© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Until last year when asked about a chief ministerial face in a state election, or the fate of a sitting chief minister, BJP leaders would say: “The Parliamentary Board will decide.” But last week, when the BJP decided to continue with Manik Saha as the Tripura CM, there was no meeting of the apex decision-making body. Nor did it meet before the party took a decision to be part of the Conrad Sangma-led Meghalaya Democratic Alliance government in Meghalaya or when the party entered into post-poll talks with the TIPRA Motha, which in its debut polls took away a lion’s share of the tribal votes in Tripura.
In the BJP, the Parliamentary Board, representing its most senior leaders, takes all the major political decisions and picks the CMs. Party leaders say if physical meetings cannot be held, the consultation happens virtually.
The latest instance, of the Parliamentary Board keeping out of decisions after the Northeast results, shows the party’s desire to strengthen state units and leadership, sources said. “There is an attempt by the top leadership to make state units the centre of all decision-making at their level… This will help the emergence of different layers of leadership,” a leader said.
Since the Narendra Modi and Amit Shah duo rose to the top in the BJP, an impression has gained ground of centralisation of power, in a party that earlier prided itself as cadre-based and not centred on individuals.
At the same time, the “empowerment” of state units coincides with what many within the party, including those at senior levels, see as the weakening of the Parliamentary Board. The revamp in August last year saw Union minister Nitin Gadkari and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan, both powerful leaders and voices, dropped from the Parliamentary Board. In the new 11-member board, power is practically seen as vested in only Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, BJP chief J P Nadda and general secretary (Organisation) B L Santhosh.
While the high command’s aim to presumably let the state units take important calls might be well-intentioned, it is unlikely that any would do so against wishes seen as coming from the top. The BJP, which once had a whole line-up of strong regional satraps, does not have many left now – barring, that is, Yogi Adityanath in Uttar Pradesh and Himanta Biswa Sarma in Assam. Besides them, Uttarakhand CM Pushkar Singh Dhami has gained more acceptability lately, while Pema Khandu enjoys popular support in Arunachal Pradesh.
Critics in the party who often cite the BJP leadership’s “failed experiments” in Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Haryana and recently in Himachal Pradesh, where CMs were handpicked by the Centre but could not repeat the mandate they came to power with, point to developments in Tripura to argue that there has to be a review in approach.
But even in Tripura, while Manik Saha was eventually retained, it was following a lot of flux. After its massive victory in 2018, the BJP had first made Biplab Kumar Deb the CM. However, in the face of increasing disillusionment with his government, Deb was replaced with Saha, less than a year before the elections. In the run-up to the polls, Union minister Pratima Bhoumik was fielded from one of the seats, triggering speculation that she could get elevated as CM if the BJP won.
But, after the elections, and her own victory from the tough Dhanpur constituency, Bhoumik is set to resign as MLA and continue as Union minister. Meanwhile, Saha stays as CM, after being given little say in any of the major pre-poll decisions, such as on the selection of candidates, alliances, or seat understandings before and after the polls. All crucial decisions about the party in Tripura and other northeastern states were, in fact, left to Sarma, who discussed them with the national leadership.
Next up is Karnataka, where the lack of a robust leadership in the state is aggravating the BJP’s troubles ahead of a tough election. Having forced B S Yediyurappa out, the party has not been able to find a leader who matches his stature or political shrewdness. And then would come the Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh elections where, despite the leadership’s perceived indifference towards them, Vasundhara Raje and CM Chouhan remain the BJP’s best bets, for lack of a strong alternative.
Even in Gujarat, where the organisation is relatively strong, the party relied on Modi’s popularity and image to register a historical verdict in December last year. In Maharashtra, the partnership with the Eknath Shinde group of the Shiv Sena and the demotion to Deputy CM post has effectively contained Devendra Fadnavis, once considered one of the most promising leaders of the BJP in the crucial state.
It is in this light that the Northeast developments are being seen. Can the leadership replicate the same in other states, to devolve more power to local levels? Or will the experiment melt once election heat comes around to the BJP’s bread-and-butter Hindi belt?
