The three-week Parliament session that ended last week was predictable: uproar, heated exchanges, repeated disruptions, and ultimately adjournments. This has become almost a permanent feature of parliamentary proceedings these days. The opposition and the ruling party were at loggerheads throughout the session. The opposition insisted on a discussion on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, while the government maintained that the subject fell under the jurisdiction of the Election Commission of India and was therefore beyond the government’s purview.
After a long standoff, the matter was resolved when, in the opposition’s words, the government “accepted” the demand for a discussion on the SIR, albeit with certain conditions. The first condition was that the discussion would not be under the heading of SIR, but under the heading of “electoral reforms.” The second was that Vande Mataram would be discussed before the debate. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju stated that the government was ready for the discussion, but that it would not be appropriate to hold it before the debate on Vande Mataram.
This debate was led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He accused the Congress party of agreeing to “split” the national song under pressure from appeasement politics. Taking aim at Nehru, the Prime Minister said that the Congress deliberately removed the verses from Vande Mataram that praised the goddess. Union Home Minister Amit Shah went even further, directly blaming Jawaharlal Nehru for limiting the national song to just two verses, calling it a result of the policy of appeasement (which he called “the policy of appeasement”). Without mincing words, Amit Shah said that if the Congress had not divided Vande Mataram as part of its appeasement policy, the country would not have been divided.
The opposition alleged that the BJP was bringing Vande Mataram to the forefront to gain political advantage ahead of the upcoming assembly elections in West Bengal. However, the ruling party categorically rejected this allegation. Mahua Moitra of the Trinamool Congress launched a scathing attack, questioning the timing and priorities of the debate. He said that at a time when actual youth unemployment is over 20 percent, when the average air quality index in Delhi has crossed 800 and people are suffocating, when the BJP is depriving opposition-ruled states of MNREGA funds, and when session after session, opposition members are intimidated and prevented from raising national issues, such debates are being held. He also questioned the BJP’s commitment to Vande Mataram, calling it “a poorly written comedy.” Despite this, the most talked-about speech was that of Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi.
In her sharp and aggressive style, Priyanka Gandhi launched a scathing counter to the ruling party’s constant attacks on Nehru. She advised Prime Minister Narendra Modi to compile a list of allegations and insults leveled against Jawaharlal Nehru. “Whether it’s 999 or 9,999, make a list and then decide on a time,” she said. Just as Vande Mataram is being debated for ten hours, debate this for as long as you like, but this precious time of Parliament should be used for the work for which the people have elected representatives. This chapter should be closed once and for all,” she said, drawing loud applause from the opposition benches.
He continued, “The country will hear all these complaints: what Indira Gandhi did, what Rajiv Gandhi did, what dynastic politics is, what Nehru’s mistakes were—let’s talk about all of this and end it there. We’ll discuss unemployment and inflation after that, but the speech that really went viral was Priyanka Gandhi’s, both in terms of content and delivery. The content of the speech was powerful, relevant, and measured, but it was her delivery that garnered the most praise. Priyanka Gandhi’s charming personality is well known. She has created a distinct identity in Parliament with her demeanor and style. Her smile is effortless, and her femininity, which she naturally exudes, is completely disarming. She strikes with arrows dipped in honey. If compared to her brother, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka’s brilliance shines more. Both gave speeches in the current session, but Priyanka Gandhi’s statement alone hogged the limelight. There was almost no discussion about what Rahul Gandhi said or didn’t say. Yes, it was true that this time, instead of wearing his signature T-shirt, he chose to wear a t-shirt. He wore a kurta-pyjama, perhaps because his opening remarks focused on khadi and Mahatma Gandhi, which detracted from the discussion of electoral reforms. So, even leaving the comparison aside, Rahul Gandhi failed to make a single compelling argument or point that would be remembered, except for his repeated accusations of “vote theft” and “rigging.”
This is an issue that has outlived its usefulness and doesn’t resonate with the general public. The Bihar election results are clear evidence of this, but the discussion returns to Priyanka Gandhi and her performance during the Vande Mataram debate, which is now being called “brilliant.” At the pace she’s progressing, she could soon surpass her brother Rahul Gandhi. This is where the question of family politics comes into play. This same internal thinking kept Priyanka Gandhi away from active politics for years. It was only after Rahul Gandhi’s political establishment that she contested her first election, nearly twenty years after her brother entered Parliament, and in less than a year, she bridged that gap. He easily decided what his brother could not decide even in two decades.
This is where the real question arises. Will he, too, be expected to step back and let his brother, whom his supporters are projecting as a “prime ministerial contender,” take the lead? Will he, too, be sidelined, his political future at stake for Rahul Gandhi? And will his fate be like that of those promising leaders of the 2004 youth brigade whose luster faded prematurely? Only time will tell, but if so, the party will have to pay the price, a party that desperately needs talented and credible leadership to overcome its current crisis. At present, the Congress needs not one, but more than one, Rahul Gandhi-like figure for political revival.
