Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent comments on the opposition parties’ “formula” for forming the government may certainly be seen as a momentous surprise on several fronts. While addressing an election rally in Karnataka, he posed the question: “…If the country has to be handed over to someone, should we think before handing it over or not?” Are you going to give it to anyone?” According to Modi, the opposition’s “formula” will include a different prime minister to head the government every year. As he put it: “If they are given the opportunity for five years (to rule), they have told their alliance partners that each one of them will get One year as prime minister, which means one year, in the evening, and the next year a second, then a third, a fourth, and a fifth…”
Simply put, it appears that Modi is no longer confident of returning to power by winning more than 400 seats. Moreover, his comments certainly indicate that he is starting to worry that the next government will not be led by his party. The question he asked is also a sign of his uncertainty about voters’ support for him and the BJP. The image he presented to voters of what the next government might look like if it headed the India bloc may be seen as a symbolic indicator of these concerns. This is just one aspect of the electoral drama that politicians stage in the electoral race.
This also means that the political hype made earlier over Modi’s wave report of election results has lost its appeal. In addition, what perhaps needs more attention is that the prospects for determining electoral results through the so-called Hindutva wave and sectarian cards appear rather weak. Sectarian extremism certainly cannot be ignored, but there are many other factors that seem to have greatly reduced its appeal.
Modi had no national profile before winning the 2014 elections. His reach was limited to Gujarat. His entry into power at the national level after two terms of Congress-led government was not defined by his national image or achievements. But the anti-government card he played, focusing on its “negative” image, had the desired effect, but not on the entire electorate, as his party failed to win even 40 percent of the votes in the 2014 as well as 2019 elections. Modi appears to be relying on these strategies. So far, one is using the “religious” card and the other is vocal about the “negative” image of his rivals. However, these do not seem to have the desired impact on ordinary voters, including the majority community. They are more concerned about the negative economic impact that some of the policies adopted over these few years appear to have had on them. Even illiterate, working-class voters seem to have become very self-conscious about playing Modi’s religious Ayodhya card. They view these matters as nothing more than electoral strategies.
It is not surprising that these days seem devoid of the kind of “success” that Modi achieved, before the 2014 and 2019 elections, in projecting a very positive image of himself. Rather, its excessive reliance on the media gives the impression that a balloon is floating without a strong base, and may soon explode. In addition, although Hindus constitute the majority community, the appeal of the Hindutva card is not prevalent throughout the country. Its influence is limited due to different caste, religious and ethnic factors even within the Indian belt.
However, it is certain that Modi and his camp have exaggerated his “great” image across the country. But was the matter really accepted at all levels with the enthusiasm he and his supporters wanted? Not real. Perhaps the distinct awareness of their identities, especially regional and cultural, was a reason for protecting voters outside the Indian belt from being swept away by the so-called hype around the Modi wave. The message is simple. They are wary of their distinct regional and cultural identity being swept into oblivion, almost lost by the importance given to that promoted by the Saffron Brigade. Distinct regional leaders/parties also seem to have become very concerned about being trapped by the BJP to the point of losing their own base in their areas. Over the past decade, the BJP has practiced this quite often – first luring regional parties/leaders to align with it and then stabbing them in the back to reduce their strength, divide them and so on. Not surprisingly, leaders like Mehbooba Mufti and Uddhav Thackeray are completely against any alliance with the BJP and seem strongly committed to the All India bloc. Think about it, West Bengal Chief Minister and Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Mamata Banerjee and Odisha Chief Minister and Biju Janata Dal (BJD) leader Naveen Patnaik may be credited with strengthening their regional identities in their states. The same can be said about the southern states, which have no intention of losing the same by going along with the claims of Hindutva leaders. The Congress might not have succeeded in the Karnataka Assembly elections, if a leader from the state had not been chosen as party president. From another angle, Bihar Chief Minister, Janata Dal-United (JD-U) leader Nitish Kumar, appears to have eroded his political power considerably by bowing (or bowing) a little to the BJP chief. The opposite can be said about the leaders of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) in Bihar. They seem to be more popular.
The anti-BJP stance of some regional parties appears to be supported more strongly (or perhaps equally) not only by their anti-social stance but also by their concern about not losing their regional parties and/or their leader base in their own regions/states. Their political power depends on this. To some extent, this idea has always guided regional parties, but they appear to have become more assertive on this front in this election. The cards that the BJP is playing before the elections, such as the Ayodhya elections, jailing of leaders, including Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal, speeches marked by anti-Congress comments and so on, are somehow being dismissed out of hand. It is natural that the negative terms used by those in power against those in opposition are responded to by ordinary voters by asking what the leaders who head the central government have provided? The nature of the BJP’s “victory” is unlikely to be determined by the Modi wave and/or its communal credentials, but by the unity shown by the Indian bloc and whether or not the voters it favors as well as anti-BJP regional leaders remain united. But regardless of the results, the electoral hype around the Modi wave or Hindutva ticket leading to the BJP’s victory may be seen as empty rhetoric!
Niloufar Suhrawardy A senior journalist and writer specializing in communications studies and nuclear diplomacy. I have come out with many books. These include: – Modi’s victory, a lesson for the Congress…? (2019); The Arab Spring is not just a mirage! (2019), Image and Content, Modi’s First Year in Office (2015), and Ayodhya Without the Communal Stamp, in the Name of Indian Secularism (2006).