POLITICS

Emerging equations

Although formal alliances are yet to take shape, the recent developments within the Congress(I) and the responses of other parties to these point to a broad convergence of political interests.

SUKUMAR MURALIDHARAN
in New Delhi

ELECTIONS being more than three months in the future, the shape of the alliances that will compete for voter allegiance is already beginning to emerge. The objective points of convergence in political interests between the various parties have been evide nt, though to convert these into formal alliances would need a great deal more of groundwork.

The day the rebellious trio of former Congressmen - Sharad Pawar, P.A. Sangma and Tariq Anwar - launched their new party under the quite pointedly chosen name of Nationalist Congress, two major regional parties were conducting important strategy session s. In Hyderabad, the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) under Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu, began its grandly titled general conference or "Mahanadu". And in Delhi, Mulayam Singh Yadav's Samajwadi Party (S.P.) wound up a meeting of its nation al executive with an affirmation of the principles that would guide it in the forthcoming elections.

These were three events that not merely coincided, but also pointed to a broad area of convergence in political interests. Pawar's group has chosen the "nationalist" badge of identity to differentiate itself from the parent organisation, which is today l ed by Rajiv Gandhi's Italian-born widow. The TDP Mahanadu has also staked out a clear position on this question, unanimously resolving that individuals of foreign origin should be prohibited from holding office as President, Vice-President and Prime Mini ster. The S.P. has not quite gone so far, although it did indicate through a reaffirmation of its belief that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress(I) are merely "two sides of the same coin" that it shared the broad attitude that could serve as a basis for engagement with the Pawar group and the TDP.

SHANKER CHAKRAVARTY
Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee with DMK member of Parliament Murasoli Maran and Defence Minister and Samata Party leader George Fernandes.

It is a situation that is riddled with anomalies. The S.P. and Laloo Prasad Yadav's Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), for instance, share a close association under the identity of the Rashtriya Loktantrik Morcha (RLM). This intimacy had begun to fray a bit aft er the BJP-led government collapsed in April and the S.P. firmly set its face against the idea of supporting a minority government led by the Congress(I). But Mulayam Singh today has chosen to provide a waiver of his anti-Congress world-view to accommoda te Laloo Prasad's compulsions in Bihar. It was known even when the RLM was formed that Laloo Prasad might be entering into an alliance with the Congress(I) in Bihar, he said. This did not represent a serious irritant, since Laloo Prasad would not do anyt hing to disrupt the stability of his alliance with the S.P. As for himself, said Mulayam Singh, he would consider an alliance with the Pawar group if he is convinced of its secular credentials.

Mutually conflicting alliances are, of course, nothing new for Mulayam Singh. He fought the last election in league with the Congress(I) in Maharashtra and against it in Uttar Pradesh. It was a smart political strategy, born out of a pragmatic understand ing with Pawar, and it yielded dividends for both. But he seems clearly unhappy at the prospect of any other party undertaking contingent and pragmatic alliances with the Congress(I), in accordance with the unique features of each State.

Mulayam Singh's greatest worry today is that his longstanding alliance with the Left, and principally with the Communist Party of India (Marxist), is rapidly deteriorating. The signs of strain were evident during the Central Government crisis of April, w ith CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet repeatedly upbraiding the S.P. leader for reneging on assurances that he would be amenable to supporting a Congress(I)-led government. The differences have become more intense following the Pawar rebel lion. The S.P. clearly saw various possibilities opening up in the event but the CPI(M) remained lukewarm, when not hostile.

Shortly after the Congress(I) rebels were expelled, the Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) made evident its low opinion of the points they had raised. "Every citizen irrespective of origin," it said, "has equal rights under the Constitution." To raise the doctri ne of differential rights, it suggested, would only play into the hands of the BJP, which had taken a stance on the issue that was "motivated by chauvinism with a communal tinge."

V. GANESAN
CPI leader A.B. Bardhan with CPI(M) general secretary Harkishan Singh Surjeet.

The CPI(M) Polit Bureau further made it clear that it would view every party and its leadership "not on the basis of the place of birth or personal characteristics of individual leaders," but "by the policies they pursue." And in this context, "the confl ict which arose in the Congress(I) leadership" did not "represent any policy differences." Rather, it was motivated merely by "factionalism and political ambition."

General secretary Surjeet was more forthcoming about what he thought about the established leadership of the Congress(I). This was evident from his reaction to the All-India Congress Committee session, convened specifically to hear Sonia Gandhi's impassi oned exercise in hand-wringing emotion and reaffirm faith in her leadership. Sonia, said Surjeet, had disarmed her critics and given them a "fitting response." In the light of what she had said, there was, he concluded, no further need to consider the po ints that the Congress(I) rebels had raised.

