top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Congress’ solo path for ‘ideological survival’

Mumbai: The Congress party’s decision to contest the forthcoming BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections independently is being viewed as an attempt to reclaim its ideological space among the public and restore credibility within its cadre, senior leaders indicated. The announcement - made by AICC General Secretary Ramesh Chennithala alongside state president Harshwardhan Sapkal and Mumbai Congress chief Varsha Gaikwad - did not trigger a backlash from the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi...

Congress’ solo path for ‘ideological survival’

Mumbai: The Congress party’s decision to contest the forthcoming BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections independently is being viewed as an attempt to reclaim its ideological space among the public and restore credibility within its cadre, senior leaders indicated. The announcement - made by AICC General Secretary Ramesh Chennithala alongside state president Harshwardhan Sapkal and Mumbai Congress chief Varsha Gaikwad - did not trigger a backlash from the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) partners, the Nationalist Congress Party (SP) and Shiv Sena (UBT). According to Congress insiders, the move is the outcome of more than a year of intense internal consultations following the party’ dismal performance in the 2024 Assembly elections, belying huge expectations. A broad consensus reportedly emerged that the party should chart a “lone-wolf” course to safeguard the core ideals of Congress, turning140-years-old, next month. State and Mumbai-level Congress leaders, speaking off the record, said that although the party gained momentum in the 2019 Assembly and 2024 Lok Sabha elections, it was frequently constrained by alliance compulsions. Several MVA partners, they claimed, remained unyielding on larger ideological and political issues. “The Congress had to compromise repeatedly and soften its position, but endured it as part of ‘alliance dharma’. Others did not reciprocate in the same spirit. They made unilateral announcements and declared candidates or policies without consensus,” a senior state leader remarked. Avoid liabilities He added that some alliance-backed candidates later proved to be liabilities. Many either lost narrowly or, even after winning with the support of Congress workers, defected to Mahayuti constituents - the Bharatiya Janata Party, Shiv Sena, or the Nationalist Congress Party. “More than five dozen such desertions have taken place so far, which is unethical, backstabbing the voters and a waste of all our efforts,” he rued. A Mumbai office-bearer elaborated that in certain constituencies, Congress workers effectively propelled weak allied candidates through the campaign. “Our assessment is that post-split, some partners have alienated their grassroots base, especially in the mofussil regions. They increasingly rely on Congress workers. This is causing disillusionment among our cadre, who see deserving leaders being sidelined and organisational growth stagnating,” he said. Chennithala’s declaration on Saturday was unambiguous: “We will contest all 227 seats independently in the BMC polls. This is the demand of our leaders and workers - to go alone in the civic elections.” Gaikwad added that the Congress is a “cultured and respectable party” that cannot ally with just anyone—a subtle reference to the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), which had earlier targeted North Indians and other communities and is now bidding for an electoral arrangement with the SS(UBT). Both state and city leaders reiterated that barring the BMC elections - where the Congress will take the ‘ekla chalo’ route - the MVA alliance remains intact. This is despite the sharp criticism recently levelled at the Congress by senior SS(UBT) leader Ambadas Danve following the Bihar results. “We are confident that secular-minded voters will support the Congress' fight against the BJP-RSS in local body elections. We welcome backing from like-minded parties and hope to finalize understandings with some soon,” a state functionary hinted. Meanwhile, Chennithala’s firm stance has triggered speculation in political circles about whether the Congress’ informal ‘black-sheep' policy vis-a-vis certain parties will extend beyond the BMC polls.

Exit from Ayni

India’s discreet withdrawal from its only overseas airbase in Tajikistan reflects the shifting nature of Central Asian geopolitics and looming challenges to its Chabahar ambitions.

ree

In an unusually muted fashion, India recently confirmed the closure of its first overseas airbase located in Ayni, a village in north-western Tajikistan more than two years after the last Indian personnel packed up and left. The revelation came not through a formal statement but during a routine press briefing on October 31 when the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson, Randhir Jaiswal, quietly acknowledged that “the arrangement was in place for several years and was concluded in 2022.”


The understated confirmation ended months of speculation over India’s departure from the Ayni airbase - a facility that once symbolised New Delhi’s strategic ambitions in Central Asia. Built at a cost of roughly $100m in the early 2000s, the base was India’s first attempt to project power beyond the subcontinent.


Strategic foothold

Ayni sits just 165 kilometres from Tajikistan’s capital, Dushanbe, and within striking distance of Afghanistan, China and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir - an enviable vantage point for any regional power. In 2001, when Tajikistan’s Ghissar airfield lay derelict, India saw an opening. Then–Defence Minister George Fernandes and a rising security hawk, Ajit Doval (now National Security Adviser), had pushed for India to help reconstruct the base.


By 2005, the Border Roads Organisation and the Indian Air Force had transformed the site into a modern airstrip, capable of hosting large transport and combat aircraft. For India, it was a strategic leap: a Central Asian perch offering access to Afghanistan, a hedge against Pakistan, and a foothold in a region traditionally dominated by Moscow.


India never maintained a permanent deployment at Ayni. The base mainly hosted transport aircraft and helicopters, two of which were gifted to Tajikistan. At times, reports suggested the presence of Sukhoi-30 fighters, though these deployments were short-lived. The base’s importance was primarily strategic rather than operational. During the 2001 crisis in Afghanistan, when Taliban forces captured Kabul, the Ayni facility briefly served as a staging point for the evacuation of Indian diplomats and citizens, thus demonstrating its potential value in moments of crisis.


Quiet exit

By 2022, that promise had faded. According to officials and analysts, Tajikistan informed India in 2021 that it would not renew the lease. New Delhi complied and the base was vacated soon after. The official rationale remains unspoken, but geopolitical undercurrents tell their own story.


Central Asia, once a remote frontier, has become a crowded chessboard. Russia regards the region as its strategic backyard, while China has emerged as an assertive player through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Both powers are wary of any non-regional military presence. Analysts say Beijing and Moscow viewed the Indian base as an anomaly and leaned on Dushanbe to end the arrangement.


Tajikistan, heavily dependent on Russian security guarantees and Chinese infrastructure loans, could hardly afford to displease either. For India, the eviction underscores the limits of its influence in a region where economic and political loyalties tilt north and east, not south.


The timing of the revelation is notable. It comes just as India is celebrating what it sees as a breakthrough: Washington’s decision to extend a six-month sanctions waiver for its operations at Iran’s Chabahar port. The project, a linchpin in India’s outreach to Afghanistan and Central Asia, has long been touted as an alternative to Pakistan’s Gwadar port and a counterbalance to China’s expanding footprint in the region.


Yet the closure of Ayni is a sobering reminder of the diplomatic and logistical constraints that accompany such ambitions. The Chabahar corridor, while offering sea access to Central Asia via Iran and Afghanistan, passes through an unstable geopolitical landscape. Tehran’s fraught ties with Washington, the Taliban’s unpredictability in Kabul and Beijing’s growing sway over both Iran and the Central Asian republics will make India’s navigation tricky.


India’s quiet exit from Ayni does not necessarily mark the end of its Central Asian aspirations, but it does suggest a shift in method. Rather than forward deployment, New Delhi may prefer flexible partnerships and infrastructure diplomacy. It remains part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), where it engages with regional leaders under the wary gaze of China and Russia.


As New Delhi sets its sights on the Iranian coast, the echoes from Tajikistan carry with it an inherent lesson that geography is destiny, but diplomacy is the art of survival within it. The road to Chabahar may be paved with fresh opportunities but, as Ayni shows, it is also lined with the ghosts of abandoned outposts.

Comments


bottom of page