With the results of the five Assembly elections out, there are certain clear heroes: Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal, J. Jayalalithaa in Tamil Nadu, the LDF in Kerala and the BJP in Assam. In the barrage of 24x7 instant news coverage on most television channels, the big story comes out clearly, but often the fine print or more detailed analysis awaits a quieter day. The undercurrents and subterranean shifts need a more contemplative analysis away from the neon lights of glaring headlines.
Who has gained in these elections, and what is the nature of loss of those who have been vanquished? A closer analysis will show it is quite a mixed picture. The BJP has won handsomely in Assam, but it was not unexpected given that the anti-incumbency factor against Congress rule for three terms was substantive. Besides, Assam CM Tarun Gogoi’s insistence in going to the polls without an alliance was probably not a good idea. An alliance with the AGP and with Ajmal Badruddin’s AIUDF could have been forged, but the opportunity was lost. What is clear is that in elections, specially in moments of adversity when you face identifiable anti-incumbency, timely decision-making is extremely important.
In West Bengal, the real heroine is Ms Banerjee. Against the predictions of all doomsayers, she led her Trinamul Congress to a spectacular win, increasing her 2011 tally from 184 to 211. The uncommented footnote is that the Congress has now become the main Opposition party in West Bengal, marginalising the Left Front. Equally significant is the fact that the BJP campaigned massively in the state, but with no real impact. At her press conference just after her massive victory became evident, Ms Banerjee said categorically that she is opposed to the BJP ideologically. She further said her first preference in the future would be a “federal front” in which the Congress could be a partner, but not the CPI(M), and, by implication, neither the BJP. She added that she has good relations with Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar.
In Tamil Nadu, it is true that Ms Jayalalithaa bucked the trend wherein governments oscillate between the AIADMK and DMK. According to this pattern, the AIADMK should have been defeated. The fact that Ms Jayalalithaa broke this trend goes to her credit. But it must be noted that in terms of vote percentage the AIADMK and DMK were almost equal. It is also to be seen how actively the elusive Ms Jayalalithaa, who is rarely seen in public, will be able to govern.
In Kerala, the results were predictable. Either the UDF or LDF rules in Kerala. Since the Congress-led UDF had won the last elections, it was the turn of the CPI(M)-led LDF to win this time, which it did. Much is being made of the fact that the BJP held on to its vote percentage of around 10 per cent in the 2014 Lok Sabha polls. But considering the investment the party put into the Kerala polls, including several rallies by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, this is hardly cause for celebration. It will still take several years before the BJP is able to translate its current voteshare percentage to seats in any significant sense.
To my mind, there are four important takeaways from this round of elections. First, strong regional leaders, be it a Ms Banerjee, Ms Jayalalithaa or Mr Kumar, are very much a factor on the electoral landscape of India, and both the BJP and Congress must take this into account. Neither the BJP nor the Congress can hope to win the next general election without doing so. Second, while the BJP deserves kudos for its excellent performance in Assam, it has little other comfort to draw. In West Bengal, it won single-digit seats; in Kerala it won one; while in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry it has won none.
The only comfort it can draw is that the Congress has not done well either. But even so, the Congress has emerged as the main Opposition party in West Bengal, overtaking the Left. The Congress is the main Opposition in Kerala and in Tamil Nadu (in alliance with DMK). In Puducherry, in fact, the Congress has won the polls. Therefore, there is no reason for the BJP to be euphoric, except in Assam, where its task was relatively easier due to the three-term anti-incumbency against the Congress.
Third, Assembly elections, while providing some important indications of the mood of the electorate, are often not the best introduction to the state of play on the national scene. Local issues predominate, and voting patterns specific to that state play a disproportionate role. For instance, the UDF-LDF oscillation of Kerala, or the AIADMK-DMK one in Tamil Nadu, are hardly relevant in influencing the results of the elections to be held in Punjab or Uttar Pradesh next year.
Having said that, the Congress does need to introspect on its performance. And the BJP needs to get over its euphoria on Assam to think seriously about why, in spite of having come to power at the Centre with an absolute majority, its national footprint continues to be so negligible.
The fact of the matter is that these Assembly polls, and those that are due next year, including the crucial one in UP, are the “semi-finals” before the 2019 final. It is already clear that, unlike in the parliamentary polls in 2014, the BJP cannot come close to a majority on its own. It will require alliance partners. The same applies to the Congress. It will need coalition partners to hope to defeat the BJP combine. What will happen in 2019 lies in the womb of the future. But it is clear that in the next three years the political pot will see a great deal of churning.
