Mr. Devraj Urs has denied that Congress (U) ministers are likely to resign from the caretaker government in New Delhi. He may well be right. But since the government is not going to take any important decision in the next two weeks, it makes no difference whether they stay or quit. The more pertinent fact is that the Congress (U)-Lok Dal alliance has broken down and that the Congress (U) is gravitating towards the Janata. This is not a sudden development. The party has negotiated seat adjustments with the Janata in Maharashtra, Andhra and some other places. But its leaders have begun to speak more critically about the Lok Dal and more warmly about the Janata. This is not surprising on several counts. The Congress (U) leaders are profoundly disenchanted with the Dal because it has not been willing to accommodate them in UP and Bihar. They have recognised that it is quixotic on their part to talk of fighting both Mrs Gandhi’s “authoritarianism”, and the Jana Sangh’s “communalism.” In Maharashtra and Karnataka, the only two states where the Congress (U) still possesses a worthwhile mass base, the Congress (I) constitutes the main threat to its existence. Those in the Congress (U) who regarded the Jana Sangh’s “communalism” as a greater threat to the country’s future than Mrs. Gandhi’s “authoritarianism” have by and large quit the party, leaving it mostly to those who regard her as their main, if not only, political opponent. There are still some individuals in the organisation who might wish to come to terms with her after the polls. But they are a small minority.
The Congress (U) was deeply divided when it took the fatal decision to turn down the Janata’s offer of support from outside if it formed the government and opted for a coalition with the Lok Dal. There were in it then a number of leading figures who were well disposed towards Mrs. Gandhi. That is presumably why it strove to steer clear of both the Congress (I) and the Janata. This is understandable. The unity of a party is important to any leader or leaders. But it speaks very poorly of the political acumen of its representatives in the Cabinet that they should have endorsed Mr. Charan Singh’s proposal for dissolution of the Lok Sabha. After all, they could not have been unaware of the possibility that in the event of an early election their strength in the Lok Sabha could be drastically reduced. Since they could not possibly be oblivious to the smallness of their own popular bases, they apparently thought that the Lok Dal was a great force, especially in north India, and that it would be generous in allotting seats to them. The second calculation, if they made it, has already turned out to be erroneous. And the first is also likely to prove wrong. All this is surprising enough. But it is truly astonishing that the CPM should have welcomed the fall of the Desai government, supported the Lok Dal in utter disregard of the latter’s class character and welcomed fresh polls which are bound to increase Mrs. Gandhi’s position in the Lok Sabha and the country irrespective of whether she wins a majority or not. Or is there more to the CPM’s moves than meets the eye?
The Times of India, 25 December 1979