COVER STORY

'Seeking a vote for the Congress, not for a coalition'

Dr. Manmohan Singh has none of the trappings of a politician. His official residence at 19 Safdarjung Road, New Delhi, lacks the security paraphernalia that many politicians like to flaunt, and hence the former Finance Minister is one of the most accessible leaders around. As the Congress(I) candidate for the South Delhi parliamentary constituency, Manmohan Singh's campaign is also unique for its simplicity. Unlike the average Congress(I) candidate who would not set out for campaigning without a motorcade in tow, he starts off from his house in an Ambassador car that may or may not be joined by other vehicle-borne activists. Still his campaign has been deemed both by supporters and opponents as one of the most impressive in terms of popular resp onse.

Venkitesh Ramakrishnan accompanied Manmohan Singh on one of his campaign trips on August 22, and in between meetings and mass contact programmes asked him questions on a variety of subjects including his chances of emerging as an alternative prime ministerial candidate. Although he negated such a possibility during the conversation, there are many people in the Congress(I) itself who perceive his new status as a mass leader as an indicator of his being positioned for the top job. Excerpts from th e interview.

You have been perceived as an "intellectual politician" rather than one with mass appeal. As the Congress(I) candidate in South Delhi, how do you see your new experience in mass politics?

When the party leadership said that I should fight for the Lok Sabha, I decided to abide by it. Personally too, I had thought that one day I should experience what it is like to go to the people directly. And I can say that this is a great education for me. I have come to understand the problems and aspirations of the people not merely from the macro level but from the micro level too. People hope that when politicians go to them some of their problems will be addressed. And these are serious and basic problems like that of shortage of power, of water, neglect of sewerage systems, public health and so on.

From these micro experiences, what is the macro solution that you see for these problems?

I think that we need more active involvement by the government in developing basic infrastructure. I do not think that this is a task which can be left entirely to market forces. When people are living on the edges of subsistence, market signals have no meaning for them. To address these issues satisfactorily, the face of our politics has to change. India needs a new type of politics. I think that politics has ceased to be a servant of social sympathies. It is no longer a creative mechanism to mediate b etween societal tensions. It has become too much of a preoccupation with self-preservation and self-promotion. And the state has become largely dysfunctional. Instrumentalities that could have given great potency to solve our problems have been used to p romote partisan ends. The politicisation of the system in a perverse manner is a factor in corroding people's faith in politics as an instrument of purposeful social change.

But the Congress(I) has also contributed to this.

Of course, the Congress(I) has been in power for so long that you can say that for anything which happens in the country. But the point is to look beyond that. As Karl Marx used to say, we have studied history for long but the challenge is to change it.

So the messiah of economic liberalisation is quoting Marx now...

I have always admired Marx. There are a lot of good things in Marx too.

The perception is that you are being groomed as an alternative candidate for the Prime Minister's post in case the Congress(I) fails to get an absolute majority and seeks to depend on other parties for support.

All this is media speculation. Hypothetical questions that exist in a vacuum.

There were reports that you had refused to contest if some of the accused in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots were given the ticket.

RAJEEV BHATT

These are all highly exaggerated reports that came in the media. Newspapers have invented discussions in the Congress Working Committee when there was no discussion at all.

It is being said, even within the party, that the Congress(I) has committed a series of mistakes after the fall of the Vajpayee government, leading to a reversal of its fortunes. That while the Congress(I) was on a winning wicket during the November 1 998 Assembly polls, it is no longer the case now.

I do not think that there is a perception like this. I have not come across any of these things. In any case, the Congress(I) worker does not bring up this issue. He is concentrating on the administrative task of managing the elections now. It is another matter that he does talk about the euphoria of November 1998. But he also knows that this cannot last forever. The Congress(I) represented a new hope from the declining standards of governance that the BJP had provided till then. The Congress(I) organi sation was facing its first major election under the leadership of Sonia Gandhi. And the party workers fought hard, knowing full well that they had a chance to wrest the administration from the BJP...

The contention is that it has all died down. And that the chances of the Congress(I) making it have receded.

It is a different type of enthusiasm now. I do not think that the chances are any less now. The BJP might be harping on nationalism and the nationality issue. They could have created a different media atmosphere. But the people understand things in their totality.

Do you think that Kargil is the single most important issue in this election?

People are certainly worried about Kargil. And also about the reasons behind it. It is not that people just accept whatever the BJP establishment is putting out. When we explain to them that these intruders had come many months ago and this government sl ept, people nod with approval.

But according to the BJP, it is the Congress(I)'s nationalism that is being questioned when the government is criticised on the Kargil issue.

I have not come across any such thing. In fact, the common feeling is that the government needs to explain its conduct on the Kargil issue.

What about Sonia Gandhi's foreign origin? This issue has put the Congress(I) on the defensive.

Nobody has brought up the nationality issue anywhere during my campaign. In fact, among the ordinary people there is a lot of sympathy and affection for Sonia Gandhi.

There is the argument that the Congress(I)'s insistence on equating single-party rule with stability is counter-productive, especially in the context of the BJP's success in forming a formidable coalition.

It is true that we are seeking a vote for the Congress(I), not for a coalition. We believe that single-party rule alone can provide the stability it needs. We are going to the people with that slogan. If the people endorse that, well and good, and if the y do not, that will be a different situation. But what kind of stability has the formidable coalition of the BJP given in the last 17 months?

What would be the Congress(I) strategy if it does not get a chance to form a single-party government but can form a coalition Ministry?

We will cross that bridge when we come to it.