Leaders, non-leaders search for relevance, desperately

Sonia-Mayawati bonhomie no precursor to a coalition of clashing ambitions.

It is said a picture speaks louder than a thousand words. Indeed, it often does. For proof, look again at the beaming visages of Sonia Gandhi and Mayawati at the largest congregation of Opposition leaders and non-leaders—the latter too many to name here—at H.D. Kumaraswamy’s oath-taking as Karnataka Chief Minister. With the two clasping each other’s hands and raising them in the air, it would seem as if the newest bonding in Indian politics may have already ended their mutual distress at the loss of power.

In a way, it was appropriate that this show of bonhomie between the marginalised politicians should take place where a shotgun marriage of two bitter political foes was solemnised. Uncertainty would dog the new marriage of convenience in Bengaluru as much as there would be doubts galore whether the Mayawati-Sonia hand-holding would actually lead to something substantial electorally or would end up as a mere photo-op.

Fear and loathing of Narendra Modi may not be the sole reason for the hitherto imperious prima donnas to try and make a twosome in politics. The fact is each one has lost her grip on her old constituency and is desperate for regaining relevance. The way the Modi-Shah juggernaut threatens to roll over all opposition yet again in 2019, anyone finding herself irrelevant, per force, would feel obliged to seek solace under a single tent, however leaky and tattered it might seem. But even for the hackneyed resort to a sham of wider opposition unity, Sonia Gandhi and Mayawati agreeing to hold hands is not without significance.

For one, Mayawati, who until very recently had spurned with disdain vote-pooling on the ground that such an arrangement invariably left the BSP feeling shortchanged, while the ally profited from her loyal Jatav voters dutifully transferring votes, seems to have come to terms with her vastly diminished appeal even to the UP Dalits. Newer and far more aggressive Dalit senas and fronts have come up to a) focus on her perfidy in using them as a captive vote bank while she lined her pockets with tonnes of illicit lucre, and, b) during her stint in power she failed to address the basic grievances of Dalits who continue to suffer from age-old discriminations and deprivations. Her diminution is a prerequisite for other Dalit outfits to gain traction.

Besides, going by her track record there is justified scepticism in political quarters whether she can persist with her current anti-Modi posture. All through the UPA decade, it is said but only half in jest, a DIG-level CBI officer would ensure “her good conduct”, her voting with the ruling party when needed or abstaining, depending on his “gentle suggestion”. With the advent of Modi, her vulnerability has only further increased with her brother, Anand Kumar, whom she post-haste inducted in BSP as her heir apparent, alone said to be in possession of huge assets.

So, if she is now embold- ened enough to challenge frontally the Modi Sarkar either it is due to the promise of a bigger thailli from an array of crony capitalists now scurrying for cover for fear of liquidators demanding return of public funds looted from various banks under the benign UPA regime. Or it is a ploy. And Mayawati might leave everyone stunned, betraying the new-found allies on the eve of a crucial electoral battle on the say-so of the self-same DIG. In short, she is not trustworthy, though it could be argued that given that she drew a blank in the Lok Sabha poll and managed to bag a paltry 19 seats in the UP Assembly, her very existence is in jeopardy and has to necessarily throw her lot with the anti-Modi forces.

Well, as for her new handholder, the situation is no less grim. Sonia Gandhi realises that the latest member of the dynasty she has nominated to take over the family firm is not up to the mark. He needs external help. The Gandhi Brand is much devalued now. It is a herculean task to recapitalise it in the political bazaar. Therefore, shedding the akela chalo arrogance and a mightier-than-thou attitude, she too feels obliged to sup with anyone and everyone who can help keep the family business afloat.

How this growing bonhomie will pan out when the voters in the past have taken a rather dim view of most khichdi alternatives is hard to say, but what can be asserted with some authority is that the Modi-Shah duo is no pushover. Besides, history of pre-poll alliances is not encouraging. 1977 was different. The Emergency and sterilisation catapulted the hurriedly put together fourparty hotchpotch in power only for it to disintegrate due to clashing ambitions and a lack of a programmatic and ideological unity.

Besides, Modi’s own popularity remains intact, though the errant behaviour of the loonies loosely associated with the party is a concern. Equally importantly, the obscurantist uttering of a few leaders, including, notably, the young Chief Minister of Tripura, tends to put off the middle class, a core base of the BJP. Modi has to enforce course-correction in social and cultural spheres, for sure. His handling of the economy by and large has been fine, leaving aside the ill-conceived demonetisation and hasty GST. Admittedly, the rising global crude prices in an election year can be problematic.

