Gandhi's unpower-grab Gregory Fossedal May 21, 2004 Copyright © United Press International (This commentary is adapted from Mr. Fossedal's recent Bottom Line article for UPI. All rights reserved.) Supporters of Sonia Gandhi were correct that the leader of the triumphant Congress Party had earned the right to become India's next prime minister. She was equally correct, however, to decline the post. Indeed, her willingness to forgo power -- quick, can you name another significant world politician who would turn down his country's top post? -- gives investors reason for confidence. In an act of shrewd self-abnegation -- at the same time, an exercise in what Harvard's Joe Nye aptly calls "soft power" -- Mrs. Gandhi embodies India's maturity as a democracy. She also showed that the skill and wisdom of her family's dynasty is by no means at an end. "He who wants the world will lose it," the bible said -- while he who renounces the world, paradoxically, will gain the world and more. It is a frustrating thing for political supporters who have worked and suffered, and won, to see their favored leader turn aside the reins of power, even for what may be a short time. In Gandhi's case, it was wise. For one thing, she and Congress had surprised even themselves. The Italian-born wife of the late, slain leader Rajiv Gandhi, Mrs. Gandhi returned only recently to political leadership. She may have been ready intellectually to act as prime minister -- her party's stunning surge amidst an ecomic boom -- but she was not ready by recent preparation and experience. Furthermore, the campaign ended in an unusually bitter debate over Mrs. Gandhi's foreign birth and the consequent appropriateness, or lack thereof, of her becoming head of state. By allowing Manmohan Singh to take the top post, despite the fact she had earned it, she defuses the issue for now. She has also made the outgoing Bharatiya Janata Party, which attacked her foreign birth late in the campaign, and then threatened strikes if she became prime minister, appear small and mean-spirited. In a few years, after Congress has been in power with Mrs. Gandhi at its head, her foreign birth will be a non-issue. An effort to raise it again would surely backfire -- if, in fact, it did not already harm the fortunes of any party that tried to raise it in 2004. In a vaguely similar way, Turkey's current prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, accepted a role as a temporary outsider after his party trimphed in the country's parliamentary elections. In a few months, after an old rule barring him from appearing on the ballot during the national elections was corrected, Erdogan ran, won, and became prime minister. Mrs. Gandhi's waiting period will be much longer, and her becoming prime minister is by no means automatic. But the self-restraint and patience she has shown are, if anything, all the greater. Finally, the road ahead promises to be politically complicated. The Congress Party's coalition partners include a number of far left parties eager to undo all the economic growth policies enacted over nearly 15 years by BJP and Congress governments alike. On the right, the BJP, which hardly can be said to have been incompetent in leading the country, will be waiting for a stumble. By allowing Mr. Singh to lead, Mrs. Ghandi can work to buttress her party's slim majority in the parliament, and smooth over any differences with the coalition partners. If the coalition as a whole stumbles, she will have at least some distance from it. If it functions well, it still bears tribute that she was willing to let Singh lead it. On a policy level, the new correlation of forces should be able to keep India on its high-growth path launched by Singh years ago. The party platform promises no increase in India's already-low marginal tax rates. Gandhi and Singh appear to agree that privatization of state enterprises will continue, though at a slower pace. There will be pressure on the government from its socialist coalition partners, but Mrs. Gandhi has already shown herself to be skilled at the art of deflection. If either the left or the right pushes too hard, Gandhi's party will be in a strong position to call a snap election and improve its position at the expense of its critics. This should help keep both sides in line. Above all, Mrs. Gandhi's declination suggests a democracy that, after more than five decades, is now developed and robust. It is populated, we now know, by skilled leaders in the now-out-party, the BJP, and in Congress. There is a prospect, in short, of a healthy competition for votes and ideas, for years to come, under a shared growth agenda. Two months ago, "Bottom Line" was bullish on India because a BJP re-election seemed highly likely. That prediction was wrong, but the political correlation of forces remains positive -- the more so, now that India has two highly competitive pro-growth parties, the BJP and Mrs. Gandhi's Congress. Gregory Fossedal is a senior fellow and former chairman of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution. He may hold positions, or advise clients who do, in securities mentioned in his articles on financial matters. Mr. Fossedal's opinions are entirely his own, and are not necessarily those of UPI or AdTI. Futhermore, they are subject to change without notice. Email: emeritus@adti.net.