HVK Archives: Why says the BJP is finished?
Why says the BJP is finished? - The Pioneer
Saeed Naqvi
()
12 January 1997
Title : Why says the BJP is finished?
Author : Saeed Naqvi
Publication : The Pioneer
Date : January 12, 1997
The United Front coalition consists of parties which came together
in the face of a perceived threat that the BJP might come to power
if they did not. Since the BJP was short of a majority after the
elections it could have come to power only with the support of
elements now in or on the periphery of the UF That the BJP minority
Government remained in place at the Centre for 13 days but could
not attract members from other parties is generally cited as
evidence of the BJP's declining appeal.
The BJP's bid for power at the Centre was preceded by the Vaghela
mayhem in Gujarat, Kanshi Ram setting up Periyar's statue at
Lakshman Chowk in Lucknow and thereby scaring away the new upper
caste converts to the BJP in UP, bickerings with Shiv Sena in
Maharashtra and now the mess being unfolded in Rajasthan. The
surface view would suggest that the BJP has receded. If would,
therefore, follow that the panic which gripped all the UF parties
soon after the general election has given way to a degree of
relaxation. But. paradoxically, this relaxation itself is a source
of instability. The saffron threat is no longer the glue that keeps
the UF together.
But if the UF is together, and intends to be together, then the
rationale for this togetherness must be different. One reason is
straightforward. The factor of power provides cohesion. But if
power can be ensured even by juggling around with the cast, the
altered scenario might not be unacceptable to the constituents,
particularly if gains can be promised to individuals. The apparent
decline of the BJP, however, also works the other way. If the BJP
stood there like Banquo's ghost, the CPI(M) would be willing to
support from the outside a Government of which even the Congress is
a part. To that extent the recession of the BJP serves against the
interests of those Congressmen who wish to get into power
instantly.
Jyoti Basu's statement that the CPI(M) made a historical mistake by
not leading the UF is, in today's relatively relaxed atmosphere, a
subject of much discussion within the party. Party leaders
Harkishen Singh Surjeet, EMS Namboodripad would all agree with Basu
on the "content" of what he said but differ on "form". In other
words, Basu is right in what he is saying but wrong for having said
it. But even these CPI(M) stalwarts would be in a minority within
the central committee where "comrades" from Andhra Pradesh and
Kerala would, on theoretical grounds, question the assumption of
"state power" without a "revolution". How would pluralism square
with democratic centralism? What would be the attitude to a free
Press, liberal democracy, etc.? Conservatives in the party argue
that the entire theoretical base would have broken down if the
CPI(M) assumed power at the Centre.
The absurdity of this standpoint is patent even to comrades within
the party. After all, the CPI(M) is an influential member of the
UF steering committee and to that extent party to every action of
the UF. What, then, is all this theoretical hoo-ha about? Had the
BJP loomed as large today as it did some months ago all this
theorising, including on relations with the Congress, would have
had a lower decibel level. In the current political discussion
there are two popular misperceptions. One, that a federal India has
taken shape; and, two, that the BJP cannot arrest its decline.
Neither is a federal India a confirmed reality nor is the BJP in
irreversible decline. Both these situations are very much possible
but complacency on both counts would be misplaced.
There is some validity in the impression that the parties that
constitute the UF are regional forces. But the truth is that the
only truly regional party in power at the Centre is the DMK. It
has been a force in Tamil Nadu since the 1960s. Telugu Desam's
credentials as an unshakable regional force are suspect. NT Rama
Rao had come to power in the 1980s on the strength of a patent mix
of cinematic charisma and linguistic regionalism. But even he lost
elections to the Congress. Chandrababu Naidu joined the current at
a time when the Congress was under the leadership of a man who
broke all records in losing elections-PV Narasimha Rao. Reports
from Hyderabad speak well of Naidu, a computer buff, ruling the
State with relative competence. But a Congress under Sitaram Kesri,
which can attract the minorities and exploit the pro-Khamma image
of Naidu's outfit, could stage a comeback.
In Karnataka, the Janata Dal is by definition a national party with
a strong regional bias. To the extent that Laloo Prasad Yadav, the
party president, has no say whatsoever in its affairs. S
Bangarappa, always shabbily treated by the Congress high command,
has been reinducted into the party by Kesri. This one fact alone
will make a material difference to the party's prospects in the
next elections.
Likewise, the CPI(M) is a national party with a strong base in West
Bengal and Kerala and its primary contest in both the states is
with the Congress. What surfaces in bold relief, therefore, is a
temporary unity between all these national and regional parties in
the face of a perceived BJP threat. In the absence of this threat
most of these parties are in conflict with the Congress in their
respective states. This contradiction cannot be glossed over. It
has to be resolved. And this resolution will be an evolutionary
process.
Over a period of time there will have to be a clearer division
between national and regional parties. Step by step, bargains will
have to be struck, a division of seats between, say, the Congress
and Naidu on the one hand, and Lakshmi Parvathi and the BJP on the
other. For example, the Congress takes 40 per cent of the Vidhan
Sabha seats but 60 per cent of the Lok Sabha seats and so on.
It is for this coalition gameplan that the BJP must prepare itself.
It has a solid support-base which is not elastic. It will only
become elastic if it sheds its anti-Muslim baggage and addresses
itself to the civilisational unity within which various religions,
cultures and languages thrive. The nosedive can be arrested. An
altered and a refined BJP has a legitimate role. If so much of
national politics is conducted vis-a-vis the BJP, who says the
party is finished?
Back
Top
|
