Consecutive losses in two General Elections, one which it was expected to win and another which it was expected to put up a decent fight, has raised existential questions for the Bharatiya Janata Party. While a lot of commentators, particularly those who have wished BJP an ignominious death ever since its inception, have been stressing the need for the party to de-Hinduise itself, more notably, this tune has been adopted by a few of those who were supposed to be close to the BJP in the past.
While the glee of quite a large section of the intelligentsia is understandable, what even the BJP’s well wishers are missing is that BJP had not won the election even in 1999, when the NDA had won a comfortable majority and Vajpayee had ruled the country for the next five years.
The first part of the sentence may sound incongruent with the second part but when the results are analyzed in detail, with the benefit of copious amount of hindsight, it becomes aptly clear that the BJP had indeed not won the elections that year too.
Let us look at a few of the ostensible reasons as to why the Congress has returned to power with a much larger number of seats in Elections 2009.
• Voters were fed up with the games of Congress’s allies and wanted to award a smooth term to the former
• Manmohan was seen as a decent and honest man and BJP’s personal attacks on him turned people off
• People approved of Congress’s handling of the aftermath of Mumbai attacks
• People were angry with the opposition and the allies for their stonewalling of the nuclear deal
These are only a few of the many reasons attributed to the Congress victory. However, if these reasons are indeed correct, howsoever in part, they only serve to highlight the fact of the BJP’s decline right from 1999.
BJP’s story, beginning with the elections of 1989, is of constant growth, both in terms of vote share and number of seats. So, from 7.8% of vote share and 2 seats in 1984, it grew to 11.36% of vote share and 85 seats in 1989, 20.11% vote share and 120 seats in 1991, 20.21% vote share and 161 seats in 1996 and 25.59% vote share and 182 seats in 1998.
Post this growth phase, BJP garnered a vote share of 23.75% and 182 seats in 1999, 22.16% and 138 seats in 2004 and 18.8% vote share and 116 seats in 2009.
What is clear from these raw statistics is that the BJP upswing was halted in 1999. Some may contend that the lower vote share was on account of BJP’s seat adjustment with allies. But, the BJP had already fought the 1998 elections in alliance with the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, ADMK, PMK & MDMK in Tamil Nadu, Trinamul Congress in West Bengal, TDP (NTR) in Andhra Pradesh, Samata Party in Bihar, Lok Shakti in Karnataka, Akali Dal in Punjab, Haryana Vikas Party in Haryana and Biju Janata Dal in Orissa. Compared to 1998, the only major changes in 1999 were in Andhra Pradesh where the BJP contested far lesser number of seats when it dumped Lakshmi Parvati to ally with Chandrababu Naidu and its alliance with the combined JD (U) and LJP in Bihar. While BJP contested 49 seats lesser in 1999 when compared to 1998, it had, in fact contested 83 seats lesser in 1998, when compared to 1996. Not contesting in seats equaling 1/7th of the parliament strength did not hamper the rise in popular support for the BJP. On the contrary, the vote share registered a rise of 5.38% in 1998 while the aggregate loss in 1999 was to the tune of 1.76%. So certainly, fall in vote share of the BJP in 1999 was not on account of contesting on lesser number of seats alone.
Now, let us get back to the thirteen month reign of the first full fledged BJP Government in the country. It was characterized by ally troubles, shooting prices and the Nuclear explosion. BJP had lost elections in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and was widely seen as being on its way out of power. In a nutshell, situation somewhat similar to what Congress faced before these elections, i.e., string of defeats in Assembly polls, high inflation, major foreign policy decision and limited ally trouble. In addition, Congress was handicapped by rising terrorism, a decelerating economy and presence of criminal elements in the Government. Of course, as far as the ally trouble is concerned, the Left cannot hold a candle to either Mamata or Jayalalitha, but still, constraints were certainly there.
Vajpayee was widely seen as a decent and honest man, hamstrung by allies. Almost every other day, there was news that the coalition Government is in trouble and some trouble shooter is rushing to placate some ally. Further, Vajpayee was called a liar and a traitor by the Congress during the polls. His Government took a major foreign policy and defense related decision in exploding the nuclear device, a move opposed in the Lok Sabha by our very own current Prime Minister. There was general appreciation for the way the NDA Government handled the aftermath of the sanctions against India. On the positive side, there were no criminals in the Government nor was the Government tainted with any scam.
