It is not clear how the party has come to this rather startling conclusion at a time when its political fortune is at its lowest ebb. Not only has the Congress been reduced to its lowest-ever tally of 44 in the Lok Sabha, it has been losing one election after another in Maharashtra, Haryana, Jharkhand and Jammu and Kashmir and is likely to come a poor third in next month’s Delhi polls.

Moreover, the Congress’s downslide began more than a year ago when it lost the Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Delhi assembly elections. Given this dismal record, it is difficult to understand how anyone in the organization can claim that the party’s two topmost leaders have “enormous credibility”. It is possible, therefore, that the two at the helm have drafted their own praise, knowing full well that none in the 130-year-old Grand Old Party of yore will have the gumption to sing a different tune.

Notwithstanding the self-praise in line with television news channels which say they are the best, it is now generally accepted inside and outside the party that far from being the “natural icon” of the progressive forces, Rahul is seen as political dilettante who is playing a role which doesn’t come naturally to him – unlike his sister, Priyanka – and is there only because his mother wants him to carry the dynasty’s torch.

As a result,, he is seen either as a “joker”, as a Kerala Congressman T.H. Mustafa said, or advised to go on a sabbatical with his mother, as a former Congress Working Committee member Jagmeet Singh Brar said, or is said to be surrounded by “rootless wonders and spineless creepers”, as a senior Congressman, K.C. Chandra Deo, said.

Considering how these jibes ring true unlike the party’s extravagant claims, it is obvious that the Congress is in a worse state than previously thought. The essence of recovery is the correct identification of the problem. The Congress, however, has been shying away from doing so.

Even the committee that was set up to ascertain the reasons for the Lok Sabha defeat began its work by absolving the party’s top leadership of all blame when it is customary in all fields inside or outside politics to resign, especially in the event of a failure of high magnitude. Instead, while an innate sycophancy among party men makes them blind to the writing on the wall, the leaders themselves, viz. Sonia and Rahul, are not honest enough with themselves to admit the truth of their disconnect with the people.

It is probably a nervous realization that such an acknowledgement will make them lose their hold on the party, paving the way for an alternate leadership, which is behind their denial of reality and the absurd assertion about “enormous credibility”.

However, given the way the party’s functioning defies common sense, it is not odd that when a former Congress chief minister like Digvijay Singh thinks that Rahul is “by temperament not a ruling person”, there is a move to make him the party chief. Only insiders will know whether this is yet another attempt to induce him to shed his dilettantism as when he was also asked to lead the party in parliament.

But, the party will be making a serious mistake if it puts so much faith in someone who gives the impression of being clueless about politics and society, as his exercises in slumming by spending nights in Dalit huts showed. Before taking such a fateful step which can spell the dynasty’s doom, it will be better for Congressmen to mull over some of the reasons for its decline.

It isn’t only the Antony committee’s view that the party’s secularism is seen as minority appeasement or that it failed to articulate the government’s achievements which led to the defeat, but several other factors. Of them, the sycophancy displayed by party men towards an apparently undeserving dynasty as well as the dynasty’s overweening sense of entitlement would rank high on the list of negatives.

The revulsion caused by the servile conduct of courtiers could not but have been aggravated by the party’s turning of a blind eye, obviously at the behest of the first family, towards corruption as was seen by Andimuthu Raja’s continuation in the cabinet till the Supreme Court intervened and the drafting of an ordinance patently aimed at providing succour to tainted politicians. The fact that the ordinance was withdrawn after Rahul publicly tore it up was the first time that the son went against the mother who had okayed it.

Except for this intervention, Rahul has shown no sign of an economic outlook which is in sync with the changes that have taken place in India following the 1991 deregulation or a political vision which does not depend on half-a-century old palliatives of subsidies and reservations. His elevation, therefore, will be a recipe for disaster. (IPA Service)