Compulsions behind JD(U)’s walking away from BJP-led NDA, again

Bihar CM and JD(U) chief Nitish Kumar. (File image: Reuters)

There never really is a dull moment in politics, and dynamics of a situation acquiring a moment of its own came to fore in Bihar on August 9. The decision of Janata Dal (United) to snap its alliance with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) falls into a familiar pattern.

In his long political journey, Nitish Kumar’s latest move is a third switch of alliance partners in about three decades, and the second time in the span of five years. The only consistency he exhibited on each occasion was choosing to shake hands with the same partner alternating between the BJP and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD).

Indications of a crisis in the making started emanating from the early 2022 with a very public spat between the Bihar Legislative Assembly Speaker Vijay Kumar Sinha and the Chief Minister inside the Assembly, a clip of which went viral. Then differences took hold on celebrations to mark the assembly anniversary, with Nitish Kumar’s name missing from the invitation. Now, Sinha is from the BJP, and took office under a power-sharing arrangement the party struck with the JD(U) ahead of the 2020 assembly polls after it ended ties with the RJD, a partner during the 2015 assembly polls.

The JD(U)-RJD alliance, in 2015 and in 2022, reinforced the adage that in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies, but only permanent interests. So what is at stake for the JD(U) to walk out from the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) again? Before attempting to examine the factors, there are a few more incidents in the run-up to the August 9 decision that sent unmistakable signals of all not being well between the BJP and the JD(U).

After Kumar’s disagreement with Sinha, the BJP’s discomfort increased when the CM preferred to remain silent on large-scale protests that broke out in Bihar following the announcement of the Agnipath recruitment scheme, and supporting calls for caste-based census. Then, in quick succession, Kumar decided to stay away from formal occasions like the farewell to former President Ramnath Kovind, the swearing-in ceremony of President Droupadi Murmu, and the NITI Aayog Governing Council meeting chaired by the Prime Minister.

The immediate trigger was a lurking suspicion that the BJP could do an Udhav Thackrey on Kumar through his former confidante RCP Singh, who incidentally was the sole party representative in the Narendra Modi Council of Ministers at the Centre. Singh, was refused re-nomination to the Rajya Sabha, and forced to step down last month, and shown the door from the JD(U) recently.

Another reason was the not-so-subtle effort by the BJP to expand its political reach in Bihar. The decision of the national party to pay attention to every assembly constituency set the cat among pigeons. This even though the BJP leadership maintained the next round of elections — the 2024 Lok Sabha and the 2025 assembly polls — will be contested with the JD(U) as a partner.

Here lies the nub. It is natural for a national party to seek ways to expand its reach. Since 2015, when the Mahagathbandhan of JD(U)-RJD-Congress won the assembly polls, there has been a steady rise in the BJP support base. Now with a little over two years left for the general elections, Bihar remains a key state for the BJP in the Hindi-speaking belt.

The political landscape is changing. Besides age and jail term, RJD’s Lalu Prasad suffers from indifferent health, while his son Tejaswi Yadav requires more time to step into his father’s big shoes. Among the older lot of socialist/Mandal-agitation leaders, Kumar is one of the tallest on the national horizon, especially after the exit of Sharad Yadav, and the passing away of Ram Vilas Paswan. Though his Kurmi caste presence is limited, he has command in the party. Yet, there is no tall leader to succeed either in the JD(U) and Paswan’s son Chirag Paswan is struggling to inherit his father’s legacy. The JD(U) holds Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) responsible for reduction in its seats, since the party contested the 2020 polls separately.

Kumar and JD(U) gravitated towards the BJP in the mid-1990s after the Janata Dal split, and found the current set of leadership vastly different in comparison to Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani. In the company of another socialist stalwart George Fernandes, the JD(U)/Samata remained part of the alliance.

This cosy arrangement broke when Kumar joined the Mahagathbandhan, and parted company following differences with the BJP amid reports his relationship with Prime Minister Narendra Modi were at best frosty.

The JD(U)’s August 9 decision also underscores the difficult nature of the relationship between the BJP and its allies. The list can begin with the JD(U), the Shiv Sena under Uddhav Thackrey, the Shiromani Akali Dal, the Telugu Desam Party, the Indian National Lok Dal, the People’s Democratic Party, and the LJP to name a few.

During the Vajpayee era, the party took pride in running a coalition government taking along 23 political parties. Interestingly, during the NDA-II, when Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK) leader S Ramadoss sought to leave the alliance as it wanted to contest Tamil Nadu assembly with the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), the leadership suggested the PMK could remain in NDA in Delhi, and contest separately in Tamil Nadu. The offer, of course, was not taken, but it reflected the spirit of accommodation.