S Nihal Singh
IS it all over for the Aam Aadmi Party that rose meteor-like in the Delhi sky to dazzle one and all in the assembly election bargaining itself into the driving seat on its debut? For many, AAP and its dynamo Arvind Kejriwal was the answer to everyone's prayers for a new kind of politics unsullied by underhand deals and caste and class arithmetic.
Then after 49 days in power, Kejriwal threw it all away chasing the chimera of national honours. What went wrong and how did the great promise AAP offered ended in shattered dreams?
There are several reasons for this modern-day tragedy, but the biggest was that Mr Kejriwal was carried away by his own success in his debut attempt at playing politics. Second, he did not draw the line between governance and agitation highlighted by his decision to sit in dharna on the streets of New Delhi as the city state's Chief Minister. Third, the theatricals that got him free lavish media coverage became an end in themselves.
AAP's success came so quickly that the new party hardly had time to put together a coherent programme, apart from the all-encompassing anti-corruption fight. Judging by the furrows made by such associates as Shanti Bushan on Kashmir and other ruminations of Kejriwal's supporters, there was no agreement in the party on its social and economic programme, much less an attempt at a coherent manifesto.
In a sense, Kejriwal was AAP, maturing in the Anna Hazare movement and splitting from his mentor by taking the political route. He had inspired many by launching his party and perhaps the rock star status he came to acquire went to his head. He had good men at his side of the ilk of Yogendra Yadav and Manish Sisodia, but he seemed to have formed a coterie in his decision-making process.
Warning signs came early even as some selfless workers from various fields sought to correct Kejriwal's propensity to take decisions without consultations, apparently guided by their impact, rather than logic. Some peeled away protesting that their voices were not being heard, but AAP's crisis became full blown after the results of the Lok Sabha elections were out, with one of the party's live wires, Shazia Ilmi, leaving the party in protest.
The crucial point to discover is whether the reverses in the general election represent the end of a brave experiment. True, AAP won four Lok Sabha seats in Punjab, its total tally in fielding hundreds of candidates, but that was due to the double whammy of the Bharatiya Janata Party singed by the anti-incumbency attached to the Akali Dal and the low opinion of the Congress-led Government at the Centre.
One can only speculate how things would have been different had Mr Kejriwal indulged in less theatre and more diligent work in running the Delhi Government while waiting to attempt a national role five years later. It would have made evident sense if AAP had devoted itself to resolving the capital's various problems, rather than indulging in political grandstanding.
One would hope that Mr Kejriwal and his loyal associates have learnt their lessons the hard way and will now get down to rebuilding the party from the ground up in Delhi and would use its token representation in the new Lok Sabha for advocating realistic policy alternatives. Unlike its spectacular debut, the party lost all seats in Delhi to the BJP although it did increase its vote share.
Sometimes, Mr Kejriwal gave the impression of a drowning man clutching at straws as when he tried to revert to ruling the state again with Congress support, until even the greatly diminished Congress said a firm 'no' after having suffered continuing insults by AAP. With the BJP cock-a-hoop after its great victory, AAP will have to go back to the drawing board to plan a new strategy.
However, AAP must face the fact that it is a much diminished party than in its earlier avatar. It has lost its sheen and will need to work twice as hard to convince the voters that it would govern, if given another chance, instead of indulging in theatricals. But Mr Kejriwal will have to convince himself that an insurrectionist form of political policy has its limits. It seems AAP forgot to change gears once it became the ruling party, courtesy the Congress.
Mr Kejriwal can spend his time usefully while preparing for fresh elections to the Delhi assembly by undertaking two tasks. One would be to frame a coherent policy framework for his party. Anti-corruption is eye-catching, but hardly a programme. From his periodic forays, largely to quell protests, the impression Mr Kejriwal has given is of a vaguely left-oriented policy guided by what has come to be known as Nehruvian socialism. He will, in that case, have to put flesh on the bones and specify how his programme differs from those of other parties.
In various degrees, the Congress and the Left parties lay claims to versions of socialism, despite the policies they follow in practice. And wouldn't AAP be harking back in a country that seems to have gone past the clichés of the past? These are valid questions to consider in presenting a manifesto for the party.
Perhaps the most difficult task for Mr Kejriwal and his team will be to re-energise the people who voted for them in the first instance in the Delhi elections. Mr Kejriwal has apologised for the manner in which he abandoned office, but he will need to do a lot more to reassure the Delhi voters that he is a wiser man after his spectacular reverses in his Lok Sabha misadventure.
AAP must realise that the party's birth was greeted with so much enthusiasm because it promised a new kind of politics to a people tired of the shenanigans of too many politicians. Judging by the conduct of AAP, it proved to be a false dawn and many old enthusiasts are still recovering from the shock.
Source Link: http://www.tribuneindia.com
