Don’t just rely on anti-BJPism: Here are the three ingredients of a successful alliance

Representational image of BJP's top ministers | PTI

Unless Congress retains Karnataka and wins in MP or Rajasthan, its chances of emerging as the unanimous anchor for opposition alliance would be uncertain.

The defeat of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Gorakhpur and Phulpur Lok Sabha bypolls is an ominous sign for the party. The opposition and analysts see this as a vindication of their claim that the race for the 2019 is wide open. And again, there is an excitement to read too much into a bypoll result as a signal that may turn out to be merely a noise. The implication of the results not only exposes the limit of BJP’s appeal, but also lays bare open the hollowness in oppositional strategy to counter the BJP.

In the usual course, reversals in two Lok Sabha seats should not be a matter of big concern for the ruling party, especially when the results have no bearing on its strength in the House. However, what is striking in this case is that the BJP managed to lose these seats despite being in power both at the Centre and in the state. That too, when the seats were vacated by an incumbent chief minister and his deputy and their government headed is well within its honeymoon phase. This is unprecedented given what we know about how bypoll results generally play out in India.

A few years ago we had analysed the results of all bypolls (1,100 assembly and 213 parliamentary seats) held in the country between 1967 and 2012. Our analysis showed that the incumbent party in the state is more likely to win these seats than the incumbent party at the national level. We also matched results of bypolls held within two years of assembly elections with the eventual state-level outcomes. Our analysis showed that the winner of a bypoll has less than half a chance of winning the next assembly elections in the state. The conclusion from these two sets of results is pretty clear: Local-level dynamics dictate outcomes of a bypoll and there is no evidence to suggest a state-wide or a national trend.

This suggests that in the Gorakhpur bypolls, the BJP managed to beat all the odds that were stacked in its favour. What would be the national ramification of these results? Very simply, it signals a possibility of ideologically divergent opposition parties coalescing to defeat it. The BJP’s expansionist imperatives are a threat to state-level parties in many parts of the country. With survival being an immediate priority, pre-election coalitions may seem like a necessary choice for many such parties. The recent dinner meeting of leaders from various parties at Sonia Gnadhi’s residence, and now these results are likely to give another fillip to this idea.

If a grand alliance of opposition parties takes shape, the BJP would be pitted against a brute arithmetic, which would definitely upset its plans in many states. For instance, coming together of SP and BSP could result in severe losses in Uttar Pradesh, which delivered 73 seats in 2014. Moreover, the BJP’s chances of increasing its base in states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Odisha, Telangana and West Bengal may become difficult if the principal regional parties and the Congress contest in alliance.

While the idea of a pre-election alliance may look like a necessary choice, the devil often lies in working out the details. In our view, there are three key ingredients of a successful and stable alliance – an anchor party, a leader who has been unanimously chosen and an ideological congruity between alliance partners. The anchor party forms the nucleus of the alliance, exercises relatively greater influence in decision-making and maintains a preeminent position in solving inter-party disputes. Presence of a leader who has been unanimously chosen not only helps in mobilising the voters, but also minimises the possibility of leadership struggles. Similarly, a concrete ideological platform (or at least a common minimum programme) helps in coordinating on more contentious issues such as seat-sharing arrangements and allows parties to present an alternate vision to voters. Anti-BJPism is unlikely to serve as the glue for long, much like anti-Congressism, which was a short-lived affair. Three anti-Congress grand alliances: The Samyukta Vidhayak Dal (SVD) experiments across north-Indian states in 1967, Janata Party experiment in 1977 and the Janata Dal governments in 1989 ceased within two years of their formation. And each time, the Congress staged a comeback.

At the moment, Gorakhpur seems like an aberration because these ingredients were not part of the contest. Going forward from here, there is no single party within the opposition that can act as the anchor. A coalition with many regional parties with similar electoral prospects will have too many veto players. The Congress is the only probable candidate, but it has failed to find a route for independent revival post-2014. Unless it retains Karnataka and wins a big state like Madhya Pradesh or Rajasthan, its chances of emerging as the unanimous anchor would be uncertain.

If the Congress and opposition parties want to challenge the BJP’s increasing electoral and ideological acceptance, they have two routes. First, they simply continue with their anti-BJP campaign and reap the benefit of brute arithmetic in their favour. A united opposition even with a half-hearted effort in key states would bring down BJP’s tally substantially in the upcoming election. However, this strategy will take them only as far as anti-Congress politics took the opposition forces in 1970s and 1990s. The second route is more arduous, but would be more effective in challenging the rise of BJP. The opposition, especially the Congress, urgently needs to find an alternative ideological vision that helps in mobilising masses. This will also help the opposition in rebuilding their organisational muscle. The ongoing plenary session of the Congress offers little hope in this regard. With less than a year to go for the next general elections, there is little doubt which strategy the opposition is likely to pursue.

The writers are PhD scholars in political science at University of California Berkeley, US.