Politicians using barbs and harsh language have not been unknown to the people. They always maintained the façade of sobriety and used the veneer of civilization as cover. On October 3, addressing a public rally in Banka, while the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, used the jibe of being untrustworthy and arrogant against Nitish Kumar, he literally resorted to arm-twisting tactics for forcing the electorates to vote for his party BJP in the ensuing election. Modi was candid in his assertion that his NDA government would not release the Rs 1.25 lakh crore special assistance, he had promised, unless the Nitish Kumar-led dispensation is replaced.

He even observed: 'Some people are raising questions on my announcement of a special package. They are asking whether it will come or not. Should a single rupee be given to the present government? Will it reach you? Even if I give it, his arrogance is so much he may even return it... he will announce he does not require it, as it has been given by Modi... in the same manner in which Gujarat's contribution of Rs 5 crore for the Kosi flood victims was returned. I cannot trust him.'

There are many facets and dynamics of his remarks; First, since the money, the Rs 1.25 crore special package belonged to Bihar the Centre is under constitutional obligation to hand over it to the state; second, there is a wider difference between the Rs 5 crore he had given for the Kosi victim and the special package, that money had come from Gujarat, not from the Union government and third, the most important is, he pointedly told the people of Bihar to vote for the B JP or Bihar would lurch. The state would not get special package if the Biharis do not vote for the BJP.

Little doubt this nature of electioneering does not conform to the stature of the person holding the highest office in the country. Modi has been found on occasions to use jibes against Nitish. The importance of the election has been an open secret. But the nature of the repulsive language which Modi was using points to some hidden agenda he and the Sangh Parivar were nursing.

Strange enough some pollsters and media experts have been projecting the BJP as the clear winner. They must be politically correct in their own assumptions. But what has really surprised is their equating Modi with Dr Manmohan Singh. They argue that Bihar is witnessing fight between development and Mandal politics (backward caste politics) While Modi has embraced the development philosophy of Dr Singh, the RJD chief Lalu Yadav and Nitish have been banking on reservation and caste votes. They have completely dismissed the development achievements of Nitish. In fact this reflects the tactical shift in electioneering by the BJP chief Amit Shah.

For a week Shah has been focusing his attack on Lalu. He has preferred to ignore Nitish. He is aware of the averseness Biharis nurse towards Lalu for not undertaking development of the state during his rule. By focusing on Lalu, he was trying to make the task easier for Modi. In that case it would be a direct fight between Modi and Lalu; governance and jungle raj. But this does not appear to be working. Nitish at his rallies has been focusing on development and growth.

Though Modi’s well wishers claim that Modi is on a strong pitch, the BJP offering freebies just a week ahead of the election raises serious doubt. If the people have rallied behind the BJP then where was the need for Modi and Amit Shah or Sushil Modi to offer laptop or scooties and also petrol for a whole year for these scooties. It implied that the BJP is trying to lure voters even at this stage. The personal appeal of Modi is not working. While Modi has been tactically refraining from taking Nitish head on issue of development, he has launched an insinuation campaign against him. They accuse Lalu of indulging and resurrecting Mandal politics, but they prefer not to attack Nitish on this count.

Think-tank of Modi nurses the view that attacking Lalu is the best tactics to alienate Nitish from the masses. It would question his credibility and his claim of turning Bihar into a developed state. The BJP leadership is now desperately trying to identify with the aspirations and mission of JP. This is a strategic move to rope in the leaders of the JP movement who are opposed to Nitish. The importance of the Bihar election could be gauged from the simple fact that Modi and his think tank have virtually used all resources and ammunitions at their command to ensure the defeat of Nitish. He is also invoking Mahatma Gandhi to win the election. At Banka Modi said: 'On Mahatma Gandhi's anniversary, I have come to you to secure your assurance for the NDA nominees' victory. India cannot prosper until and unless Bihar prospers and an NDA government alone can ensure this.' Undoubtedly this is the biggest electoral test of Modi’s political life.

Scholars from a top American think-tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have correctly underlined; 'No matter what the voters of Bihar decide, the ramifications will be felt far beyond the state's borders'. On a day’s visit to Bihar, the Congress president, Sonia Gandhi also shared the same view: “Bihar is at a crucial crossroad. From here the future of both Bihar and the country will be determined. You have to decide whether from here on the country will move towards divisiveness or harmony.”

Realising the importance and sensitivity of the election, at least 12 Union ministers have been deputed in Bihar by Amit Shah. He has deployed entire manpower to micro-manage the most important political test for Modi. Shah has divided Bihar into 12 ‘zones’ and has appointed one Union Minister as “rajnitikprahari” or political supervisor to each of these divisions. If Modi succeeds in his mission to prove that Nitish is “bogus”, “arrogant” and “untrustworthy” then he may hope for a win. This is in fact a paradigm shift from his earlier stance. He is accusing Nitish of incapable and inefficient to deliver. This is manifest in is remark: “He (Nitish) is 'too arrogant' to be trusted with governance. Even if I give it, his arrogance is so much that he may even return it. I cannot trust him'. Though he cautioned the people of state of all kinds of 'isms' like fuedalism, capitalism, separatism and dynastyism, he ought to have realized that he himself was riding on the back of these “isms”. (IPA Service)