On coalition course

That visual dissolved without trace because it spoke of something familiar. An ally of the BJP calibrating its position on a contentious issue 8212; to be seen as part of NDA, yet not part of it. A member of the ruling combine denying responsibility and warding off accountability for the government8217;s decision. We the People with Televisions have come to expect this selective distancing and its demand that we suspend disbelief. Isn8217;t it inevitable when parties with unalike agendas get together to govern?

Perhaps. Yet, if we pause and rewind to that visual, we might come up against another, more unsettling, question: are these distancing games normal in coalition politics even on fundamental issues? Surely, there is a line to be drawn here?

Looking back, the group within the NDA that courts the 8220;secular8221; tag has been confronted by some very fundamental issues in the recent past. The near-crisis the VHP set off at Ayodhya, followed by the unchecked massacres of Muslims in BJP-ruled Gujarat, followed by the steamrollering through Parliament of the repressive Poto. On each of these issues, parties like Mamata Banerjee8217;s Trinamool Congress, Chandrababu Naidu8217;s TDP, JDU and even George Fernandes8217; Samata are reliably known to harbour fundamental differences with the Sangh Parivar. On each, the NDA government has taken positions that rhyme with those of the VHP and Bajrang Dal.

Yet on each issue, the 8220;secular8221; band has been provoked to a wholly dishonest, entirely painless response. Instead of taking a strong position inside the NDA, enough to compel the senior partner to moderate its stance, these parties made hectic rounds of TV studios. Their loudest protest rang out in the media. The NDA meeting, on the other hand, yielded only the absolutely general and completely non-specific commitment to adhere to the letter and spirit of the NDA agenda.

These allies banded together to denounce the BJP8217;s position on Ayodhya after the attorney general had argued the VHP8217;s position in the Supreme Court. They made indignant noises on the Gujarat carnage that stopped short of asking for Narendra Modi8217;s resignation. As repressive a legislation as Poto entered the statute book while concerned allies sublimated their angst in harmless ways 8212; the Trinamool Congress simply, physically, stayed away from the scene of the crime.

If we look back further, it wasn8217;t always like this. Under pressure, coalition governments were not always so elastic. Contentious issues have wreaked serious damage; they even precipitated the collapse of governments. When the 1977 experiment unraveled in 1979, the dual membership issue was cited as provocation. V.P. Singh8217;s National Front government fell on another contentious issue, the rath yatra embarked upon to counter Mandal. But the NDA coalition rides the big disagreements with token rumbles.

There could be many reasons for this. It could be the present set of coalition partners is less principled. It could be there is less by way of a common programme at the Centre that binds these regional players, so it takes more than its violation to break them apart. It could be the Vajpayee government fattens on nothing more unifying than the TINA/SITA factor. It probably is a little of these and something more. Mamata and co are also able to take dishonest positions on crucial issues with the impunity with which they do, they are able to partake of one stance at the Centre while flaunting its opposite in their states, because of the nature of public discussion and debate on coalitions. Or the sheer poverty of it.

The terms of the debate, such as it is, are pre-set against the viability of coalition governments. The urban middle classes, who set most of these terms, decided long ago that coalitions are untrustworthy, undesirable. For these sections, the era that set in since the 1990s has cluttered democracy. It has 8220;fragmented8221; the verdict and divided it between a host of new caste-based and regional agendas and parties that made their debut on the national stage. It has brought into their world a political idiom and issues they don8217;t always understand, much less control.

People Like Us, therefore, react to Mamata and co with a knowing cynicism. We affect a dismissive air. Mamata Banerjee is like this only8230; The NDA is an unprincipled alliance8230; Aren8217;t all coalition governments inevitably opportunistic8230; Can8217;t we clear the mess and begin afresh8230; With a two-party system, the 8220;national8221; parties, Congress vs BJP?

More than a decade after coalition politics set in, there has been no serious thinking on coalitions. We rush to condemn and criticise, as if we could harangue the phenomenon out of existence. We make no effort to examine and explore the possibilities and limits of political coexistence. How are differences to be negotiated? To what extent can they be negotiated? Where is the line to be drawn 8212; this far and no further?

Mamata and co make use of the latitude provided by the lack of public articulation of coalition norms. They criss-cross the proverbial Laxman Rekha pursuing nothing larger than their own interests. In moments of crisis, they choose the path of least resistance. They know they will be let off lightly, with just the token name-calling that quickly dies down. Had circumstances been different, Mamata may have felt the need to take the harder option of standing her ground on Poto within the NDA forum instead of merely staying away from the vote. She may even have felt compelled to opt out of the NDA on this issue.

This licentious politics and our acceptance of it as coalition politics is a problem in the longer term as well. The recent assembly elections have underlined that the proliferation of parties reflects real divisions on the ground. The days of clear majorities are over. Coalitions are here to stay.

If we continue to allow the NDA allies their patently dishonest stances, without seriously questioning them, we will naturalise a schizophrenic politics as coalition politics. We must accept we cannot wish coalitions away. And it follows, therefore, that we need to apply ourselves more seriously to coalition politics. We must set the standards we can then expect political parties to live up to.