But to come back to the Bengaluru photo-op, Mayawati and Sonia Gandhi, despite their majboori, cannot make easy partners. The former will always live in fear the latter might try and gobble up her Dalit con- stituency or whatever is left of it. Besides, Congress has very little to offer Mayawati in UP, the only state where she hopes to regain power. Marriages made in heaven have a better chance of survival than those made on the political terra firma by desperate politicians staring at irrelevance. The timing of the complaint that the Congress Party’s coffers were running dry was a dead giveaway. The party feared that after the loss of Karnataka, the only other big state besides Punjab in its stable, money might be hard to come by. Yet, it was unfair to suggest that the BJP cornered all the funds. Not true. Because if for two major states under its belt, the party received Rs 225 crore last year, the BJP rules in 21 of the 29 states. Do your sums. At more than a hundred crore apiece, the Congress tally is higher in proportion to the BJP’s Rs 1,000 crore for the 20-plus states.

Besides, if there is such a paucity of funds, draw a small amount from the mountains of illicit cash hoarded away in benami real estate or in secret foreign accounts. In the off-chance voters take kindly, the party can recoup the amount with compound interest. Why whine like bad losers? There is widespread speculation as to who would lead the opposition charge against Narendra Modi when the Lok Sabha elections take place next year. On Saturday, the Bharatiya Janata Partyled NDA government completed four years in office and preparations, on both sides, are in full swing for the final showdown. Therefore, it is to be expected that with each passing day, the political momentum would pick up and the outcome of the Assembly polls later in the winter in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh would set the agenda for next summer’s final.

Political analysts often make the mistake of conjecturing the name of the candidate who would spearhead the challenge to the incumbent government. It is evident that most of the regional leaders, who are considered Prime Minister material, may not even be in the reckoning when the time arrives. It is not easy to surmount someone like Modi, who is a tireless 24x7 campaigner and a seasoned politician down to the last letter. In fact, he draws his energy from his public interactions and excels in changing the narrative if he sees it is not swinging to his advantage. He had ably demonstrated this trait when he flipped the political discourse in Karnataka from the one between Modi and Siddaramaiah to that of Modi vs Rahul Gandhi. This, without a shadow of doubt, facilitated the BJP to emerge as the single largest party.

In the past, there have been several elections when polls have been held without any specific leader taking control of the campaign against a sitting Prime Minister or the government. In 1977, everybody was clueless as to who would take on a commanding personality like Indira Gandhi. The mood of the nation was decisively against the Congress, and yet when the time came, Morarji Desai got the final nod, though both Charan Singh and Jagjivan Ram were equally confident of realising their lifelong ambition.

Similarly, once again, in 1989, when Rajiv Gandhi’s popularity had waned and it was virtually well-known that the Congress might not be able to retain its government, there were multiple contenders for the top post. In 1984, Rajiv had become Prime Minister with the largest ever mandate received by any political party following Indira Gandhi’s gory assassination, but paradoxically, within a span of five years found himself struggling against opposition onslaughts, particularly on the Bofors gun deal.

Ignoring advice from his benefactors, Rajiv refused to advance the polls to prevent his detractors from re-grouping and therefore had to face the people’s wrath. The over 400seat advantage was reduced to merely 196 seats, and though Congress emerged as the single largest party, Rajiv acknowledged that the mandate was against him and decided to sit on the opposition benches. What followed was vicious power play between three principal contenders—Vishwanath Pratap Singh, Chandrashekhar and Devi Lal. V.P. Singh initially received the crown with the assistance of both the Left parties and the BJP, who offered outside support to him.

The 1991 outcome demonstrated that the people preferred the Congress over others, and though after Rajiv’s assassination it was not clear as to who would lead the Congress, the voters threw their weight behind the party to enable it to form a coalition government. Rao, the ultimate Prime Minister, rose to the position after Sharad Pawar decided to withdraw his claim, thereby ensuring a unanimous election.

In 1996, people voted against the Congress, and the BJP became a major beneficiary by obtaining the maximum number of seats in the Lok Sabha under the overall leadership of Atal Behari Vajpayee, who became the Prime Minister for solely 13 days. He thus paved the way for both H.D. Deve Gowda and Inder Kumar Gujral, strengthening the belief that more than support, one needed to have destiny on one’s side to occupy the august office. Subsequently, the complexities of the coalition governments were in full view as Vajpayee served six and a half years, over two broken terms, as the head of government.

In 2004, no one in their wildest dreams could have imagined that Manmohan Singh would replace Vajpayee; Sonia Gandhi had opted for this reluctant and most academically qualified politician as her primary choice. He continued in office for ten years, the longest after Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi.

The short point is that people vote for and against parties, not necessarily to elect Prime Ministers. The majority of times, governments have fallen on account of strong and defined negative vote. This virtually has happened in every poll after 1977, with so far 1984 being the sole exception. In 2009, the Congress managed to increase its tally before UPA-II commenced its tenure. Thus if the people decide to vote against the BJP and the NDA, it does not have to be considered as a vote in somebody else’s favour.

However, it is perceptibly clear that Modi is not an easy opponent to deal with. Undoubtedly, he is the undisputed mass leader of the country, and has an extremely committed following. Therefore, the opposition’s collective efforts to dislodge him may prove to be insufficient. The 2019 polls would be Modi vs Modi. In 2019, the electorate would determine whether Modi of 2014 was able to deliver on his promises. The vote would be, either for or against Modi. Between us.