EDITS | Friday, October 23, 2009 | Email | Print | 
Winner comes second
The Pioneer Edit Desk
MNS plays spoiler for BJP-Sena alliance
The Congress had hoped for a clean sweep in the Maharashtra, Haryana and Arunachal Pradesh Assembly elections. But for the INLD’s spectacular performance in Haryana, the Congress’s hope would have been fulfilled. Mr Om Prakash Chautala has declared that he will not sit in the Opposition; it now remains to be seen whether he is able to cobble together a simple majority which, at the moment, does not appear to be impossible. The result of the election in Arunachal Pradesh was a foregone conclusion, although the BJP would do well to look into why it has failed to hold on to its previous tally, leave alone increase its strength in the Assembly. Having said that, the most significant result is that of the Maharashtra Assembly election. What was expected to be a close contest has turned out to be a victory for those who should have lost this election — the Congress-NCP tally will no doubt afford the coalition its third successive term in power, but it does not reflect, as is being claimed by both the parties, either absence of anti-incumbency or popular endorsement of 10 years of pathetic non-performance. What has given the Congress-NCP coalition its ill-deserved victory is its clever strategy of propping up Mr Raj Thackeray’s MNS which has played spoiler for the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance, especially in the Mumbai-Thane-Pune stretch.
Mr Raj Thackeray has reason to gloat over his deeply parochial party’s performance in this election: 13 seats may not sound a lot in a House of 288 members, but he has succeeded in blocking the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance from coming to power. A quick computation shows that the Congress-NCP coalition has garnered 37 per cent of the total votes; the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance has secured 30 per cent. The MNS, which contested 143 seats and lost its deposit in 95 of them, has managed to tote up a vote-share of six per cent. Had the MNS not eaten into the votes of the BJP and the Shiv Sena, which it has, and not split the Opposition space, it would have been an evenly poised battle. Indeed, it is anybody’s guess as to whether the Congress-NCP coalition would have been able to retain power despite its poor record. Mr Raj Thackeray says that he has damaged both the Congress-NCP coalition and the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance. But that is not entirely true. The MNS’s vote-share in the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance’s traditional catchment area — the Mumbai-Thane-Pune stretch — could be as high as more than 20 per cent in some constituencies. Mr Raj Thackeray’s candidates may not have won, but they ensured the defeat of BJP and Shiv Sena candidates.
It would, however, be self-defeating for the BJP to pretend that the ‘MNS factor’ alone is responsible for its poor performance. Its tally has declined from 56 seats in 2004 to 46 seats in this election. The Shiv Sena has suffered greater loss: It is down from 62 seats to 44 seats. There is cold comfort in the fact that the BJP will get to appoint the Leader of Opposition in the Assembly. What should worry the party is the erosion it has suffered in its support base in Vidarbha and Marathwada regions where the MNS was at best an insignificant factor. If the Shiv Sena is facing a crisis of leadership — Mr Uddhav Thackeray pales in comparison to Mr Raj Thackeray’s charisma — so is the BJP, both in Maharashtra as well as at the national level. Simply put, the BJP has failed to enthuse voters. This is more a comment on the party’s leadership than on its agenda of governance which, tragically, appears increasingly immaterial.
Email | Print | Rate:
|