Five years ago, the BJP had pulled off convincing wins in both Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh. And yet, two years later, a jittery UPA returned to power at the Centre in 2009 with increased numbers — better than the numbers it had given itself, in fact.
Now that the same state polls are upon us again, it is useful to remember that their meaning and influence can be overread. Having said that, the battle in the two states may not be typical of the multiplex dramas that India’s political stories have become, in as much as it is mainly bi-polar, but it offers a watchable plot. These elections will test the soundness of the political instincts of the Congress and BJP. They will also show the extent to which a media saturated discourse can influence political choice. The last few months have seen much furore over the coal-block and 2G spectrum allocation, with institutions like the CAG pointing fingers at the government, allegations traded between politicians and liberally aired in the media.
During the monsoon session, the BJP had managed to hold up Parliament by agitating about corruption at the very top — even trying to implicate the prime minister in the irregularities in coal allocations. The BJP might have hoped that the hype around corruption would take down the Congress — as in 1989, for instance, when it was much stronger. Now, with a high-decibel campaign being waged against its own party president, the same hype has come back to haunt the BJP.
These two state elections may help us gauge if Indian voters still separate “local” or state issues and national issues while making electoral choices, and hence vote differently in national and state elections. Perhaps the local and the national have drawn closer now, and it could be that a single mood is reflected in municipal, state and national elections.
With campaigning tools and styles having changed in recent years and more information available to the voter, elections have certainly become different. But how different? Several commentators who claim to know the national mood now say elections will turn on the issue of corruption, but what will votes for the non-corrupt look like? It is perfectly logical for corruption to be an issue, but with several kinds of allegations flying about, it might confuse voters’ choices.
The results of these two polls may also provide pointers to the Congress and the BJP on how they should project themselves in future. Should the BJP stick to the anti-corruption platform while trying to bring down the Congress? Many non-Congress parties have done so when other social factors don’t work for them. Or will the noise about all elected representatives being corrupt actually diffuse the issue and make it irrelevant to electoral choice?
Pressure groups that focus on issues they consider important are expected to intervene, whether these issues are corruption, minimum wages, jobs or the right to food or health. But it remains to be seen if political parties develop the wherewithal and poise to respond sensibly to such groups. In recent times, they have keeled over or launched irrational counter-attacks. To deal convincingly with allegations hurled by outsiders at the political system, instead of responding with equal aggression, will remain a challenge for the government. Nehru had to face it, despite his overwhelming mandate. Large mandates have only made pressure groups more vocal. Argumentative Indians tend to be most argumentative when the system is dominated by one political grouping.
The Gujarat election, where 226 seats will be contested, involves one of the most polarising figures in Indian politics — Narendra Modi. For all the attempts at an image makeover, he has been unable to shake off the shadow of 2002. If he is re-elected this time, it will have larger implications for both the BJP and the Congress. For the BJP, ignoring his claim as the party’s prime-ministerial candidate may become very difficult. Meanwhile, the Congress, which uses Modi to gather his detractors around itself, will suffer a loss of face if it proves unable to stand up to him in Gujarat. For his part, Modi seems to have concluded that to focus his attack on the national leadership of the Congress will give him two big advantages. For one, it will deflect attention from local issues. It will also help him grandstand within his party, play up the idea that the Congress is fatigued and that he is its top leadership’s most bitter foe. Meanwhile, the Congress keeps the discussion focused on local gaps and failures. So far, it has managed to avoid using the “maut ka saudagar” rhetoric, perhaps because it offers few electoral gains.
Himachal Pradesh may be a small state with only 68 seats but the debate there has come to represent larger issues — the use of land, forests, infrastructure, employment. The most prominent figure here is the Congress’s Virbhadra Singh, former chief minister of the state who recently stepped down from the Union cabinet after charges of corruption. He has fought through the party ranks to emerge as the face of the Congress in Himachal. The BJP in the state seems to be struggling with factionalism; there is bitter rivalry between former CM Shanta Kumar and the incumbent, Prem Kumar Dhumal.
An unfazed Nitin Gadkari continues to campaign in Himachal Pradesh, that too on the corruption issue. But L.K. Advani avoided the mention of corruption, choosing to speak mystifyingly of “electoral reforms” instead. Virbhadra Singh, anxious to shake off the allegations in Delhi, continues on his election tour, speaking to packed houses. This election could reveal how the fifty shades of corruption play out politically.
In fact, both the state elections promise plenty to chew on, throwing light on how local and national issues play off against each other in an age of allegations and counter-allegations and on how the corruption issue will influence votes. Next year at the same time, the Congress and the BJP will face off again, defending two states each in the elections for Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Delhi. The score, right now, is 2-2.
