Bihar gets its chance

The BJP wants a mid-term poll and hopes to ride over its internal feuds through the victory in Bihar. Lalu does not mind a mid-term poll, but wants first to convince Congress president Sonia Gandhi that Ram Vilas Paswan is not a dalit leader but a pretender who has to be eased out for her party to have a meaningful support in the Extremely Backward Class (EBC). For the first time Lalu does not want the spotlight on himself. He intends using the Congress as a shield to ward off further onslaughts.

Lalu's defeat was never in doubt, but his rout was. Although the swing against him is less than one per cent, he has lost nearly one fourth of his strength in the state assembly, some 21 seats. When I was in Patna after the third phase of polling, I could see a yearning for a change. People had had enough of Lalu and his mis-performance. Still Lalu's staunchest opponents did not give the Nitish-BJP combination 143 in the 243-member assembly as the tally turned out to be. It seems the undercurrent of anger against Lalu was too strong to be gauged correctly.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Most analysts blame Paswan for lessening Lalu's votes. This is partly true. Nitish, himself a leader of backward community Kurmi, organised his support from among the EBC, primarily Paswan's base. This chunk of 35 per cent electorate solidly voted against Lalu because he represented the Yadavs who had treated them with contempt. In the past, the EBC did not generally vote because the Yadavs would not allow it to go to the polling booth. Fear stalked its habitations. The Election Commission, which did a tremendous job, ensured this time that it could exercise the franchise right without fear.

Paswan also had made it clear before election that he did not want to be a party to the ordeal of prolonging Lalu's 15-year-long misrule. However, the initial mistake is that of the Congress and the Marxists. They should not have insisted on Lalu because of his bad name. But both wanted his Rashtriya Janata Dal's support in the Lok Sabha to keep the Manmohan Singh government in power. On the other hand, Paswan's suggestion to have a Muslim chief minister was not outlandish. He wanted to strengthen the secular base in the country. True, he has halved his own seats through his doings. But both he and the CPI, which has stood by him, have proved that they were right in their assessment about the unpopularity of Lalu.

The worst thing which the CPI (M) and the Congress have done is that they have polarised the state to the benefit of the BJP. Riding on the Nitish bandwagon, the BJP has increased its strength in the state assembly. True, Nitish, heading the government, has made it clear that he has nothing to do with the BJP's philosophy of Hindutva. He has said the same thing during electioneering. But an average person cannot differentiate between the two when he finds them in the same government. BJP leader Uma Bharti says that they won in the name of Ram and roti (bread). The BJP has 55 seats against Nitish's 88 and added 18 more seats to the February poll tally of 37.

Even the Muslims, tired of Lalu's promises, have voted for the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), a combination which the BJP has constituted in parliament to become an alternative. Nitish has said that there can be a difference on the basis of ideology. But pluralism and parochialism are antithesis of each other. The BJP cannot be part of the same government. What message has gone when the deputy chief minister in the Nitish cabinet is the state's BJP chief?

The combination of Nitish's Janata Dal (United) and the BJP reminds me of the Janata which was constituted in the wake of Mrs Gandhi's rout in 1977. The Jana Sangh, the predecessor of the BJP, joined the Janata government and had its two BJP leaders, Atal Behari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani, in the cabinet. The Jana Sangh was dissolved for public consumption but worked as a group within the Janata Party. This group left when told to break its ties with the RSS. My worry is that Nitish may find out one day that the BJP has not stopped working on its Hindutva agenda. With him, the party has attained respectability.

I have no doubt Nitish would put in all his efforts to restore law and order in the state and develop it economically as much as he can stretch the resources. He is a product of the Jayaprakash Narayan movement in the 1970s and its ethos was to effect parivartan (change) in the society. Nitish may not make much headway despite his honest work because the BJP's eyes are fixed on New Delhi, not Patna. After all, Bihar, with 48 Lok Sabha seats, is too big a state to be left to secular pursuits.

At least New Delhi should not make Nitish's task difficult. One of the central ministers has said that governor Buta Singh will not be transferred. By not allowing Nitish to form the government in February when his was the largest combine, the governor played a partisan role. The Supreme Court characterised it as "unconstitutional." How can he continue as the Bihar governor? In fact, he is one of the causes of Lalu's rout. The governor dissolved a house that was never constituted. He did not even allow the elected legislators to take oath. This angered the people, who voted for the NDA with a vengeance.

Patna was once Patliputra, capital of Emperor Ashoka. It was here he renounced violence after winning the war at Kalinga, Orissa, where thousands of people were killed. Victory, Ashoka said, might put up the back of one, but it meant destruction. Defeat is an opportunity to improve. Can Lalu Yadav learn a lesson from Ashoka and consider his debacle a chance to renounce the path of crime and corruption? Were he to do so, he would fulfill the dream of Jayaprakash Narayan, because Lalu, like Nitish, was JP's lieutenant. Bihar needs to be pulled out of the morass of poverty and helplessness. Were Lalu to work at cross-purposes, the state would not go ahead with full speed which it badly needs. His statements after the defeat are of little help.

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.