New on my other blogs

KERALA LETTER
"Gandhi is dead, Who is now Mahatmaji?"
Solar scam reveals decadent polity and sociery
A Dalit poet writing in English, based in Kerala
Foreword to Media Tides on Kerala Coast
Teacher seeks V.S. Achuthanandan's intervention to end harassment by partymen

വായന
Showing posts with label Bipolar polity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bipolar polity. Show all posts

07 June, 2009

Early signs of bipolar trend at national level

B.R.P. BHASKAR
IANS

The story of how the electorate belied political prophesies and made smooth government formation possible after the Lok Sabha elections deserves close scrutiny because it contains early intimations of a new trend.

Even the best scenario visualised by pollsters had left the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA), widely acknowledged as the frontrunner, far short of a simple majority in the 545-member house. Some experts suggested the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA), a close runner-up, might be in a better position than the UPA to attract support from other parties and raise the tally to 273, needed to chalk up a majority.

As it happened, the UPA was only 10 short of the magic figure. This shortfall was small enough to be made up without placating Prakash Karat, Mayawati, J. Jayalalithaa, Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad, not to mention Nitish Kumar, who too turned up at the auction room.

The voters had so exercised their franchise that the so-called third and fourth fronts were left with no bargaining power at all. The worst sufferers were the reunited Yadavs, who had adopted a strategy calculated to enhance their capability by limiting the Congress party's strength.

This is not the first time that the Indian electorate has demonstrated an uncanny ability to brush aside political gibberish and arrive at the best possible verdict in the circumstances. Millions of voters, taking independent decisions in the privacy of their minds, had given expression to a common will when they voted out Indira Gandhi's emergency regime in 1977. They displayed the same determination again when, sickened by the Janata Party squabbles, they recalled Indira Gandhi.

The 1977 and 1980 verdicts can be explained in terms of a wide swing of the pendulum. The Congress party's vote share had dropped from 43.68 percent in 1971 to 34.52 percent in 1977, sweeping it out of office. It climbed to 42.69 percent in 1980 and the party was back in power.

There was no big swing this time. Provisional figures released by the Election Commission show that the Congress party's share increased slightly from 26.53 percent to 28.55 percent and the BJP's declined slightly from 22.16 percent to 18.80 percent. These changes may be sufficient to explain the rise in the Congress' strength from 145 to 206 and the fall in the BJP's from 138 to 116, but not to understand the way the electorate resolved the national conundrum.

It was the rise of regional parties and the vaulting ambitions of their leaders which had raised fears that government formation might not be easy. There was no appreciable change in the popularity of the national parties and the regional parties. In 2004, the national parties (those recognized as such by the Election Commission) together commanded 62.89 percent of the votes. This time their share was 62.32 percent.

The combined vote of the Congress and the BJP declined from 48.69 percent to 47.35 percent. The decline was too small for the Left parties to realise their pet dream of keeping both of them out of power. Communist Party of India (CPI) general secretary A.B. Bardhan's forecast that the Congress and the BJP together would not win even 250 seats went awry. Actually they increased their combined strength from 283 to 312.

The electorate made government formation easy by eliminating the bargaining capacity of the ambitious leaders of the smaller parties. It rebuffed the sponsors of the Third Front, who wanted to hold the major national parties at bay. The Communist Party of India-Marxist lost 27 seats and the CPI six.

The voters meted out harsh punishment to the Yadavs who had cynically indulged in a game of self-aggrandizement. The Rashtriya Janata Dal of Lalu Prasad lost 20 seats and the Samajwadi Party of Mulayam Singh Yadav lost 13 seats. Their ally, Lok Janshakti Party of Ram Vilas Paswan, lost all its four seats.

The election results provide early intimations of a bipolar trend. A tendency towards a bipolar polity is already in evidence in several states. It is the emergence of diverse forces in the different states that has made coalitions at the centre inevitable.

The parties which aligned themselves with either of the major national parties did well. Those ranged on the side of the Congress benefited the most. The Trinamool Congress in West Bengal made a whopping gain of 17 seats. Going by the winner-takes-all pattern witnessed in Tamil Nadu in recent years, Jayalalithaa's AIADMK should have made a clean sweep this time. Anticipating such a development, the well-known electoral weather cocks, Vaiko's Marumalarchi DMK and S. Ramadoss' PMK switched to her side. The results were disastrous: while the PMK lost all its six seats, the MDMK managed to save one of its four seats.

Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's poll eve vacillation notwithstanding, the Janata Dal-United, BJP's partner in the NDA, fared well in Bihar. The only Third Front party to buck the bipolar trend was Orissa's Biju Janata Dal.

15 December, 2008

Assembly elections confirm bipolar trend in India

By B.R.P. BHASKAR
Comment
Indo Asian News Service

Contrary to the fond hopes of Third Front promoters, the Indian polity is moving towards a two-party system. Those who have their eyes focused on the national stage may have missed it, but the results of the just concluded assembly elections confirm the bipolar trend.

All the five states where elections were held were already well on their way to a two-party system with the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) figuring as the contenders for power in Delhi, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The Congress and the Mizo National Front clashed in Mizoram.

In Delhi, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh, the ruling party held on to power though with reduced majorities in the assembly. In Rajasthan and Mizoram, the party in power and the main opposition changed places. Nowhere did a third party come within striking distance of power.

One aspect of the election results which has received much media attention is the impressive performance of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) in the four Hindi belt states. The party, which contested almost all the seats in these states, earned a rich dividend in the form of more votes as well as more seats.

Provisional figures indicate that the BSP's vote share registered significant increases in all the states: from 4 percent to 8 percent in Rajasthan, from 4 to 6 percent in Chhattisgarh, from 6 to 9 percent in Madhya Pradesh and from 6 percent to 14 percent in Delhi. The gains are no doubt remarkable. However, they do not represent an immediate threat to the BJP or Congress as neither seems to have suffered significant erosion of support.

The Congress' vote share dropped from about 48 percent in 2003 to about 41 percent in Delhi and the BJP's from 43 percent to 39 percent in Madhya Pradesh and from 39 percent to 36 percent in Rajasthan. These swings are attributable to the burden of incumbency they carried in these states. In Chhattisgarh, the BJP bucked the anti-incumbency factor and increased its vote from 39 percent to 41 percent.

The Congress improved its position marginally in Madhya Pradesh (from 32 to 33 percent), Rajasthan (from 36 to 37 percent) and Chhattisgarh (from 37 to 38 percent). So did the BJP in Delhi where its vote rose from 35 to 37 percent.

Such is the electoral arithmetic that while the two top players together command more than 70 percent of the votes polled, the polity will remain essentially bipolar. The BSP will have to cut into the votes of the Congress and the BJP in a big way before it can upset the two-party system that has come into vogue in these states.

This is not to suggest that the BSP's performance is a flash in the pan. The Congress and the BJP will do well to see it as a convincing demonstration of its capacity to grow beyond the borders of Uttar Pradesh.

The BSP has two distinct advantages. One is that it is now the No. 1 party in the most populous state. The other is that in Mayawati it has a charismatic leader, who is widely recognised as prime ministerial material.

Uttar Pradesh's electoral history testifies to the tortuous course of multiparty politics. In 1985, the Congress was still the leading party in that state, with a 39 percent vote share, as against its immediate challengers, Janata Dal's 21 percent and the BJP's 10 percent. Thereafter, the Janata Dal, the BJP and the Samajwadi Party rose to the top and fell, one after another, before the BSP became the largest party.

It took the BSP - which entered the election arena as an unrecognised party in 1989 and bagged less than 10 percent of the votes - six elections spread over 18 years to achieve primacy. While the BSP (30.43 percent) and the Samajwadi Party (25.43 percent) are way above the BJP (16.97 percent) and the Congress (8.61 percent), it is too early to conclude that Uttar Pradesh has become a bipolar polity.

Outside the Hindi belt too, the two-party system is gaining ground. However, the parties in contention are not the same as in these states. In Andhra Pradesh, a national party and a regional party are the contenders for power. In Tamil Nadu, it is two regional parties that vie for power.

Kerala has a bipolar polity, but it is not two parties, but two fronts that seek power. The doggedness with which the Congress and the Communist Party of India-Marxist, the leading players, have pursued coalition politics appears to have blocked the evolution of a two-party system in the state.

The bewildering variety that has come up at the state level in the wake of the Congress party's decline has made coalition governments at the centre inevitable. Even as we accept this fact realistically, it is necessary to take note of the dangers inherent in the present situation, which allows small parties with limited agendas to exercise authority on a scale beyond their ken. The big parties, which had to yield to the blackmail tactics of such parties, must order their priorities in such a way that the bipolar trend gains strength in the long run.