What a week it has been for Indians: euphoria, nervous excitement, and some serious skepticism.

Pratibha Patil (www.agri-history.org)

After 60 years of independence, the country is likely to get its first woman President.

Pratibha Devisingh Patil, the 72-year-old Governor of the western border state of Rajasthan and currently the only woman Governor in the country, has emerged as the consensus “surprise” candidate for the multi-party ruling coalition, the United Progressive Alliance, and the communist Left.

The chief opposition coalition in Parliament -- The National Democratic Alliance -- has turned down the Prime Minister's request for support, and has vowed to put its weight behind the incumbent vice-president Bhairon Singh Shekhawat. However, barring some serious cross-voting or last-minute political machinations, Patil is likely to take the top job as the country's 12th president once President APJ Abdul Kalam's five-year term ends on July 24.

For the uninitiated, the President of India – or Rashtrapati, as he (she?) is referred to -- is the highest elected member of the executive, but, much like a state Governor, is largely a titular head with limited powers. The President and Vice-President are indirectly voted to their offices by an electoral college made up of elected members of Parliament and State legislatures.

But former presidents have impressed with their personalities, intellect, and penchant to raise red flags in legislations, kicking off national debates and discussions. Patil will be expected to do no less if not more.

A lawyer by training, Patil is no newcomer to governance, but hasn't been a hard player in popular politics either.

Her candidature has drawn celebrations and scathing criticism alike. Some see her choice, however symbolic, as the right thing to do. As an editorial in The Hindu puts it:

The office of the President may be a largely ceremonial one, but those who occupy it send a strong message to the people of the country and elsewhere. The fact that a woman is likely to occupy the highest office in the land is a matter of pride for the country... She [Patil] may have a relatively low profile, but her background in politics and social work would suggest she is the right symbol of the idea of the Indian state — one that is liberal, secular and progressive.

But the air is thick with skepticism as well. Seen as loyal to the family of Congress party president Sonia Gandhi, Patil's competence as a president or champion of women's causes is being questioned.

An Indian Express editorial termed her nomination as “unfair”:

All the celebratory statements about the possibility of the ‘first woman president’ — they are unfair to Pratibha Patil, the UPA’s presidential candidate and unfair to all those who work for gender sensitivity in this still largely reflexively male chauvinist society. Unfair because politicians have discovered the virtue of having a woman president post facto. Unfair because such tokenism in public statements from political leaders imply they take genuine gender issues far less seriously than they should. And not just unfair but indicative of a larger malaise — the use of the concept of group disadvantage as a camouflage for any number of political manoeuvres.

Business Standard's Aditi Phadnis says (as many others have) Patil's choice was nothing more than a safe political compromise.

More than any other election, this election is a national shame—because it represents everything that is regressive about the Indian system. Patil-Shekhawat is being supported by the Congress for one reason and one reason alone: that she has the right name. That she is uncontroversial and non-threatening is being described in Congress circles as her biggest strength. The Congress did not go out purposefully in search of a qualified, appropriate woman candidate for Presidentship who could become a consensus candidate. They chanced upon Patil-Shekhawat when the Left and the DMK put their foot down and nixed three other names they were offered.

Both, CNN-IBNand NDTV have raised the issue of the ruling coalition fielding a “nice” presidential candidate, a second choice, rather than a strong one.

New York-based Amrita Rajan writes on Desicritics:

This isn't a blow for women's rights, it's an act of condescension. It's the political equivalent of getting a pat on the head, handed a couple of sweeties to eat, and then being told to run along and be good.The point wasn't to send a woman to Raisina Hill. The point was to elect the best person for the job - caste, religion and gender no bar. It's not rocket science, we've been doing this for 60 years now. I agree the post of President is largely symbolic, but it is symbolic for all citizens. President Kalam is not just a "Muslim President". He is the President. Whose religious identity happens to be Muslim...

...Is Patil the right person for the job? I don't know because everybody is so hung up on her gender that we're lucky to have the barebones of her resume. How am I supposed to get all excited about a random saree wafting towards the Presidential Palace? What kind of a "message" is that?She seems like a nice enough lady and in all probability, she's going to become our next President - I don't want to dismiss her without giving her a chance. But this constant carping on her gender puts my teeth on edge.Tell me how she's the best person for the job, tell me why she deserves this honor, tell me why I should be proud of her for things she did rather than something decided in her mother's womb. Tell me why she represents me and my country. Don't try to guilt me into accepting her as the face of my country.

Freelance journalist Geeta Padmanabhan, however, has a more positive outlook. She writes in a blog post:

But who can say “no” to a woman Prez? Not me. Pratibha wins my vote for an important reason. She excelled in sports as a school girl. A Prez interested in sports! And she is a lawyer by profession. That’s great too. She was educated at a time when a lot of women did not go o college. Obviously she grew up in a household with progressive views. Yes, if you think of the bunch in contention, Pratibha is definitely a better choice.

Sonia Gandhi (www.rahulgandhi.net)

Regardless, Patil's nomination has evoked --- if I may call it so --- an expectant interest, in the nation at large and women in particular. She will join the Indian women's political power club, which currently includes names like Sonia Gandhi and Mayawati. Ruling UPA chairperson Italian-born Sonia Gandhi galvanized a shaky Congress party and nearly became Prime Minister of India in 2004.

Mayawati (www.konkaniworld.com)

More recently, Mayawati staged a political coup of sorts, when she drew in both high and low caste votes to shore up a majority in India's most populous state, Uttar Pradesh, and became the state's Chief Minister for the fourth time.

The controversy over the nomination of a figurehead is a good thing for Indian women. Why?

• Thanks to a few former presidents who rose above being mere loyal showpieces for the governments that installed them, Indians have begun expecting more from the President – a leader with education, stature and insight who raises the right questions.

  
  

• With all the brouhaha over India getting its first woman prime minister, Patil is likely to feel the heat. She will need to deliver the goods. So many women with oh-so-many expectations.

  
  

In an interview with The Hindustan Times, Patil promised that empowering women would be her top priority:

Women’s empowerment is another issue...There are also other areas which people pay little heed to....The social evils of female foeticide and child marriages. My stress has always been on women empowerment. Such empowerment cannot happen if these issues are not addressed.

Now, that's a tall order.

Will Patil be able to start fixing India's skewed (and worsening) sex ratio?

Will Patil be able to draw some serious attention to India's missing girl children, victims of a cruel culture of dowry and preference for boys?

Will Patil be able to move forward the Women's Reservation Bill, pending for a decade now, which demanded that 33 percent of seats in elected bodies be reserved for women?

We are waiting and watching.