What Sonia Gandhi could learn from Queen Elizabeth II
Opinion

What Sonia Gandhi could learn from Queen Elizabeth II

The great matriarch of the Congress has to be more than just a manager of the party, and communicate to the public.

Sonia Gandhi

File image of Sonia Gandhi | Photo: LSTV GRAB via PTI

There are some uncanny similarities between Sonia Gandhi, interim president of the Indian National Congress, and Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor, Queen of the United Kingdom.

Both are unifying matriarchs of long-running dynasties. Both have helped their dynasties survive difficult times. Queen Elizabeth II is the longest-serving British monarch, while Sonia Gandhi has been the longest-serving Congress president. Both have heir apparent who aren’t particularly popular.

The most striking similarity is how both keep themselves aloof from the public. We hear very little from them, and see them more as ceremonious symbols. This makes sure that they are above reproach. Both wear a neutral expression on their faces; you can’t tell what they are thinking or feeling. They don’t put out their real personalities. If you don’t know who they are, there’s no scope of liking or disliking them.

It’s incredible how little criticism Sonia Gandhi receives from anyone even though she has presided over the terminal decline of her party. In virtually no state has the Congress revived itself under her leadership. Yet, all the blame goes to her son Rahul Gandhi, who became the public face of the party. Sonia is the one who cannot be named, leave alone blamed.

Sonia Gandhi, like the English Queen, is an extremely private public figure (the oxymoron spells out the problem). The Nehru-Gandhi family, like the British monarchy, is good at surviving against all odds. No matter how many elections the Congress loses, the Nehru-Gandhis cannot be removed. Monarchies, even constitutional ones, are an anachronism in today’s world. Across Europe, they were abolished by either revolution or democracy. But the British monarchy survived. Both the British monarchy and the Nehru-Gandhi family don’t think of the immediate; they think of the long-term survival of their dynasties.

But there are two key differences. First, the British monarchy is not just surviving, it’s popular too. Both the Nehru-Gandhi and the Windsor dynasties are seen as privileged and entitled. Yet, an astonishing 70 per cent people in Britain support the monarchy’s continuation. The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty under Sonia Gandhi, however, is facing increasing public disapproval.

Second, while both keep their private lives out of the public glare, the British Queen and the royal family have survived key crises by putting themselves out before the British public. The Nehru-Gandhi family, particularly Sonia Gandhi, doesn’t do that.


Also read: Hooda, Tharoor, Scindia — Why Sonia Gandhi won’t crack the whip in Congress, yet


“Huge Royal commercial”

A six-part Channel 4 documentary, The Royal House of Windsor (currently available on Netflix in India), shows how the British monarchy has survived various threats to its existence, from World War I to the death of Princess Diana and beyond, by changing itself, aligning itself to the public mood, and most of all, by putting the royal family out there in the public eye to show they are only too human. That is a lesson Sonia Gandhi, as well as her two children, could learn to adapt to the political reality of India in 2019.

The Swinging Sixties was a youth revolution in UK that attacked tradition. There was no greater symbol of tradition than the monarchy. The House of Windsor seemed like the worst embodiment of entitlement and privilege in the name of tradition. They didn’t seem to be in touch with the people, and instead came across as “tin gods”. Their remoteness earlier protected them, but now it seemed to produce disaffection.

The Queen’s husband, Prince Philip, insisted they should use the newly dominant medium of mass communication — TV. He would appear a lot on TV, saying in one interview, “Well, instead of endlessly having to fend off, err, you know, too close a scrutiny in an attempt to try and live a normal life, it is now possible not to go to the offensive but to try and make contact and try and create a two-way relationship”. He knew the monarchy couldn’t live forever in a gilded tower.

He managed to persuade the Queen to allow a TV crew to come in and shoot a documentary showing their private lives. Three-fourths of Britain is said to have seen the film that showed the royals as any other family — playing with dogs, rowing a boat, sitting on the dining table, reading books, doing what normal people do. It was like a “huge royal commercial” that emphasised on “family” more than “royal”. It instantly had a positive effect on the image of the monarchy, producing an “electric buzz of a direct connection”.


Also read: What Priyanka Gandhi Vadra could learn from Mahatma Gandhi


The arrogance of distance 

Contrast this with Sonia Gandhi and her children, who refuse to tell the people of India their story. The Congress party stalled the release of Red Sari, a dramatised biography of Sonia Gandhi by Spanish writer Javier Moro. When the book came out people wondered why the Congress was trying to prevent its release. It shows her in a good light.

All kinds of good, bad and ugly rumours circulate about the Nehru-Gandhi family, and in the age of the internet, they aren’t even hush-hush. If you don’t tell your story, someone else will, and it may not be flattering. If you are a public figure, it is compulsory in today’s world to tell the story of your life. Before the masses may like or trust you, they want to understand who you are, where you come from and where you are going. Nobody knows this better than Bollywood stars, and Narendra Modi.

Sonia Gandhi was the Congress president when the political mismanagement of UPA-2 reduced the Congress party to a historic low of 44 seats. Part of the reason why she didn’t get the flak was because she had been unwell, suffering from cancer. Public figures who survive cancer often write books or do interviews about the experience. It’s the sort of thing that makes us see public figures as human. When powerful public figures don’t tell us their life stories, or their versions of their life stories, they come across as distant and aloof, and people can very quickly judge them as entitled and arrogant.

How little it takes

The British monarchy has turned itself into a global spectacle, its royal weddings are telecast worldwide, media is given access to key events in royal members’ lives. The Queen herself makes compromises, coming down from her high perch so as to come across as humble and in touch with the people. On her 50th wedding anniversary, she and Prince Philip did a long walk into the church, greeting people waiting for them, mingling with commoners. Ten couples who shared the same anniversary dates were invited to come and celebrate with them.

Even if Rahul Gandhi were to get married, can you imagine the Nehru-Gandhi family letting TV cameras telecast the ceremony live? The House of Windsor, on the other hand, has for decades used the BBC as a propaganda arm to make sure their ratings among the British public remain high, and they continue to be seen as representing the British people even though they are not elected.

Princess Diana was at odds with the monarchy. She had separated from Prince Charles, overshadowed the monarchy with her own personality, was having affairs and publicly said in a TV interview that Prince Charles wasn’t fit to be a king. When Diana died in an accident, there was an unprecedented outpouring of grief. The Queen found herself on the wrong side of the public opinion. She turned up for Diana’s funeral, bowed before her body, gave a two-minute speech praising her, and all was well with the monarchy again. That is how little it takes.

It will take very little for the Nehru-Gandhi family to start being liked by the people again. They only have to show us their human side, and tell us their story.


Also read: Shashi Tharoor: Congress members must constructively criticise Modi, not go after my tweet


Views are personal.