Maharashtra assembly elections, compared to that of Haryana, may be viewed as quite different from several angles. These do not seem to be a strong fight between simply Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Indian National Congress (INC) with reputation of primarily their key leaders’ Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi at stake. There is no denying, these may be regarded as primarily a battle between regional parties dependent on political hold of their respective leaders in Maharashtra. It may be noted of the 48 parliamentary seats from Maharashtra, while 13 were won by INC, 9 by BJP, the rest were won by regional parties and an independent candidate. Though electoral fight was primarily between two blocs, but unlike Haryana elections, where Lok Sabha seats were won only by BJP and INC, Maharashtra politics spells a different political situation. Undoubtedly, in all assembly elections and to a considerable degree in parliamentary polls, regional leaders play a major role. In Haryana, these were primarily members of either BJP or INC. However, their respective identities cannot be sidelined in Maharashtra.
Political developments in Maharashtra, over the past few years, have been marked by state’s key parties splitting between family as well as party members. These were primarily parties whose identity and popularity rested on names of their key leaders and symbols as well as names, they were associated with. Heading the list is of course Shiv Sena founded by Bal Thackeray. After his death in 2012, his youngest son Uddhav Bal Thackeray took over as party’s leader. But, after Bal Thackeray, no other Thackeray or any party member can be credited with apparent command the former had and displayed over Shiv Sena and those associated with it. Interestingly, Uddhav failed to even retain name and symbols of this party. Initially, he and his then party remained associated with BJP, but parted away from it in 2019, and aligned with Congress-led alliance to head the Maharashtra government. However, this step probably proved politically expensive for him as a faction of his own party members parted company with him, with command over the party name and symbols. In alliance with BJP, led by Eknath Shinde, they formed the state government. Uddhav tried using legal strategies to regain his former party’s name and symbols, but did not succeed. Since then, while Shinde heads Shiv Sena, Uddhav’s party has his initials linked with it, that is Shiv Sena (UBT), as a new party.
Undeniably, another name which cannot ever be de-linked from politics of Maharashtra is that of Sharad Pawar, who along with Tariq Anwar and PA Sangma founded Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) in 1999, after their faction parted company with INC. Sharad Pawar’s nephew Ajit Pawar played political cards similar to those of Shinde and with a sizeable number of NCP members parted political company with his uncle and has held command over the name and symbols of this party since 2019. At present, he is the state deputy chief minister. Sharad Pawar chose to add his own name to his new party, which is known as NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar).
Politicking indulged in by Shinde and Ajit Pawar may be viewed as their attempt to assert their political identity by falling back upon that which had already been established by those known as celebrities in this field. Undeniably, the command held by Bal Thackeray and Sharad Pawar in their respective domains cannot be ignored. Shinde and Ajit Pawar apparently chose to take advantage of this. Nevertheless, there is a difference between political factions parting company with parties they were formerly associated with, by forming a new party with a different name and between their preferring to hold command over the former. In case of Shinde and Ajit Pawar, please note their apparent aim to make best of both the worlds- one to cash on the popular appeal of party names and symbols they chose to retain hold of. The other may be viewed as that of their alliance with BJP and in the process pushing the formerly more dominant members of Shiv Sena and NCP literally to opposition as well as their being forced to start projecting their political identities with new names and symbols of their respective parties.
This political drama may not have been staged in in Maharashtra, if Bal Thackeray’s Shiv Sena and Sharad Pawar’s NCP were not popular along with names of their founders. The question of Shinde and Ajit Pawar trying to adopt the image of the same, respectively would not have then probably prevailed. Their primary agenda rested on the hope that they’d succeed in politically cashing on their names and symbols. They apparently did not want to take risk of beginning anew with different party names as well as symbols with which people of Maharashtra were not familiar. It is also possible, their alliance with BJP partly rested on this “strategic” planning of theirs. This may have also been aimed at reducing the political appeal of those, who were earlier strongly known by their old party names and symbols, including Sharad Pawar and Uddhav Thackeray. But, have their plans succeeded?
They have certainly not failed totally as these led to toppling of Thackeray’s government and their alliance with BJP assuming power with Shinde as chief minister. At the same time, parliamentary results from Maharashtra cannot be ignored. Of the 48 seats, as mentioned earlier, INC won 13 seats, BJP – 9, Shiv Sena (UBT)- 9, NCP (SP)- 8, SS-7, NCP-1 and independent-one. It seems, the apparent “strategic” planning of Shinde and Ajit Pawar failed to deprive Sharad Pawar and Uddhav Thackeray totally of their electoral appeal. This is marked by seats won by both. Against Sharad Pawar’s NCP (SP), Ajit Pawar’s NCP won just one. While Uddhav Thackeray’s party won 9, that of Shinde – seven.
What stands out strongly at present, is perhaps the limited importance accorded to both parties in distribution of seats for Maharashtra Assembly Elections. While BJP has decided to contest from around 50% of the 288 seats, roughly 27% have been spared for Shinde’s SS and 17% for Ajit Pawar’s NCP. Against this backdrop and that of two parties’ performance in Lok Sabha elections, would it be fair to assume that their “strategic” planning, a major gamble, to cash on two parties’ names, symbols and more has really helped them gain the political “stature” they probably desired by doing so and aligning with BJP? They did gamble and did succeed a little but not totally. Once the results of Maharashtra polls are declared, the impact of their gamble based on “strategic politicking” will be clearer!