The raging Covid-19 pandemic and Electoral Commission guidelines have greatly affected election campaigns in Bihar. However, this has in no way stopped political juggling in the state.
With just one day before the nomination for the first phase of voting, the political alignments remain far from resolved. On the other hand, cracks have started to appear in the Mahagathbandhan on the question of seating arrangements as well as on the question of leadership.
For starters, the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) led by Tejashwi Yadav, the main opposition party in Bihar, is facing pressure from the Allied Congress on the number of seats that the RJD is reportedly offering to the great old party. Congress is reportedly unwilling to accept fewer than 70-75 seats against RJD’s offer of around 60 seats in the 243-member state assembly.
Another RJD ally, the RLSP led by Upendra Kushwaha has already severed ties and joined the Mayawati BSP in the state.
However, it is the rebellion brewing in the NDA camp led by Chirag Paswan of the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) that has puzzled political observers in the state. In a rapidly changing political landscape, LJP National Secretary General Shahnawaz Ahmad Kaifi said Tuesday that Chirag Paswan is the main ministerial face of his party, a stance contrary to the BJP’s acceptance of Nitish Kumar as the face of the alliance in state polls.
Speaking to the ANI news agency, Kaifi said: “Party members also believe that we should fight for at least 143 seats in the elections. I would also ask the party to fight in these many seats. “
On Monday, Paswan junior reportedly met with BJP president JP Nadda and demanded a decision on seating arrangements soon. This was Paswan’s second meeting with the head of BJP in the last two weeks. The two previously met on September 15, where Paswan reportedly asked Nadda to contest more seats in the state than Nitish Kumar’s JD (U).
Paswan also reportedly sent a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, insisting on the current political situation in Bihar while speaking out on the strong anti-incumbent wave against the CM.
So what explains Paswan junior’s sudden uprising against JD (U) and especially Prime Minister Nitish Kumar?
Before proceeding further, it would be wise to explore where the LJP stands electorally in Bihar’s caste-ridden identity politics.
It is true that there was a brief period in state politics in which Ram Vilas Paswan was seen as a singular claimant for Dalit votes, which constitute about 16% in the state. However, with the Nitish Kumar government separating the ‘Mahadalits’ or the most underprivileged section among the Dalits, Paswan was left with only 5% of the loyal votes from his Dusadh subcaste. The loss of this central bank of captive votes before the JD (U) continues to hurt the party.
Electorally, too, the LJP’s share of the votes in the assembly polls has dropped from 11.10% of votes in 2005 to a lousy 4.83% in the latest state polls. The party won only two of the 42 seats it contested in the 2015 assembly elections.
The Lokniti-CSDS Post Poll for the 2015 assembly polls found that only 51% of paswans (Dusadhs) voted for the NDA in which the LJP was a partner. This was much lower than the 2014 Lok Sabha polls when more than two-thirds of Paswan’s votes went to the alliance.
Realizing the importance of the fluid Dalit vote bank, Nitish Kumar has also been trying to further consolidate his Mahadalit votes plus Paswan’s Dusadh core votes.
Many of Nitish Kumar’s recent decisions point in this direction, including the return of Jitan Ram Manjhi, a prominent face of Dalits in the state, to the fold of the NDA.
Furthermore, as noted by a political expert, the appointment of the Minister of the Building Construction Department (BCD) and a Dalit face, Ashok Choudhary, as acting president of the state of JD (U), advertised jobs for relatives of the murder victims who were from the programmed castes, the induction of retired IPS officer Dalit Sunil Kumar into the party are some of the recent steps taken by Kumar to consolidate his dominance among the Dalits. Any further fracture in the LJP’s Dalit voting core will also help the JD (U) counter the former in the event Paswan exits the NDA and runs candidates against the JD (U).
Top BJP leaders have so far been silent on the ongoing infighting between the two key allies. The LJP has not received any guarantees from the BJP so far on the allocation of seats with sources claiming that the party has been offered around 27 seats, far less than the 42 seats it contested in the 2015 assembly polls. Other The problem that has reportedly arisen is that the seats offered by the BJP are not LJP’s choice.
So where are things moving from here for the LJP?
The first and safest option for now would be to agree on the number of seats on offer and continue in the NDA alliance, says a political commentator who declined to be named.
The gamble, argues the commentator, for the LJP would be to abandon the alliance. But, it can turn out to be a sheer misadventure. Given LJP’s narrow and limited voter base, Paswan could well face a similar prospect to LJSP’s Upendra Kushwaha or Jan Adhikar Party’s Pappu Yadav. In addition, it will make Paswan’s senior position in the Union Cabinet untenable, he said.
The second option for the LJP would be to go alone, an idea pushed by some LJP leaders, including the party’s state chairman and Samastipur MP Prince Raj, cited by Times of India as if to say that the LJP is “prepared to contest 143 seats, either as a member of the NDA or on our own.”
A source close to the party suggests that these 143 seats would be those that the JD (U) would dispute. This step is a safer option and would keep the route open in case the party decides to return to the NDA fold later. However, getting out of the NDA fold for the party is easier said than done. Although the party has published a video message from its Vaishali MP Veena Devi in favor of fighting in 143 seats, a future rebellion cannot be ruled out. There is a history in the party and Chirag Paswan would do well to remember it.
In 2005, when Ram Vilas Paswan was hesitant to support Nitish Kumar as CM, 21 of his 29 members rebelled against him and later joined the JD (U) led by Nitish.
.
