Why Sonia took on Mulayam over Durga Shakti Nagpal

[caption id=“attachment_1011491” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  A miscalculation or driven by idealism? AFP[/caption] Was Congress President Sonia Gandhi’s letter to the Prime Minister seeking fair treatment to IAS officer Durga Nagpal, suspended by the Samajwadi Party government in Uttar Pradesh, simply bad political judgment or a highly calculated political move? The letter, sent three days ahead of the Parliament session, has had the effect of a declaration of war against the SP, which has retaliated with the threat of refusing to back the food security ordinance. It is hard to imagine that Sonia Gandhi didn’t anticipate the political implications of taking on an ally days ahead of introducing a crucial bill in Parliament. Could it be that the newfound support from the JD (U) – which has pledged support to the food security ordinance – gave Sonia Gandhi the confidence to take the political risk of antagonising the SP? With 20 seats in the Lok Sabha, the JD (U) has only two seats less than the SP’s 22 seats. So even if SP decides not to back the Food Security ordinance (which, however, doesn’t seem to be a certainty going by the latest statements from the party indicating conditional support) it may not represent an existential threat to Sonia Gandhi’s pet project. With 273 votes necessary to pass the ordinance, should NCP (9) and former UPA member DMK (18) give their support, and assuming Lalu Prasad’s Rashtriya Janata Dal (4) and Farooq Abdullah’s National Conference (3) and others in the UPA fold (comprising RLD (5), IUML (2), AIUDF (1) SDF (1), KC (M) (1), AIMIM (2) and VCK (1)) go along, UPA’s tally in favour of the food ordinance adds up to 250. And with 20 more from JD (U) the tally goes to 270, bringing UPA comfortably close to half way mark. However, it remains to be seen how many in the UPA fold will eventually come through –the NCP, for one, has expressed reservations, thus keeping the UPA on tenterhooks and vulnerable to amendments being sought by political parties. Given such circumstances, the Congress can ill-afford more political opposition to the food security ordinance, which is why perhaps, Sonia Gandhi’s decision to take up the IAS officer’s cause at this stage may still seem like a political miscalculation. Political analyst and senior journalist Kumar Ketkar believes the decision was not political at all. “I don’t think this was a political calculation on the part of Sonia Gandhi. Whenever someone approaches her and she feels injustice has been done, she writes to the Prime Minister. It has happened several times before,” says Ketkar. So did she not anticipate the fallout? “I don’t think she calculated it that way. She probably felt that this was an issue that had to be justly tackled and she responded to it. I don’t think she bothered about the political cost-benefit. That is not her type of politics,” he said. Commenting on whether UPA needed the SP to push through the food security ordinance, Ketkar said, “They need the SP. The numbers are not very favourable. Other than Congress members (206 in LS) and perhaps Lalu Prasad’s RJD, none of other parties can be trusted to support the ordinance." “Even the Left has sought many amendments….With reliable support the total (in support of ordinance) will come to about 250. UPA will need everyone on board,” he said.