The Vinod Binny complication: How badly will it affect AAP?

The AAP-Vinod Kumar Binny rift is now officially now in the open. The rebel MLA from Laxmi Nagar in East Delhi held a press conference earlier today accusing Arvind Kejriwal of running the party like an autocrat and of going back on his promises to the people.

The most serious charge that he levelled was that Kejriwal was close to Congress MP Sandeep Dikshit and is working closely with the party that is supposed to be an arch rival.

The first sign of impending trouble emerged when when the AAP cabinet was to be decided. Binny's name as a possible minister was doing the rounds but he eventually didn't make the list. It was reported at the time that Binny was unhappy with the party's decision. Kejriwal however dismissed reports of any tensions.

However, Binny negated that with his statements today.

Binny during his dramatic press conference today. PTI

"Kejriwal doesn't like it if someone disagrees with him in meetings. He gets very angry if you don't agree with him. Even he himself has admitted that he has a temper problem," Binny, a former MCD councillor, said.

"Sources have told me that Kejriwal is close to the Sandeep Dikshit. Why is Kejriwal not taking any action against Sheila Dikshit?" he said.

When asked about proof that Kejriwal was close to Dikshit, Binny said that this was information he had received from sources and that if he had the proof he would have shown it to the press.

Binny also alleged that AAP's process to pick candidates for the Lok Sabha elections is a farce and that the candidates were already fixed.

"It has already been decided where Kumar Vishwas, Dilip Pandey, Shazia Ilmi, etc will fight from. All this asking for forms and 1000 signatures is drama," he said.

Binny said he wouldn't resign from the party. He also alleged that the party runs from top by a few key leaders such as Manish Sisodia, Arvind Kejriwal and Sanjay Singh.

The party has already responded strongly to Binny's allegations with senior leader Yogendra Yadav saying that the MLA will face strong disciplinary action.

"There is a place for differences, dissent and disagreement in our party. But there is no place for indiscipline. Nobody has the right to make such indisciplined display of dissent," he said.

Yadav pointed out that in the two weeks that they have been in the government they have kept their promise of free water, lower power rates, CAG audit of power distribution firms and an anti-corruption helpline.

"Strangely, his address seemed like a speech written by someone else. You would remember, Binny's speech was uncannily similar to what BJP MLA Harsh Vardhan had to say about AAP in his Delhi Assembly address. I wonder why he sounded exactly like him," he said.

But could Binny's rebellion prove to be detrimental to AAP and Arvind Kejriwal's image ahead of the national elections? Not everyone is convinced, despite the media attention that Binny has managed to garner.

Manisha Priyam, who is a political analyst and an Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) fellow, feels that Binny's outburst is unlikely to have any impact.

"Binny was never clearly the face of the party. If it was some other important leader like Manish Sisodia, Kumar Vishwas or even Yogendra Yadav who had raised these issues and made such a remark, it would have mattered. Binny may have been part of the original team, but he was clearly not the media face," Priyam said.

Sanjay Kumar, Professor at CSDS feels that the Binny's impact will be minimal and is unlikely to affect the party's electoral prospects.

"The Binny episode is unlikely to have an impact nationally for AAP. His influence is limited to his area and locality. Of course people will also understand that this kind of dissent does happen in political parties as well," Kumar said.

"Even in terms of numbers, it is just one MLA. If it was say two-thirds of the MLA's, then yes it would have been important. But out of 28 MLAs, one dissenting is hardly going to make a difference," Priyam said.

According to Pradip Kumar Dutta, Professor of Political Science at Delhi University, credibility is still a big issue for Binny.

"Binny did retract his statement last time. He doesn't have credibility at all. This appears to be a recurring behavioural pattern," Dutta said.

So is the Congress working with the AAP? Dutta doesn't agree.

"In the instance of FDI in retail, you can see the difference between the AAP vision and Congress vision. In fact, some of the trader lobby in the BJP might be more on Kejriwal's side with his decision. Look at Khurshid's comments on Kejriwal and AAP," he said.

Kumar pointed out that in case allegations that the Lok Sabha candidates are already fixed do turn out to be true, then it could be worrisome for AAP.

"If say it is proved that the seats and nominations were fixed, it could affect party morale for the volunteers. If more people come out and make the same charges, then it might appear that AAP too works like the BJP and Congress," he said.

As far as Kejriwal is concerned, Priyam also feels that the break-up with Binny is unlikely to affect his image in any negative way.

