The move comes at a time when the disparate opposition was showing signs of greater camaraderie. The post-Amar Singh Samajwadi Party has been moving closer to an as yet lukewarm Left. Mulayam Singh Yadav was already hurt at the way the Congress kept him off the UPA government which he had salvaged in July, 2008 at great risk. Each byelection showed how devastating is Rahul Gandhi's determined forays into Mulayam's traditional minority support base in UP. Instead of an anti-Mayawati tie-up with the Congress in elections, the latter under Rahul Gandhi has become a Frankenstein for the SP. Thus Mulayam has little love left for the Congress.

The change in BJP has been more telling. With power a distant dream, the BJP under the new RSS mandate has begun rooting for a clearly more populist line. As of now, they are ready to offend the corporates and the US lobbies. Clearly the reform champions within the UPA government anticipated an opposition line-up against it on issues like price rise and budget measures such as duty raise on a wide ranging items. There were joint walkouts and informal floor coordination. The BJP had spurned the lobby pressures on the nuclear liability bill. The threat of cut motions to corner the government on budget looked real.

The sudden resurrection of the women's bill was a brilliant master stroke to disrupt this growing opposition line-up. The surcharged atmosphere generated by the women's bill could also have overshadowed the other more crucial issues like prices, budget imposts and corporate and US-mandated legislations like nuclear liability bill. Some say the idea came from the outside lobbies. Others say one of the government's own agencies has suggested it. Unfortunately, the short-sighted political gamble had a diametrically opposite effect. Not only have the old Mandal groups got themselves united against the government they are even talking about a 1977-type anti-Congress consolidation.

Thus a game plan crafted to wean away the Mandal parties from the NDA-Left opposition had boomeranged on its sponsors. The Congress party's Core Group had to be called twice on the day the bill was disrupted in the Rajya Sabha. The panic was on three counts. First, the loss of face if the bill got stuck in the House. Second, with the political divide so sharp, the fear of the budget and government bills getting blocked is so real. Then there were rumblings over the bill among large sections of minorities. The Muslim groups - Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, Jamiat-Ulama-i-hind, All-India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat and the All-India Milli Council - have warned of a 'Muslim backlash' if sub-quota was not introduced for the Muslims and OBCs. Similar demands were made by UPA allies like National Conference, Muslim League and the Hyderabad-based Owaisi party.

On the ground, there were more scary signals. The Yadav chieftains in UP and Bihar are telling Muslim groups that the bill will reduce the Muslim representation in legislatures. There were 48 Muslim MPs in Lok Sabha in 1984. Now it is just 29. It will now go down further The Congress has every reason to fear that this might disrupt Rahul Gandhi's strenuous field work in the two states to regain the long lost trust of the minorities. Threat of a revival of the old 'M-Y' (Muslim-Yadav) looked real. Therefore, at the Core Group meeting, Mukherjee, more worried about his budget and US-mandated bills, made a strong pitch for deferring the women's bill.

Herein comes the other subtext, less known but potentially more disastrous. At the Core Group's second crisis meeting on March 8, Mukherjee was ready with arguments in favour of deferring the bill in the greater interests of the government. After finishing the official business, the party will get an opportunity to fix the opposition, he assured. The PM gave him full backing. But Sonia Gandhi displayed unusual stubbornness. She seemed even ready to risk the government to salvage the women's bill. Stunned by her vehemence, Mukherjee and PM had to push the bill even if the CISF had to be deployed in House. Why was she acted so intractable in that meeting?

The routine explanations looked so naïve. As a woman? She is not the kind to be swayed by such sentiments. A tribute to her husband Rajiv Gandhi? This is a media myth. The women's bill was first introduced by the Gowda government five years after Rajiv's death. If she chose to assert her ultimate authority and curtly overruled the PM-Pranab pleading at the two meetings, it was to send an unmistakable message. For the past few weeks, there have been subtle changes in the power equation in UPA. Before this, whenever the government deviated from the party line - on issues like India-Pak joint statement - the party chief has been using her veto powers. Things suddenly changed after Mukherjee's perceived line-up with what is described as the reform group.

Now a situation has emerged where the Congress establishment had little role in government policies. Mukherjee was put in finance with a mandate to make economic policy more aam aadmi-friendly, and not excessively corporatist. But in the past few weeks, the party was forced to tail the government even on issues like petro hike and price rise. Much against her intuition, the budget has dumped the aam aadmi. Each of Sonia's flagship scheme is being diluted by excluding large sections through devices like change in BPL definition. First they came with the idea of pushing the women's bill to split the opposition, and then when things went haywire wanted to drop it. And this time the Congress chief chose to assert her authority and did have her way.

If she was forced to relent the very next day after being unusually forthcoming on TV and hosting a victory feast, it was only to salvage the government from the mess it had created. However, by far the most notable subtext of the UPA's misadventure has been the increased centrality of Mukherjee. With the PM looking up to him for support and the party heavily dependent on him, he has acquired a unique position in the Congress power equations. So much so, he is often seen as the sole arbiter of government policies, none else. (IPA Service)