The Congress’s defeat in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan has put the limelight back on the INDIA alliance. The Opposition alliance, which began with a bang with a few high-profile meetings, ironically remained in a state of hibernation even as the political temperature soared in the run-up to the Assembly polls. The months leading up to the polls and the campaign brought to the fore the differences among the leaders and the weakness in the alliance. A joint Opposition rally, which was planned in Bhopal, did not fructify. Even crucial matters such as seat-sharing or a joint manifesto have shown no signs of progress in the last three months. A hurriedly convened meeting of party leaders on December 6 was downgraded to a meeting of floor leaders after top leaders including West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav said that they would not be able to join.
On a shaky wicket
The campaign made it apparent that the INDIA alliance is on a shaky wicket on the subjects of seat-sharing and an ideological common ground. While Mr. Yadav had an acrimonious exchange of words with Kamal Nath after the SP and the Congress failed to broker a seat-sharing deal in Madhya Pradesh, the Sanatana Dharma episode featuring DMK Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin put the alliance on the back foot. More recently, DMK MP Senthilkumar’s ‘gaumutra’ remark created anxious movements for the alliance. Congress leaders such as MP Karti Chidambaram, who called the statement “unparliamentary”, rushed to diffuse the situation. The two problems are related to an extent. While the Sanatana Dharma and gaumutra episodes are a sign of the alliance’s inability to establish a firm ideological common ground, the bitter war of words over seat-sharing only furthers the criticism of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that the alliance is nothing but an opportunistic formation. With three months of inactivity, and with general elections less than five months away, time is running out for the INDIA alliance to fix these problems at the earliest.
If ideological differences are coming to the fore, it could mean that despite the bonhomie displayed by top leaders of different parties, the alliance could fail on the ground. Voters may be partisan and cadres may be unwilling to ally with ideologically opposed constituents. Examples from across the world show that there are multiple ways in which ideological differences can hurt ideologically diverse alliances. Voters can choose to stay at home to express their displeasure with their preferred party’s decision to ally with a party that has different ideological commitments or they can even switch to the rival party or alliance.
A two-fold strategy
The political parties of INDIA would have to stop viewing the 2024 polls from a prism of their own party’s expansion. If they do view it such a manner, it could complicate the issue of seat-sharing as parties may show little willingness to compromise.
Also read | Payback time for Congress as INDIA allies take it to task for ignoring them
Once some degree of consensus has been reached on the issue of seat-sharing, ensuring that ideological differences do not take centre stage and muting such differences would be central to INDIA’s fortunes. This calls for making and highlighting justifiable ideological compromises between different parties. Such compromises could also facilitate voting for an ideologically distant candidate or alliance partner. Moreover, parties would have to keep ideological commitments that are more contested by other allies in the background. In the case of an alliance partner like the DMK, this implies setting aside more fiercely atheist-rationalist elements of ideology to the background or muting its rhetoric against the disproportionate influence of the north. Instead, the party could choose to focus more on other aspects of the Dravidian brand of politics that could have a wider appeal such as welfarism — for example, the recent expansion of the mid-day meal scheme to include breakfast.
Second, it is important for INDIA that cadres of different parties are not too concerned about their ideological commitments and potential voters are not too sceptical about the parties’ ideological contradictions. To achieve these twin goals, the alliance needs to ensure that its cadres and potential voters are more influenced by anti-incumbent motivations. In simple terms, anti-incumbent motivations are the consequence of the policy failures of the incumbent. From price rise to unemployment, there is palpable discontent on the ground with the BJP. But what the Opposition has failed to do so far is to tap into this anger and consolidate it to mobilise its voters and cadres. To do so, it would not only have to launch a sustained and coordinated campaign highlighting the economic failures of the Modi government but also come up with a convincing and alternative vision for economic revival that appeals to the electorate. The BJP’s electoral success is closely linked to its ability to consistently set the agenda in a proactive and aggressive manner, which has always left the Opposition with no choice but to react. It is important for the Opposition to break this pattern. If the INDIA alliance can seize the narrative and weave a credible campaign around the economy, it can tide over its inadequacies and significantly boost its chances.
Thus, in the end, for the INDIA alliance, the strategy could be a classic case of “It’s the economy, stupid!”
Omkar Poojari is a political researcher and columnist
