 "Should we be afraid of a third front coming to power?")
And, if what we are hearing inside the Congress is true – that if the Congress gets less than 115 seats, Rahul Gandhi would rather sit in the opposition than help someone else form a government – then the options are even narrower: Either it is a third front government supported by the BJP or a third front government on its own which would be a highly unstable combination facing the danger of falling any time.
Is this the case?
More From This Section
1996-1998 was such a period. India had a fractured electoral verdict. The BJP got 161 seats but had to cower after the 13-day government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee could not survive. Along with the CPI(M), the Congress (with 140 seats) agreed to support the United Front government consisting of Tamil Maanila Congress, Samajwadi Party, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Asom Gana Parishad, Communist Party of India and Telugu Desam Party.
From the outside, it seemed as if it was a chaotic government, barely able to cohere and function. What lent credence to this was the fact that in two years, India had two prime ministers. But its Common Minimum Programme (and remember, this was a Left-supported government in which the CPI actually participated) had some things the Congress still hasn't been able to do: These included privatisation of Insurance sector; rehabilitation of sick state-owned units; entry of 'low priority' multinationals to be discouraged, but only through fiscal instruments like taxes; higher foreign investment in infrastructure; more federal element in governance; and an increase in agricultural investment. The argument was that those two years represent more economic reform than the entire previous period because those opposing it were part of the government.
But it was a government where individuals rather than political forces were paramount. It was P Chidambaram as Finance Minister, who was able to push through several reforms that the previous Narasimha Rao government and, even before that, Rajiv Gandhi, was unable to do. On the other hand, if you look at the reform closely, only those reforms could be undertaken which increased economic resources and aroused less opposition. Hard decisions like cutting revenue expenditure could not be taken.
Scholars who have studied the pace of economic reform in coalition governments in India say the weak majority of coalition governments is their major strength. Since a collapse of the government would be a loss to every member of the coalition, the fear of losing power could in fact be considered the strength of a weak coalition. This tenuous hold of coalitions on power gives them the license for undertaking reforms.
But this depends a lot on individuals who run the government. The UF Home Minister was Indrajit Gupta. Thankfully, there was no spectacular terrorist attack during that period. But what if there had been?
The way the Left parties are today promoting a third front government (a convention with erstwhile third front constituents is planned soon) suggests they are the most enthusiastic votaries of it. While it is true that they got a higher profile because of the Third Front, it is hard to see how that can be replicated today. In addition to the Congress and the BJP, the Left now has Trinamool Congress to contend with. Trinamool cannot join any government that the Left has any party in.
And the Left and the BJP certainly cannot support the same government any more. They have done, once, when V P Singh became Prime Minister with the support of both the Left and the BJP. That can't happen today. Nor can the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi Party support the same government.
And this is a very tentative, empirically unvalidated, purely anecdotal hypothesis: that in UP, which is a major contributor of elements which contribute to Third Front government, the people are done with regional parties. They've tried BSP and SP both, and now they want to give a major national party a chance. Maybe this feeling of ennui holds the key to the 2014 elections.