Polls - Karnataka '08

[acharya]

Three Messages from Karnataka

Filed Under Current Affairs, Politics

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

B.J.P has won a decisive victory in Karnataka. Whether it signals B.J.P’s rise as a true pan-national party remains to be; there are specific local factors which may obstruct the party from making further advances south of the Vindhyas. Nevertheless, it is a significant victory, both for its implications on national politics and its confirmation of the changing nature of Indian polity. There are three fundamental messages which the Karnataka election has delivered.

First, B.J.P is now the fulcrum of Indian politics. In sixties, seventies and even in eighties, opposition parties bemoaned the fact that they lost elections because of the division of the anti-Congress vote. In the first past the post system, Congress ruled the roost as the opposition–even with a higher vote share–remained hopelessly divided. It may seem a life-time away but in 1989, a grand alliance consisting of Leftists, Centrists, and Rightists under the leadership of V.P Singh was cobbled together with the sole agenda of defeating the Congress.

But intense dislike is also a form of flattery. If disparate political parties with no ideological cohesion and multiple ambitious and competing leaders came together, they did so because they acknowledged that Congress was too powerful to be taken on individually. If they set aside their differences–even momentarily–they did so because the stranglehold of Congress was suffocating both ideologically as well as politically. The desperate anti-Congressism underscored that Congress was the center of Indian politics.

Prithviraj Chauhan and Kapil Sabil blaming the split in the ‘’secular vote” for the loss of the Congress party illustrates the tectonic shift in Indian politics: B.J.P is the new Congress. Not only is it a de facto admission that Congress is powerless to take on the B.J.P singlehandly, it concedes that anti-B.J.Pism has replaced anti-Congressism and all non B.J.P parties must form unnatural alliances merely to defeat the saffron party. After all, despite the secular plank, Congress and JD(S) have as much in common as the original Janata Dal had with B.J.P in 1989.

Perceptive readers may point out that Congress had conceded as much by forming the UPA in 2004 elections especially after its Pachmarhi resolution rejecting coalition politics. But UPA was an exercise in government formation; it still accorded Congress monopoly in fighting elections at local levels especially in its area of dominance. However, What Chauhan and Sibal acknowledged was that Congress cannot defeat the BJP even in straight contests necessitating alliance formation at state level.

At the political level, this admission may translate in to alliances with ‘’secular” regional parties like BSP in Madhya Pradesh resulting in replacement of single party Congress governments over large swathes of country by UPA type coalitions. At a ideological level, it is clear that Congress is in terminal decline and is no longer the premier national party.

Second, the most satisfying aspect of the Karnataka results is the virtual decimation of Gowda and sons. Their so-called party had held Karnataka hostage for the last four years and Gowda had nursed ambitions of playing the king-maker again. The electorate has dashed their hopes to the ground and reduced them to virtual non-entities. But it is BJP and not the Congress which has been a major beneficiary of the defeat of Gowdas: Why?

After the UP debacle, Arun Jaitley had observed that national parties are handicapped in elections which see a large degree of caste polarization. National parties, naturally, must offer a broader social coalition which may be unable to compete with a party owning the absolute allegiance of a single caste/religion.

In Karnataka, the Congress attempted to circumvent this problem by harking back to its tried and tested formula of offering sops to each and every community illustrated most clearly by its phalanx of leaders in contrast to BJP’s presidential style campaign revolving around Yeddyurappa. BJP, on the other hand, relied on a single issue–development–and hoped it would transcribe the barriers of community allegiance. It is clear who has succeeded.

The grammar of Indian politics is changing. The Congress party’s attempts to position it self as a giant umbrella which takes cares of every community by handing out communal hand outs has been defeated by a focussed and singleminded emphasis on development. An improved road network, for example, benefits everyone. Politicians may continue to play populist games–free power, loan waivers–but populism needs to be buttressed by a focus on overall development. It is a paradigmatic shift and the Congress party, caught in a time warp, has been extremely slow to realize that. The delimitation exercise which has substantially added to the number of urban seats makes it even more imperative for the Congress to learn the language of development.

Third, the era of stability is returning to Indian politics. After multiple fractured verdicts resulting in wobbly coalitions and dysfunctional governments, the voter is increasingly veering towards entrusting a single political party or formation with power. In Bihar, NDA swept to power, in UP, after 15 long years, BSP won simple majority, in Gujarat, Narendra Modi won decisively; Karnataka continues this broader national trend. Does it signify a squeezing of the third space? Not necessarily, but parties which have thrived by playing the spoiler may no longer find favor with the voters.

The voters of Karnataka have spoken. Political parties which have learned their lessons will do well in the multiple state elections scheduled for this year and the general elections in 2008. Interesting times lie ahead.