 |
|
|
There are two ways in which the Congress party can interpret the
results of zilla parishad (ZP) and panchayat samiti (PS) elections
in Maharashtra. It can either boast that it remains the major
player in rural areas or it can thank its lucky stars that its base
has not suffered more erosion. The sensible choice would be
humility and ruthless honesty with itself. From 1995 to 1997 the
Congress has travelled unstoppably downhill, losing Assembly, Lok
Sabha and major municipal polls to the Shiv Sena and BJP. A quick
end after four decades in power. It is generally believed the
Congress urge to self-destruct is so powerful that nothing but the
complete surrender of fortress Maharashtra will satisfy it. What
remains is to watch rival leaders finish each other off. All they
could be found doing between one disaster and the next was
sharpening their knives in preparation for a new round of
in-fighting. Even in the run-up to the elections to local bodies
there was palpable diffidence about doing battle with the real
challengers.
The outcome of elections in the State's 29 districts show the
Congress' precipitous decline has been arrested momentarily. It has
not lost its grip on rural areas but it is much weaker; it has won
half the seats in ZPs and PSs compared to two-thirds five years
ago. Despite the best efforts of Congressmen to destroy the party
completely, it has held on. If nothing else, therefore, the
stubborn loyalty of rural voters should make those in the party
still capable of it, do some serious thinking. Not only in the
much-cosseted sugar belt but all over the State, barring the Konkan
districts, a majority of the people continue to vote as they have
done for 40 years. It is not that Congress raj was an undiluted
blessing and indeed successive governments failed to haul
sufficient numbers over the poverty line and to reduce perennial
water shortages. And it is not as though there was no alternative.
The Shiv Sena and BJP have made rapid strides in rural districts,
either by enlarging their own organisations or co-opting rebel
Congressmen.
The Congress survives in rural Maharashtra only because the
foundations built by an earlier generation of leaders were sturdy.
But corruption has eaten into heart of the co-operative network
making it less and less capable of delivering general prosperity.
The decline of co-operatives has been accompanied by the decay of
the Congress organisation. Younger rural leaders with initiative
are looking for newer avenues for political and economic
advancement and some are finding them in the SS-BJP or outside
politics altogether, and in market openings. The evidence suggests
the zilla and panchayat results may be the Congress swan song. If
so, it would be a tragic waste of institution-building effort over
many decades. This is not to say rural co-operatives are the last
word in progress or the Congress stranglehold was healthy. But
there is no getting away from the fact that the Congress party
proved a useful vehicle for rural development, uneven and halting
though it has been, and there is no comparable alternative as yet.
|
|
|