Former Union Minister and Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari, in an interview with the Hindustan Times, talks about the letter that created ripples in Congress and the party’s future course of action. Edited excerpts:
Why did you sign the letter?
Congress today faces profound electoral, ideological, and organizational challenges. The electoral challenge is accentuated by our two consecutive defeats in 2014 and 2019 and our reduced footprint across the country. A general electoral rejuvenation is vital if Congress is moving toward a majority in 2024. We are not currently on that trajectory.
What are the ideological challenges?
Interestingly, in this hypercommunicative age, there has been a critical flaw in messaging. There is the central issue of secularism. Is Congress comfortable interpreting secularism as Sarv Dharm Sambhav or should it follow the classic construction of the separation of church and state? How does the party combat the immoral allure of majority rule?
With nationalism, the challenge is further accentuated. We are failing to convincingly articulate that our nationalism is infinitely superior to the chauvinistic and exclusionary musculature espoused by the BJP. The irony is that Congress led the fight for freedom, while the right collaborated with the colonizer. It’s amazing that we are not appropriating our own legacy while they cynically vandalize our accomplishments and leaders and pretend they belong to them. The truth is Gandhi, Patel, Ambedkar, none of them approved of the intolerant politics of hatred of the right. So we have serious organizational challenges. Congress has lost the vitality of the cadres on the ground, where real electoral battles are fought. These problems require deep reflection.
Have you lost faith in the Gandhis?
Absolutely not. I respect Sonia Gandhi as much as my late mother. She led us with dignity, sensitivity and equanimity for 19 years and was in charge of creating and guiding two successive governments of the UPA. If we had lost faith in her, do you think we would have written to her collectively? For my part, I am deeply grateful to Ms. Gandhi for all the opportunities she has provided me over the past 21 years.
Who of the 23 is best suited to be an effective “full-time leader”?
None of the 23, to my understanding, wrote that letter for any personal aspiration to be president of Congress or to seek any other position. Most of them already hold high positions in the party or have held high positions in the government. In fact, I told my colleagues, who signed the letter, to send it only if they believe in the need for reform, as there would be consequences and reprisals. The letter is not a negotiating tool. Some of my colleagues have trouble being called traitors and dissidents. For me, the label of being a conscious dissident works. The labels are irrelevant, the problems are vital.
Is Rahul Gandhi the target?
That’s an idiotic thought. In December 2017 we all unanimously elected him as party president for five years. In May 2019, he resigned assuming moral responsibility for the defeat, despite being urged by everyone to stay. It was an unusual step that indicated a good moral compass. Rahul Gandhi is in the best position to outline his own way forward. Nobody has difficulties with him, least of all me. But whoever assumes the mantle will have to embark on a path of serious introspection and action simultaneously or we will perish collectively.
What do you expect Ms. Gandhi to do now?
The letter is not a conspiracy to destabilize the existing order. In fact, it is a cry for reform and rejuvenation. It was written with a clear conscience in the best interest of the party. As for the hoax that the letter was written in collusion with the BJP, one can only laugh. None of the letter writers need a certificate; his political life testifies to his credentials.
What if your concerns are not addressed?
We will continue to raise them internally, because they are related to the resurgence of the party. The party must recognize that every time an issue is denounced it is not a dissidence, much less a negotiating position. If you are not going to debate and argue, how are you going to refine the positions of the parties on various issues? We will have a session of Parliament soon. China occupies Indian territory. . In fact, the government has been wrong. However, the Chinese have not taken over the territory of the BJP, they have taken over the Indian territory. Aren’t we all Indians first? Shouldn’t we send a message to our military that the nation is behind them in this hour of national danger?
Do you anticipate that a new president of Congress outside of the Gandhi family could be appointed and hence the letter?
The letter is about processes, problems and not about personalities. All those who reduce it to that binary do so in bad faith.
The party chose Gaurav Gogoi over you or Shashi Tharoor as its deputy leader in the Lok Sabha. Is it a consequence of the letter?
I never asked for any position. The only thing I begged the leadership for with folded hands was the opportunity to fight the 2019 parliamentary elections. That too, because the perception had been created that I was afraid to participate in the elections and I withdrew from the battlefield in 2014 for fear of losing. It is a decision that I regretted every moment of my life from 2014 to 2019. I should have fought, even from my hospital bed. I am grateful that the leadership has given me the opportunity to claim my honor.
He wants elections for the position of president but has criticized the elections in the Youth Congress. Is there not a contradiction?
Some of us from the NSUI and the Youth Congress felt that the elections were not a good idea when Rahul Gandhi started the process in 2007. In fact, most of the signatories have been beneficiaries of the nomination paradigm and felt that they were not. there was a need to shake the tree. However, as the process unfolded, the impression gained ground that the barrier to entry for the less well-off was getting higher and higher.
Do some of the letter writers seem to have bought peace? Is there a division?
The only peace you need to buy is with yourself and with your god. I signed the letter in good faith with the best interests of the party in mind. Not for any post and much less for advertising.
It started the process a few months ago and was only able to get 23 signatories as many refused to sign the letter. Why?
I didn’t mind asking how many they approached. Even if she had been in a minority of one, she would still have signed because the issues are critical. Could the letter have been more cheerfully worded to obviate any presumptions and conclusions? Maybe. Should it be seen as a disinterested act in the interests of the country and the party in general? Absolutely.
Is there a danger that the party will split?
Why should there be a division? The issues the letter raises must be addressed if you want to be on the glide path to 272. No one, even in their wildest imagination, is contemplating such a move.
.
