret was the only way for Sonia Gandhi to avoid the mud being thrown around.

The question is whether she can avoid it even today. Everyone is bound to suspect that there is a clear link between Sonia Gandhi's admission into the party and the drama in Delhi nine days later. And suspicions are also sure to arise that the proximate cause was the unwelcome progress of the Bofors investigation.

If anything, the decision to thrust the fact under wraps for 50 days is proof positive that the Congress had something to hide. So what has the party gained by the exercise?

Very little. Yes, there will be some Congress workers who will feel a little enthusiasm pumping through their veins. Yes, the Congress can be reasonably sure of retaining the Amethi Lok Sabha seat, a feat of sorts in a state where the Congress polled less than 10 per cent of the total votes (losing even Indira Gandhi's Rae Bareilly).

But what effect will Sonia Gandhi have on the millions outside Amethi? Does anyone believe that she can sway voters to any sizeable extent elsewhere in the country? Come to that, does anyone believe that the courts will allow the Bofors probe to be derailed?

The answers to those questions are obvious. The Congress has gained nothing by the shabby manoeuvre. Nor has Sonia Gandhi.

The Congress wants to cash in on the Gandhi name. But the value of that currency has dropped even further than that of the rupee.

Let me sum up my reaction to Sonia Gandhi's much-touched entry into the Congress by quoting Mahatma Gandhi: "It is a post-dated cheque drawn on a crashing bank!"

Tell us what you think of this column