Patel an indefatigable trouble-shooter
GRANTED, the Congress never does well in the Opposition. It was in much the same trough after the defection of Sharad Pawar & Co in 1999. Four years later, it picked itself up, stitched together alliances with other Opposition parties and went to war.The
Congress presidents came and went, but Ahmed Patel endured. From playing Tonto to Rajiv Gandhi’s Lone Ranger in the 1980s, he evolved into the more substantive role of Richlieu to Sonia Gandhi’s Louis XIII. He was her first minister, far more powerful than any Cabinet minister or indeed, several ministers put together. Small wonder the Family’s prestige was said to be riding on the Gujarat Rajya Sabha elections.
Although Ahmed-bhai served erstwhile Congress presidents PV Narasimha Rao and Sitaram Kesri as well, both of whom eventually fell out with the Family, his default image is that of a Gandhi loyalist. Over the years, he eased through the ring of Gandhi family friends and party heavyweights, out-manouevering the clever tactician Vincent George (Sonia’s erstwhile secretary) and the stalwart Ambika Soni, to secure a permanent place at Sonia’s elbow.
The importance of being Ahmed lay in his reputation for loyalty, discretion and integrity. He was no great electoral strategist. The ‘Congress ka haath-Aam Aadmi ke saath’ campaign, which swept an overconfident BJP out of power in 2004, was dreamed up by Khursheed and Ramesh, but somehow, Ahmed-bhai wound up getting the credit for the famous victory. As his detractors – who spoke in hushed whispers, lest word get back to the omniscient political secretary – pointed out, his fabled tactical genius deserted him in his home state of Gujarat.
Nor did he have the intellectual depth and erudition, flair for language and witty repartee, grasp of economics and global affairs and charming TV presence that so many of his colleagues – P Chidambaram, Salman Khursheed, Kapil Sibal, Jairam Ramesh and Shashi Tharoor, to name a few – had in spades. But it was to Ahmed-bhai that they all turned, when the levers of party or governnment had to be moved in their favour.
His genius lay elsewhere. He was an indefatigable trouble-shooter and had an unparalleled command over the party’s organization, an instinctive grasp of deal-making and a vast intelligence network. All this, while staying resolutely in the shadows. He never wore his power on his sleeve. His discretion was legendary and his distaste for publicity pronounced. Unlike party colleagues, he had no desire to adorn headlines or TV screens. Being at the centre of the intense political drama playing out on news channels in recent days must have been hard.
The ultimate backroom boy, he had an input on all matters of policy and organization. A member of numerous committees, he could influence party and government appointments at virtually any level, be it a chief minister or a general secretary. Before every election, ticket-seekers thronged his house on Willingdon Crescent and his office at the AICC headquarters. His sole escape lay in his office at 10, Janpath.
Within the party, the cachet of being ‘Ahmedbhai’s man’ was much sought after, because it held the promise of upward mobility. Big business beat a path to his door, knowing full well that the levers of power lay in his hands. Negotiating between the various Congress allies and members of the Opposition, ticking off senior party leaders and resolving disputes between them, was all part of a day’s work.
Ahmed-bhai’s power waned with the electoral fortunes of the Congress. His coterie, which included such influential figures as Kapil Sibal, Ashok Gehlot and Suresh Pachauri, suffered electoral reverses. Also, he was an old-style politician, with a penchant for face-to-face negotiations and a give-and-take approach. This did not find favour with the data-driven psyche of the new wave politicians represented by Rahul Gandhi. In the generational transition within the Congress, Ahmed-bhai lost out.
He failed to stop or even predict the defection of Shankarsinh Vaghela from the Congress, who was quickly followed by a handful of turncoats. In a too-little too-late effort typical of the Congress in recent years, it sought to corral the MLAs it had left in a guesthouse in Bangalore. The fault may lie at Rahul Gandhi’s door rather than his, but the result was that the man who had once referred to Ahmed-bhai as a ‘Sufi’ refused to vote for him in the Rajya Sabha elections.
That said, the Rajya Sabha elections have no bearing on the Congress’ prospects in the forthcoming assembly elections. The party is already in disarry, thanks to Vaghela’s volte face. From being hopeful of riding an anti-incumbency wave to victory, Congress members and supporters are now in despair, anticipating a UP-style rout.
Granted, the Congress never does well in the Opposition. It was in much the same trough after the defection of Sharad Pawar & Co in 1999. Four years later, it picked itself up, stitched together alliances with other Opposition parties and went to war. The difference is that today, the Congress is much weaker and thus, has a greater distance to travel. It will have to work much harder to win the confidence of its allies and ultimately, the voters. Its veterans, who led the party to power in 2004, are quiescent and the new generation has not thrown up effective leaders. Certainly none of Ahmed-bhai’s calibre.