Why the BJP should dump the sena.

In India, like in any other place, political alliances endure because of personalities. This is a truism but worth repeating nevertheless and is especially important as we watch the shenanigans of the Sena-BJP before the Maharashtra electoral battle. The Sena-BJP alliance was forged in the 1980s when Lal Krishna Advani headed the BJP and Balasaheb Thackeray ruled unchallenged from Matoshree. The two hard core nationalists saw a lot of benefits in a tie-up. The Sena had a strong base in Mumbai, Thane, and could boost the BJP which was readying itself to play a major role at the centre.

To say that the alliance is at the crossroads is stating the obvious but what has also become increasingly obvious is that the alliance partners have almost reached the point of no return. Changing priorities, shifting demographics and a radically altered political landscape are making it extremely difficult for the Sena-BJP to function together as a cohesive political force. Media reports have portrayed it as a clash of egos but it is not just that. The differences between the two parties have widened especially after the Modi-led BJP set about transforming itself from a party of religious zealots and trigger-happy nationalists into a mature, inclusive, development-oriented modern party.

Gone are the days when parties could win power solely based on appeals to ethnic, religious and linguistic causes. Changing demographics means that every party now has to tailor and customise its message to appeal to a burgeoning young population. Women, who played a marginal or passive role in past elections are now becoming an increasingly important force. The BJP realised this a long time back and it could be said that the Modi’s emergence as a prime ministerial candidate was largely driven by the realisation that there was no other leader within the party who could appeal to this young generation. This is not the case with Sena. It continues to stick to the past, having anointed Balasaheb’s son Uddhav as the leader after the patriarch’s death. It continues to shun modernisation and change its ideology to better reflect the aspirations of new and young voters. The decimation of the old guard and tight control exercised by the family means that the Sena bench is practically non-existent.

Tuesday’s agreement, coming after weeks of hard-nosed and bitter haggling may help the alliance regain power (if it stands) but the fighting and the hand-wringing is one more example of how far the alliance partners have drifted apart.

I would actually argue that the BJP is better off without the Sena. This is because the larger issues and problems within the Sena cannot be ignored any longer. Its governance record is extremely patchy and the absence of top-quality leaders, an effective second-rung makes the party entirely dependant on the Thackerays. This was not a problem as long as the Sena was winning elections and attracting talent. Suresh Prabhu, one of the party’s brightest minds has been sidelined; so is Manohar Joshi, the first Sena-BJP chief minister. After the departure of Raj and the death of Balasaheb Thackeray, the party does not have a popular vote getter either.

There is another reason too. So far, the party has fared poorly in states where it is the junior partner in government. Just look at Punjab. States where it is the sole party in power have been different. Despite criticism and brickbats (some of which is probably well deserved), Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Raman Singh have provided reasonably effective governance. It can be said that the BJP often struggles to establish itself and is unable to control its ally in an alliance where it is the junior partner.

The problem with the Sena is that it has nothing to show for in terms of governance or achievements despite controlling the country’s biggest civic body for more than two decades. Mumbai as a city does not have a problem with basic services like water and electricity but infrastructure continues to be poor and the quality of roads is pathetic. The BMC collects a lot of taxes but very little flows back into city development.

In fact, the BMC example should be warning to all those who think that the BJP should stick with its alliance and that Sena could provide effective governance. The last thing the party of Modi wants is to be hobbled by a party disinterested in development in a large and important state like Maharashtra.

The third and the most important reason is this. The alliance has endured for so long largely because of Balasaheb and Advani. But as we look back at the last two-and-a-half decades, it is hard to miss the point that the alliance has overpromised and underperformed. It missed a great opportunity to make a mark at the state-level after the 1995 elections. Widespread corruption, an inept administration widely perceived as powerless and toothless drove voters into giving the reins of the state back to the Congress, five years after it lost power in the state for the second time since independence.

Of course, breaking with long-standing partner is difficult and could end in electoral tragedy if not handled well. Sometimes it is better to be discreet than valorous and the BJP probably realised that dumping the decades-old alliance partner this time around may well cost it the state, something it cannot afford after a string of bypoll defeats. That is a fair call to make.

But they should use this opportunity to build a support base in weaker regions of the state so that they are well prepared for a final break if and when it comes.

Source: Economic Times blogs.