'Rahul Gandhi's problem is that he doesn't think big.'
'He looks more like an activist, while politics is like a game of chess. You attack and then defend and have a game-plan.'
Rashid Kidwai is one of India's most seasoned and insightful political journalists, particularly noted for his deep understanding of the Congress party.
As the author of 24 Akbar Road and Sonia – A Biography, he has chronicled the internal power dynamics and ideological journeys of the Congress over decades. Kidwai's commentary draws on years of on-the-ground reporting, nuanced reading of political alliances, and a historian's grasp of party legacy -- qualities that make his analysis especially salient in the wake of the 2025 Bihar assembly elections.
In that contest, the National Democratic Alliance secured a staggering 202 out of 243 seats, reducing the Mahagathbandhan -- anchored by the Rashtriya Janata Dal and Congress -- to just 35 seats. The Congress itself won only six seats, even as the RJD fell from 75 in 2020 to just 25 this time.
Against the backdrop of this political rout, Kidwai spoke to Syed Firdaus Ashraf/Rediff on how strategic, organisational, and leadership failures combined to produce a humiliating outcome for the RJD-Congress combine.
Every time we speak the Congress has lost one or the other election. There is never good news for the Congress in elections, it seems.
What was the problem this time? Why did the RJD-Congress lose so badly in Bihar?
The outcome of the Bihar assembly polls will hurt the Opposition, and the Congress in particular, a lot more.
The Bihar election results were a profound case of missed opportunity for the Congress.
Public memory is very short and therefore a quick recap is required.
Throughout 2023 Nitish Kumar criss-crossed the country to form an Opposition alliance to take on Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. At that point of time he was an architect, or I would say a mid-wife, of the INDIA bloc that existed on paper. He was present and Opposition unity was in full display during Siddaramaiah's swearing-in ceremony as Karnataka chief minister.
Nitish Kumar was very keen at that point of time that the Congress should take the lead and project him as the prime ministerial candidate for the 2024 general elections against Modi. Had this happened, the Bharatiya Janata Party's seats would have reduced from 240 by another 30-40 seats, to 200, which would have enabled the INDIA bloc to form the government.
This was a missed opportunity. It was not that Rahul Gandhi did not want Nitish Kumar as PM candidate, but he kept dithering because there was a group in the Congress party who felt that if Nitish claimed the PM's post it would harm Rahul Gandhi's prospects because he is the sole heir of the Nehru-Gandhi family.
But this was in 2023 when Nitish was aligned with the RJD who he then dumped to rejoin the BJP and form a government in Bihar once again. Why bring this up in 2025?
I am giving you this background because had the Congress and Rahul Gandhi been farsighted and a little visionary, they could have retained Nitish Kumar in the INDIA bloc. They did not do so and hence he went back to the BJP as his lifetime ambition of becoming prime minister was not going to be fulfilled in the Opposition alliance.
And the mandate of Bihar talks of Nitish Kumar's stature. It was because of him the BJP benefitted and even the smaller parties of NDA scored a 80 percent strike rate in the number of seats they contested.
Nitish could have been a great choice to lead INDIA from the front. Even now if he was a part of the INDIA bloc Nitish could have been a very potent force for them.
Rahul Gandhi's problem is that he doesn't think big. He looks more like an activist, while politics is like a game of chess. You attack and then defend and have a game-plan.
There was a lack of game-plan from his side.
Can you give some instances of what he should have done in retrospect?
He attacked the BJP over 'vote chori', which is a serious allegation, but the fact was that when the SIR (Special Intensive Revision) exercise was undertaken, those who were left out did not get the right to vote. Now, those who had the right to vote didn't feel strongly about this issue to vote Nitish's government out.
Whenever the Opposition takes up an issue to take on the government, like V P Singh did with Bofors or Narendra Modi took on the Congress over national security, there is an end game in sight.
Check out Modi's speech soon after the Bihar assembly elections where he speaks of Muslims and Maoists coming together. This was bizarre, but the fact of the matter is that Modi is seen as someone who is protecting India's domestic as well as international security interests.
The Congress did project RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav as the chief ministerial face of Bihar, a youth icon kind of image.