It is nobody’s case that Manmohan Singh has ever enjoyed anywhere near the recall and adulation enjoyed by Vajpayee in his heydays. There must have been a feeling of revulsion in large sections of the society when he was dubbed a traitor for his role in the Quit India movement and a liar by the Congress. People must have sympathized when his Government was held hostage by one man parties. People must have cringed when the left, centre and sundry cried foul over the nuclear test with their leader in the Rajya Sabha bemoaning that the sanctions would lead nothing to defend.
BJP’s loss by one vote in the trust vote followed by Sonia’s ‘I have 272 and more’ followed by the then President K R Narayanan’s activist interest in getting a Congress Government installed is now a part of the folklore. What changed the game for the BJP was the Kargil incursion which led to an upsurge of patriotic feelings in the country. That the Indian troops managed to recapture most of the occupied peaks from the infiltrators gave many a feeling of victory and this, combined with alliances sewed by the NDA, managed to keep the BJP’s seat numbers static. Even here, the Congress went to the campaign highlighting the failures of the BJP Government in pre-empting that infiltration, something which any responsible Indian needs to do.
Overall, in a situation which was in many ways similar to the Congress’s situation before these elections, the BJP was on a backfoot and lost much of its support base. Not only was its forward march halted, it stated withdrawing from its catchment areas, most notably Uttar Pradesh where it suffered a loss of more than 25 seats. It is anybody’s guess as to what would have happened had Kargil not happened? Kargil managed to paper over the failures of the BJP Government and bought back some memories of 1998, when people were voting for a change. Even then, the Congress gained around 2.5% in vote share, while suffering significant losses in terms of seats.
Conventional wisdom and history states that power begets power and political parties use their stint in power to expand their spheres of influence and enter into areas where they were hitherto unknown. Contrary to this, the BJP ceded ground everywhere. Except for Karnataka, there is no region of the country where the BJP has been able to expand or consolidate its presence in the last ten years.
BJP and its supporters would only befool themselves if they try to analyze their causes of defeat only through the prisms of 2004 and 2009. They must pause to ask as to what went wrong in 1999? What happened that the party of hope and change was no longer a preferred alternative for a people longing for something different? What made the party lose its momentum so soon? What made it stop its entry into newer areas and withdraw from its new conquests? Unless the BJP finds answers to these questions, there would be little hope for the party to regain its following among Indians.
My take:
Results of 2004 and 2009 are only a continuation of the BJP’s decline. Except for the nuclear blasts, which were in line with the BJP’s persona, BJP did nothing in those years which would have portrayed it as a party with a difference. People don’t opt for clones over originals, particularly when the original itself is not something great by itself.
While the glee of quite a large section of the intelligentsia is understandable, what even the BJP’s well wishers are missing is that BJP had not won the election even in 1999, when the NDA had won a comfortable majority and Vajpayee had ruled the country for the next five years.
The first part of the sentence may sound incongruent with the second part but when the results are analyzed in detail, with the benefit of copious amount of hindsight, it becomes aptly clear that the BJP had indeed not won the elections that year too.
Let us look at a few of the ostensible reasons as to why the Congress has returned to power with a much larger number of seats in Elections 2009.
• Voters were fed up with the games of Congress’s allies and wanted to award a smooth term to the former
• Manmohan was seen as a decent and honest man and BJP’s personal attacks on him turned people off
• People approved of Congress’s handling of the aftermath of Mumbai attacks
• People were angry with the opposition and the allies for their stonewalling of the nuclear deal
These are only a few of the many reasons attributed to the Congress victory. However, if these reasons are indeed correct, howsoever in part, they only serve to highlight the fact of the BJP’s decline right from 1999.
BJP’s story, beginning with the elections of 1989, is of constant growth, both in terms of vote share and number of seats. So, from 7.8% of vote share and 2 seats in 1984, it grew to 11.36% of vote share and 85 seats in 1989, 20.11% vote share and 120 seats in 1991, 20.21% vote share and 161 seats in 1996 and 25.59% vote share and 182 seats in 1998.
Post this growth phase, BJP garnered a vote share of 23.75% and 182 seats in 1999, 22.16% and 138 seats in 2004 and 18.8% vote share and 116 seats in 2009.
