Like in all bad marriages, Shiv Sena and BJP keep giving alliance a ‘last’ shot

Vajpayee and Advani would visit Bal Thackeray to discuss thorns in alliance. Modi and Shah have no such respect for Uddhav.

BJP president Amit Shah meets Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray in Mumbai| PTI

The Bharatiya Janata Party and the Shiv Sena have finally buried their hostility and formed an alliance in Maharashtra before the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. So, who ‘won’ and who ‘lost’ in the bargain? The differences between the two Hindutva parties were hyped by leaders of both parties, creating an impression that divorce was imminent.

But as I have written before, the simulated internal struggle has ended in an anti-climax, with BJP president Amit Shah, Shiv Sena chief Uddhav Thackeray and Maharashtra chief minister Devendra Fadnavis announcing that their charges and counter-charges were “now buried, and from this moment, we will fight as one united front”. It is the ideology of Hindutva that binds them together.

In realpolitik, however, both had realised that divided they fall and if they stay united, they have a chance to survive. That was a political compulsion they could not overlook. Despite the alliance, they had fought October 2014 assembly elections separately. That was because, after Modi-Shah-led BJP won absolute majority in the Lok Sabha elections in May 2014, the duo thought they don’t need the Shiv Sena muscle anymore.

That overconfidence of Modi and Shah had proved to be just bravado. The BJP fell short of absolute majority in the state and had to eat humble pie and form the government together. But ever since the BJP broke the alliance for the 2014 October elections, the marriage was on the rocks. They lived under one roof, but had separate kitchens and independent bedrooms.

It was like Warren Adler’s novel The War of The Roses, in which a loving couple slowly grow apart, but live in the same house, constantly cribbing and even becoming violent towards each other. In the end, they both die in the same house, the ownership of which had become a contentious issue between them.

In the case of the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance in Maharashtra, the ending looks tragi-comic. Uddhav Thackeray had repeatedly, for the last four months, echoed Rahul Gandhi’s sharp attack, “chowkidar chor hai”, condemning Narendra Modi for the Rafale deal. He had also described Amit Shah as “Afzal Khan”, known in the history of Shivaji era as the brutal agent of Aurangzeb. And Amit Shah had called Uddhav Thackeray a “rat”.

Almost on a daily basis, Saamana, the mouthpiece of the Shiv Sena was attacking the Modi government. In fact, the Congress had just to watch the internal vicious conflict, and do nothing. Most of the opposition space was occupied by the Shiv Sena.

Indeed, the Shiv Sena campaign against Modi, in particular, and the BJP, in general, was considered by some commentators as the harbinger of the new Shiv Sena-Nationalist Congress Party-Congress front. But that was not to be. It is believed that Sharad Pawar tried very hard for this strange partnership. Together they had the numbers and could have toppled the Devendra Fadnavis government.

Who then lost in the bargain and who won in the freshly minted seat-sharing in Maharashtra? Both Narendra Modi and Amit Shah were never keen on the alliance. They had made it clear umpteen number of times, by humiliating Uddhav Thackeray personally, by insulting the Shiv Sena publicly, by marginalising their ministers and by repeating the arrogant claim of coming to power on their own.

Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani used to personally go to Balasaheb Thackeray’s house to pay respect to him and discuss the thorny issues of the alliance. Modi and Shah never paid such respect to Uddhav. At the time of the swearing-in ceremony of the Fadanvis’ ministry in December 2014, Modi barely paid any attention to Uddhav’s presence on the stage.

Frustrated and angry with this insult, Uddhav and Saamana editor Sanjay Raut used to regularly support the formation of the Federal Front. Raut, a Rajya Sabha member, used to publicly praise Mamata Banerjee, Chandrababu Naidu and Sharad Pawar. That was really the unkindest cut to Modi.

Despite this controversy and conflict, Amit Shah came to meet Uddhav Thackeray personally, and suggested a patch up. Somehow, the BJP had begun to realise that they had hardly any presence in the southern states. Even in the east, with Mamata Banerjee holding on to power, Shah was finding it difficult to enter Bengal. Odisha’s Navin Patnaik was not coming forward. Chandrababu Naidu had left the NDA. Asom Gana Parishad has also left the alliance now.

Now, the BJP needs a ‘Mahagatbandhan’, as much as the Congress. That is why Shah has hurriedly tied up with the AIADMK and the Shiv Sena. But the relationship is so delicate that it can break again if the BJP does not win more than 200 seats of their own. The Shiv Sena is still insisting on the option of both parties sharing the chief ministership for two-and-half-years each if the alliance comes to power. The BJP has not responded.

The Shiv Sena is also privately saying that if the numbers game does not go in favour of Modi, the party would support Nitin Gadkari as the PM candidate. If the Third Front chooses Sharad Pawar as the PM candidate, the Shiv Sena can support him. Gadkari and Pawar are Marathi and the Shiv Sena’s first loyalty is to the Marathi Manoos. (The Sena had supported Pratibha Patil even when the Hindutva alliance was in place).

On the ground, however, neither the Shiv Sainik nor the Sangh Parivar appear enthusiastic to work for each other. The loyal Shiv Sainik will not work for bringing the Gujarati PM again. The Parivar does not want the Sena to win more seats, to put them in their place.

The marriage, therefore, is on shaky ground. Uddhav had once said that their alliance is with the BJP, not with Modi and Shah. The War of the Roses has not ended. This is just the intermission.