Allies,competitors

Of all its allies,the Congress has a most overt relationship of mutual suspicion with the NCP. Perhaps the personal history of their leaders accounts for this appearance,if not the reality. The NCP was born of Sharad Pawars rebellion directly against the Congresss president,and it was carried out at a particularly critical time for the Congress in 1999,just after the general elections had been announced,and the party had perceived a chance at victory. In the years since,the two parties first came to an arrangement to share power in the Maharashtra assembly,a relationship that has endured for a second consecutive term. In 2004,they cemented a seat-sharing pact for the Lok Sabha elections. But once again,in the run-up to general elections,the air has been thick with speculation of Pawars plans to outwit his senior alliance partner and scout around for other options.

In this season of alliances coming apart,the NCP-Congress compact is illuminating. Indications are that after heated rhetoric by the NCP about wanting the Congress to accommodate its growing ambitions to contest from more seats and about keeping open the option of pitching Pawar as a possible prime minister,the two parties could eventually settle for the same seat-sharing deal of 2004. Then the Congress and NCP had split the 48 seats in Maharashtra 26:22. Pre-election negotiations are battles of wit,and nothing is truly over till its over. Nonetheless,the comparison with the Congresss other prominent negotiations,with the RJD-LJP in Bihar,is telling.

Over Bihar,Congress leaders have announced a sense of betrayal. The RJDs Lalu Prasads and LJPs Ramvilas Paswans transactions with the Congress have been the UPAs smoothest. The sudden public announcement by the two Bihar leaders of their decision to keep most of Bihar between them,therefore,created a stir. If the Congress-NCP seat-sharing deal is in the end a rather tame affair,there would be a message. Perhaps durable alliances are not contingent on personal rapport as much as a conviction that each partners chances are diminished without the other.