Maharashtra politics took a dramatic turn on Tuesday (November 12) with Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari imposing President’s rule. After BJP and Shiv Sena failed to deliver on a power sharing arrangement, the latter was given a bare 24-hour to put together a viable alliance with the Congress and NCP. While the talks between three parties did take place, the Sena requested more time from the governor which was denied. Next, it was turn of NCP to request for time. But governor Koshyari appears to have convinced himself that government formation isn’t possible in the current scenario.

If a stable coalition between Shiv Sena, NCP and Congress is to form, this will require some time to hammer together a power sharing formula and a CMP. Governor’s giving minimum time to both Sena and NCP to cobble together such a coalition – before precipitately declaring President Rule—will be seen as an attempt to preclude precisely that. Not surprisingly, Sena has approached the Supreme court against governor’s move.

More broadly speaking, the standard criticism of such a diverse coalition as the Sena is seeking to form now, is that it is a ‘khichdi”; one that is bound to be inherently unstable. However, it is by no means clear that an absolute majority for a single party—or a coalition where one party is clearly dominant – always delivers superior results. In India this often creates a top-down centralized style of governance—one that BJP in its current avatar, also seems to favour.

In a vast, complex and diverse polity such as India, power sharing arrangements may work out better, as long as they can work out a suitable coalition dharma that ensures stability. Which is why if Sena, NCP and Congress do indeed eventually form the government in Maharashtra, they will do well to thrash out all important issues beforehand.

While recommending President’s rule, Governor Koshyari noted that a situation has arisen when the formation of a stable government is not possible even 15 days after election results had been declared.

It is unusual for a pre-poll alliance that won an assembly election to fail in forming the government. That Maharashtra has been placed under President’s rule, despite the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance winning a clear majority in the last assembly elections, is an exceptional development. The BJP and Sena have been partners for almost three decades, sharing power in local bodies, the state government and the Centre. This relationship was firmed up by adherence to the ideology of political Hindutva. Now, the two parties have had a seemingly bitter parting, jeopardizing the prospects of BJP—Sena government, with Sena also quitting the NDA.

For BJP, the Maharashtra mess is a moment of reckoning. Among other things, it reveals the predicament of the new BJP, which has been expanding at a furious pace, and has been on winning spree. For many years, the BJP, despite its ideological character and in contrast to the Congress, was viewed as a party that has flexibility and skills to stitch coalitions in most adverse circumstances. Since 1996, when Atal Behari Vajpayee, after failing to win support for his 13-day government at the Centre, complained of parties practicing “political untouchability”, the BJP was seen to have mastered the art of winning allies and running governments.

Coalition dharma was a much evoked principle in the NDA of Vajpayee and L K Advani. However, there is reason to suspect that the party, after its several electoral victories under Narendra Modi and Amit Shah, seems to be loosing the ability or willingness to engage with the partners and allies. Now the BJP’s approach seems to be more intransigent, to emphasize its numbers and insist that the regional party lower the expectation.

It is curious that the BJP’s national leadership refused to intervene in public spat involving Maharashtra leaders and Sena over the chief minister’s office and ministerial berths. Does it view the Sena’s departure as an opportunity to mobilize the entire Hindu votes in Maharashtra? Or is it an instance of the leadership failing to judge the Sena’s intent? Either way, the Maharashtra break up reflects poorly on the BJP’s management of allies even as anti-BJPism may again become the glue that can bring together disparate Opposition parties. (IPA Service)