"Look at the history of this party. Kejriwal has fallen out with some big names in the past and survived. Anna Hazare, Kiran Bedi are two such important people. Arvind has a certain resilience and tenacity that he will go on despite these fallouts," she said.

Gandhi saving tactic: Why Cong won’t name Rahul PM candidate

It seems that Digvijaya Singh knew it all.

The Congress Working Committee officially arrived at the same conclusion that he publicly spoke of only last week -- that Rahul Gandhi would not be named the Congress party's Prime Ministerial candidate. And that this decision was scripted by none other than Sonia Gandhi.

But then there was some consolation for the cheer leaders, announced by another powerful general secretary, Janardan Dwivedi, after the meeting. "It is always clear who the leader is in Congress. It is never an issue for us. The resolution in today's meeting says, This meeting of the AICC declares that the campaign of the elections will be headed by Rahul Gandhi".

While writing and adopting this resolution, the assembled high and mighty party leaders must have gone on the simplistic idea that public memory is short, and therefore no one would care to ask why Rahul Gandhi was not made the face of the party campaign after a day long brain storming sesstion at Surajkund in November 2012.

At that time, it was announced that Rahul Gandhi would lead the party's 2014 campaign and head a six-member poll coordination committee. Janardan Dwivedi who also made that announcement, went on to announce the formation of three sub-groups - a six-member pre-poll alliances sub-group headed by Defence Minister AK Antony, a 10-member manifesto and government programmes' sub-group, also headed by Antony, and a seven-member communication and publicity sub-group headed by Digvijaya Singh.

PTI

Fifteen months down the line, the status of these committees is not exactly known. But the one thing that is certain is that Rahul continues to be the reluctant prince, no matter what he told Dainik Bhaskar in an interview. His answers in that interview were mistakenly interpreted as his willingness to officially accept being a prime ministerial challenger, but didn't in reality, reveal anything beyond what he had been saying in his public rallies.

The Congress may be taking shelter behind its "our tradition" defence in not naming a prime ministerial candidate, but that has made the BJP pounce on them with the most obvious question -- Is Congress trying to protect its first family from ultimate ignominy in the face of a near certain defeat in the coming elections?

But a much bigger question that a number of ordinary Congress workers are asking, is whether the party has lost the appetite to fight aggressive challenger Narendra Modi and emerging challenger Arvind Kejriwal.

The Congress decision also perpetuates the impression that the party has already conceded defeat and does not want Rahul to get into a personality fight with Modi who is miles ahead of him in the popularity rating charts. The recent state elections also proved that Rahul was not able to mobilise voters. In fact he was already setting diminishing returns for the party. His and mother Sonia's populist schemes, food security and land acquisition acts did get any votes for the Congress. Rahul had banked heavily on these schemes to win elections in the four Hindi heartland states, but eventually did not find any takers.

A total decimation in the assembly polls made Rahul switch from the avatar of right based entitlement giver to that of anti-corruption crusader. The slogan of one of the posters released by the Congress a day earlier, read Rahul ji ke nau hathiyar, door karenge bhrashtachar (The nine weapons of Rahul ji to end corruption)," the posters listed three laws and nine bills that the Congress-led UPA government intends to push in the next session of Parliament.

"Rahul ji ka uddeshya, bhrastachar mukt desh (Rahul ji's aim, a corruption-free India)," says another poster. But can these posters separate Rahul from the corrupt UPA regime? The Congress think tank obviously feels that people may be able to see a messiah in Rahul and accordingly hail his leadership even as he has proved to be a failure in mobilising popular support for his party.

The recently concluded assembly elections, like several other elections in the past, have proved that a successful campaign revolves round a persona of the leader who personifies the ideology or principles of that party. But then once a leader is named, the performance of the party at the polls will have to accounted to his personal fortunes. The Congress is perhaps trying to avoid just that. A win is for Rahul, a loss is for the rank and file of the party, even if it is headed by his mother and himself.

It looks like mother Sonia is again coming forward to protect her son, like she did two years ago after the fiasco of the UP assembly elections.

The CWC decision not to name Rahul Gandhi punctured the hype around todays AICC conclave. It has also dampened the enthusiasm of diehard enthusiasts in the Congress party who had so eagerly looked forward to Rahul's anointment as PM candidate.

The middle manager problem: Why Rahul cannot lead Congress

In the second week of September 2005, Tehelka was still an organization we had faith in. The magazine had launched over a year earlier and I had joined as chief of bureau shortly after. We had been doing stories on merit, and nothing was off-limits. So when Vijay Simha, a journalist in the news bureau, came back from Amethi saying that Rahul Gandhi had given us an interview, his first, we thought it was a good break for us.

