Polarisation 2.0: Will it win UP again

Welcome to Operation Polarisation, Season Two, in Uttar Pradesh. Season One, launched with the Muzaffarnagar riots in August-September 2013 and ending in Narendra Modi’s declaration of Amit Shah as the man of the match, had a great run. With the state likely to vote as early as February 2017, the BJP is leaving no stone unturned in an attempt to match its 2014 performance. Despite the fact that the BJP hasn’t been in power in the state since 2002 and in the past two Assembly polls ended up a distant third, its breathtaking performance in the Lok Sabha polls makes the party a strong contender for power in the state. Failure to match — or come close — to the magical figure of 2014 would seriously dent the BJP’s image and its bid to secure another term in 2019.

As a combo of communal campaign and development spiel worked for Mr Modi and the BJP in the Lok Sabha elections, it was only to be expected that this formula would be dusted and remodelled for the necessities of 2016-17. The bare outlines of this was visible at the BJP national executive meeting in Allahabad last weekend when Mr Modi was emphatic in using the D-word while Mr Shah stirred the communal cauldron by terming the so-called exodus from Kairana as an eye-opener. A revelation it indeed was as it established that the BJP was again resorting to the use of a two-faced campaign and speaking with a forked tongue. For once, the BJP cannot deflect the blame on “fringe forces” as the party president is not anything but the official voice of the party.

After its claim of an extensive Hindu exodus from the western UP town was established as grossly exaggerated, the BJP will undoubtedly have to temper its Kairana script. But this doesn’t mean that it will stop attempts at widening the communal schism in the state. Issues like the Moradabad riots and Dadri lynching incident may be against all tenets of political morality, but the BJP and the Sangh Parivar have a considered view evolved over many decades that promoting social prejudice and levelling populist charges is the best avenue for its growth. Whether one likes it or not, one section of Hindus can be visualised nodding their heads in appreciation at Sanjeev Balyan’s assertion that after all, Mohammed Akhlaq and his family alone would not have consumed the animal whose meat was sent to the Mathura lab. As storing and eating beef is illegal in UP, the police should investigate the matter and book all Muslims of the village, he said.

There is ample reason to believe that the respite after Hukum Singh’s claim boomeranged on the BJP will last only till the time the party doesn’t get another occasion to vitiate the atmosphere. In the absence of dramatic positives from various initiatives of the Narendra Modi sarkar, it is certain promissory development slogans will alone not secure the state. For the moment, Mr Modi is limiting himself to promising development of the state the way he did in 2014. In Allahabad, Mr Modi also used several politically correct words in his fabled seven-word code for party workers. But when the party chief referred to Kairana from the same venue without a fact check, will party workers take Mr Modi at face value

The BJP has curiously trained all its guns on the Samajwadi Party and made little reference to Mayawati and the Bahujan Samaj Party. It will be incorrect to read a potential understanding between the BJP and BSP into this. On the contrary, the BSP is now regarded as the frontrunner in UP. The BJP’s offensive solely against the SP and the UP government is merely a ploy to garner the anti-incumbency sentiment and position itself as the main alternative. In the normal way, as power has alternated between Ms Mayawati and the Yadav clan since 2002, the BSP would be the natural recipient of the rising anti-SP disposition in the state, and the BJP is trying to elbow out the BSP from public perception.

The BJP is also directing its offensive against SP as it is more identifiably entrenched among Muslims. Projecting the SP as its main foe, the BJP estimates, will enable it to consolidate the Hindu votebank by accusing the SP of appeasing Muslims. Though Muslims have supported the BSP too, the Yadav clan is seen as consistent cultivators of the community. The BJP would prefer if Muslims cast their lot completely with a single party and don’t opt for tactical voting seat by seat and going with the candidate with the best chance of defeating the BJP.

What is crucial, however, in the BJP gameplan is the solution it eventually finds to its leadership dilemma in the state. There are two clear choices: First, it can opt for the Maharashtra, Haryana or Jharkhand models, where votes were sought in the name of Mr Modi. Inversely, the polls in UP can also be contested after projecting a chief ministerial candidate the way the party did in Assam. The BJP’s predicament stems from the fact that it doesn’t have a credible and popular local face in the state. The names that have been floated so far have at least one, if not more, factors ranged against them. Among those that are being considered, Smriti Irani is possibly the most charismatic, but securing acceptability for her in the party and the Sangh will test the sparse persuasive skills of the Modi-Shah duo. The risks of seeking votes in the name of Mr Modi are ample, specially if the gamble fails. Just two years ahead of another parliamentary contest, a bloodied nose will be a setback to Mr Modi’s vanity and the party’s prospects. Deciding the set of issues with which it will seek a mandate is the least of the BJP’s anxieties at the moment.

The writer is the author of Narendra Modi: The Man, the Times and Sikhs: The Untold Agony of 1984