What A BJP-Shiv Sena Alliance Means For Both The Parties

Will they, or won’t they? This is the question which has captivated Maharashtra politics for many months now. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Shiv Sena (SS) have such a complicated relationship, it is doubtful if Facebook could codify it in its relationship status options.

You can also read this article in Hindi- शिवसेना और भाजपा के गठबंधन से किसको मिलेगा कितना लाभ

SS has a minister in the Narendra Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government in New Delhi. But SS does not always vote for the government in Rajya Sabha. At the minimum, SS bargains hard before every crucial Rajya Sabha vote. Sanjay Raut, the self-anointed Chanakya of SS, badmouths Modi and his party at least once every day – a consistency which should be a matter of envy in politics, a profession otherwise known for shifting views.

SS has ministers in the Devendra Fadnavis-led Maharashtra government in Mumbai. But SS does not always share dais for project inaugurations. SS ministers in Fadnavis government undertake photo-ops with the Thackeray family, the SS patriarchs, when launching new projects in their departments, but don’t always credit Fadnavis.

The BJP supports the SS in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), which basically keeps the party afloat – running India’s commercial capital is the fundamental leverage SS has in Indian politics. However, the BJP is not part of any of the BMC governing committees.

BJP and SS fought the April – May 2014 Lok Sabha election together but contested the October 2014 Vidhan Sabha elections separately. Since then, they have dealt with municipal and local bodies elections in various ways. There are instances of contesting against each other but forming post-poll alliances or post-poll outside support mechanism. There are instances of contesting against each other and sitting in opposition after the polls. There are also instances of contesting together, but only providing non-participatory support to run local bodies after the results.

Short summary – it is complicated.

The Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) have also been through their own relationship pangs but have come together to contest the 2019 Lok Sabha together under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) banner. The four-cornered fight helped BJP in the last five years. But now, the opposition is united. As the 2019 Lok Sabha polls close in, it is imperative for the BJP and SS to take a final call.

2014 Assembly Election was the key break-away moment for BJP

In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP won 23 seats, the SS 18, and 1 seat was won by an NDA ally, the Swabhimani Paksha (SWP). The Congress won just 2 and the NCP trumped on 4 seats. Since then, the BJP has lost 1 seat in a by-poll to NCP and the SWP has crossed over to the UPA fold.

That the NDA alliance was very effective in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections can be gauged by looking at the results of the assembly seats. The BJP led in 132 assembly seats, the SS in 100, the SWP 9, and another ally Rashtriya Samaj Paksha (RSP) 3. The NDA led in a whopping 244 seats out of 288, leaving the NCP with just 26 and the Congress with just 16 leads.

In the assembly elections held barely five months later, the four key parties fought on their own. The BJP then won 122 seats, the SS 63, and the RSP 1. The Congress improved its tally to 42 seats and the NCP to 41. So, the NDA constituents had 186 seats, down from 244, the gains accruing to the UPA or other smaller parties.

A closer look at the 2014 assembly results throws up some interesting facts. On the 83 seats won by the UPA parties, the UPA vote share was more than the combined BJP and SS vote share on 61 seats. The NDA parties lost 22 seats by not contesting together. The reverse was true only for 11 seats, where the UPA combined vote was more than the NDA vote and one of the NDA parties won. Of the 102 seats not won by the NDA parties, the BJP led the SS in 53 and the SS led the BJP in 49.

In fact, BJP emerged stronger than SS in 176 out of the 288 seats in assembly. Contrast this with the fact that until 2014, BJP used to fight only around 120 seats while SS contested around 165.

BJP has built significantly on the 2014 Assembly elections success

While 2014 assembly election results give a good peek into the individual strength of different parties across the state, a number of things have changed since 2014.

Firstly, the BJP now has a much better base in the state with much deeper grassroots presence. Before 2014, SS was always the big brother and BJP contested much lower number of assembly seats. The party could never establish its cadre base in the state with any day to day visibility on the ground. Under Devendra Fadnavis, the party has changed this. At least in the cities and towns, the BJP is now a force to reckon with, even though it may not be the single biggest local political group in every one.

Secondly, Congress and NCP do not have a lot of proactive issues to talk about. Their caste-based machinations have not yielded much fruit in the last few years. The Fadnavis government has tackled most of the caste-based issues, demands, challenges, and sporadic violence with reasonable competence, ensuring minimal escalation.

