NDA’s narrative and ‘alliances’ are ready. Opposition’s challenge is to catch up

These Janata parties represented dominant farming constituencies, who had been “socialised” during the anti-Indira era. In 1989, it was this larger ‘Janata Parivar’ coalition that had routed the powerful Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress in Northern and Eastern India, quartering different states amongst themselves, and ensuring a one-to-one contest in the majority of seats.

Now, the rump Janata formations are coalescing around the Congress, on an anti-BJP platform. Thus, Patna intimated of the possible birth of a new structure of political competition in several North Indian states.

The Bengaluru meeting allows the Congress the opportunity to assert its primacy within the opposition coalition. It is the state where the party holds power after having recently dethroned the BJP. It also reflects the increasing centrality of the progressive political agenda of the party: a mix of signature welfare schemes, backward caste representation and social harmony. Using the recall value of the Karnataka battle, the Congress seeks to imbue the Congress brand with this progressive agenda, and inspire confidence in the capacity of the party to take on the dominant BJP.

The two stumbling blocks remain in place: the question of leadership, and the process of dividing the turfs. Even though the opposition was bolstered before by large state-level anti-BJP coalitions, the absence of a clear and coherent agenda from the opposition alliance, and the belated stitching up of coalitions, helped the BJP to effectively paint opposition’s yearning for unity as opportunistic politics of marginalised parties. Thus, beyond the optics of the event, the Bengaluru meeting ought to be judged against progress made on devising a mutually agreed upon alternative narrative.

NDA: Brand Modi All The Way

Meanwhile, the recent spurt of alliance making by the BJP in Maharashtra has been characterised by the state’s Deputy CM Devendra Fadnavis as “diplomacy”. It is a remarkable addition to our political lexicon. Diplomacy, as per the colloquial usage of the term, signifies a transactional relationship based almost entirely on the self-interest of the engaging units. In contrast, the term political alliance seeks to communicate a relationship predicated either on shared values or on shared goals, acting on behalf of their popular constituencies. That is why few parties describe their government partners as diplomatic partners.

But the present BJP is like few other political parties. The Prime Minister recently informed the United States Congress that the country had gained Independence after a blanket “thousand years” era of slavery. The seven decades after that, in this telling, have belonged to the secularist regime, so it is their turn now to shape the country. Thus, the next election is being framed in terms of a civilisational battle (of which the “achievements” on the foreign stage centred around the personality of Narendra Modi constitutes one aspect).

Such grand narratives leave little conceptual space for Brand NDA as evoking a political programme, or representing a political consensus. The BJP spent the post-Babri Masjid demolition years of wilderness slowly accumulating trust of the political elite around its moderate agenda. The NDA was thus built around the principle of reasonable parity between partners, conceived under a long-term vision. It often accepted a stable junior role despite having a large cadre base, such as in Bihar, Orissa and Maharashtra.

The BJP alliance resembles more of an entourage assembled around a singular charismatic personality. Apart from the AIADMK and TDP, the rest are small parties representing a caste bloc or a sub-regional force. Few of them would object to the narrative of the alliance being dictated by their saffron patrons. Or to the nature of the (likely) Presidential campaign mounted by the NDA, centred around national pride. In fact, most of these patronage-centred parties, whether the LJP or HAM in Bihar or SBSP in Uttar Pradesh have joined the BJP precisely with the hope of riding on the coattails of a Modi wave to Parliament, for the second or third time running.

Will Allies Plug BJP’s Chinks? 

Yet, shortcut routes also exact significant costs. The political brand of the BJP has become significantly tarnished from the exhausting ‘turns’ of ‘chankaya neeti’. In the previous two national elections, the narrative of the BJP had a Hindutva-plus factor: whether development, anti-corruption or socio-economic welfare.

These factors have receded in value in terms of adding sheen to the BJP platform. BJP's nationwide MLA count has declined in the six years between 2017 and 2023 (from 1358 to 1311). The BJP is, if anything, more dependent on the personal charisma of Modi now to deliver the third term.

Further, the return of LJP (Chirag Paswan), HAM, VIP and Upendra Kushwaha in Bihar (after a chaotic period where the BJP distanced from these outfits) represents an implicit admission of weakness on two fronts.

Firstly, the BJP would be hard-pressed to explain why it has been unable to produce a single leader with mass connect in Bihar. The personalisation of BJP’s appeal in terms of Brand Modi, and the stultifying bureaucratisation of party organisation are, after all, inter-related processes.

Second, it represents an admission that the civilisational narrative of the BJP (or even the rolling Hindutva mobilisation) does not yet evince the same enthusiasm among the subaltern sections these smaller parties represent, as opposed to the core middle class base of the BJP.

As the recent poll of the Sakal agency of Maharashtra showed, for all the BJP’s creative diplomacy, the party’s space in state politics (on a vote-share basis) seems to have become more shrunken. Yet, the NDA has emerged for now as the dominant front in Maharashtra, pushing the BJP more reliably in pole position for 2024.

Asim Ali is a political researcher. Views are personal, and do not represent the stand of this publication.