During the editing process there was some discussion over a particular statement by Rahul where he had claimed he could have been PM at 18. It was pointed out that the minimum age to be PM in India was 25. The statement was amended to reflect this, which I thought was a mistake. This had the disadvantage of making a rhetorical statement appear like one that had been carefully thought out, but it did nothing to dilute the seeming hubris that later led to criticism. Expectedly, as soon as the article was printed, the reactions started pouring in. With allies weighing in and the criticism pouring in, Rahul, in the kind of move that has since typified his politics, chose to stand aside and let the Congress spokesperson tackle the problem, "Rahul Gandhi would like to state that he did not give any interview to Tehelka.... It arose from a casual conversation."

AFP

As far as we were concerned this was not the case. Rahul had even told Simha at the end of the interview, "Tell Tarun (Tejpal) this is for him."

Tehelka issued a statement standing by the interview. Later the same day, I was contacted by people wanting to know why we had retracted our earlier statement. The new statement had been issued by Tarun by-passing the entire editorial process, agreeing there had been a 'misunderstanding' between Rahul and his reporter.

Despite such obfuscations, this remains Rahul's first published interview, and it was revelatory about the person the Congress has reposed faith in. One of the first things one notices returning to it after a decade is how little Rahul has changed. After ten years in politics he still sounds much as he did then. This inability to learn from experience has often been commented on, but it seems engrained in the assertion he made then at the age of 35, "My personality is made. I am done. There is nothing more to be made of me. I am what I am.''

If this was really the case, then what have the past ten years been about? What has the exposure to India been aimed at? And again the answer is there in the decade-old interview.  "The guy who fixes the air-conditioner at my place knows more than me about air-conditioning. The person who sweeps outside my house knows more about sweeping than I do. My job in politics is to transmit the knowledge that people have from one person to another. This outlook is central to my life.''

Rahul has spent this decade looking for structural changes that could make his party more efficient. He has interacted with experts, some on UP, some on panchayati raj, some on the economy, in the hope that he can pipe this expertise into a vision for the country.

This is an approach that has not got him anywhere and for good reason. Ramachandra Guha rather succinctly summarized Rahul's capabilities while dwelling on the possibility of what this country would have been like if Lal Bahadur Shastri had been alive for some years, "…Sonia Gandhi would "still be a devoted and loving housewife, and Rahul Gandhi perhaps a middle-level manager in a private sector company". Only a middle-level manager would continue to search for managerial solutions to what is essentially a crisis of leadership in the Congress.

Given that Rahul Gandhi has spent so much time speaking to so many `experts' over the past decade, he should spare some time to meet the president of PEN International John Ralston Saul, a writer and philosopher who has devoted considerable thought to contemporary politics. Saul currently happens to be in the country.

The same year that Rahul was giving his first interview, Saul spoke on good governance at a university in Canada. Dwelling on a question – what are the barriers to good governance? – that is fundamental to the crisis unfolding around us, Saul ended by listing several reasons and then concluded, "… Finally, a terrible confusion between leadership and management. Examine how much money goes into producing managers in the world today under the misapprehension that they are leaders. They are not the same thing: a leader has a relationship with the population; even a benign dictator has a relationship with a population. A manager does not. A manager is in charge of structure. The inability to change the discourse is tied to this terrible confusion between leadership—not heroism—and management.'' Fundamentally, this is Rahul's problem, he has no relationship with the Indian public.

(Hartosh Singh Bal is a consulting editor at Firstpost.)

Prof who begs for his schools on Mumbai’s local trains joins AAP

If the Aam Aadmi Party's national strategy is to ride the personal brand worth of known faces from across the spectrum—civil society activists, bankers, industrialists, corporate gurus—then they have a winner in Mumbai. Not many debutant politicians can boast of the visibility that professor Sandeep Desai enjoys -- most of the 40 lakh aam aadmis who take the suburban railways everyday know him, several lakhs have chatted with him and, crucially, thousands have trusted him enough to give him their money.

Desai is the slight man with a backpack and a plastic donation box who talks to lakhs of office-goers on board local trains every single day, asking them to donate money to his charitable organisation Shloka, which runs four schools in Rajasthan and Maharashtra. He collects anywhere in the vicinity of Rs 3,000 a day, all of which is directed towards the operation of Shloka's schools -- two in rural Rajasthan, one in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district and another in Sindhudurg. (A fifth one is to start soon in Ratnagiri.)