Thirdly, several Congress leaders are reportedly afraid to contest the Lok Sabha election. The party is a divided house in Mumbai, which attracts constant negative publicity. Priya Dutt has already withdrawn from the 2019 race and Milind Deora has threatened to do so. Narayan Rane who formed the bulwark of the party in Konkan region has moved over to the BJP.

Fourthly, NCP has its own problems. Chhagan Bhujbal, a key OBC leader from the Khandesh area, has been under investigation in corruption cases and spent significant time behind bars. Another stalwart from Western Maharashtra, R.R. Patil passed away. Ganesh Naik’s hold over Navi Mumbai has weakened considerably and NCP has been swept completely out of Mumbai with no sitting MLAs and MPs. The party patriarch Sharad Pawar has been unable to pull himself out of electoral politics, something he has talked about many times since 2014.

Fifthly, the BJP has had spectacular success in the municipal elections. The party controls several large corporations across the state, a rarity outside the Vidarbha region until 2014. Local leaders from other parties have naturally gravitated to the BJP since then. Most importantly, the party has won elections in Marathwada and Western Maharashtra – traditionally weak areas for the BJP. In these areas, agriculture and education co-operative barons aligned to the Congress, the NCP, or the SS dominate local politics.

Finally, BJP has been able to keep its own house largely in order by controlling potential rebellion from senior leaders like Eknath Khadse.

The SS does not like any of this. It’s historic role as the big brother of NDA in Maharashtra has been usurped by a resurgent BJP. The SS has taken no significant steps to grow outside its strongholds of Konkan, Mumbai, Thane, Navi Mumbai and parts of Marathwada even as its hegemony in Greater Mumbai region has been challenged successfully by the BJP. The party has attracted no new leaders to its fold. Aditya, the third generation Thackeray, has not been as visible and impactful as his father Uddhav would have hoped.

Lack of a BJP-SS alliance could be a death-knell for Shiv Sena; Good gains for NCP-Congress

The SS needs the BJP for relevance in Lok Sabha and thereafter. If the SS contests alone in the Lok Sabha election, it is unlikely to win more than a few seats – as low as 3 or 4, it’s worst performance since 1989.

An analysis of the 2014 Assembly Elections results rolled up to the Parliamentary constituency level is very instructive in this regard. A look at the table below shows that if BJP and SS had contested separately against a united NCP & Congress, BJP would still have managed to hold on to it’s 2014 LS tally whereas SS would collapse to low single digits. This is why SS Lok Sabha MPs have been pushing Uddhav Thackeray for an alliance with the BJP. Absence of an alliance could see 4-5 of them contesting on BJP tickets in 2019.

Note that this doesn’t factor in that BJP would win a higher share of votes in a national election. Clearly, SS is the biggest beneficiary of the BJP-SS alliance whereas NCP-Congress are beneficiaries of a lack of one.

Hobson’s choice for Shiv Sena

While the limited benefit to BJP’s own kitty from an alliance is likely well-understood by the BJP leadership, their desire to work towards an alliance with SS stems from limiting the battlefronts in the 2019 election. Battling the SP-BSP combine in UP, Congress-JDS in Karnataka and a resurgent Congress in MP, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh will suck-in significant resources and BJP would prefer to limit the UPA tally in Maharashtra, especially if it is benefiting SS. Given SS’ Hindutva leanings, it is difficult for any other political grouping to openly ally with SS at the national level.

The BJP government is still dependent on SS for its majority in the Maharashtra assembly. Despite its increased base, the BJP still doesn’t have a clear line of sight to get a clear assembly majority on its own in the assembly elections. Having the SS by its side may potentially ensure a comfortable second term.

Staying together for election helps both sides gain in their own way for now. But any BJP gain is likely a long-term SS loss. The SS has two ways to lose – going alone and losing now or going together with the BJP and lose later. It is indeed a Hobson’s choice for the party and the constant rhetoric against the Modi government should be seen in this context. The BJP on the other hand may not lose immediately by not allying with the SS. However, it has an extra option of winning now as well as winning later by accommodating the SS on its own terms in 2019 assembly elections.

Mumbai, India’s commercial capital, is no stranger to game theory in business. Now an interesting political version is being played out. The solution may emerge in the week of 18 February.