|
Even as Pranab Mukherjee basks in the sunshine of an almost
certain victory in the presidential election, there are inevitably
a number of losers, such as P.A. Sangma, who banked on the
perception of the Congress's political weakness and habitual
dithering to fish in troubled waters. But, the biggest among them
is Mamata Banerjee, who has undoubtedly made the most egregious
mistake of her career.
Coming on top of her other follies as chief minister - intolerance
of dissent, inability to control her unruly cadres, lacking a game
plan for the state's development - her latest bungle is bound to
haunt her for a long time, especially because she tried to prevent
a fellow Bengali from rising to the country's highest
constitutional office.
What is more, she tried to do so not because of any ideological
kink, like the roadblock put up by the Communist Party of
India-Marxist (CPI-M)'s Prakash Karat and his supporters in the
politbureau against Jyoti Basu becoming the prime minister in
1996, which the then West Bengal chief minister called a "historic
blunder". Instead, Mamata was guided solely by her petty, personal
angularities. As a result, what could have been a routine exercise
involving adherence to coalitional loyalties turned into an
unedifying spectacle of hectoring, subterfuge and double-talk.
Yet, none of this political vaudeville would have occurred if she
had simply agreed, or disagreed, with Sonia Gandhi's list of two
names for the president's post - those of Pranab Mukherjee and
Hamid Ansari. If the Trinamool Congress chief disagreed, as her
subsequent actions showed, she could have informed the Congress
president accordingly and, as political propriety demanded,
announced her decision to leave the ruling United Progressive
Alliance (UPA).
But, such a simple observance of norms was apparently alien to
Mamata's volatile nature. So, she chose to remain in the UPA -
while daring the Congress to oust her - but still walked over to
what could be deemed a parallel, if not a rival, group and
announced the names of three other candidates, including the prime
minister's - to rub salt in the Congress's wounds, as it were. And
the reason for all this play-acting was her personal prejudice
against Mukherjee, presumably because the latter had not treated
her with adequate respect when she was in the Congress. Nor
perhaps later when her rabble-rousing tactics enabled her to rout
the CPI(M) and gain huge popular acclaim in West Bengal. That her
popularity is still widespread is evident from her party's success
in recent elections in the state. But, there is little doubt that
the extent of the dent in it which has been caused by her display
of pique against an elderly political colleague will become
evident in course of time.
What made her adopt such an uncompromising position is difficult
to say. But, it is not impossible that having had her way in a
number of confrontations with the centre - on foreign investment
in the retail and aviation sectors, land acquisition, the setting
up of the National Counter-Terrorism Centre (NCTC), pension funds,
et al - she apparently thought that she could browbeat it on the
matter of the presidential nominee also. That she was working to a
plan in this respect was evident, first, from her dismissive
references to Mukherjee several weeks ago when she called him a
"son of the world" when asked whether he was a son of Bengal; and,
secondly, from her decision to be in touch with the Samajwadi
Party (SP) before and after her meeting with Sonia Gandhi.
Why the SP initially fell for her strange, even infantile, tactics
is not clear unless it simply wanted to keep the centre
off-balance for a while. On Mamata's part, by including Somnath
Chatterjee's name in the list of candidates drawn up along with
Mulayam Singh Yadav, she obviously wanted to atone for her
decision to oppose Mukherjee. The choice of A.P.J. Abdul Kalam was
a part of the typically cynical Muslim-appeasing tactics of Indian
politicians. Regrettably, the former president, too, played along
probably because he is too simple-minded to detect their cynicism.
But, the house of cards which Mulayam and Mamata were building was
too fragile to withstand the gusts of realpolitik. It didn't take
long for the far more experienced Mulayam to understand that none
of the trio of Kalam, Manmohan Singh and Chatterjee will be
acceptable to anyone as president. Unfortunately for her, Mamata
did not see the writing on the wall although the SP's
functionaries had begun singing a different tune even before she
left Delhi for Kolkata. Now, she is in a quandary.
If she stays on in the UPA, it will be at the cost of her
self-respect, especially now when there are bound to be murmurs in
her own party at her immaturity. But, she will be isolated as
never before if she leaves the UPA. Although she was all alone
when she fought the CPI(M) for three decades, that was when her
political stars were rising, even if unknown to herself. Now, they
seem to be sinking.
(Amulya Ganguli is a political analyst. He can be reached at
amulyaganguli@gmail.com)
|
Comments
|
Quick links