Why a delay in Janata Parivar merger may not hurt Nitish, Lalu in Bihar

A fellow journalist who met Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar a few weeks before the May 2014 Lok Sabha elections came out fully convinced that Nitish’s gamble of breaking ties with the Bharatiya Janata Party would pay him rich electoral dividend. “Nitish’s optimism stems from favourable reports he has been receiving from the ground which suggest that he will get total support from Muslims,” the journalist told me later.

The actual verdict showed that Nitish was way off the mark in his political assessment. I get a sense that he is not getting the right feedback even now. He is the one who seems to be pushing for a merger of all constituents of the erstwhile Janata Party the most.

 

Nitish’s optimism is solely based on electoral arithmetic. A combined Janata Parivar is expecting votes from, among others, Yadavs, Kurmis, Mahadalits, Muslims and Most Backward Classes (MBCs). These groups together constitute nearly 60 per cent of the state’s population.

However, these social groups have tended to vote for different parties in different elections. Kurmis are unlikely to join hands with Yadavs. MBCs and Yadavs may not like to vote for the same party. Even after a lot of convincing, Mahadalits will find it hard to share the same political space with Yadavs and Kurmis.

The proponents of a combined Janata Parivar will find it hard to manage these contradictions. And if not managed well, there is a danger of some of the groups, which are seen to be potential voters of the combined entity, deserting the ship altogether. A forced merger without ideological cohesion and agreed upon agenda may prove counterproductive. These diverse social groups can be brought together on the basis of forward looking political agenda alone. Have the proponents of a united Janata Parivar evolved one? Does not seem so. 


 

The situation will be totally different if Nitish Kumar and Rashtriya Janata Party leader Lalu Prasad Yadav fight elections as allies. There is a possibility that they can complement each other without bothering too much about managing contradictions. Over the years, Lalu has built his own social coalition and so has Nitish. The merger can disrupt already built social equations.

Nitish and Lalu, though allies now, are fierce competitors themselves. They would like to see their respective parties getting more votes and seats than the other. The competition, though in a friendly environment as allies, may spur them on to give their best. If they become two equal partners of a merged entity, it will lead to dilution of individual sense of responsibility.

Brand Nitish and brand Lalu evoke contrasting responses in Bihar. Even after years of dilution, they retain their appeal across the state. Merger of contrasting brands tend to create confusion. Biharis are still clueless about what will the merged brand stand for. Will it be closer to brand Nitish with a clear focus on development? Or will the brand Lalu that has so far stood for a particular kind of social justice and communal harmony prevail? If the confusion persists, people may find it hard to identify with the merged entity.

Merger now or after assembly elections, the race to Patliputra will depend a great deal on how the two Bihar strongmen negotiate seat sharing arrangement among themselves and whether the saffron surge visible during the last year’s Lok Sabha elections has retained its momentum still.

The last two election cycles (2004 and 2009) have shown that there is 50 per cent probability of assembly elections following the trend of the preceding Lok Sabha elections.