Before dismissing all this as sheer moonshine, two of the deadlines they have set looks quite interesting. One is 2012 when the present PM, then 81, will take over as President as the post falls vacant. And by then, Rahul will be ready for the launch. The second deadline is the 2014 general election, which, we are reminded, will be fought on a youth wave. Rahul, young by Indian standards, will catch the aspirations of the young voters who will constitute 70 per cent of the total. But to interpret that Niyamgiri is going to be a launching pad for Rahul is simply absurd. Niyamgiri has just 1500 tribals. Tribals in India are spread out over isolated pockets with each one dominated by local leaders and groups. So the whole concept of a 'national tribal leader' is unworkable.

For Rahul, this was not the first launching pad. He led the UP Congress and made some marginal success in the 2009 elections. He has been to every state for sure-shot engagements like visiting the victims at Leh. In any case, Niyamgiri is not the first central intervention for Rahul. The whole Bundelkhand development plan was launched after a Rahul Gandhi meeting with PM, again, along with Digvijay Singh. It was wholly aimed at boosting his image as that backward region's saviour. At the moment, he is leading the UP farmers' in their agitation against Mayawati's land acquisition.

However, let us do not miss the real import of Rahul's current initiatives. It is now part, and at times parallel, to the Sonia establishment's own developmental activism which has been giving much discomfort to the PM and those plying the classical reform line. Now Rahul's calibrated entry into the policy domain has sharpened this conflict of ideas. Both sides have different objectives and varying compulsions. Earlier, the schism between the GDP chasers and those nursing the aam aadmi vote bank was claimed to be complementary. It is no more so. The clash of concepts has now led to sort of policy paralysis in Delhi.

Look at the number of reform-related initiatives blocked by the Congress establishment. Kapil Sibal's education tribunal bill was halted at the last stage not by the opposition but an AICC office-bearer. For all practical purposes, Sonia Gandhi's NAC has become a parallel planning commission and union cabinet put together. So far, it wetted only the party's welfare programmes. Now it goes beyond the NREGS and food security bill to environment, social harmony and even UID. Last week, Congress leaders said the party chief was keen on the recognition to Bhojpuri language and was working on it. We are now told that the NAC will redraft the communal harmony bill after the one prepared by the government was found inadequate.

While the government is still grappling with the controversial Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh, the party chief has already assured a favourable response on giving it the status of a national project. This was done in a letter to the state Congress leaders. Another case what the government side regretfully call 'micromanagement' related to Nandan Nilekani's high-cost UID scheme. Over a hundred NGOs have submitted a petition to Sonia Gandhi questioning the claims made by the protagonists of this technology demonstrator. Those like NAC member Aruna Roy dispute the claims of UID checking PDS corruption. The whole thing, including the appointment of Nilekani, they allege, was done without transparency. Huge contracts are given in an 'opaque' manner. They claim the NAC is set to scrutinize the UID project as well.

During the UPA1, Sonia establishment had acted as an honest broker or arbiter in disputes between the Left and PM. Now it has emerged is a parallel authority to which the government itself has to be subordinate. Look at the bare facts. At least three bills are being redrafted by the NAC. One day PM assures Orissa CM of a favourable environmental clearance for Posco. And within two days, Jairam Ramesh throws doubts by expanding the areas of environmental concerns. Later Ramesh tells media that the Congress is determined to win over the tribes by protecting their environs. For five years L.K. Advani had shouted that UPA PM was 'weak'. Now few in industry and government doubt who hold the virtual power. Emergence of the Rahul 'window' as a power centre has further heightened the uncertainties.

Every one knows hereafter any Rahul-led move will have the overriding precedence. When he proposes programmes for Bundelkhand, free market rules or economic justification just won't work. Watch the disturbing silence on the Vedanta cancellation. Business pour out in private but their associations dare not utter one word on this crucial decision. Any group with access to the young leader can push an idea provided it can enhance his support base. There is suppressed fright in business circles. If the trend continues, environmental policies can greatly harm future projects. Corporates world over take a dim view of the environmental objections. So much so world corporates view the climate changes as 'scare'. Thus when Rahul joins land acquisition protests against Mayawati, its consequences send shockwaves in boardrooms.

The reform anchors have reasons to worry about two other associated side effects. First is a clear return to populism, subsidies and non-market priorities. The Sonia establishment has waged a bitter battle with the reformers for widening the scope of job schemes and food security. More matters are on the firing line. Remember, Indian politicians, when in trouble, always turn to the Left and talk of the poor. Indira Gandhi had won her first battle through nationalization, and after the declaration of Emergency on 20-point programme. After encashing the aam aadmi cheque once, she needs more appealing schemes.

The other side effect is Rahul Gandhi's present proclivity to agitational mode. Mobilisation of tribals and his UP stir against land acquisition are bound to invite retaliation by the rival opposition parties. If a Mamata Banerjee from Singur and Nandigram could mar the entire industrial land acquisition climate, one can imagine the extent of damage the new agitational mode could cause. This is the kind of suppressed fears in the reform corridors. (IPA Service)