Professor Sandeep Desai.

Desai, 53, says he first spoke to Arvind Kejriwal well over a year ago, during the Anna Hazare agitation in Bandra Kurla Complex, when he received a call from Kejriwal's PA. The then Hazare associate was looking for Indians committed to a cause who would also join the struggle against corruption. More meetings followed and, on Tuesday, he formally joined the Aam Aadmi Party.

Ask the former professor of marketing whether politics and education really mix and he agrees that it's a bold step. "A lot of people, strangers, some wearing the Aam Aadmi cap and others too, have been telling me when they meet me in the train to join the Aam Aadmi Party," Desai says. "Those who can make a change should join the party," they believe. In spite of that, and despite the fact that AAP had already made overtures to him, he never fancied a career in politics.

He took the plunge this week after great thought. "I do follow politics in the country, and specifically the nexus of politicians and educational institutions," he says. The extent of data the Mumbai team of AAP has gathered against politicians including those who have amassed land and money in the name of education impressed him and he felt he could play his part in the struggle.

A former member of the Forum for Fairness in Education, Desai was chief mover of several public interest litigations against politician-led educational institutes including for unfair fees and more.

In fact, it was in court that he resolved to run a different kind of school. During hearings for a PIL on unfair charges levied by a Mumbai college, a judge asked him, "Professor, have you ever run a school?" He didn't know if it was an admonishment or a suggestion, but he took it as a challenge. "I haven't yet sir, I replied, but I will one day. And they will be run totally free of charge -- that's what I told the judge."

Education is the cause he is closest to, he is quite clear about that. "Vidya daan shreshtha daan aahe (donating for education is the highest form of charity)" he repeats to commuters as he walks through compartments, carrying laminated cuttings of newspaper reports about his work. No sum is too small, those interested in finding out more about Shloka's schools are welcome to call, check the organisation's website or just engage in a more detailed conversation.

Desai says he has no idea what role he will be required to play as elections draw closer, and whether he may be asked to contest as a highly visible Mumbaiite, but adds that he is open to any kind of service to the party and the people. His four years talking to strangers in local trains have led to unexpected career moves -- Desai is now also a motivational speaker in colleges where he presents his 'In Pursuit Of Happiness' seminar. He has also cultivated a rare courage. There are plenty of obstructionists in the trains, he says, who try to stop him, call him a fraud, threaten to physically stop him from seeking donations. "I've learnt to deal with all kinds of people. And there are many more Indians who will come forward to support a good cause and to tell such people to back off if they can't support one."

He has now begun to tell people on the trains to join AAP, but without giving them forms or doing anything more persuasive. "If I have to campaign on the trains, I will keep aside the fund-raising work for Shloka for four months," he says. "I don't want to mix the two."

Once picked up by the Railway Police Force for begging, Desai says there are actually scores of RPF men who have helped him. At least three station masters have in fact suggested that he join AAP.

What is his assessment of the so-called AAP wave, especially in Mumbai? "It's difficult to replicate the Delhi success," he reasons. "There, Kejriwal was leading from the front. But apart from that, the money power in Maharashtra is greater than in politics anywhere else in the country." Still, early surveys have indicated that AAP could win one out of the six Lok Sabha seats in Mumbai. "I am pretty confident that I can help win another -- people do recognise me."

Rahul Gandhi will not be Congress’ PM candidate

Despite a majority of leaders at the Congress Working Committee meet pushing for Rahul Gandhi to be made the party's prime ministerial candidate, the party demurred from the decision and instead decided to appoint him the poll campaign chief.

"We had one major resolution that has to be passed tomorrow and all the issues in it were discusses...The Congress President and Vice President placed their views on the resolution," Congress spokesperson Janardan Dwivedi told reporters, refusing to disclose all its contents.

"Many of the members in the CWC wanted that he (Rahul) should be made the Prime ministerial candidate but after some debate Congress president Sonia Gandhi intervened," he said.

"She said that there was no such tradition in the Congress. If someone declares their PM candidate it doesn't mean that we have to do the same," Dwivedi said.

Rahul Gandhi reportedly shot down the proposal to make him the PM candidate. PTI

He said that Sonia had endorsed making Rahul Gandhi the head of the party's campaign in the upcoming elections.

"The resolution in today's meeting says: 'This meeting of the AICC declares that the campaign of the elections will be headed by Rahul Gandhi'," he said.

Rahul Gandhi said that he would do everything to strengthen the party and that he would do anything that the party sought of him, Dwivedi said.

