Africa-Press – Mauritius. Your party colleague, Steven Obeegadoo, was not kind to the MMM in his last interview with Week-End earlier this year, and one wonders if your “political leave” not in the same logic of protest vis-à-vis the general state in which the party currently finds itself, among other things, its functioning, its options and its political strategies?
Pradeep Jeeha: I don’t think Steve was hard on his ideas. He said what everyone thinks inside and outside the party. He painted a picture of where the MMM currently finds itself. And he made proposals that he thought would help the party turn the corner.
As for me, the leave I took advantage of is part of a particular perspective, but it is to a large extent dependent on this interview, especially since the motion of censure voted against Steve is the one of the discordant points at the base of my approach.
But whatever the case, my decision to take leave from the Politburo (BP) is in line with the MMM’s permanent fight against injustice and for the protection of civil liberties (freedom of opinion , expression and thoughts) above all.
However, on another level of thought, I must admit that the values that my parents instilled in me and the principles that I imbibed over the course of these long years spent at the MMM taught me this: before respecting the others, you have to know how to respect yourself.
This self-respect would not have allowed me to continue, on the one hand, to sit in such an important decision-making body as the PB and, on the other hand, to be excluded from the decision-making process.
on the grounds that there are members who indulge in “organized leaks” of PB decisions in the press. And, to counter these “leaks”, Paul has found nothing better than to decree that he will, from now on, only talk to Reza Uteem and Ajay Gunness regarding any major party decision. I see there a flagrant lack of respect for the dignity and the value of the other members of the PB and I could not continue to sit there.
* A Deputy Leader of a political party who boasts of being very disciplined does not take “political leave” and would not organize a leak in the press, as Paul Bérenger maintains, unless he has become aware of the means that the bridges between his party and him are definitively cut, and that everything separates the management and himself in terms of agenda, orientations and political interests, right?
I have just explained to you the reason for my leave. As for leaks in the press, I will not dwell on it because dirty work is not my forte. To come back to your question, I must say that I do not share this analysis of my action.
I respect Paul’s opinion even if I disagree with him. And I would have liked it to be reciprocated on his part given the nature of the good relations that we have always had.
He knows full well that shenanigans and low blows are not my primary qualities. I am first and foremost an activist who loves his party like all the others.
As an activist, I contributed to the Party from a young age and, in return, the Party also gave me so much. I have no other agendas than the welfare and advancement of the party, but I am also a fierce defender of righteousness and respect for others.
I’m all for bringing everyone together and I hate the pettiness and personal jealousies that are then presented as the rules of party discipline to frustrate adversarial debates within the party. I advocate listening, tolerance and unity. I have only one interest, and that is to make MMM again the great party it once was.
* Do you feel that what appears to be the sidelining of elements like Steven Obeegadoo, yourself and others, is part of a strategy of diversion from the real problems that the MMM encounters on the electoral plan, or would we be making room for new faces eventually?
The MMM is like any other organization that is subject to renewal in membership and program to adapt to the world in which we live. We are no longer in the years 1936 or 1969.
The world has changed a lot and we risk becoming obsolete if we do not adapt to this new reality. Take the example of the Nokia mobile phone which was the number one in the world in 1997.
But today it is in oblivion, being relegated by iPhone and Samsung, because they could not adapt to the Android technology which is much more “user friendly”.
We were very strong when we were with the working class, civil society, trade unions, cooperative societies, artists, students and teachers. They are the volunteers and architects of change.
Over the years, little by little, this umbilical cord has weakened. Obviously, the effect is reflected in our election score even though our platform and core values have remained the same.
Added to this, the electoral system which forces us to make alliances which have proved disastrous for us in the long term. We won elections but we lost a bit of our electorate with each alliance made and eventually broken.
* In the interview with Week-End, Steven Obeegadoo described the party’s latest defeat in terms of a “rout”.
He had also spoken of “the image of the MMM which is no longer credible”, of a lack of trust between the electorate, and of an MMM “frozen in its way of being, of operating”, of the authorities and “outdated” structures… Do you agree with his analysis?
This analysis is also shared by the President of the party and also by many activists and supporters. But I will not speak of a rout. We have already lost elections in the past and we have been able to recover.
The only difference: before, the MMM was a strong and tight-knit team. The MMM was not what we see today. Steve (Obeegadoo) and Rajesh (Bhagwan) both claimed that MMM’s credibility took a big hit with the 2014 alliance.
, immortalized by this photo showing Paul putting a piece of cake in SAJ’s mouth.
Today we bear the brunt of our hesitations, our lack of consistency and our lack of confidence in our own abilities. In 2014, our electorate sanctioned us for our association with the PTr.
In 2017, the MMM presented itself alone at a partial. Our campaign revolves around a key theme: the MMM will go alone to the next elections with Paul Bérenger as candidate for the post of Prime Minister for five years. We come away with one of the most bitter defeats in our history. Why? This is the question that must challenge us and guide our future actions.
We can’t get out of where we are without going back to our base, without listening to them and understanding the reasons why they don’t accept what we’re offering them, and without thoroughly reviewing the operation of our antennas in different constituencies and adapt them to the new needs and aspirations of the electorate.
* Do you think that the MMM does indeed run the risk of disappearing, as Steven Obeegadoo has argued, if the “conservative current” – “which thinks we should continue as before” – manages to have the upper hand on the “current modernist” – “who realizes that there is a fundamental problem”?
You know, in Africa, there is a proverb that says “even when dry, the river keeps its name”. I do not see the MMM disappearing, as Rajesh and Steve assert in their respective interviews with the press.
