Regionalists with national ambitions

CP Bhambri

MAJOR regional parties along with two all-India parties like the Congress and the Communists have decided to unite and form a common platform of the Opposition against the Modi government's decision on demonetisation of high-value currency notes. For the first time, the Modi government in its two-and-a-half years of power at the Centre witnessed a collective and aggressive Opposition both within Parliament and outside. The BJP leadership both in the government and the party has failed to break the unity among these regionalists who in the past have never shown any common social concern or united on any national issue.

Have the regionalists suddenly developed an all-India national consciousness? Has this collective of regionalist opposition parties and groups realised the genuineness of people's anger against demonetisation and hence consider it a fertile ground to mobilise anti-Modi sentiment. Is it a temporary phenomenon and as in the past, the regionalists opposition unity would collapse like a house of cards? What about Modi's assertion in BJP parivartan rallies in Uttar Pradesh that the poor are with the government on the demonetisation policy? 

If Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s understanding of the popular mood is correct, the opposition unity will collapse like a house of cards. Regionalists will go back to their "local" and "parochial" roots if they find that the people of India are not with them on this issue and the agitation against Modi will not bring in popular support. 

The post-demonetisation politics of regional parties, leaders and groups may be only a transitory, one-issue phenomenon like in the past. Does it have any potential of becoming an all-India common platform of all castes, religions and language groups represented by diverse regional political formations? Strong regional parties and authentic regional leaders have emerged on the basis of “anti-Congressism. The regionalists have occupied political space vacated by the all-India socially inclusive Congress party. If Ram Manohar Lohia the late Socialist leader of post-Independence India was the ideologue and the practitioner of anti-Congressism, the formation represented by the Jan Sangh and the RSS had targeted the Congress because of its fundamental ideological differences with the secular, pluralistic and socially all-inclusive model of Congress politics. These two original political opponents of the Congress in post-Independence India through a zig-zag process could succeed in 1977 when under the leadership of Jaiprakash Narayan, an anti-Indira Gandhi “alliance” succeeded in displacing and defeating the Congress party both at the Centre and in many states. It took two more decades, beginning with 1977 to 1998, for anti-Congress Bharatiya Janata party and multiple regional parties to displace the Congress in the major states of India. This long process of ups and downs in Indian politics — from 1947 to 1977 and 1977 to 1998 — has provided an opportunity to authentic regional parties to play a decisive role in not only the politics of their states or regions but also as participants and partners of coalition governments at the Centre. If the Shiromani Akali Dal of Punjab, or the Samajwadi Party of Mulayam Singh Yadav and the Bahujan Samaj Party of Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh; or the Rashtriya Janata Dal of Lalu Prasad Yadav or Janata Dal (United) of Nitish Kumar of Bihar, or the Biju Janata Dal of Naveen Patnaik of Odisha, or National Congress Party of Sharad Pawar or Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, or the Telugu Desam Party of Chandra Babu Naidu of Andhra Pradesh or the AIADMK or DMK of Tamil Nadu et al have emerged as a strong political force in their states. Leaders of all these parties have participated in the coalition government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee (1998 to 2004) and the Congress-led UPA government from 2004 to 2014 and even the Narendra Modi-led BJP government at the Centre has representatives of regional parties like the Shiv Sena. 

It is not only the regionalists, the Communists too have supported the UPA government led by Manmohan Singh of the Congress from the “outside” from 2004-2008. The political opponent of the Communists in West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee of the Trinamool Congress has combined her regional political role with active involvement in national politics. 

The upshot of above narrative clearly substantiates the argument that every regional party, from Jammu and Kashmir to Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, has maintained an effective link with the Central government. All important regional leaders have on the basis of these strong "local, state-level" support base have participated in coalition governments at the Centre. They have also influenced the direction of national politics and government. 

Have the regional parties and leaders played a principled or opportunistic role in national politics? This issue of  “opportunism” or “principled politics” of the regionalists at the national level has arisen in the past when so-called secular regional parties actively participated in the BJP-RSS-led government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee whose coalition had about a dozen regional parties from 1998-2004. This issue has arisen again now when 14 opposition/regional parties have joined together to oppose the BJP government on demonetisation in Parliament. These parties have also launched protest movements, including an Akrosh Divas on November 28. This post-demonetisation Opposition's united  struggle against a particular policy decision of the Modi government can be a short-term, "one-issue" movement and it will come to an end when long queues before banks and post offices to withdraw money "thin down" and normalcy is restored and the anger of the people is over. This “one-issue” united struggle of the Opposition groups will have no impact on the functioning of the Modi government if it fizzles out after people's anger is over and everything becomes normal. 

The other side of the story can be that the regionalist political leaders continue to maintain and strengthen this unity against the Modi government if this mobilisation is against the larger issue of an “authoritarian” style of governance by Modi who does not care for people's sufferings caused by ill-conceived and ill-executed public decisions. Opposition unity can be strengthened if the regional leaders collectively realise that national interests are not safe under the Modi government because the style of decision making is not according to the well-established norms of consensus making in a democracy. Policies and decisions are announced from the “top” and imposed on the people. It is not the first time that the Prime Minister has decided on his own about a policy to be followed by his government. Evidence is also provided by the government's approach towards the disturbed situation in the Kashmir Valley.  

The opposition had to compel the Modi government to send an all-party delegation to Kashmir for a “dialogue” with stakeholders, including civil society groups. Is it the way to deal with people's grievances in a disturbed region of our own country? The upshot of above narrative is that the role of regionalists, whether parties or leaders, has never been confined to the territorial boundaries of their states. The regionalists have national ambitions and they have been involved in national governmental affairs. 

It is the responsibility of regional parties and leaders to unitedly apply checks on the authoritarian decision making of the Modi government and defend the democratic fabric of Indian society.  

The writer is Professor Emeritus, Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University.