Rahul Gandhi: Damned if he speaks, damned if he doesn't!

He doesn't give full length interviews, doesn't socialise on social media and critics dub him as a clueless kid; however, Rahul Gandhi’s recent statements offer invaluable lessons in communications - what not to speak and when not to speak 

Damned if he speaks damned if he doesn't. Rahul Gandhi, the Congress vice-president, may have a point here that political commentators complained when he had too little to say and now when he’s talking, they continue to complain. However, his very own actions and words are to be blamed as to why he’s often mocked at and misunderstood. The Gandhi scion has been in active politics for almost a decade now; yet he has shown no inclination to express his views on key policy issues. Rather than entering into debates on real issues and laying out a policy framework, he is apparently more than happy stating, restating the age old problems and yes the various references to his mother - thereby always reminding all of us of his surname and lineage. 

Sample the statements: “Dalits need Jupiter’s escape velocity on Earth”, “Poverty is a state of mind”, “My opinion about the ordinance is that it is complete nonsense. It should be torn up and thrown away”, “India is a beehive”, "My mother came to my room and cried... because she understands that power is poison", or for that matter “If India is computer, Congress is its default programme” and you know exactly why opposition, media and political pundits are emboldened to say that he is a huge disappointment, a clueless kid and at best a diffident politician. 

While the opposition and critics may say that he avoids policy discussions (and they are largely right in saying so), yet towards the fag end of September 2013, for once he did address a policy issue in his by-now-legendary “nonsense” press conference on convicted MPs ordinance. He didn’t stop there, a few days later he followed this with his masterstroke political-physics (escape velocity) metaphor; in short making himself a subject of much mockery. We know the marginalised lot (Dalits, as Rahul Gandhi referred to them at a rally in UP) needs to be empowered, but isn’t the escape velocity metaphor indigestible. No wonder it was criticised left, right and centre. 

Interestingly, whenever he is in a tight spot or perhaps wants to sound more emotional he unfailingly makes a reference to his mother. The recent one being at a rally in Gujarat, post his ‘nonsense’ remark, he said, “My mother (UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi) also told me that I used very strong words and that I could have said the same thing in a nice manner. As an afterthought, I agree it was a mistake to use harsh words but I have a right to raise my voice." Well there is nothing wrong in accepting one’s mistake but it seems the Gandhi scion has made it a habit of being reminded of the same by his mother. 

What perhaps the young Gandhi has failed to understand is that while he unfailingly avoids policy deliberations, and if at all he makes one his timing of the same is grossly miscalculated. His latest impetuous reaction on the ordinance clearly shows a glaring communication as well as generational gap within the party. Let us give him the benefit of doubt; he may not have intended to undercut and insult the prime minister, but this is exactly the message that went out to the electorate. And in politics public perception matter more than reality. For a party that has pinned its 2014 electoral hope on Rahul Gandhi, such statements will only add to the misery. 

While his frustration at times may be well justified, but as a leader he needs to show respect, humility and sensitiveness. The Gandhi scion has rather donned the hat of a party outsider; he needs to be reminded that he is the party vice-president and he should raise his reservations/voice on policy issues when they are being discussed at various levels within the party and the government and not as and when it incenses him. 

As the de facto leader of the party Rahul Gandhi is expected to be its face and articulate its position on several matters, but he has over the years preferred to remain a backroom boy, with a few ill-timed dramatic exceptions here and there. It goes without saying, if you can’t lead or think you have been forced to lead, better quit and give way to deserving candidates. But then, perhaps once again his mother needs to remind him of this and ask him to hand over the reins to the capable and deserving lot. And perhaps, as an obedient son he’ll follow suit. 

Of late, he’s been addressing a number of rallies. Leave aside the content, which is the point of discussion in newsrooms, he’s gradually becoming combative. Here is a lesson for him and future leaders (political as well as corporate) – the product offering / promises need to be fresh with added advantages. It’s good to criticise the opposition’s policies, but the criticisms should be complemented with concrete arguments and must also tell the masses what better you have to offer. A clear cut argument would imply that you have given the entire matter much thought and importance; else it will be seen as mere tantrums and you run the risk of losing all credibility.

Political as well as corporate leaders need to a take a note: tokenism will no longer work; actions need to match the words.