I am pragmatic. I am optimistic. I believe that we can find a happy medium to stem these two currents. But a climate conducive to the consolidation of the party at all levels must be established.
We must put an end to these infantile quarrels and personal attacks. The low blows must give way to constructive dialogues and that this practice of dialogue of the deaf ceases.
We also need leadership that is more flexible, more attentive and more ready to accept its failings and weaknesses. * Nine consecutive defeats for the MMM, it’s serious.
But what is even more serious is, as Steven Obeegadoo pointed out, that the 42% who voted for the MMM in 2010 fell to 28% in 2015 and 14% in 2017. And, following this logic election, the MMM is likely to face a 10th defeat in 2019.
If this were to happen, what will it mean for the MMM? This score of 14% in the partial of Quatre-Bornes should challenge us in more ways than one. I told you earlier.
We cannot deny it. We have almost two years until the next general election. If we know how to learn the necessary lessons and adjust our shots, we can take the corrective measures to avoid suffering the same fate in 2019.
This requires a consistent message. We need a powerful political strategy, which can make young people dream, bring together all social strata of the country, reassure Mauritians as a whole and focus on equity and equality.
More “for now” strategies. Who wants to go far takes care of his mount. Elections are won and lost on the ground and not only in the meetings of the authorities. You have to meet people, listen to their grievances, their concerns and their hopes, and the reasons that prevent them from sleeping well at night.
It’s good to be on social media, but it’s better to be with the real people on the street on the subjects that resonate with them and there is no shortage of those. When was the last street demonstration of the MMM?
* In the current state of affairs, the options available to the MMM are dwindling, and we do not see the MMM standing alone before the electorate and hoping to win the elections.
What did you advocate for the party? I do not share this opinion. Mauritians have known the reign of Labor and they are now undergoing that of the MSM, the PMSD being the common denominator.
Many recognize that the MMM can bring this country to a successful conclusion. It is up to us to seize this opportunity and give ourselves the means to achieve this feat.
I don’t think that’s impossible for the MMM. You can hear the crash of falling trees, but not the murmur of the growing forest. Who would have thought that the Alliance Lepep, mainly MSM, would have won the elections in 2014?
* It is often alliances that allow parties in decline to stay alive and possibly survive for quite some time.
The present situation of the MMM but also political pragmatism would rather dictate the search for the right formula – a “winning formula” that will ensure the survival of the party, as the “conservative current” would no doubt wish.
What do you think ? We have tried all kinds of alliances. Activists are tired of these alliances that don’t even last a spring. The best solution for the MMM is for it to stand alone in the next elections, even if it means experiencing yet another defeat.
But we must be careful not to offer formulas or adopt strategies that have failed in the past. To consider setting a new course with means that have proven inappropriate in the past would be childish, to say the least.
I say and I maintain: the MMM can claim to take the helm of this country. But to do this, it must reinvent itself. He has the means and he must first stop with his compromises and compromises.
“We make formula but others win with our formula”.
* You do not think, Mr.
Jeeha, that the MMM can claim to win the next general elections alone and that by presenting Paul Bérenger as a candidate for the post of Prime Minister, do you?
To answer this question, let’s try to understand why we made an alliance with the MSM in 2000 and 2005 with the sharing of the post of Prime Minister.
Then, we made another alliance in 2014, this time with the PTr. The new formula was the sharing of power between the Prime Minister and a President elected by universal suffrage. The reason: it was to have a government for an inclusive society. Obviously, in this equation, there is the role that Paul Bérenger must play.
If we can share with people from outside, why can’t we do it with people from inside our party? This is why, since 2006, I have proposed sharing within the party, but no one has listened to me, with the consequences of the defeats of 2010 and 2014.
* Steven Obeegadoo also said in his interview with ‘Week-End’ that Paul Bérenger is “irreplaceable”.
If this is indeed the case, the MMM should logically experience the same political fate as the PMSD or worse the CAM or the IFB, shouldn’t it? No one is irreplaceable.
I don’t believe in the cult of personality. And I especially do not believe that the MMM will become a PMSD or a CAM, if we reconnect with the electorate sincerely with a clear message and concrete actions.
* Advocating democracy within and in the functioning of political parties is undoubtedly necessary, but have you wondered if the activists would be ready to support another party leader in place of Paul Bérenger?
People leave, institutions remain. Since 1969, many fighters and militants have fallen on the field and left. The MMM has survived all these departures. We have not stopped evolving, and most recently, we renewed our Constitution.
Unfortunately, not all of the Task Force’s proposals on party reforms have been accepted, but I hope that the MMM will be able to lay the groundwork for increasing the democratic space that will be conducive to emergence of a new generation of leaders.
* In the meantime, do you see the leadership of the party engaging in reflection and debates on questions regarding the future of the party itself and how to ensure its sustainability? Do you see in current political strategies the premises of such an approach? Unfortunately I don’t see anything coming so far.
* Since the bridges are now cut – we do not see any possibility of patching up after the attacks of “betrayal” launched against you, you no longer think that the future that was said to be promising for you within the MMM is always possible, right? Could the future lie elsewhere? Since I got involved in politics, I never thought about my political future anywhere other than in the MMM.
Now if the party leadership no longer wants me, it is obvious that I will not isolate myself in the depths of a closet, because I have the intimate conviction that I can always contribute a lot to the advancement of my country just as I did during my ministerial term as Minister of ICT from 2000 to 2005. I fear nothing for my future. The future belongs to those who deserve it and can turn out to be more beautiful than the past.
For More News And Analysis About Mauritius Follow Africa-Press
