As Prime Minister Narendra Modi prepares to take oath of office for the third time, he must bear in mind the overarching message of Mandate 2024 – that voters want stability, but not hegemony. By narrowing the gap between the two national political formations – the NDA and INDIA alliance - to 52 seats, they have curbed the BJP’s electoral dominance while leaving scope for continuity and political stability.
At first glance, the mandate is a mosaic, with no discernible pattern. States falling within the same geographical region have voted differently, reposing faith either in the NDA or the dominant regional party. In the East, the NDA lost considerable ground in Bengal, but swept Odisha and managed to hold on to a majority of seats in Bihar, Jharkhand and the North-East. Likewise, the INDIA alliance dominated Uttar Pradesh, but was wiped out in the neighbouring states of Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Uttarakhand. Bellwether seats, too, have thrown up a mixed result, albeit with the majority going to the BJP.
Enough fodder has been generated to keep analysts busy for weeks, but the end result is a healthy dose of democracy, along with the likelihood of a stable regime. While the BJP has the numbers, its allies have generally proved less reliable than those of the Congress. But voters’ outright rejection of the BJP’s egregious political opportunism in Maharashtra may discourage parties from switching sides.
As of now, the NDA allies have declared they will not only stand by the alliance but by PM-elect Narendra Modi. In his third term in office, the onus is on him to ensure the coalition stays together, so that the government can run without constant hiccups. If that means putting paid to the proposed Uniform Civil Code, toning down the mandir-masjid rhetoric, limiting the free run that regulatory agencies have enjoyed and adopting a more accommodating approach on several fronts, so be it.
Prima facie, a coalition government is less stable than a single party majority. But after the experiments of the late 1980s and 90s, India mastered the art of stable coalitions, as in 1999, 2004 and 2009. Political competition is always healthy, and it can be argued that too much stability is bad for democracy, and for economic growth.
The stable, One Party Dominant (OPD) or Congress system which lasted until 1977 did not deliver economic growth. But subsequent coalition governments did. Nor can it be said that only a single-party majority government can take bold decisions. It was PV Narasimha Rao’s minority government that triggered economic liberalisation and introduced Panchayati Raj, and the Pokhran II nuclear tests were conducted by a BJP-led coalition. The point is that political stability cannot deliver without good governance.
What’s desirable is policy continuity in terms of economic and security drivers. A raft of initiatives has been set in motion in the last five years: the Semiconductor and Quantum Missions, Gati Shakti (for improving logistics), Product Nation (India as a global manufacturing hub) and space sector reforms, not to mention the Rs one lakh crore corpus for financing private sector R&D in sunrise sectors. These are critical for India and must be carried forward, regardless of the shape of government. The Quantum Mission may not make sense to most voters but its importance vis-a-vis national security cannot be underrated.
Coalition dharma, a term coined by the late Atal Bihari Vajpayee, is the only means of keeping political instability at bay in the current scenario. Expectation management is tricky. Even former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had to face a trust vote precipitated by the Indo-US nuclear deal. But the UPA coalition of over a dozen parties, with outside support from others, not only lasted a full term but won a second with a larger mandate.
So, the Congress in the past has shown its ability to effectively run a multi-party coalition. But these coalitions were held together by the logic of power-sharing. If the INDIA alliance finds itself in the Opposition, it will have to make consicous efforts to remain united. For its part, the BJP may have to clean house after fixing accountability for the losses in UP, Rajasthan, Haryana and Manipur.
The NDA governments of the last 10 years have not been successful in managing the expectations of allies. The Shiv Sena, Shiromani Akali Dal and various regional parties abandoned ship, while JD (U) leader Nitish Kumar’s revolving-door politics is the subject of many memes. Modi cannot afford to lose sight of the fact that his two principal allies — the JD(U) and TDP — would be comfortable in either of the two possible coalitions. Both parties have already indicated that they might lobby for special status for their respective states, and for certain Constitutional offices and ministries.
There is always the possibility of bringing more parties into the fold, so that no one member of the NDA “family” can exert undue pressure, but the BJP would do better to eschew Maharashtra-like shenanigans and focus on keeping existing allies happy. Voters have exercised their franchise with great wisdom, and indicated that they want stability but will reject hegemonic tendencies. These sentiments must be respected.
Bhavdeep Kang is a senior journalist with 35 years of experience in working with major newspapers and magazines. She is now an independent writer and author
