Chandigarh: Despite being among the first national leaders to voice concern over the devastating floods in Punjab, the visit of former Congress president and Lok Sabha leader of the opposition Rahul Gandhi, which was cut short, appears to have had limited political impact. Instead, it has sparked questions over timing, effectiveness, and whether it achieved the desired political resonance.
The recent floods, described as Punjab’s worst in 40 years, devastated nearly 2,300 villages across all districts. More than 4 lakh people were affected, 55 lives lost in 14 districts, and 1.72 lakh hectares of farmland in 18 districts damaged, alongside extensive losses to homes, livestock, and infrastructure.
There is public anger against the Aam Aadmi Party govt in Punjab over alleged mismanagement, while dissatisfaction has grown with the BJP-led central govt for announcing only a Rs 1,600-crore relief package against estimated losses exceeding Rs 20,000 crore. Against this backdrop, Gandhi’s visit appeared unable to harness prevailing public sentiment.
His tour came a week after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Sept 9 visit to review the damage. Since the first week of Sept, central BJP leaders have been frequenting Punjab, while strongly criticising AAP govt’s handling of the crisis.
Although flood-affected families met him during his visit, Gandhi avoided making direct attacks on either the state or central govt, both of which continue to face negative public opinion over their management of the disaster.
Party insiders acknowledged the Punjab Congress leadership, which had been sharply critical of the AAP govt, expected Rahul’s presence to energise them politically. Gandhi was the first national leader to demand a relief package on Sept 2, but explained his delay in visiting Punjab by citing his engagement with the Voter Adhikar Yatra in Bihar, which concluded on Sept 1. Thereafter, he travelled abroad.
His foreign visit drew criticism from BJP and AAP leaders, who accused him of shirking responsibility.
A Punjab Congress functionary, who did not wish to be named, defended Gandhi’s timing, arguing he chose to visit later so as not to disrupt relief operations. Drawing a contrast with the PM, the functionary remarked: “Unlike PM Modi, who did a photo-op, Rahul Gandhi went on the ground, met affected people, and took details that he will raise at the right platform.”
On social media, however, criticism persisted. Tractor2twitr_P, a farmer-support page, asked: “Can anyone explain a single benefit of LoP Rahul Gandhi visiting a flood-affected state one month late? LoP was needed when state and central govts failed rescue ops and when Delhi threw peanuts for rehab. But he was nowhere to be found.”
Prof Mohammed Khalid, a former faculty member of Panjab University’s political science depatment, said Gandhi was “a bit late” in visiting Punjab and the Congress failed to gain politically from the exercise. He noted the visit might have gone largely unnoticed had Gandhi not been stopped from visiting areas across the Ravi. “He could have tapped into public anger had he visited a bit sooner,” Khalid observed, adding that all parties appeared more intent on scoring political points than on helping those affected.
Gandhi’s plan to visit Toor village, across the Ravi river, had to be cancelled. He reached Makora Pattan for onward travel by boat but, according to the party, could not proceed after Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge received a call from Union home minister Amit Shah advising against crossing the flooded river for safety reasons.
Prof Ashutosh Kumar, who too is from the political science department of Panjab University and has an expertise in Indian politics, especially Punjab, took a more measured view. He argued that visits by senior leaders, whether PM Modi or Gandhi, always had political value. He recalled Gandhi’s previous visits to the Golden Temple helped soften Sikh community attitudes toward the Gandhi family.
Courtesy : TOI
Note: This news is originally published on https:/timesofindia.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights