Brinda Karat, within 24 hours of the much talked about Bengaluru meeting of 26 opposition parties, strongly criticised Mamata Banerjee as anti-democratic. Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar openly expressed his reluctance to be the Convenor of the yet-to-be-born coalition. Also, he appears discomfited by the way things are being handled by the Congress.
The Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance or INDIA, a nice acronym selected by the opposition's dream coalition, can't hide the deep-seated acrimony within, and the contradictions in this grouping. What clearly emerges is that the constituents' daydreams of a repeat of 2004 have no ground support.
At least five key factors clearly underscore the fact that the distance between 2004 and 2024 is not just 20 years. It is so much more.
Firstly, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government was a coalition of 22 parties, whereas the BJP under Narendra Modi, although an NDA government, has a clear majority in Lok Sabha. In Rajya Sabha too, it is comfortably placed. Naturally, when Mamata Banerjee, Chandrababu Naidu and others refused to do business with the BJP prior to 2004, there was the lurking danger of electoral roadblocks. In contrast, political parties that had deserted the NDA of their own volition between 2018 and 2023, are limping back to the NDA. This includes the officially recognised Shiv Sena of Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.
Secondly, compared to 2004, the internal contradictions within the opposition coalition that is yet to take shape are potential obstacles to their coming together. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) versus Congress (Punjab), Trinamool versus Left ( West Bengal), and Left versus Congress (Kerala) are some of the glaring fault lines. Many key questions like whether the Shiv Sena would support quota for Muslims, as fondly envisioned by the Congress, also remain unanswered. Ironing out these contradictions is supremely important as, unlike 2004, people have seen the emergence of the BJP's clear governance vision in the last nine years. Comparable data is available in the public domain. With its record of failures in dealing with poverty and the lack of development in recent years, the Congress's attempt to build a narrative around guarantees fails to cut much ice with voters.
Thirdly, as pointed out in many edits, this INDIA coalition cannot be woven around just an anti-PM Modi theme. Even in 2004, the verdict was not against PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Also, compared to Atal ji, PM Modi has successfully governed for a longer period of time, enabling him to make a mark in practically every sphere of public life. Vajpayee's narrative of Good Governance has been taken to a different level by PM Modi. Through his hugely influential presence on social media, innovative ways of communicating with the people and push for technology, PM Modi has earned a place in the ethos of the aspirational Gen-Next Indians, and that is something unique about him. Even Rajiv Gandhi, though much younger than Modi during his Prime Ministership, could not manage that connection with the younger generation.
Fourthly, and perhaps more importantly, the new alliance's claim of being Developmental and Inclusive, as the title suggests, is far from facts. The imagination of those who led India's Grand Old Party, the Congress - the only party that has ruled this country for over six decades - did not and could not go beyond 'most backward districts', the nomenclature that Modi changed to aspirational districts. It was Vajpayee, not the Congress, who created the Department of the North East region, a testimony to the BJP's developmental-inclusive approach. Again, it was Vajpayee who carved out a separate Ministry for Tribal Welfare and changed the condescending term Social Welfare into a more egalitarian Social Justice. Yet those who made a Brouhaha in Bengaluru have the gumption of claiming to be Developmental and Inclusive. The Congress must answer - if they are serious about the claim, why did they deny quota to the underprivileged communities in Jammu and Kashmir, hiding behind the provisions of Article 370? Why were economically backward sections denied quota prior to the Modi regime? Why didn't they think of promoting education in the mother tongue to boost regional languages in India? Why was the need for building a network of rail, road and air travel to facilitate access to every corner of our country ignored all along?
Finally, those who gathered at Bengaluru must know that as far as development politics is concerned, the credibility of PM Modi is unparalleled. Even if one takes into account the collective value of the performances of MK Stalin, Siddaramaiya, Ashok Gehlot, Mamata Banerjee and Nitish Kumar, PM Modi stands head and shoulders above all of them. Genuine concern for the poor and the underprivileged, creative solutions to chronic governance issues, out-of-the box thinking to ensure results and the art of implementation are the key features of the Modi brand of governance.
Democratic governance is becoming more and more complex by the day. It takes an unusually high level of ability to govern and strike the right balance between being popular and taking care of the popular interest with a long-term vision. In a situation like this, educating people all the time with every element of honesty, integrity and credibility at one's command remains the only way. PM Modi's emphasis on people's participation in all development initiatives; his avowed commitment to taking decisions that may not be popular but are unquestionably in the interest of the people; his insistence on evolving a deeper understanding of the diverse manifestations of our innate unity through programmes like Ek Bharat, Sreshtha Bharat; his passionate appeal to parents of young boys and girls to make both genders equally answerable for their personal conduct are examples of his efforts towards public education. Against this, the partners of the INDIA coalition have precious little to show when it comes to any resolve to educate people on issues apparently not so popular and yet serving the larger interests of the people.
The Congress-led INDIA coalition remains a feeble attempt to capitalise on the nationalistic fervour and aspirational ethos painstakingly crafted by the BJP in the last nine years. Not just 'Millennials', even common voters today are less likely to be hoodwinked by slogan-mongering. With little evidence, INDIA's claim of being Nationalist, Developmental and Inclusive falls absolutely flat. What remains then is 'India' and 'Alliance', which is the coming together of those who desperately need mutual support to present their case nationally. The story of this alliance is nothing but "you scratch my back and...'. Worse, the possibility of mutual back-stabbing in the name of mutual back-scratching is very real.
Vinay Sahasrabuddhe is former MP, Rajya Sabha and columnist, besides being President of Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.