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.

The Last Post

France’s final military withdrawal from Senegal closes an era in West Africa marked by colonial hangover, geopolitical missteps and the rise of rival powers like Russia and China.

ree

France’s departure from its last permanent military base in West Africa—Camp Geille in Senegal— was a geopolitical funeral march. After six decades of military entrenchment across its former colonies, France’s final exit from Senegal symbolises not just the end of an era but a profound reckoning with its diminished standing in a region it once considered its pré carré.


General Pascal Ianni, France’s top military commander in Africa, insisted the exit marked a “new phase” in Franco-African military relations. It is more accurately read as a capitulation to the political and popular mood across West Africa, where post-colonial sentiment has hardened into full-blown rejection of foreign troops, especially those wearing French uniforms. President Bassirou Diomaye Faye of Senegal, elected earlier this year on a platform of sovereignty and pan-Africanism, made clear that foreign bases were incompatible with the republic’s dignity. The French departure, he implied, was non-negotiable.


The move follows a broader pattern. In Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, military juntas have not merely expelled French forces but have replaced them with Russian mercenaries from the Wagner Group (now operating under a new Kremlin-controlled umbrella). Ivory Coast and Chad saw their last French bases shuttered earlier this year. What remains is a skeleton presence in Gabon and a training detachment in Côte d’Ivoire—pale shadows of France’s once expansive African garrison.


This withdrawal is the culmination of years of diplomatic inertia and military overreach. France’s once-popular counterterrorism operations—first in Mali with Operation Serval and later with the broader Operation Barkhane—began with fanfare but ended in ignominy. Perceived by locals as colonial meddling and marked by limited tangible success, French troops became symbols of both occupation and impotence. Terrorist violence did not ebb; civilian trust in Paris evaporated.


The geopolitical consequences of this exodus are significant. France’s absence has created a power vacuum, swiftly being filled by Russia, which sees Africa as fertile ground for influence, arms deals, and resource extraction. The Central African Republic is already a Wagner-run fiefdom in all but name. Burkina Faso and Mali now openly parade Russian armoured vehicles and advisors. In Niger, the junta that toppled President Mohamed Bazoum—a Western ally—immediately turned its gaze toward Moscow. China, too, is deepening its military and infrastructural ties in the region, though with less theatre than the Kremlin.


By contrast, France’s pivot to a more “flexible partnership model” (as Colonel Guillaume Vernet described it) sounds less like a strategy than an admission of defeat. The promise to offer training and “targeted support” assumes African nations still want such assistance from Paris. Many do not. Even the usually measured Senegalese military, once a key partner in West African peacekeeping, now insists that defence autonomy trumps foreign help.


Yet it would be hasty to see this solely through the prism of France’s failures. The withdrawal also reflects the transformation of African politics. Senegal’s new leadership joins a growing wave of pan-Africanist sentiment, particularly among younger voters. They want not just the trappings of sovereignty but its substance—military, economic and political. This aligns with broader BRICS-aligned rhetoric that pits the Global South against the neocolonial West.


Still, sovereignty has its price. Russia’s support comes with strings—opaque mining contracts, mercenaries with poor human rights records, and alignment with autocratic tendencies. France may be gone, but African nations now risk trading one master for another, especially if the West fails to offer viable alternatives. The United States, too, has scaled down its military presence in places like Niger. If democratic governance continues to erode in the Sahel, no amount of sovereignty will prevent the region’s slide into armed instability.


France’s military pullout is in a sense, the beginning of a new, more uncertain geopolitical story in which Africa is no longer just a theatre for European power projection but an active, if fragmented, actor in its own right.


Comments


bottom of page