The problem with Tejashwi is that he is considered a caste leader and a dynasty leader (being RJD founder Lalu Prasad Yadav's son). He had no image like that of the late Madhavrao Scindia, Dr Manmohan Singh or even Pranab Mukherjee.
You can also look at Congress leaders like Revanth Reddy or Siddaramaiah, they are known as leaders who are capable of delivering.
Was it a mistake then to project Tejashwi as the Mahagathbandan's CM face?
The Mahagathbandhan in reality was not a Mahagathbandhan of social coalition (of castes) in Bihar. There were far more social groups and smaller parties that were with the NDA.
Look at the exclusion of Asaduddin Owaisi from the Mahagathbandhan because he wanted just five-six seats for his party. He was not given that but elbowed out of the alliance with the thinking that Muslims anyway vote for the RJD-Congress alliance so why take him in the Mahagathbandhan?
The thinking was that Owaisi comes with a burden so why share the spoils of power? Owaisi proved to be more potent as he converted his vote share into five seats and was runner-up in two. The Congress on the other hand got only six seats.
Do you feel the RJD-Congress alliance took the Muslim vote for granted as they declared Mukesh Sahani of the VIP as deputy chief minister candidate before the elections, considering that the Mallah community constituted only three percent of Bihar's population whereas Muslims constituted 17 percent?
I am asking you this because Owaisi repeatedly told Muslim voters that the RJD-Congress wants Muslims to only spread the dari (carpet) for Mahagathbandhan leaders after they win on their votes.
This move backfired badly for the Mahagathbandhan.
You look at the paradox. Owaisi and the Congress tied up to contest Telangana's Jubilee Hill assembly by-election just now where the Congress candidate won. And in Bihar they did not contest together.
Had Owaisi been co-opted the Mahagathbandhan would have done much better.
They gave a lot of importance to Mukesh Sahani of the VIP who drew a blank.
Prashant Kishor too wanted to have some kind of tacit understanding with the Mahagathbandhan, but he too was shooed away. Had Prashant's three-four percent votes come to the Mahagathbandhan that would have given them an edge.
Look at Nitish Kumar, he is very uncomfortable with the Lok Janshakti Party but yet went in alliance with them. It was co-opted.
In Bihar, the Dalits are about 19 to 20 percent of the population and Dalit politics in Bihar is not about assertion but collaboration.
Paswans have always collaborated and here Chirag Paswan collaborated with the NDA and that gave him an admirable success rate.
What about the Rs 10,000 given to each woman in Bihar just before the elections? Did this factor work for Nitish and the NDA?
This was improper for sure, but the Congress too did the guarantee business in Telangana, Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh where they ruled.
The Election Commission of India did intervene in the case of Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu, stating the governments cannot announce freebies just before elections.
But this is a grey area. It is like one party is putting salt in the flour whereas the other party is putting flour in the salt.
It is very glaring, but how do you cap it? There are only two ways to stop this. Firstly, courts can make this unlawful and secondly, the Election Commission of India can make freebies impossible to announce during election time.
Thirdly, this can be stopped if there is a broad consensus among major political parties not to announce these kinds of sops and freebies. But this is not happening.
How can you blame Rahul Gandhi for the defeat if the NDA is inducing voters with Rs 10,000 just before the elections and the EC is quiet and the courts too don't intervene? Voters will obviously vote for the BJP.
The Congress too offered free power for farmers in Karnataka, what is that then?
That is why I said in my earlier answer, one party is adding salt in the flour and other is adding flour to the salt.
Tejashwi too promised one government job for every household in Bihar knowing very well it is not possible. A state with 30 lakh (3 million) government employees cannot promise one crore (10 million) additional state government jobs.
I agree with you that Nitish Kumar had an unfair advantage with freebies, but then Jagan Reddy in Andhra Pradesh too distributed freebies before elections and yet lost.
The Congress' Ashok Gehlot gave freebies before the Rajasthan elections but lost in December 2023.
Right now, if I am an Opposition voter, 'vote chori' resonates in my mind and I feel there is no point in voting as the BJP will always win and this is a permanent feature of Indian politics.
So why go out and vote? Is Indian democracy rigged?
The 'vote chori' allegation is callous and dangerous too.
