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 Wrong Target

By threatening India with secondary sanctions over its ties with Russia, the West exposes its double standards and risks alienating one of its few true democratic partners in Asia.

Mark Rutte
Mark Rutte

It is a curious spectacle when the world’s strongest democracy lectures the world’s largest on strategic morality. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s recent warning that India (along with Brazil and China) could be hit “very hard” by secondary sanctions if it continues doing business with Russia reeks of a familiar condescension. Coming hot on the heels of President Donald Trump’s announcement of a new 50-day deadline for a Ukraine peace deal, with tariffs of up to 100 percent hanging over Russian trade partners, the message was toe the Western line.

 

For India, the implied threat is galling. For decades, it has walked a careful tightrope between East and West, rooted not in opportunism but in a principled pursuit of strategic autonomy. That Delhi imports Russian oil is no secret; it does so not to bankroll Vladimir Putin’s war machine, but to protect its own economic interests in an inflation-prone, energy-starved developing economy. Moreover, unlike China, India is no revisionist power. It has neither enabled Russia militarily nor undermined the Western sanctions regime. If anything, India has emerged as a rare voice that can speak with both Moscow and Washington and be heard across the world.

 

The irony, of course, is that America and NATO now choose to single out India while continuing to mollycoddle Pakistan - China’s closest ally in the region, a nuclear-armed state with a military-dominated polity, and a long-standing haven for terror groups. For years, successive U.S. administrations have poured billions into Pakistan’s military establishment in the name of counterterrorism only to watch its generals shelter the Taliban, enable cross-border terrorism in India (as in the recent Pahalgam massacre) and deepen defence cooperation with Beijing.

 

In contrast, India has stood by the West on every fundamental value – be it democracy, rule of law, open markets and yet faces threats of punitive tariffs. If the West wants to preserve the global order it claims to defend, it would do well to treat India as a partner, not a subordinate.

 

The notion that New Delhi can simply be strong-armed into severing ties with Moscow reveals a deeper, post-Cold War Western anxiety.

 

India has legitimate defence needs that cannot yet be met by Western suppliers alone. Around 60–70 percent of India’s military hardware is still of Russian origin - an inheritance from Cold War alignments born out of necessity, when the West chose Pakistan over India. And despite all the talk of de-risking from authoritarian supply chains, India has yet to see the kind of strategic technology transfers or manufacturing partnerships from the West that would enable a full pivot.

 

This is not to suggest that India is indifferent to the Ukraine war. It has called repeatedly for diplomacy, refrained from recognising Russia’s annexations, and provided humanitarian assistance to Kyiv. But Delhi’s neutrality is not an endorsement of Russian aggression.


Trump’s new 50-day ultimatum, accompanied by Rutte’s cheerleading, will likely fall flat in South Block. Not because India supports Russia, but because it sees through the US’ hypocrisy.


NATO nations continue to import Russian gas by proxy; European firms quietly circumvent sanctions through third countries. The same West that demands India sacrifice its economic security did not flinch when arming autocracies in West Asia or coddling China until it was too late.

 

If the Western alliance believes that coercive diplomacy will bring India into line, it is badly mistaken. Far from isolating Russia, it risks pushing India away into a more assertive non-alignment, one that resists bullying from either pole. And that would be a strategic loss for the West.

 

For the world’s liberal democracies to prevail against authoritarianism, unity must be forged through trust, not tariffs. The sooner NATO realises this, the better. Because if it alienates India today, it will find itself dangerously alone tomorrow.

Comments

bottom of page