The Sonia Years - Implosion: India's Tryst with Reality - page 168

of Sonia's position as the Congress 'High Command' , no one dared challenge her as the
party leader or Singh as the prime minister.
By mid-2012, the Nehru-Gandhis were providing a prime example of the problems that
dynasties can cause. Their determination to stay in control, whatever the cost to India, was
preventing the Congress from developing and electing new leaders and it was depriving the
country of the quality of government it desperately needed. Absolute loyalty to the dynasty,
namely Sonia and Rahul, had become a primary qualification for most top, and sensitive,
posts. This led to key government posts being given to those who were seen as loyal rather
than capable. A prime example was A.K. Antony, the defence minister, who was kept in his
post even though he failed to reform the defence industry and ensure adequate prepared-
ness of the forces. 17 Shivraj Patil was home minister from 2004, even though he was clearly
inadequate at a time of increasing security concerns - Sonia Gandhi only agreed to move
him after a devastating terrorist attack in Mumbai in November 2008. 18 The president of
India from 2007 to 2012, Pratibha Devisingh Patil, was chosen by Sonia to be India's first
woman president because of her loyalty to the Gandhis, but she turned out to be one of the
most undistinguished and self-serving in the country's history. 19
Singh had been appointed prime minister in 2004 because Gandhi knew that, as well as
being a distinguished and respected veteran public servant and economist, he would not
challenge her authority and would keep the prime minister's seat warm for her son. He con-
stantly pushed aside advice from close advisers to assert himself more and build a power
base as head of government alongside Sonia Gandhi's party and coalition leadership. 20 And
he said several times that he would hand over when Rahul Gandhi was ready to succeed
him. 21 It seemed that, approaching 80, he was no longer up to the job but did not want to
resign for having failed, preferring to hang on till he could gave way to the heir apparent,
who was little more than half his age at 41 and showed no sign of wanting to take over. 22
With no other acceptably loyal candidate, Singh was kept in the job instead of being al-
lowed to retire, and was boxed in by the dynasty and its coterie so that he was less than
effective in most areas, apart from foreign relations with the US and Pakistan.
It had become clear by now that the dynasty was becoming a drag on India's economic
development because both Sonia and Rahul believed that the way to keep the Congress in
power was to channel subsidies and funds to the poor, irrespective of how wasteful that
could be, while discouraging growth-oriented economic reforms that might do short-term
harm to the Congress's pro-poor image. 23 The worry was that they were not interested in
striking a balance between pro-poor and growth initiatives, but focused solely on the first
as the route to election success. 24 This contrasted with the constructive economic growth
policies that Rajiv Gandhi had initiated in the 1980s.