Surjeet followed up quickly on the implications of the new line of political association in order to defeat the BJP and its allies. In Chennai a few days later, after the Tamil Nadu State Committee of the CPI(M) had unanimously endorsed the new line of c onsolidating all the "secular and democratic forces," including the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), to "defeat the BJP-DMK combine," Surjeet conferred with AIADMK general secretary Jayalalitha. He later expressed himself in favour of a n arrangement with the AIADMK on the grounds that every secular force had a role in the struggle against the BJP. The CPI(M) in Tamil Nadu will be one among a constellation of new political forces, some of which were till recently bitter adversaries. The Congress(I), which was marginalised during the 1996 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections and also during the 1998 Lok Sabha elections in the State, will like to bring back G.K. Moopanar's breakaway party, the Tamil Maanila Congress. But the TMC has serious reservations about any alliance that Jayalalitha will be associated with. The CPI(M) and the TMC were, of course, allies in the United Front, but that was in the context of the anchorage that the DMK provided in the State's political landscape. M. Karuna nidhi's DMK, which was first out of the starting blocks to announce its intention to make common cause with the BJP on the reasoning that "corruption" was a bigger issue than "communalism," is now firmly in the BJP camp.

Tamil Nadu is the State where the new alignments will face their thorniest problems of reconciling a multitude of personal animosities and political rivalries. It is also the arena where the CPI(M)'s new outlook on political associations will face a dema nding test.

Within the broader Left alliance, a certain degree of dissent is already apparent over the tactical line that the CPI(M) has been developing. The CPI has its own inclinations on issues such as the stance towards the Pawar group and towards the Congress(I ) in particular States like Andhra Pradesh. The Revolutionary Socialist Party and the Forward Bloc, similarly, have stuck to the policy line articulated in April that they will have nothing to do with the Congress(I), either in an electoral contest or in the future Lok Sabha.

Aside from the fissures within its ranks, a problem for the Left lies in the growing public perception that it is opting for a role supportive of and subordinate to the Congress(I) in national politics. The specific political identity of the Left in trad itional bastions like West Bengal and Kerala has been forged in fighting opposition to the Congress(I). If it is seen as an ally of the Congress(I) in national politics, its autonomous claims to voter loyalty in national elections will be in serious ques tion. As a credible and leading vehicle of Third Front politics in the last two general elections, the Left managed to hold its ground in both West Bengal and Kerala. What will be the impact of the effects of the new line on political association on its electoral performance in these strongholds? It was an awareness of these realities that seemingly impelled E.K. Nayanar, CPI(M) Polit Bureau member and Kerala Chief Minister, to state that his party would not have serious objections to the Pawar group if it were to clearly articulate an economic policy platform distinct from that of the Congress(I). With the party Polit Bureau scheduled to meet in the middle of June, it is evident that the last word has not yet been said about the range and scope of all iances and adjustments that will be forged.

Mamata Banerji's Trinamul Congress seemed for a while to be a prospective partner for the Pawar faction. This would obviously have tied the hands of the Left as far as association with the rebel Congressmen is concerned. But in recent days, the realisati on seems to have dawned on Mamata that it would be imprudent to disrupt the alliance with the BJP for the uncertain and unproven benefits of the Nationalist Congress.

Another likely key player, the Bahujan Samaj Party, is giving few indications of its intentions. It has a widespread network of voter loyalty in both Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, though an established capacity to win seats only in the latter. The Co ngress(I), which has been reduced to a rather parlous state in Uttar Pradesh, is keen to revive the alliance with the BSP, which provided it with a short-lived political stimulus in the 1996 Assembly elections. But the BSP is giving nothing away, at leas t at this stage, and seems more intent on retaining its identity as a player who can exercise immense influence at the margins.

Except for Kerala, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, the Congress(I) is inclined to go it alone in all States. In Kerala of course, it is part of a long-established coalition and in Bihar and Tamil Nadu, alliance with Laloo Prasad and Jayalalitha is v iewed as an imperative of political survival. But if it fails to work out a viable strategy for Uttar Pradesh, its gains in the next general elections could prove inadequate, especially considering the damage more or less guaranteed by Sharad Pawar's gro uping in Maharashtra. It would then have to choose between lofty isolation and political associations premised upon a broad notion of equality. Whether the leadership of the Congress(I) today has the vision to make the appropriate choice still remains un clear.