Opinion: In 'Dahi' And Nandini, A Taste Of BJP's Catch-22 In Karnataka

As election day inches ever closer in Karnataka, parties have attempted to gain political mileage using every possible opportunity. Over the last month, two issues have caught public attention. The first was the controversy over India's food safety regulator FSSAI's order to label curd as 'dahi'. Second was the hullabaloo over the green signal given to Amul to sell milk online. While both come across as mundane 'non-issues' politicised in the lead-up to an election, a nuanced observation will highlight how both issues underscore a battle between two identities: a pan-India national identity and a regional linguistic identity.

When the FSSAI issued the order to label curd as 'dahi', there was immediate pushback from the southern states. In Karnataka, the issue quickly became a political battle. JD(S) leader HD Kumaraswamy labelled it as an act of 'Hindi imposition'. He also accused the state BJP government of not doing enough to prevent the 'imposition of Hindi'. Following the backlash, the FSSAI promptly withdrew the order.

Within two weeks of this controversy, tensions rose once again after news emerged that Amul would be selling milk in Bengaluru on online platforms. The first response first came from the Karnataka Milk Federation (KMF). The concern among Kannadigas was that Amul's entry would hurt Nandini, the home-grown brand. Political parties soon joined in, with both the Congress and JD(S) accusing the BJP of trying to destroy Nandini. Congress leader DK Shivakumar made a much-publicised visit to a Nandini milk parlour to send a message. Rahul Gandhi, too, bought a packet of Nandini ice cream and called the brand the "pride of Karnataka".

At the core of the Congress's and JD(S)'s response to both these issues was an attempt to bring to the forefront the Kannada linguistic identity. The Nandini-Amul controversy, in particular, has been projected as a battle to preserve Kannadiga pride. For many Kannadigas, the Nandini brand holds emotional value. Opposition parties like the Congress and JD(S) were quick to recognise the potential electoral dividends that could be gained by evoking the pride flowing from this identity.

For its part, the BJP responded to both these issues swiftly. The 'curd versus dahi' controversy settled down quickly after the FSSAI withdrew the earlier notification. Interestingly, BJP's own leader from Tamil Nadu, K Annamalai, voiced his displeasure at the FSSAI's order. The Nandini-Amul controversy gathered more momentum. Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai had to issue reassurances that Amul's entry was not going to harm Nandini in any way. He also had to stress that there were no plans to merge Amul and Nandini. Reports also suggest that the Karnataka government has had back-channel discussions with Amul to postpone their launch in the state.

The emotive political and public response to both these issues has put the BJP on the back foot. It also brings to the fore the potential stresses that could emerge between an overarching pan-Indian identity and regional linguistic identity. This becomes even more important in state assembly elections, where regional issues and concerns are often key. The Congress and JD(S) are well aware of the current BJP establishment's vulnerabilities when it comes to regional identities outside the Hindi heartland.

That is not to imply that the BJP has completely disregarded regional identities. The BJP's ability to adapt to regional socio-cultural realities is one of the key factors behind the party's growth in Karnataka. The party has tapped into the influence of Lingayat seers and the Pejawara Math at various points in time. In Dakshina Kannada, the party has blended regional cultural symbols like the Bootha Aaradhane and Kambala with its pan-Indian nationalism. Similarly, in states like West Bengal, Assam, and Manipur, where regional identities are very strong, the BJP has managed to integrate regional cultural symbols into its pan-India nationalism.

In Karnataka this time around, the regional versus national debate is challenging the BJP due to the dynamics of the campaign. With the Bommai-led government seemingly unpopular, the party needs to shift the focus towards pan-India nationalism and the performance of the central government. 'Centralizing' the campaign and focusing on its national leadership is the BJP's best bet. For the opposition Congress and JD(S), keeping the discourse local and focusing on the performance of the state government offers the best shot at success. This dynamic opens the door to friction between a pan-India identity and a regional linguistic identity.

Just weeks away from the election, the tug-of-war between regional and national identities is likely to gain further momentum. The controversies over the 'dahi' labelling and Amul's proposed ventures into the dairy market in Karnataka are symbolic of the broader battle between the two identities. The pushes and pulls of the Karnataka election campaign make these fault lines more apparent. The BJP's best chance at success lies in its ability to centralize the narrative and focus on its national-level leadership, even as it provides some space to regional sentiments. For the opposition, keeping it local and focusing on the state government's performance is more likely to bring electoral rewards. One will need to wait until the May 13 to see which of the two campaigns proves to be more successful.

(Sanjal Shastri is an independent researcher who has recently submitted his PhD thesis at the University of Auckland. He did his masters in International Relations from the London School of Economics and Political Science.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.