Follow the leader?

The question of who will succeed Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy as chief minister of Andhra Pradesh appears to have been settled for the moment. YSRs cabinet have all taken the oath again,and appear to have accepted,however reluctantly,K. Rosaiah as their chief minister for now. Perhaps,from the point of view of stabilising policy in a shell-shocked state,that makes sense. And there is little question that the spectacle of the Andhra Congresss overwrought legislators barely waiting out a dignified mourning period before sloganeering for dynastic succession was by turn pitiable and tasteless. But the manner in which the All India Congress Committee enforced obedience on its state unit gives rise to worrying questions. Is the AICC clampdown on disagreement with the central line in its state unit caused by disquiet about Jagan Mohan Reddy? Or is it a sign that the Congresss central leadership has been taken aback by the popularity of a mere state leader,and wishes to show whos boss?

Whether or not it is true Jagan Mohan Reddy would have made the best chief minister for Andhra is beside the point. The point even survives discussion of whether or not his elevation would have been best for the narrower question of the Congresss political fortunes in Andhra. The point here is a larger one. It is about whether the Congress understands that decentralising to strong state leadership is necessary for its future. And whether its rhetoric on modernisation and democratisation can be matched by reality.

The partys central leadership will have to ask itself: does it really want apparently loyal Congressmen standing up and,tearfully,declaring that in the Congress,no one must question the high command? That was what Rajya Sabha MP and YSR loyalist K.V.P. Ramachandra Rao was forced to do. Is that the direction in which it wishes to move the Congress? Because it sounds less like the promised future and more like the darkest,authoritarian past which,needless to say,is what sparked the partys decline in the first place. The problem and privilege of living with democracy is that,sometimes,you dont like the outcome that democratic discussion throws up. That will be as true of democratic parties as democratic countries. The powerful in countries proud to be democratic know that those are moments not to intervene as deus ex machina but to lead by example,and by persuasion. It is perhaps time to learn that that is equally applicable to the powerful in parties struggling to be democratic.