Some political party getting 30 percent of votes does not mean that the whole country has given endorsement (to vote chori).
'The vote chori' allegation needs to be probed and we have former election commissioners who can do something about it if the current Election Commission is not doing anything.
But we even saw a Brazilian model voting in the Haryana elections. A BJP MP voted in the Delhi assembly elections and was going to vote in Bihar. This is proof that the Election Commission is not taking any action.
This needs to be probed and the Opposition parties, the Congress in particular, can bring in a citizens panel with people like S Y Qureshi or O P Rawat, former chief election commissioners, and Supreme Court judges for a probe. They can think out of the box and set up a panel. Announce prizes to people who can find out 'vote chori' in elections. The Congress can do this through crowd sourcing.
But the Brazilian model voting in Haryana is proved for sure, isn't it?
We have the Constitution of India and rule of law. If any irregularity is taking place, the framers of the Constitution of India did not envisage a partisan Election Commission of India. And technically speaking, the Election Commission of India is not part of the government, just like the courts are not part of the government.
Somewhere it has to be established on evidence. If the Election Commission of India is not ordering a probe then state governments can set up an inquiry on 'vote chori;. What stops the Karnataka government under the Congress to set up a commission of retired Supreme Court chief justices and CECs to inquire into 'vote chori' allegation? They can then submit a report which can be made public.
We can also have a strong citizens panel as they were set up in 1984 during the anti-Sikh riots. A citizens report came out at that time which later on became very substantive.
The problem with the Indian Opposition, and Rahul Gandhi in particular, is that he is raising the bogey of victimhood. Rahul cannot play the victimhood card all the time. Victimhood can be fine at times, but the voter in India is looking for solutions and they need to have trust factor in their leader.
Does it mean it is a done deal that Rahul Gandhi cannot connect with Indian voters as he has lost elections dozens of times?
That is very unfair to Rahul Gandhi. He proved his mettle in the Lok Sabha elections of 2024.
It is very difficult for any political party to raise their seats from 55 to 100 after losing two consecutive general elections. And there is consistency in the 20 percent votes that the Congress gets in general elections.
In Bihar it was seen as Rahul is not a coalition builder. He is a little evasive.
For coalition politics you need a lot of chemistry. I saw that in V P Singh when he broke away from the Congress and formed the Jan Morcha which was a cohesive front of all opposition parties.
INDIA bloc on the other hand does not have that. Mamata Banerjee, Akhilesh Yadav and other opposition leaders want to be seen as co-equals of the Congress party leadership. This needs to be sorted out.
There has to be top 10 leaders of the INDIA bloc and there needs to be a steering committee but then there is no INDIA bloc to do all these things.
What about the next elections for Rahul Gandhi?
The Opposition needs to understand that winning an election is not about creating doubts in the minds of people about Indian democracy. They need to come up with an alternative vision. A socio-economic agenda and what they want and how they will implement all this.
What is preventing Rahul Gandhi to have a 24x7 national election management team and campaign? Why is Rahul Gandhi depending on the outsourcing of election process when there is going to be elections in Assam, Kerala and other states?
And right now things are very bad. In Kerala you don't know where Congress leader Shashi Tharoor stands. Is he with the Congress alliance or is he going to be the chief ministerial candidate of Kerala for the Congress party?
Lastly, I would like to say, can you imagine a political leader like Priyanka Gandhi Vadra does not have work location for the last 10 months? She has no particular area which is designated to her that she needs to work on in some state as she is the All India Congress Committee general secretary.
The kind of drift, inactivity, inaction -- and I can go on with all kind of adjectives -- to explain that the entire Congress party is getting the Priyanka treatment.
What do you do in such a situation when you are facing a strong opponent like the BJP?
Is it true that the Congress got bad candidates to contest the Bihar elections, where 45 out of 60 were outsiders and not even aligned to the Congress ideology?
This happens when you outsource elections.
The Congress did try to have intra alliance and did not want to be projected as a Lalu-Congress party and tried to woo the Extremely Backward Castes, which was Nitish Kumar's vote bank, but it boomeranged very badly on them.
Electoral politics is all about success and coming first, and the Congress with its allies didn't get that position in Bihar.