TRAGICOMIC POLITICAL THEATRE- BEWARE OF GATEKEEPERS GUARDING DOORS TOO TIGHTLY : Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

TRAGICOMIC POLITICAL THEATRE- BEWARE OF

GATEKEEPERS GUARDING DOORS TOO TIGHTLY

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

The Hans India (24-08-2025)

{I feel leaders who were otherwise shrewd in public battles, become strangely naïve in public relations. They fail to read the petty insecurities of a dozen self-appointed gatekeepers. These ‘trusted aides’ whose true qualifications often begin and end with proximity to the leader’s chair, live in perpetual fear of being found out. They intelligently protect themselves by cunningly blocking the path between the leader and his or her true loyalists}-Synoptic Note by Editor Hans

In politics as well as in real life, ‘Accessibility and Availability’ of individuals to well known, less known and even unknown, is more than an open door. It is the ‘Lifeline between Leadership and Legitimacy; Guidance and Rightfulness.’

Every individual, especially Political Leader, who prefers to be physically present, emotionally connected, and intellectually within reach, earns enduring loyalty. History’s Greatest Statesmen, from Mahatma Gandhi to Nelson Mandela, emphasized that ‘Presence Alone is Power’ and ‘Distance is an Unambiguous Decay.’

Leaders who once walked freely among their people have become convicts of their own ‘Kitchen Cabinets’ who are not truth-tellers, but comfort-seekers, quietly misleading the leader to sever ties with genuine allies. The result is, as predictable as it is tragic: victories without depth, defeats without support, and lonely end in the political spotlight, while the chorus of flatterers vanishes into the shadows. This is the anatomy of Accessibility and Availability, their perils and the subtle betrayals that reshape power from within.

If Accessibility and Availability are taken as the ‘Foundation Stones for Leadership, Good Governance, and Statesmanship’ the discussion must begin with the simple truth that, leaders who remain within the reach of their people are the ones who earn trust, command loyalty, and foster an environment of participatory governance.

Accessibility and Availability does not merely mean physical proximity, such as an open-door policy or frequent public interactions; it is equally about emotional and intellectual reachability, whether a leader listens, understands, and responds without barriers of arrogance, secrecy, or distance created by ‘Kitchen Cabinets.’  

Mahatma Gandhi’s open interaction with villagers, his simple life, and his readiness to listen even to the humblest person created an unshakeable moral authority. Winston Churchill’s wartime walks through bombed London, Nelson Mandela’s personal outreach to all communities in post-apartheid South Africa, and Volodymyr Zelensky’s decision to stay visibly among his people during war are the most persuasive form of leadership. These are few compelling examples of success where Accessibility and Availability became the defining factor. The fall of Louis XVI was the best example where inaccessibility led to alienation, mistrust, and eventual collapse.

Jawaharlal Nehru’s warmth and correspondence was his moral authority. Yet his inability to heed ground-level warnings, for instance, before the 1962 China War, revealed how even Accessible and Available leaders can falter if it is not continuous. Indira Gandhi’s early Accessibility and Availability won her the image of ‘Indira Amma’ but during the Emergency, she became insulated, filtering information through a small inner circle or the ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ and losing the trust that had made her formidable.

YS Rajasekhara Reddy sustained Accessibility and Availability both in and out of power through direct contact with common people and influenced alike.

NT Rama Rao’s dramatic political comeback after being unseated in 1984 was possible because he toured villages, met workers without protocol, and never abandoned those who stood by him.

K Chandrashekhar Rao’s Accessibility and Availability during the Telangana movement created emotional momentum, but after assuming power, it was alleged that these were narrowed for numerous early comrades, leaving some bewildered. Chandrababu Naidu’s selective accessibility in his early tenure weakened his base during years out of power, a gap he later successfully bridged.

Many leaders have seen people who were inseparable during their peak years and once closest vanish almost overnight after loss of office. Equally, there are instances, where leaders themselves become less Accessible and Available to their most loyal comrades once they rise to power, often due to over-reliance on a ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ that acts as a gatekeeper not to speak of inexplicable formal permission, security (Nicknamed as Bouncers) clearance, and weeks, months, years of waiting.

The most ‘Tragicomic Theatre in Politics’ is the leader’s own residence, where the true artistry of ‘Distance Management’ is successfully enacted.

With over 15 years of closely working experience in the Press and Public Relations as well as experience of meticulously watching through personal contacts with at least seven-eight Chief Ministers, in and out of power, I feel leaders who were otherwise shrewd in public battles, become strangely naïve in public relations. They fail to read the petty insecurities of a dozen self-appointed gatekeepers.

These ‘Trusted Aides’ whose true qualifications often begin and end with proximity to the leader’s chair, live in perpetual fear of being found out. They intelligently protect themselves by cunningly blocking the path between the leader and his or her true loyalists.

The technique is simple but devastating. First, they filter communication, like WhatsApp messages, from true loyalist friends and well-wishers, obviously by saying like: ‘Sir/Madam, I will handle it, no need for you to waste time on such small matters.’ Next, they plant doubt as, ‘These old friends of yours seem to be drifting, I am not sure they are with you anymore.’ Then they create busyness, ‘Your calendar is full, let us push this meeting to a later date.’ Ill-informed leader believes that, those once-close, loyal associates are less important and less relevant.

The ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ meanwhile, thrives in this closed circle. They become the gate, the guard, and the gospel, ensuring that the only voices the leader hears are those that echo their own self-interest. And because the leader hears them every day, and the genuine well-wishers less and less, the truth is slowly rewritten. It is a strange form of political brainwashing; gentle, persistent, and almost invisible.

By the time the leader realizes what has happened the damage is complete. The leader is now surrounded only by ‘Yes Men and Women’ who always nod, always flatter, and always make sure the real picture never reaches the desk. These are the very people first to abandon when the winds turn rough. I have often thought, there should be a warning plaque on every leader’s desk: ‘Beware of those who guard your door too tightly. They may be guarding it against your interests.’

Because the hard truth is, when the curtains fall and the leader moves from triumph to disaster, it would not be the ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ standing beside the leader on that deserted stage. It will be the very people they allowed to be pushed away, provided they did not give up entirely. But by then, as in an old Telugu drama, the hero stands alone in a dim spotlight, and the kitchen cabinet is nowhere to be found. They have already set up camp in someone else’s kitchen.

The moral is, a leader’s Accessibility and Availability is not merely about meeting people, but it is about guarding the channels of trust from being hijacked by those who thrive in darkness. A true statesman keeps their door open wide enough for truth to walk in freely, even if it steps in with muddy shoes. Those who close that door, intentionally or otherwise, are not protecting the leader. They are writing the first lines of their political obituary.

Accessibility and Availability is not a decorative trait of leadership. It is the very oxygen without which political life suffocates. A leader who allows loyal, competent voices to be silenced by self-serving intermediaries, it is not merely committing an error of judgment, but dismantling their own support system brick by brick.

Triumph and disaster alike demand the counsel of those who dare to speak the uncomfortable truth, not just the convenient lie.

When a leader’s door becomes a fortress guarded by those afraid of their own inadequacy, they trade the long-term stability of trust for the short-term comfort of flattery.

In politics and in real life, the lights go out, the crowd disperses, and the leader is left in the company of those who never really believed in them, because the ones who sincerely served, had chosen the way out long ago.