Will Rajasthan’s Desert Wind Blow Towards Karnataka? CM Cliffhanger Shows Gandhis Still Hold All the Aces

There is only one rule when Congress chooses its chief ministers — That there is no rule.

Cut back to five years ago when both Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh fell into the Congress kitty but the celebration was dampened by the nagging question — “Who will be the chief minister?”

In Rajasthan, the issue was Sachin Pilot on one hand who had shifted to Jaipur for four-and-a-half years when he was asked to go by Rahul Gandhi to ensure a win for the party as he felt young ones must take charge. However, when Congress won, Rahul Gandhi’s push for Pilot as CM had few takers. He was told and convinced that with 2019 polls round the corner, an ace politician like Ashok Gehlot could not be ignored as he alone would be able to ensure the Grand Old Party won Lok Sabha seats from the state.

Then there was Madhya Pradesh to deal with. Kamal Nath was seen as a Delhi neta who understood central but not state politics. But as state chief, he had ensured a win for the party. Some say the task was made easy by the fact that Digvijaya Singh had opted out, preferring to call the shots from behind the scenes and not be chief minister. Jyotiraditya Scindia was also not in the race. The Congress high command cut out other suitors by saying as state chief, Nath had the first claim.

In Rajasthan, this rule was changed. State chief Pilot lost out to Gehlot on the grounds that the latter — known in political circles as The Magician — had the MLAs and was too tall a leader to be ignored. Gehlot became the chief minister and Pilot was placated by making him the deputy CM. He was also told the state chief could not be made the chief minister as One Man, One Post was the party’s mantra — overlooking the flouting of this rule in MP.

In Chhattisgarh, a similar problem reared its head. Rahul Gandhi had stepped in to choose Bhupesh Baghel, who was state chief, by quoting Reid Hoffman: “No matter how brilliant your mind or strategy, if you are playing a solo game, you will always lose out to a team.” Congress then had four contenders for the CM’s chair — Baghel, TS Singh Deo, Tamrajdas Sahu and Charan Das Mahant.

So what’s common in all these cases? The fact that it’s not the MLAs alone but the high command which decides the chief minister. This also ensures that the central leadership has control over state politics. After the death of YSR, the most powerful Congress leader and chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, the top brass realised that minus central control, state politics would flounder.

With the exit of a CM, even in unfortunate circumstances, the party must not be left in the doldrums. It was then that a tacit understanding was reached that the Delhi brass should decide the chief minister so that whoever has been picked remains in gratitude towards the central leadership.

That this doesn’t always work is shown in Punjab and Rajasthan.

The similarity between Rajasthan and Karnataka cannot be missed. As in the desert state, there is a strong chance that Siddaramaiah, as a veteran leader who has the support of a large number of MLAs and experience, cannot be ignored. Similarly, aggressive trouble-shooter DK Shivakumar, who built the organisation and remained loyal to the party despite being arrested, would expect that it is payback time.

The fact that despite MLAs’ feedback, the central leadership will take the final call, shows that the earlier formula — a strong state but stronger central leadership — will not be given up. In Himachal, despite an open demand by Pratibha Singh that she should be chief minister, Sukhvinder Sukhu was chosen, sending across the message that it is the Gandhis who call the shots. It also made the point that no one could put pressure on Delhi.

In Karnataka’s final decision on chief minister, this rule will be implemented once again.