"Rahulji said the decision on other matters will be taken at the appropriate time," he said.

CNN-IBN quoted sources as saying that Rahul had himself said that he didn't want to be the party's prime ministerial candidate and was backed by the top brass of the party on his decision, including by Sonia Gandhi.

The Congress leader is to be appointed the party's poll committee chief at the AICC meet tomorrow, thus making him the face of the party's campaign, but not pitting him in a direct race against the BJP's Narendra Modi.

In a recent interview, Rahul had said that he was willing to accept any responsibility for the party which had been interpreted by some as saying he was set to be the party's prime ministerial candidate.

However, as Firstpost's R Jagannathan had noted, it made little sense for the Congress to make him the prime ministerial candidate ahead of an election in which the party is facing massive anti-incumbency:

There is nothing Rahul gains beyond emphasising his prime ministerial ambitions when he is not going to get the chance this time. In fact, no title or announcement is going to enhance his status as Congress' pre-eminent power after Sonia Gandhi for he is already the de facto nominee for PM. So the best we can expect when the party meets on 17 January is a clearer statement of his position as the party's lead campaigner in the Lok Sabha polls, and the one who will henceforth take the final call on party level changes and selection of candidates.

Not naming Rahul PM candidate is Cong’s Gandhi saving tactic

It seems that Digvijaya Singh knew it all.

The Congress Working Committee officially arrived at the same conclusion that he publicly spoke of only last week -- that Rahul Gandhi would not be named the Congress party's Prime Ministerial candidate. And that this decision was scripted by none other than Sonia Gandhi.

But then there was some consolation for the cheer leaders, announced by another powerful general secretary, Janardan Dwivedi, after the meeting. "It is always clear who the leader is in Congress. It is never an issue for us. The resolution in today's meeting says, This meeting of the AICC declares that the campaign of the elections will be headed by Rahul Gandhi".

While writing and adopting this resolution, the assembled high and mighty party leaders must have gone on the simplistic idea that public memory is short, and therefore no one would care to ask why Rahul Gandhi was not made the face of the party campaign after a day long brain storming sesstion at Surajkund in November 2012.

At that time, it was announced that Rahul Gandhi would lead the party's 2014 campaign and head a six-member poll coordination committee. Janardan Dwivedi who also made that announcement, went on to announce the formation of three sub-groups - a six-member pre-poll alliances sub-group headed by Defence Minister AK Antony, a 10-member manifesto and government programmes' sub-group, also headed by Antony, and a seven-member communication and publicity sub-group headed by Digvijaya Singh.

PTI

Fifteen months down the line, the status of these committees is not exactly known. But the one thing that is certain is that Rahul continues to be the reluctant prince, no matter what he told Dainik Bhaskar in an interview. His answers in that interview were mistakenly interpreted as his willingness to officially accept being a prime ministerial challenger, but didn't in reality, reveal anything beyond what he had been saying in his public rallies.

The Congress may be taking shelter behind its "our tradition" defence in not naming a prime ministerial candidate, but that has made the BJP pounce on them with the most obvious question -- Is Congress trying to protect its first family from ultimate ignominy in the face of a near certain defeat in the coming elections?

But a much bigger question that a number of ordinary Congress workers are asking, is whether the party has lost the appetite to fight aggressive challenger Narendra Modi and emerging challenger Arvind Kejriwal.

The Congress decision also perpetuates the impression that the party has already conceded defeat and does not want Rahul to get into a personality fight with Modi who is miles ahead of him in the popularity rating charts. The recent state elections also proved that Rahul was not able to mobilise voters. In fact he was already setting diminishing returns for the party. His and mother Sonia's populist schemes, food security and land acquisition acts did get any votes for the Congress. Rahul had banked heavily on these schemes to win elections in the four Hindi heartland states, but eventually did not find any takers.

A total decimation in the assembly polls made Rahul switch from the avatar of right based entitlement giver to that of anti-corruption crusader. The slogan of one of the posters released by the Congress a day earlier, read Rahul ji ke nau hathiyar, door karenge bhrashtachar (The nine weapons of Rahul ji to end corruption)," the posters listed three laws and nine bills that the Congress-led UPA government intends to push in the next session of Parliament.

"Rahul ji ka uddeshya, bhrastachar mukt desh (Rahul ji's aim, a corruption-free India)," says another poster. But can these posters separate Rahul from the corrupt UPA regime? The Congress think tank obviously feels that people may be able to see a messiah in Rahul and accordingly hail his leadership even as he has proved to be a failure in mobilising popular support for his party.

