How the south may be lost

The jury is still open as I write on Chandrababu Naidu. It could still be that he becomes the beneficiary of a backlash against Telengana separatism, with the electorate in Rayalseema and coastal Andhra voting to keep their state just the way it is. And the AIADMK boss wields far too great a majority in the assembly to risk losing her position. That leaves the representatives of the Congress.

Of the three, I think the chief minister of Kerala may be the most to be pitied. Sushil Kumar Shinde had prudently opted against simultaneous polls to the Maharashtra assembly which gives him about six months worth of breathing space. I do not, as readers of this column know, have any particular sympathy for the Congress in its current incarnation, but every unbiased observer should acknowledge that S.M. Krishna tried his best to administer Karnataka decently and efficiently. Alas for Antony, he is in grave danger of losing that which he prizes most — his credibility! But let us deal with them one by one.

As I said, Krishna did not really do anything wrong. Under his leadership, Bangalore has become one of the hottest sites on the global software map. The farmers in Karnataka are undoubtedly suffering, but, I would argue, their brethren in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala are equally badly off. And I am not sure that anyone else could do a better job of battling the ravages of nature. No, Krishna, I would argue, has come up against one of the peculiarities of politics in Karnataka.

Karnataka is the only state which is geographically contiguous to every other state in south India. All those states are home to strong regional parties — the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, the MGP in Goa, the two Dravidian parties in Tamil Nadu, the Telugu Desam in Andhra Pradesh and a whole slew of creed-based parties in Kerala. Yet the voters of Karnataka have consistently refused to follow this trend. To succeed in the state — whether in assembly or Lok Sabha polls — you must be a national party. Today, this tendency has been reinforced by the fact that simultaneous polls are being held to both legislatures.

In effect, this means that Krishna finds himself pitted against Atal Bihari Vajpayee rather than any chief ministerial candidate belonging to the BJP. It is an unfair fight; every opinion poll shows that the prime minister is head and shoulders in popularity above every other politician. And so an exasperated Krishna finds villagers in the far reaches of Karnataka solemnly deciding that this time they must vote for ‘‘Ajja’’ (grandfather) which seems to be the popular nickname for the prime minister in these parts. The chief minister of Karnataka is losing because he cannot put up a strong candidate for prime minister.

That is definitely not the problem faced by Krishna’s brother chief minister, A.K. Antony. There is certainly no tilt to the BJP (which is yet to get a single MP elected to the Lok Sabha). Nor is there any discernible wave in favour of the Left Democratic Front. There are people in Kerala — including those from the Marxist ranks — who recall the antics of the Nayanar ministry with a shudder. Yet the Congress should count itself lucky if it wins half a dozen of the 17 Lok Sabha seats which it is contesting. (Kerala has 20, and the others have been allotted to the Congress’s allies.) No, if the chief minister faces calls for his head after the election results are declared, then he has only himself to blame.

Antony’s problem is that he has failed to quell the dissidence in his own party. You may call Karunakaran selfish and obsessed with building his own dynasty but you can never accuse the octogenarian of lacking guts. Karunakaran has consistently fought on while Antony has been making one compromise after another. Antony did not get to the top because he was a wonderful administrator or because of his being a modern Chanakya — he became the chief minister on the strength of his reputation as an honest man, someone who would refuse to compromise on principle. With regard to Karunakaran, it has all been just one long dreary story of compromise.

Forget the number of seats that each of these chief ministers wins or loses. The opinion polls and the exit polls could be wrong (as they were in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh six months ago). But you cannot accuse Chandrababu Naidu of playing along with Telengana or Jayalalithaa of being soft on Vaiko, even when those policies would have paid off. Antony’s tragedy is that he has made up with Karunakaran — who represents a different face of Indian politics. Antony has compromised, and that is that.