‘I made history, but Sonia Gandhi refused to take my call’

medium119589308As soon as I became President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), congratulations started pouring in. It was a historic first and a great honour, marking the pinnacle of my journey from the Indian parliament to the world parliamentary stage. The IPU presidency had included in the past not just leading world leaders, but also former prime ministers, speakers of parliament, philanthropists, advocates, Nobel laureates and luminaries active in peace movements. As more and more parliaments from around the world joined the IPU, the choice of presidents reflected its global reach. It was all the more precious because the confidence bestowed on me echoed India’s new trajectory of growth and global leadership. Both the country and its daughter were thrust into the international spotlight.I telephoned Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee from Berlin and he received my call instantly. When he heard the news, he was delighted, first because the honour had come to India, and second, it had come to an Indian Muslim woman. He said, ‘You come back and we will celebrate.’ I could also connect to the vice-presidential office instantly. However, when I rang Sonia Gandhi, Congress Party President and my leader, one of her staff first said, ‘Madam is busy.’ When I pointed out that I was calling from Berlin, an international call, he just said, ‘Please hold the line.’ I waited for one full hour. Sonia never came on the line to speak to me. I was truly disappointed. After that call, I did not tell her anything.Before forwarding my name for the post of IPU President, I had taken her permission, and at the time, she had given her blessings. If every country, culture and family has its special moments — events so important, and somehow so personal, that they transcend the normal flow of daily life — this was one such moment for me — a moment in time of such importance that it drilled a sense of rejection in my psyche forever. It was, however, a rejection that proved prescient. It prophesied a time of transition, a downward spiral and crisis in the Congress that left its old-time and experienced members, who had given their all to the party, beleaguered and demoralized. A new coterie of inexperienced sycophants started running the affairs of the party.Around the same time, after I became the IPU President, the Vajpayee government upgraded the ranking of my office from minister of state to cabinet minister. Atalji allocated ₹1 crore in the Budget for the IPU president to travel to countries not paid for by the IPU Council. It was Vasundhara Raje who invited me and other MPs to celebrate my election as IPU President at the Parliament Annex, where we generally host all our Parliament receptions. medium119589371The following year, when I invited Sonia Gandhi to attend the Millennium Conference of Presiding Officers in New York, she opted out at the last minute. In 2001, Vajpayeeji wanted me to lead a goodwill delegation to Iraq to meet President Saddam Hussein, to negotiate on India’s behalf and secure the dues Iraq owed after the Gulf War. I requested Sonia to send someone else in my place. She told me that I should take on the responsibility. I also suggested that she recommend Natwar Singh, who was looking after the foreign affairs matter in the party, but she turned down the suggestion. Later, it became an issue with the Congress MPs close to her because nobody else from the Congress was included in that delegation. They did not know that I had taken her permission. Later, I was informed by a Congress colleague that Sonia did tell the MPs to not make it an issue as she already knew about the trip.Besides me, a number of veteran leaders felt marginalized. In 1999, Sharad Pawar, P.A. Sangma, and Tariq Anwar moved out from the party on the issue of Sonia’s foreign origin and created the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP). Frontline leaders Rajesh Pilot and Jitendra Prasada, too, stood up against the Gandhi family. I continued in the party, but Sonia began suggesting that I would eventually leave and join Pawar. It was strange of her to think so. Sharad had specifically asked me not to leave, advising me that since I was holding office of the presiding officer, I should remain above party issues. Every time, I reassured her: ‘Madam, even when Mrs Gandhi was out of power, I did not leave her.’ I was one of the few who stayed with Mrs Gandhi when the Congress split and many joined Sharad Pawar’s Congress (S). Long before becoming an MP, I used to come to Delhi to meet Mrs Gandhi and do whatever I could to help her — from arranging meetings with Muslim leaders such as the Shahi Imam, to dinners with ambassadors of Gulf countries. ‘You are witness to all that, Madam,’ I pointed out repeatedly. ‘You know what role I played. Why should I leave now?’Sonia trusted very few people. And I felt she did not trust me. Ironically, while suggesting I would join Pawar which I did not, Sonia went ahead and formed an alliance with him. So, while it would have been wrong of me to be Pawar’s friend and ally, it was not so for her. Seemed hypocritical.Sonia Gandhi’s CongressWe were dealing with more than just deep mistrust. We were cut off from Sonia Gandhi and could not communicate with her. This was a sharp and serious departure from the earlier Congress culture. Indira Gandhi used to keep an open house. She was accessible to the rank-and-file members. She assiduously greeted every visitor who came from across the country to meet her every morning. I could reach out to her anytime and would inform her about things on the ground in my own way. I never critiqued her harshly but simply pointed out things I had experienced, seen or heard on the ground. For instance, when scarcity of milk products and baby food became a reality in the months following the Emergency, I wrote to her describing how busy I had become standing in queues for hours to procure milk for my children. She understood.In 1998, when Sonia donned the party mantle, far too many layers of people sprung up between the rank and file, and the leader. That was the problem with 10 Janpath. Direct communication was cut off because of junior functionaries. They were not party workers, just clerks and other staff working there. And they blocked all access to the leader, affecting organizational health and ethics, compromising both harmony and productivity of the party members. medium nocaptionAs Congress followers, we no longer had an active role in providing feedback to our leader — so critical for a party to perform well. There was little interaction based on the quality of our exchanges, little understanding of who were part of our leader’s in-groups or out-groups or even how to support our leader’s vision. The decline started then. At the time, Rahul and Priyanka were not in politics but busy with their own lives. Our leader’s behaviour was counter to the best practices and principles of collaboration that had evolved in the Congress over many decades.I witnessed one such event with Sitaram Kesri, who was unanimously elected as President of the Congress Parliamentary Party (CPP) in 1997. One day, when I was waiting for Sonia in the lobby at 10 Janpath, he came in and was also asked to wait.As moments passed, he started losing his temper, and said, ‘I am Treasurer of the party and not any ordinary member. She is Deputy Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha. We have not come here to exchange pleasantries, but have serious issues to discuss. And we are made to wait like this?’ He felt humiliated and departed. I was reminded of the time Vasantdada Patil quit the party as Makhan Lal Fotedar had humiliated him in a similar manner.Our only recourse was the good-natured Vincent George, long-time private secretary to Sonia, who understood that the relationship between leaders and followers depended on mutual respect, trust and support, and could potentially make or break political parties. Unfortunately, at times even reaching out to him became a problem.Excerpted with permission from In Pursuit of Democracy: Beyond Party Lines (published by Rupa Books)