The recently concluded assembly elections, like several other elections in the past, have proved that a successful campaign revolves round a persona of the leader who personifies the ideology or principles of that party. But then once a leader is named, the performance of the party at the polls will have to accounted to his personal fortunes. The Congress is perhaps trying to avoid just that. A win is for Rahul, a loss is for the rank and file of the party, even if it is headed by his mother and himself.

It looks like mother Sonia is again coming forward to protect her son, like she did two years ago after the fiasco of the UP assembly elections.

The CWC decision not to name Rahul Gandhi punctured the hype around todays AICC conclave. It has also dampened the enthusiasm of diehard enthusiasts in the Congress party who had so eagerly looked forward to Rahul's anointment as PM candidate.

Rahul Gandhi may not win, but he is here to stay

After releasing a new series of posters featuring only Rahul Gandhi, the Congress's decision to declare the party vice-president the head of poll campaign, not the PM candidate of the party, is being seen as a means to protect him from a presidential style Modi Vs Rahul contest with the scales tipped heavily against him.

Congress leader Janardan Dwivedi told the press on Thursday after the Congress high command meet that though all party leaders pressed for Rahul as PM, Sonia Gandhi said the decision on the PM candidate would be made come only at an appropriate times.

Rahul Gandhi. AP

Faced with pressure to name a PM candidate with the BJP having done so months ago, the Congress party is now saying they don't have a tradition of naming a PM candidates.

During a debate on CNN-IBN, Congress minister of state Shashi Tharoor reiterated that the party does not need to name a PM nominee, but that Rahul was the person who would lead the party in the 2014 Lok Sabha election.

"Rahul is already in the battlefield and we have good chances of winning. Rahul has a clearly defined rule. He will lead the campaign and take the message out. We will run on a 10-year record of having made a difference in people's lives. The president is Sonia Gandhi and then we have a leader who will lead us to the polls," Tharoor said. Asked repeatedly who is the Congress captain right now, Tharoor said, "Rahul is the captain of the election campaign."

Despite Tharoor's argument, questions remain on why, despite other leaders' wishes to declare Rahul as PM nominee, Sonia Gandhi continued to disagree? Was it not creating confusion among Congress supporters and also setting an example of dynastic politics where the leader takes decisions on their whims?

"The fact is that the president of the party takes a last call... In any party the chief to have the final call. There are good sound strategic reasons why people should keep their options open. We intend to win, and when we have done that we will see what is to be done," Tharoor said on CNN-IBN.

"It is not uncommon that the Congress has not decided on a PM candidate. Also, there are many occasions when if Sonia Gandhi has not felt so strongly about something she is convinced by the others," he said.

Meanwhile, Outlook's Vinod Mehta was of the opinion that it was only creating confusion among party cadre and supporters. "Janardan Dwivedi was clear that all the CWC members wanted Rahul as the PM nominee. The meeting was going out of hand and that is when Sonia exercised her veto. They shouldn't have built all that hype around Rahul, and there wouldn't have been an anti-climax at the last moment," Mehta said during the debate.

"If the intention was to make this type of announcement, then they should have prepared for that, it is causing more confusion than clarity," he added.

Looking at other possible aspects of the Congress decision, Manini Chatterjee, Editor (National Affairs) of The Telegraph said that may be the Congress was keeping its options open.

"Rahul is not the leader of the UPA, he is the leader of the Congress. The Congress decision is tactical. They are not trying to protect Rahul. It is that they don't want to make it a Modi vs Rahul election," she said. She added that it made sense to keep options open for a post-poll scenario where the leader of the UPA will have to be picked and the PM candidate will have to be a collective choice of the coalition.

Columnist Pushpesh Pant too said Rahul should not be blamed for shirking responsibility. "I don't think Sonia is protecting her son and we should not blame Rahul for shirking responsibility. Congress is right now an interesting creature. It has always had a high command which decides who will be the leader," he said.

So is this the end of the PM game for Rahul, or does he stand another chance? Is the Congress going into the elections with Rahul as the front runner knowing that they will lose.

Chatterjee said, "Rahul Gandhi is here to stay. If today BJP loses, no one knows what will happen to Narendra Modi in the next five years. But Rahul has age on his side. Even if the party loses he has the chance of reviving it."

Tharoor agreeing to Chatterjee's argument said, "We don't expect to lose. Rahul has every prospect of being number one. He is not here for a one day match, but for a whole series."