What is clear from these raw statistics is that the BJP upswing was halted in 1999. Some may contend that the lower vote share was on account of BJP’s seat adjustment with allies. But, the BJP had already fought the 1998 elections in alliance with the Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, ADMK, PMK & MDMK in Tamil Nadu, Trinamul Congress in West Bengal, TDP (NTR) in Andhra Pradesh, Samata Party in Bihar, Lok Shakti in Karnataka, Akali Dal in Punjab, Haryana Vikas Party in Haryana and Biju Janata Dal in Orissa. Compared to 1998, the only major changes in 1999 were in Andhra Pradesh where the BJP contested far lesser number of seats when it dumped Lakshmi Parvati to ally with Chandrababu Naidu and its alliance with the combined JD (U) and LJP in Bihar. While BJP contested 49 seats lesser in 1999 when compared to 1998, it had, in fact contested 83 seats lesser in 1998, when compared to 1996. Not contesting in seats equaling 1/7th of the parliament strength did not hamper the rise in popular support for the BJP. On the contrary, the vote share registered a rise of 5.38% in 1998 while the aggregate loss in 1999 was to the tune of 1.76%. So certainly, fall in vote share of the BJP in 1999 was not on account of contesting on lesser number of seats alone.
Now, let us get back to the thirteen month reign of the first full fledged BJP Government in the country. It was characterized by ally troubles, shooting prices and the Nuclear explosion. BJP had lost elections in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and was widely seen as being on its way out of power. In a nutshell, situation somewhat similar to what Congress faced before these elections, i.e., string of defeats in Assembly polls, high inflation, major foreign policy decision and limited ally trouble. In addition, Congress was handicapped by rising terrorism, a decelerating economy and presence of criminal elements in the Government. Of course, as far as the ally trouble is concerned, the Left cannot hold a candle to either Mamata or Jayalalitha, but still, constraints were certainly there.
Vajpayee was widely seen as a decent and honest man, hamstrung by allies. Almost every other day, there was news that the coalition Government is in trouble and some trouble shooter is rushing to placate some ally. Further, Vajpayee was called a liar and a traitor by the Congress during the polls. His Government took a major foreign policy and defense related decision in exploding the nuclear device, a move opposed in the Lok Sabha by our very own current Prime Minister. There was general appreciation for the way the NDA Government handled the aftermath of the sanctions against India. On the positive side, there were no criminals in the Government nor was the Government tainted with any scam.
It is nobody’s case that Manmohan Singh has ever enjoyed anywhere near the recall and adulation enjoyed by Vajpayee in his heydays. There must have been a feeling of revulsion in large sections of the society when he was dubbed a traitor for his role in the Quit India movement and a liar by the Congress. People must have sympathized when his Government was held hostage by one man parties. People must have cringed when the left, centre and sundry cried foul over the nuclear test with their leader in the Rajya Sabha bemoaning that the sanctions would lead nothing to defend.
BJP’s loss by one vote in the trust vote followed by Sonia’s ‘I have 272 and more’ followed by the then President K R Narayanan’s activist interest in getting a Congress Government installed is now a part of the folklore. What changed the game for the BJP was the Kargil incursion which led to an upsurge of patriotic feelings in the country. That the Indian troops managed to recapture most of the occupied peaks from the infiltrators gave many a feeling of victory and this, combined with alliances sewed by the NDA, managed to keep the BJP’s seat numbers static. Even here, the Congress went to the campaign highlighting the failures of the BJP Government in pre-empting that infiltration, something which any responsible Indian needs to do.
Overall, in a situation which was in many ways similar to the Congress’s situation before these elections, the BJP was on a backfoot and lost much of its support base. Not only was its forward march halted, it stated withdrawing from its catchment areas, most notably Uttar Pradesh where it suffered a loss of more than 25 seats. It is anybody’s guess as to what would have happened had Kargil not happened? Kargil managed to paper over the failures of the BJP Government and bought back some memories of 1998, when people were voting for a change. Even then, the Congress gained around 2.5% in vote share, while suffering significant losses in terms of seats.
Conventional wisdom and history states that power begets power and political parties use their stint in power to expand their spheres of influence and enter into areas where they were hitherto unknown. Contrary to this, the BJP ceded ground everywhere. Except for Karnataka, there is no region of the country where the BJP has been able to expand or consolidate its presence in the last ten years.
BJP and its supporters would only befool themselves if they try to analyze their causes of defeat only through the prisms of 2004 and 2009. They must pause to ask as to what went wrong in 1999? What happened that the party of hope and change was no longer a preferred alternative for a people longing for something different? What made the party lose its momentum so soon? What made it stop its entry into newer areas and withdraw from its new conquests? Unless the BJP finds answers to these questions, there would be little hope for the party to regain its following among Indians.
My take:
Results of 2004 and 2009 are only a continuation of the BJP’s decline. Except for the nuclear blasts, which were in line with the BJP’s persona, BJP did nothing in those years which would have portrayed it as a party with a difference. People don’t opt for clones over originals, particularly when the original itself is not something great by itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment