Last Sunday, September 21, Uddhav Thackeray took the centrestage at a small auditorium in a Mumbai suburb. With talks between the party and its ally BJP stuck, a moderate gathering of Shiv Sena workers and leaders waited anxiously, hoping to hear him lay down the party’s political strategy. Uddhav, flanked by large screens that captured his every move, rose to address them. The 54-year-old who had always lived in his father’s shadow, during his life and more so after his death, delivered what was his finest speech that morning. Not known to be either a “go-getter” or “aggressive” — gentler terms for qualities seen as necessary to lead a party as wrought on machismo as the Sena — Uddhav thundered, “Mark my words, ‘Mission 151!’.” The word quickly travelled to the BJP headquarters in Delhi. That number was the most ambitious the Sena had set for itself in the two parties’ attempts to forge an arrangement for the Assembly elections next month. It was more than half the seats in the Maharashtra Assembly, showed the Sena had learnt a trick or two from the BJP’s Lok Sabha campaign, and was a number that had been set much earlier by the other Thackeray now firmly on the stage, 24-year-old Aditya. What was being only sensed so far by a quizzical BJP, that prides itself as much on its shrewd politics as its negotiation skills, was now evident. Facing his first major election after Bal Thackeray’s death in November 2012, Uddhav would not be a pushover. “If the Mahayuti (grand alliance) stays, fine,” he told his audience, amid loud whistles and thundering claps. “Else, we are all set to fight alone.” For three days after that, even as the BJP slid up and down from its original demand of 130 seats, with 140 for the Sena, in the hope of retrieving their 25-year-old alliance, Uddhav did not budge. After the tie-up was finally called off and the BJP still struck out a conciliatory hand, he didn’t take it, rather dismissing them with, “Take it or leave it.” The next day, he went silent, after — sources said — putting in place the Sena’s “war room” to head into what looks like a very difficult battle. While some are seeing Uddhav’s actions as immature, even hasty, or driven by son Aditya’s unhidden ambitions, he may have had little choice. Seen as soft-spoken, even a “gentleman not fit for politics”, Uddhav has often been criticised for “failure to display steel” when it comes to taking hard decisions. Senior leaders who had worked with Thackeray Sr have talked about his lack of “political sense and timing”; others have questioned his “dependence” on a coterie. Had Uddhav not stood up to the formidable might of BJP president Amit Shah and Prime Minister Narendra Modi — or at least shown that he could — where would that have left him, loyalists ask. Being a regional party deriving its political meaning entirely from “majha Maharashtra (my Maharashtra)”, the Sena can ill-afford losing its base, particularly to an ascendant BJP. The recent bypoll setbacks to the BJP, denting the myth surrounding a Modi wave, gave Uddhav the confidence he needed. Explains a senior Sena functionary, “Please understand the circumstances. If Modi and Shah were to rule Maharashtra, what would be the significance of the Sena? Uddhav’s assertion was part of a script to emphasise his leadership among the cadre. The strength came from the confidence that the Sena is the sole representative of sons of the soil. The MNS (of Raj Thackeray) has been on the backfoot ever since the Lok Sabha elections.” Political analyst Prof Suresh Jondhale agrees. “People often make a mistake in reading Uddhav,” Jondhale says. “The Sena leader is not aggressive, but he is certainly assertive. I am not going into the merits of whether his decision to stretch the seat-sharing talks to breaking point would work to his advantage or not, but surely he firmly stood his ground.” There is no question that the Sena is on more uncertain ground than the BJP, which is confident that the Modi effect and the party’s development plank can counter any loss to the Hindutva votes. Or at least attract it post-poll allies if the numbers fall short. Says Union minister Prakash Javadekar, “This is a just a turning point.” State BJP chief Devendra Fadnavis adds, “It’s unfortunate the alliance did not work, but we will not speak against the Sena in the campaign. Our rivals are the Congress and the NCP.” The Sena, on the other hand, is clear about using emotional pitch to polarise the vote bank, even targeting the BJP directly. Says a close aide of Uddhav, “We will appeal to our Marathi voters to choose between Modi-Shah and Bal Thackeray.” Says senior Sena leader Ramdas Kadam, “In Maharashtra, the leaders who rule are Bal Thackeray and Uddhav Thackeray. There is no Modi wave or any other wave.” However, many others question if Uddhav pushed too far, given that together, the Sena and the BJP were sniffing at victory after 19 years. Had Uddhav shown some flexibility in accommodating the BJP and smaller allies — which have decided to stay with the BJP — he could have even bargained for the chief minister’s post, they say. In the 2009 Assembly elections, the Sena had won only 46 seats out of 169 it contested, these leaders point out. If in the 2014 Lok Sabha polls, it won 18 seats out of the 24 it fought, it was because of the Modi factor, and Uddhav refuses to acknowledge this, says a BJP leader. Laments a leader of the “moderates” within the Sena, “What is clearly lacking in Uddhav is the ability to judge a situation for himself. Balasaheb had a great sense of judgement. Whether it was people or partnerships, he could dominate because of his charisma and also flexibility.” He may have been less “calculating” than Uddhav, says a Sena insider, but Bal Thackeray had the tact to extract the maximum even from a difficult ally. That’s why despite differences the BJP never broke away, he says. Citing “lack of tact” in Uddhav, a BJP leader says, “Last week, senior central leader Om Mathur wanted to speak to Uddhav over the telephone to take the talks ahead. BJP leaders called up Matoshree. The response was that Uddhav was not available, that he was exercising.” The BJP was also stunned when Uddhav deputed greenhorn Aditya to hold talks with the seasoned Mathur. “Uddhav’s biggest mistake is he often measures politics with status. From the beginning, he was clear that talks would be held between him and Amit Shah,” says a BJP leader. “Bal Thackeray never insisted he would discuss seat-sharing with Vajpayee or Advani. He would wind up the entire exercise within minutes of talking to Pramod Mahajan.” Adds another BJP leader, “Bal Thackeray would speak bluntly, often appearing to humiliate individuals. But he would not allow individual egos to come in the way of taking larger decisions.” Party leaders also cite the example of Uddhav staying away when Amit Shah paid tribute at Bal Thackeray’s memorial at Shivaji Park. An 80-year-old Bal Thackeray follower said, “If Uddhav had been present at the memorial when Shah arrived, it would have projected a different picture.” Bal Thackeray’s politics was not “dry economics”, he added. “Its base was chemistry. That is clearly lacking under Uddhav’s Sena.” Old-timers also question Uddhav’s frequent war of words with the BJP in party mouthpiece Saamna. Bal Thackeray believed in directly speaking his mind, whether it was pulling up the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government over India-Pakistan relations or calling L K Advani and the BJP “cowards” for disassociating themselves from the Babri Masjid demolition. However, both the senior BJP leaders and others had found a welcome reception every time they went to Matoshree. Senior BJP leader Eknath Khadse who has seen the Sena-BJP alliance through its ups and downs says, “Do you think Bal Thackeray and Pramod Mahajan would engage in such hassle or ego trips? Both would sit across a table armed with their information and agendas. And it always ended cordially via give and take.” BJP leaders say they never had the same sense of comfort dealing with Uddhav. They cite an example from 2004 when a dispute over two Assembly seats — Chimur (Vidarbha) and Guhagar (Konkan) — had also led to talk of breaking of ties. State BJP president Nitin Gadkari and Pramod Mahajan had complained against the Sena’s highhandedness to Advani and Vajpayee. Uddhav was then the Sena’s working president. “There were occasions when Uddhav did not respond to telephone calls from even Mahajan or Advani,” reveals a BJP mediator. Thackeray Sr could get away with ticking off Mahajan because of the affection and mutual respect they shared, say party leaders, but Uddhav is in no position to demand or expect the same. Then there is the Aditya factor. The president of the Yuva Sena, which came into being on October 17, 2010, he is the eldest of Uddhav and Rashmi Thackeray’s two sons. Aditya made his political debut in 2010 at the Sena’s annual Dussehra rally, seeking the blessings of grandfather Bal Thackeray. Cast more in the mould of Thackeray Sr, Aditya is seen as a natural politician, always smiling, ready to connect with people, a busy presence on Twitter and a valuable counter to Raj Thackeray and his MNS’s appeal among the youth. A BA in History from St Xaviers College, Aditya moved on to organisational matters of the Sena after dabbling in campus politics. At the age of 17, he published a book of poems. He has also released an album of songs and poems written by him called Ummeed, which was unveiled by Amitabh Bachchan. It was at a Sena conclave a couple of months ago that Aditya first defined the party’s strategy as ‘Mission 151’. It was he again who hinted that Uddhav would be CM (no Thackeray has ever contested elections so far). Party insiders are not surprised Uddhav went along. So, would the situation between the Sena and the BJP be different had Pramod Mahajan, or even senior BJP leader Gopinath Munde, been alive? The answer from the Sena and the BJP is a resounding yes. Both parties believe that while Munde — who died following a car accident in Delhi earlier this year — may not have been able to get more seats from the Sena, he would have managed to save the alliance and even succeeded in the larger game plan of retaining the CM’s chair for the BJP. It was back in 2004 that the BJP first declared its mission as “Shatpratishat Bhajap (100 per cent BJP)”. More than intimidating the Sena, the slogan was a game plan for the party to emerge as the single largest player and have its own CM in Maharashtra. The BJP has long known that while the Sena provided it a crucial Hindutva platform, there were limits to which it could expand from there in the alliance. As long as Bal Thackeray was alive, the BJP did not dare part ways. With Uddhav not commanding the same control over the Sena and with Modi leading the BJP from the front, could that opportunity finally be at hand? Uddhav would certainly hope not. Apart, not parted Sena, BJP are partners in 4 of the state’s 26 municipal corporations — Mumbai, Thane, Kalyan Dombivali and Aurangabad BMC is the most coveted of them all, with a massive budget of Rs 28,000 crore Considering that in civic bodies, partnerships are more about convenience, not ideology, their ties may last here. Both Sena, BJP admit this Case in point is Nashik, where the MNS, BJP were partners till recently, and now it is MNS plus Congress plus NCP
