Congress-SP deal in UP: An alliance born of anxiety

While the tie-up is expecting a rich seat yield in Uttar Pradesh, certain fault lines have surfaced

The decision of the Samajwadi Party (SP) to seal an alliance with the Congress was a “pledge” that Akhilesh Yadav felt he had to “redeem at all costs”, an SP official and a key member of Team Akhilesh said.

He said the Uttar Pradesh (UP) chief minister (CM), who is also SP president, had made the “promise” to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi when his party was in the throes of a crisis, fuelled by his father, Mulayam Singh Yadav, in concert with Mulayam’s brother Shivpal Singh Yadav, and Amar Singh. “It appeared as though we would lose the SP’s cycle symbol. The CM worked on a Plan-B to try and offset the electoral damage the symbol’s loss might cause. One of the proposals was seeking out the Congress as an ally,” the aide said.

Akhilesh dropped the first hint at the prospective (now final) alliance when he told media persons in Lucknow on December 13, 2016, with a brave veneer hiding the nervousness beneath: “Though Samajwadis are going to form a majority government in the state, if the alliance (with the Congress) takes place, it will win 300 (of the 403) Assembly seats.” He emphasised that Mulayam would take the final call. When the do or die moment came, father and son were so estranged that it fell on Akhilesh to settle matters with the Congress.

Outwardly, the Congress and SP seem fired up in expectation of the rich seat yield their alliance is projected to reap. However, on the ground, certain fault lines have surfaced, raising questions over its viability. A Congress leader, who played a supporting part in firming up the alliance, voiced a fundamental concern that his colleagues shared. "On paper, the alliance is representative of a larger social formation that should combine the Congress's traditional votes with SP's Yadavs and other backward castes and the Muslims. But, you can’t go by social combinations alone. You have to also add up the votes of floating electors, youths and the middle class to have a serious shot at winning,” he said. What are the likely causes of the fissures that could and have erupted?

Seat-sharing 

SP believes it has done a huge favour to the Congress by parting with 105 seats, which the party’s UP minder, Ghulam Nabi Azad, clarified from the beginning as was non-negotiable . The demand sounded “unreasonable” to the SP because since 1989, the Congress’s showing in Uttar Pradesh has steadily declined to the point of being abysmal, while that of the 25-year-old SP has improved dramatically despite the periodic setbacks. Akhilesh gave in because he concluded the “psychological strength” it was expected to give "more than made up" for relinquishing 105 seats. 

The exercise has run aground, notably in Amethi and Rae Bareli, the Gandhis' surviving bastions. The Congress has declared it will contest all the 10 seats, five each in the two Lok Sabha constituencies. The announcement came after the SP announced five candidates, ostensibly as part of the deal. Deepak Singh, the Congress’s Uttar Pradesh legislative council member from Amethi, exhorted the party workers to “prepare to fight on all seats and win” on his Twitter handle.

A Rae Bareli district functionary of the Congress said if the party diluted its claim over Amethi and Rae Bareli, it would be impossible to regain the ground in the rest of UP before the next Lok Sabha polls. The Congress, the functionary said, was ready to give three seats to the SP at the most. “SP’s not ready to withdraw its declared nominees. So, in some seats, we will have to fight them,” he said. 

SP’s viewpoint was that having won seven of Rae Bareli and Amethi’s seats in the 2012 elections, it deserved all the 10. That year, the Congress had taken only two seats in Rae Bareli, Sonia Gandhi’s constituency. In Amethi, Rahul Gandhi's fief, it drew a blank. SP sources also claimed, with some legitimacy, that Rahul’s victory from Amethi in the previous Lok Sabha polls was possible because it did not field a contender and Mulayam directed his legislators to work for the Congress. Textiles Minister Smriti Irani’s unexpected but spectacular entry in Amethi as the Bharatiya Janata Party’s candidate not only generated a buzz but threatened to topple Rahul’s applecart once the “Modi wave” hit the Gandhis' political principality. 

While the Congress pinned its chances of a revival in Uttar Pradesh on Amethi and Rae Bareli, some Congressmen admitted to feeling “aghast” at the fact that no seats were set aside for them in the Avadh and eastern regions. “Faizabad, Barabanki, Ambedkar Nagar, Siddharth Nagara — you name the district and we are not there. How can the alliance work in these places? It’s a solo show,” ranted a former MP from Avadh.  A former UPA minister from the state conceded, “It’s true that a lot of people who worked hard didn't get seats.”

Leadership

“The votes will be cast in Akhilesh’s name and the elections will be fought only under his leadership,” said Sunil Kumar Sajan, a member of the chief minister's core team. He made it clear that there was no space for a collective command. 

Congress sources maintained that “right now”, the party did not have an issue with Akhilesh steering the election wheel. “He is different from Mulayam Singhji. He is not your typical SP, he is the new SP, with more space for youths and all castes and communities. So, Congress supporters and workers will be at ease with him,” explained a key party strategist. To Congress spokesman Akhilesh Pratap Singh, contesting from Rudrapur in east UP, Akhilesh’s greatest plus was “he has nothing negative against him”. “Whether it is corruption or criminalisation, it was Mulayam and Shivpal who didn't want action against the guilty. Akhilesh wanted to punish them,” he claimed. The other reason why the Congress seemingly endorsed and accepted Akhilesh’s leadership was because he had “carved out the best possible platform in the circumstances to take on the BJP and the BSP (Bahujan Samaj Party)”. “There was pressure from the ground from the anti-(Narendra) Modi voters. They didn't necessarily like Mayawati (the BSP presiden) but sought another platform,” said Singh.

Congress and SP sources acknowledged that the question of leadership would acquire a more serious dimension before the 2019 Lok Sabha election. “Then obviously it won’t be about Akhilesh. Rahul will come directly into the picture. If Akhilesh wins the UP election and tries to position himself as a PM candidate, the Congress will reject the attempt. If the alliance endures until 2019, even the seat-sharing formula will alter drastically. We will not allow SP to call the shots,” a Congress senior said. 

Vote transfer

Before the alliance was cemented, SP’s fear, voiced by those close to Akhilesh, was while its own votes could be transferred easily to the Congress, the reverse would not happen. “The Congress’s upper caste voters would have preferred BJP over SP,” a source said.

The source admitted his anxiety persisted. “It depends on how the electioneering goes and how aggressively Rahul sells the alliance. If he dithers even a bit, it’s difficult for us to get the Congress’s votes,” he said.

Singh of the Congress had a different take, contending his traditional Brahmin and Rajput voters were “happy” because they thought the partnership was a “good way of containing SP’s excessive tilt towards the Yadavs”. Salman Khurshid, the UPA’s foreign minister and a former UP Congress president, said: “Both sides have taken cognisance of the practical realities and ensured there's a safety net for everyone.” 

A Congress strategist adduced another line of reasoning. He believed vote transfer was not relevant because “together SP and the Congress were focused on defeating BJP”. “Therefore, a Yadav supporter of SP will vote for a Brahmin candidate of the Congress because he is fixated on making Akhilesh the CM. Even if BJP fields a Yadav against a Brahmin candidate to get the Yadavs on its side, the gambit will not work,” he said. 

Reverse polarisation

The alliance was predicated on the notion that a “secular” tie-up would consolidate the Muslim votes, a determinant in as many as 114 seats, according to researchers. Both sides were aware and wary of the pitfalls that the emphasis on “Muslim consolidation” carried. “My experience is that if a Muslim leader abuses Hindus, only then the Hindus polarise against the Muslim’s party,” said Singh, adding, “Akhilesh must rein in the SP’s intemperate Muslims to check reverse polarisation”.