Opinion: Gujarat elections, a litmus test for Rahul

In exactly a week from now, we shall know whether the Lotus has bloomed or the Hand has swept aside its rivals in Gujarat. We shall also know whether Rahul Gandhi begins his new innings as Congress president with a morale-boosting win or a defeat for which his minions will need to scamper to find scapegoats. And, we shall know too if Prime Minister Narendra Modi approaches the forthcoming electoral challenges after having being endorsed as Gujarat’s Pride or rejected in his own backyard. Both sides are confident of a decisive victory, but that is only to be expected. One has to lose and will lose. After all, while many scenarios have been discussed, none has ventured to suggest a hung Assembly where the winner-loser is unclear.

Election campaigns are composed of several issues, and it is rare for just one or two of these to determine the outcome. The 2014 Lok Sabha poll was one such exception where corruption and policy paralysis alone doomed the Congress. Various other matters, factual or perceptional, became subordinate to this twin overriding narrative. In the Uttar Pradesh Assembly election held earlier this year, the two issues that tamed the Samajwadi Party were minority appeasement and poor law and order.

The Gujarat campaign began in a simple enough manner, giving hope to the plethora of commentators of a fairly accurate assessment.

The Bihar Assembly poll was fought and won by the Lalu Prasad-Nitish Kumar combine (which has since evaporated) on pure caste arithmetic. Aside these, elections are contested and decided on multiple grounds, and this makes the democratic exercise all the more challenging — and even more challenging to predict. Rare is that political commentator who is able to say, with some amount of accuracy, that a particular issue would be the dominant factor. In hindsight, once the results are known, there are many to ‘analyse’ the impact of one strand or the other.

The Gujarat campaign began in a simple enough manner, giving hope to the plethora of commentators of a fairly accurate assessment. Led by Prime Minister Modi, the Bharatiya Janata Party went on an overdrive, listing its achievements in the State over the two decades of its rule — especially the period 2002-14 when Modi was the Chief Minister. The Gujarat Model of development was showcased, the ease of doing the business ranking of the World Bank was flaunted, the upgrade in the country’s ratings by Moody’s was quoted, the robustness of the Indian economy was pointed out, and the ‘exemplary’ law and order situation in the State was underlined. The Congress sought to pick holes in the Gujarat Model by citing matters of unemployment, poor social welfare indices, farmers’ distress etc.

Thereafter, as the campaign picked momentum, the issue of reservation for the Patidar community gained ground. While it was there from the beginning, the matter received heft after the Congress and Patidar leader Hardik Patel joined hands officially. Once the Congress formally endorsed Patidar reservation, the BJP swung into action, first by projecting that the Patidars were a divided lot and that the sensible among them — who according to BJP leaders were in a majority — would remain loyal to the BJP. Second, the ruling party forcefully projected the ‘impossibility’ of the reservation in constitutional terms and said the Congress was taking the Patidars for a ride.

The BJP had been keeping an eye on Rahul Gandhi’s sudden devotion to temples; by some accounts, he has visited more than a dozen of them during his campaigns in the State.

So far, the going was simple enough and the commentators were still a happy lot. The BJP pitched for inclusive development (reminding voters of its past record and promising more of the same for the future) while the Congress aggressively pushed for reservation as an affirmative action to benefit the Patidars who form nearly 12 per cent of the population in Gujarat. The caste rainbow of Patidar-OBC-Scheduled Caste, which the Congress had quickly put out, was supposed to extinguish the BJP’s flame of hope. Then, the development versus reservation narrative began to change.

For some time, the BJP had been keeping an eye on Rahul Gandhi’s sudden devotion to temples; by some accounts, he has visited more than a dozen of them during his campaigns in the State. But after his trip to the Somnath temple, the party got an opportunity to say something. Somebody supposedly from the Congress leader’s side entered his name as a non-Hindu visitor to the temple. BJP leaders were quick to demand an explanation. The Congress fell in the trap and one of its senior functionaries claimed that Rahul Gandhi was a “Janeu-dhari (sacred thread wearing) Hindu”. To top this, Rahul Gandhi said he was a Shiva devotee! His acolytes then went on to speculate on the religious affiliations of both the Prime Minister and BJP president Amit Shah.

The sudden turn towards religion, on which the Congress generally finds itself on the defensive given that the BJP leaders make no bones about where their inclinations lie, shaped the narrative even more decidedly when senior Congress leader and noted lawyer Kapil Sibal demanded that the Supreme Court postpone the hearing on the Ayodhya temple-mosque dispute case, and take it up after the 2019 Lok Sabha election. The direct linkage of the dispute with politics left the Congress red-faced. Worse, even the litigants who had hired Sibal condemned the senior advocate’s stand and said they wanted an early hearing and quick settlement of the issue.

The manner in which the BJP latched on to the issue at his public rallies and converted it into a major talking point, should have alerted the Congress against more self-goals.

The manner in which the BJP, especially Prime Minister Modi, latched on to the issue at his public rallies and converted it into a major talking point, should have alerted the Congress against more self-goals. After all, it suited the opposite party to target the BJP on the issues of reservation and lack of real and inclusive development. But, perhaps already confident that they were winning Gujarat, senior Congress leaders breached the red line. Mani Shankar Aiyar called the Prime Minister “neech”, a term which Modi and his team ran swiftly to the electorate and termed it as a slight to his social status of being an OBC. Now, the BJP used the occasion to not just strike at the Congress for its ‘elitist’ and ‘feudal’ mindset but also quoted the abuse as an insult to Gujarati asmita (pride).

Had these blunders come in the early stages of electioneering, the Congress could have had a better chance of glossing over them or having them dominated by other, fresher issues. But they have come towards the end stages of campaigning, and their recall value is, therefore, more likely. Does this mean that religion and personal abuse will eventually determine the outcome? The Congress must be hoping to the contrary, and the BJP praying that the issues click.

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).