The fragility of Jharkhand is really worrying. The present crisis began five months ago when the BJP decided to support the JMM chief Shibu Soren to become the chief minister while the Congress refused to back him. For the past few weeks, there is a chief minister who is not a member of legislature and an administration, which is not functioning. No one knows how long the crisis will continue but as of now President's rule could be the only answer.

Since the creation of the state in 2000, Jharkhand has seen seven chief ministers and as many governors. Although the political class promised the moon before the creation of Jharkhand, the mineral rich state continues to be crying for development. Ironically, today it is a classic example of not only bad governance and rampant corruption but also political instability. The political parties have not only missed a chance to develop the state but also allowed the big business and politicians to loot. The successive governments failed to provide even the basic amenities to the tribal dominated state. Ad hoc decisions are made to meet the political exigencies and schemes are not implemented. With a fractured mandate, Jharkhand became a bizarre example of how an independent like Madhu Khoda, who is accused of big time corruption, could become the chief minister. With political instability comes the attendant features like lack of development and increased corruption and also horse-trading.

The present crisis got accelerated when the chief minister voted in favour of the UPA government on the cut motion brought by the BJP on April 27. Naturally this infuriated the BJP and top leaders like L.K. Advani, Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley were for immediate withdrawal of support to Soren. But the BJP decided to play an opportunistic politics eyeing the Jharkhand gaddi. A coalition government led by the BJP was on the cards after four weeks of negotiating with the son of Shibu Soren. The BJP was to hold the Chief Minister's post for the first 28 months and the JMM would rule for the next 28 months. Almost everything appeared to be in place. But Soren, instead of reaching the Raj Bhavan with his resignation letter dashed the BJP's hopes by not resigning. Incidentally Soren, who was sworn in as chief minister in December 2009, is yet to resign his Lok Sabha seat and get elected from the state legislature.

In retaliation the BJP has now pulled out its support to the Soren Government plunging the state into deeper crisis. The Congress is playing a “wait and watch” game. The governor has given Soren a week to prove his majority. But the arithmetic is not in his favour. The BJP has 18 MLAs in the 82-member legislative assembly. Its partner in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), the JD (U) also withdrew the support of its two MLAs to the government. The Soren government now has 25 MLAs, including 18 of the JMM, five of the AJSU and two others. The JMM chief is now looking to the Congress, which has 14 members, to bail him out. The Congress ally Jharkhand Vikas Manch led by former chief minister Babulal Marandi has 11 members. Marandi is not willing to support JMM. No alternative can emerge unless three major players combine to form a stable government.

Will Jharkhand come out of its political crisis? What are the options available now? The first is that Shibu Soren manages to get the magic number by persuading the Congress, independents and others, which does not appear to be easy. The local Congress is not for supporting JMM.

The second is the Congress supports Marandi to become the CM or Marandi supports the Congress. Marandi is willing to support the Congress from outside and not merge with the Congress. The Congress insiders claim that the party wants Marandi to merge his party with the Congress and the tribal leader is not willing.

The third option is the imposition of President's rule by keeping the Assembly under animated suspension as the elections were held just five months ago. This may result in regrouping but whichever government comes will be a hotch-potch government, as the coalition will have its inherent contradictions.

The Jharkhand example shows the fragility of a smaller state. There cannot be a case that all small states are not doing well as some like Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand are not so volatile. That is perhaps because of a two party system, which has emerged in these states. The problem arises where there are regional parties as in the North East and Jharkhand. A handful of legislators can topple the governments in these states. States like Jharkhand develop parochial outlook and lack broader vision.

It is often said that small is beautiful but is a small state stable? The track record of many of the smaller states in the country, particularly in the North East and states like Jharkhand and Goa show that the political stability is the first causality in a crisis. The national parties should take a relook at their role in these small states. Knowing that they were becoming irrelevant, they do not mind going in for a coalition with the regional players. This by itself is not bad but if states like Jharkhand should have a stable government, the regional parties should take responsibility for value based politics and not look to opportunistic alliances. (IPA Service)