Remember Gaya Lal, a Haryana legislator?
In 1967, he changed his party thrice in two weeks, from the Congress to the United Front, and then back to Congress. Nine hours after reasserting his allegiance to the Congress, he moved back to the UF.
Since his name was Gaya, in Hindi, means ‘went away’, his political freewheeling which saw him putting himself at the centre of sought after political gains, generated much mirth and contempt. The Aya Ram Gaya Ram metaphor which stood for unprincipled defection, the revolving door of politics for profit, was born.
Now Maharashtra witnessed an unprecedented large scale migration, much like Gaya ram. Like the wintering birds do from the cold climes to more alluring, comfortable zones across the globe, the Shiv Sena crossed over, lock, stock, and barrel from the Opposition to the Treasury.
AFP
India may not have seen the likes of it yet, 63 MLAs walking over, strengthening a government, weakening the opposition, and leaving a huge vacuum in the latter’s space.
If you look at slowly unravelling political developments during the past few weeks, one can easily say that Maharashtra has a huge collective of Gaya Rams. And both the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Shiv Sena stand exposed to the charge that they believe in politics of power, naturally, and not principles.
Anything to stay in or acquire power, and things that come – or go? - with it.
It unrealistically wanted to lead the government, then demanded a deputy’s job, and menacingly walked over to the Opposition benches, and then sought any means back, going by the latest version that the party even gave up the Home portfolio which would have given it some heft even as a junior partner.
It is now seen as a party that will blow hot and cold and cut minimum deals. Its machismo is lost.
The power-sharing deal seems to have been done, sealed but delayed in delivery due to the state mourning following AR Antulay’s demise. It is time to assess who gained and who lost since the election results were announced and Maharashtra got a minority government led by BJP’s Devendra Fadnavis.
BJP, which wanted to rule on its own strength found itself floundering for want of numbers and suddenly realised that its old, domineering partner now turned foe was not to be laughed at. Having competed for seats, BJP can explain that a potential partnership was in mind even while in contest, and that’s why the BJP did not brutalise the Shiv Sena in the campaign, a courtesy the Sena did not return.
By this, BJP gains stability but wants the Sena to defang itself a tad so it gets a modicum of respect – some ministries and not a deputy chief ministership. But it also should realise that by making the BJP wed it again, the Sena could very well be a problematic spouse, throwing tantrums.
A divorce and remarriage is not an easy relationship to sustain; one has to constantly look over the shoulder and detract their attention from governance.
The Sena seems to have lost more than it gained. For one, the party which has always believed that it did not have to chase power because it was destined to rule, has been seen as a power-chaser. A bit of haughtiness on the exterior but craven when it comes to the lures of being in power. It was a party which threw a tantrum when Amit Shah did not call on Uddhav Thackeray on his first visit.
To the Sena, it was at the centre of it all, in or out of power. Then it sent emissaries to Delhi, sought more share in the Narendra Modi cabinet. It sent emissaries to Fadnavis’ official bungalow.
The party also betrayed its fears of a split within with the power-hungry breaking away to make common cause with BJP. After a drought of power for 15 years, its pull could be strong, though the sainiks on the street, the real muscle of the party superstructure, would have preferred that cleansing to happen.
But Uddhav Thackeray has the power-seekers around him, the common sainiks required to vote and attend the rallies.
And the Nationalist Congress Party, a fourth? It thought that because of the minority status of the Fadnavis government, it can fish in troubled waters. Its stratagem of offering outside support, a bid to consign the Sena to Opposition and leverage that to secure a certain softening of BJP’s approach to itself didn’t work.
NCP may have to reassess its political credibility and mend its trustworthiness. BJP didn’t trust it mainly because it was too generous an offer. Sharad Pawar does not dole out free lunches. It emerged too clever by half.
The Congress? In its own throes of confusion – no leadership at the centre, none at the state level, is poised to merely secure an undeserving consolation prize: Leader of Opposition’s office. For a third biggest party, it is a boon to a struggling party without a single lal batti to mark its nominal presence.
It is neither a winner nor a loser.
However, how BJP treats its smaller allies which were with it in the campaign, Ramdas Athavle’s Republican Party of India, Mahadeo Jankar’s . Rashtriya Samaj Paksh, Raju Shetty’s Swabhimani Paksh, and also the others who swore allegiance to it just before the trust vote would be interesting to see.
Don’t be surprised if Ramdas Athavle resigns his Rajya Sabha seat and returns to join the BJP-led post-poll coalition.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at http://ift.tt/jcXqJW.
from Top Stories - Google News http://ift.tt/1vQ7Kp5
via IFTTT
0 comments:
Post a Comment