The hurt over prime ministerial decisions was so deep that the Congress party avoided its formal response for days. The PM's climb-down in the India-Pak statement on composite dialogue is legion. The whole party is at a loss why the PM allowed the mention of Baluchistan. Then came his silence on G8's India-specific decision not to provide ENR technology without signing the NPT. A similar kind of climb-down took place at the same venue on the issue of climate change and emission. The Indian experts' team had gone there with a fool-proof case, and was determined to prove its case.

But suddenly, forces worked from the top to adopt a more lenient stand at the meeting. In fact, the Indian team was vertically split between the one that ready to toe the suddenly reversed government position and the other one reiterating India 's long-term national interests. But for A.K. Antony's valiant resistance for three years, we might have a more rigorous end-use agreement - as hard as the original one meant for the NATO allies. So far, the latest climb-down comes in the case of a free trade agreement with Asian countries minus China .

About 4000 items like rubber, coffee, cardamom, rubber and several manufactured good are being thrown open for free trade with these countries, again due to the invisible pressure from foreign forces. The decision can cripple the plantation industry and throw lakhs of people out of their livelihood. The point is that crucial decisions affecting millions of people are taken in a self-righteous manner without broader consultations with the stake holders or the party workers who have to answer the people's fury. Most of these have origins in the old doctrinaire precincts based on pre-meltdown concepts..

Most Congress men invariably view such policy flip-flops in relation to their respective vote banks and its possible effect on the poll-bound states. Now proximity of elections in Maharashtra has prompted Sonia Gandhi to do some quick damage control. At the time of writing, she has consultations with Pranab Mukherjee and A.K, Antony along with her political aide Ahmed Patel as to how to tackle the ill-effects of the repeated faux pas. As yet we do not know whether it is going to be another firefighting remedy or a more serious move to find institutional remedies on a long-term basis.

Before going into this aspect, it is pertinent to ask why so many politically embarrassing slip-ups in quick succession? Apparently, these emerges from the notion that the 15th Lok Sabha elections have been an endorsement of the PM's initiatives, and it gives a blanket go-ahead for UPA2 to complete the process. Such misplaced assumptions are symptomatic of a situation where decisions are taken by a small homogenous group without multi-channel communication and consultation. It is here that the Sonia establishment can contribute liberally to put the UPA government on the right trajectory.

The bane of the UPA government has been its extremely narrow decision making corridor. Every other dispensation in the past has had the benefit of extensive interaction by people of varied backgrounds. 'Janata' governments had too many pulls and pressures. Vajpayee took decisions after wide discussions among his party colleagues and operators. Even the 'authoritarian' Indira Gandhi avoided rushing with decisions. This writer remembers how joint meetings of the CPB (central parliamentary board whose role then was not confined to candidates' selection) and concerned PAC (political affairs committee) continued late into the night to sort out crucial issues. Often they had to disperse without taking decisions.

Members discussed, without inhibition, as to how a decision will help the Congress and ways to corner the rivals. Political consequences were central to the debate at such meetings, not compulsions of reform schedule or big power pressures. She had encouraged uninvolved people - among them journalists - to provide confidential feedback. Such multi-channel system helped her cross-check realities on the ground. The UPA's problems are compounded by its distinctly dual leadership, Even under Vajpayee, the effective leadership was with him. In the case of UPA, while the effective political authority remains with Sonia Gandhi, PM functions under reflected power.

During the first four years, the disconnect between the PM and the political power centre did not show up because the Left's tussles with the former had overshadowed all other schisms. Left had a view on every issue and they voiced it at every stage. They imposed two coordination panels, one for the UPA parties and the other with them. The CMP was a manual for references. After the exit of Left, coordination panels became defunct. After leaving policy making powers to the PM, the Congress establishment now is placed in a curious plight: while it has no role in decision making, it is left to defend the government's wrong actions.

Obsessive adherence to a set of pre-meltdown economic remedies, a narrow range of foreign policies and lack of coordination with ruling party's own political establishment are UPA2's congenital defects. Absence of policy flexibility and political pragmatism makes it the most chaotic system India ever had. We even lack the kind of excruciating vigil of the US senate. The BJP's 'weak PM' charges made policy guidance by the Congress establishment anathema. And after the Left exit, freer hand to PM became a political dogma. At their first meeting with the PM, Mamata and DMK had asked for a coordination panel. But the PM sidetracked the issue. Now Mamata has shocked him by scornfully blocking the land acquisition bill at the cabinet meeting.

Fresh cases of floundering, and rumbling over them within the Congress, keep coming. All this points to the need for a sound mechanism within the UPA to wet government initiatives before they lead to controversies. The Congress Core Group is essentially a damage control arrangement. Post facto course correction is as damaging as stonewalling by a Mamata or Left. Call it coordination or oversight panel. The Congress establishment will have to evolve a sound system of broad consultations for considered decisions and wider consensus. If Indira Gandhi can rely on joint meetings of the CPB and the concerned cabinet panel, why does the UPA shy away from a system for broader consensus? (IPA Service)