By G. Krishna Mohan Rao*
Congress’s High Command Bared by Kharge Gaffe; Stirs Storm
New Delhi: In the heart of New Delhi’s political whirl, a candid moment on July 1, 2025, ignited a firestorm within India’s grand old Congress Party, as President Mallikharjun Kharge, fielding media questions about a leadership tussle in Karnataka, let slip a truth that echoed through the corridors of power: the “High Command will decide” the fate of Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. This unscripted honesty exposed the worst-kept secret of the 140-year-old Congress—that its elected president is not the real boss, but rather the Gandhi family, Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, who steer the party through a shadowy High Command. The admission triggered a political storm, embarrassing Congress and drawing scrutiny from rival parties, as it laid bare a dynastic system thriving on loyalty, fear, and devotion from the party’s rank and file.
Kharge’s revelation came amid questions about Karnataka, where Siddaramaiah battles to retain his post against Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar in a factional clash that has gripped the state unit. The remark sparked immediate questions: if Mallikharjun Kharge is not part of the High Command, then who is? The answer is loud and clear: it is the Gandhi family, controlling the party through remote control politics, with decisions flowing from Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. The High Command, a unique decision-making body developed by the Congress, which ruled India for decades post-independence, exists to maintain the Gandhi family’s centrality under the illusion of democratic decision-making. In other words, the High Command means the Gandhi dynasty, while the Congress Party is its fiefdom, with the Congress Working Committee (CWC), the party’s highest policy-making body, reduced to a rubber stamp, endorsing directives from the Gandhi parivar.
This centralisation marks a stark departure from the Congress of the 1950s and 60s, when the party functioned on collective leadership and decentralisation of power, with District Congress Committees wielding significant influence. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, despite his tremendous influence on the party and government, rarely intervened in routine matters unless required. To revamp and streamline the Congress and eliminate unwanted people in the early 1960s, Nehru introduced the Kamaraj Plan, under which several party organisational decisions were taken, balancing central authority with local autonomy. It was only during Indira Gandhi’s long stint as Prime Minister and party chief that the Congress underwent a radical change. Her authoritarian leadership concentrated power, fostering a High Command culture that encouraged ruthless sycophants. She split the Congress party twice—in 1969 and 1978—consolidating control so that the buck stopped at her table on all party matters. Succeeding leaders like Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, and Rahul Gandhi perpetuated this model, each serving as the ultimate High Command.
The CWC, once the most powerful body of the party, became redundant and useless as the High Command scripted its resolutions. The High Command’s reach is extensive: it elects chief ministers, picks party candidates for legislatures, and resolves factional fights within the party, leaving state units with no autonomy. In Karnataka, the High Command brokered a deal allotting two and a half years each to Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar, with a changeover set for November 2025—if the High Command sticks to its word. This top-down control extends to other states, from Maharashtra’s candidate selections to Punjab’s factional disputes, where local leaders await Delhi’s directives, stifling initiative and fostering dependency.
Kharge’s slip of the tongue is a delicious irony, as he democratically fought the party president election in 2022, defeating Shashi Tharoor, only to admit that the Congress President post is a decorative piece. The Karnataka leadership battle, where Siddaramaiah seeks to retain power while Shivakumar eyes the coveted post, underscores the High Command’s grip. The High Command culture was imported by the BJP and other political parties, with sycophancy and ji huzoori to a supreme leader becoming a master class in remote control Rajneethi, where decisions are imposed from the top, but blame for failures is fixed on hapless state units. In Congress, AICC (All India Congress Committee) General Secretary K.C. Venugopal, Rahul Gandhi’s man Friday, calls the shots on behalf of Rahul, wielding full power of attorney and taking decisions according to his whims and fancies. Rahul, the de facto party chief, shows little interest in the nitty-gritty of decision-making or keeping a micro eye on party developments, preferring to control the levers of power from the back. He enjoys driving, but enjoys backseat driving more.
This dynamic took shape when Rahul was made party president in 2017, only to resign in 2019 after the party’s defeat at the hustings, declaring that no one from the Gandhi family would become the party president. Those words proved to be hot air, as Sonia Gandhi was persuaded to take over as interim president from 2019 to 2022, reportedly unwilling to trust anyone else to occupy the chair lest Rahul change his mind. Kharge once explained that Sonia Gandhi, president for 21 years, and Rahul Gandhi, the former president, collectively make decisions and may be called the High Command. Out of decorum, he refrained from including Venugopal in this elite circle. The current pitiable situation within the grand old party is one where decisions are not taken, elections are not won, BJP sleeper cells are not thrown out, and there is neither accountability nor responsibility, nor a political think tank to help take decisions.
The Congress’s High Command culture, rooted in Indira Gandhi’s splits and perpetuated by her successors, has entrenched a system where loyalty to the Gandhi family overshadows merit or strategy. The 1969 split sidelined senior leaders like Morarji Desai, while the 1978 split marginalised rivals like Y.B. Chavan, cementing Indira’s dominance. Today, this legacy hampers Congress’s ability to compete in a dynamic political landscape, where parties like the BJP leverage organisational agility. Karnataka’s factionalism, unresolved without High Command intervention, mirrors similar paralysis in states like Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh. Kharge’s admission, far from a mere gaffe, has forced a reckoning, spotlighting a party tethered to dynastic control, unable to reclaim the decentralised spirit of its formative years. As India’s political future unfolds, the Congress faces a pivotal question: can it break free from the Gandhi family’s remote control, or will the High Command’s shadow continue to define its dwindling fortunes?
*Senior journalist
