Despite demographic transitions, technological practice and a renewed stress on economic issues, the upcoming general elections in India are not going to be very different from the previous ones. These changes may influence the voting behavior of some groups in major cities, but would not create ripples in the rural and newly urban areas.
India is still a traditional society, which might be modernizing, but it is primordial identity that largely determines voting behavior. Revolution in Communication Technology (RCT) has aided in consolidation of ‘we’ and dissemination of differences between ‘we’ and ‘they’. The electoral victory of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in 2013’s Delhi assembly election challenged the existing determinant. Up to what extent the AAP formula of using day to day issues instead religion, caste or community equations to win polls succeed in India is going to be determined in the 2014 general elections. It is this existing identity based voting behavior that could stop Narendra Modi from becoming Prime Minister of India.
To fulfill Modi’s political dreams, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) has to win about 190-200 seats. Then, with a support from its allied partners, Narendra Modi can lead a new government. Anything less may help the BJP led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) to form the next government, but not Narendra Modi to be the next Prime Minister of India.
[quote]Religion plays a significant role in India's elections[/quote]
In the post-election alliance, due to his alleged role in 2002 Gujarat pogrom, regional parties with substantive number of Muslim populations in their states will shy away from extending their support to him. This was the reason why, after his name was announced as the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP led NDA, a trusted ally, Nitish Kumar-led Janta Dal-United (JD-U), moved out from the ominous alliance. The use of political issues to attract Muslim votes in India is not a new thing in Indian politics. In 1977 when Janta Party government came into power, Prime Minister Morarji Desai secretly invited an Israeli leader Morshe Dayan to New Delhi. When this aberration from India’s pro-Arab position was exposed in 1980, Indira Gandhi exploited it as an issue in her victorious campaign to return to power. The point sold among Muslims voters was JP government’s step to establish relations with Israel was a betrayal that would hurt the political interests of Indian Muslims.
From 1996 to 2004, BJP managed to form and run a coalition government only due to ‘liberal’ Atal Behari Vajpayee as its Prime Minister. Most of its coalition partners wanted to maintain their Muslim vote bank, so they agreed on his name. These two, out of many, are just examples. This equation can be changed only when short term political interests of a regional party prevail over long term popularity.
As religion plays a significant role in India’s elections, Pakistan is being used as a means to make electoral gains. To placate the right wing Hindu voters, Pakistan is being depicted as a sole threat to the Indian nation’s security, and the only way to fight against it is to have a security obsessed government in India. Another portrait of Pakistan is being painted by those who believe that Indian Muslims are tied to their co-religionists from other side of the border. This perception justifies the two nation theory which was given by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, and became a reason for India’s partition in 1947. Both perceptions have been practiced as alternatives by almost all political parties.
The rising political participation and awareness among the Muslims have compelled even the right wing leaders to amend their political vocabulary, though only for electoral reasons.
Narendra Modi, in his many past speeches used vitriolic against Pakistani leadership and people, has maintained an eerie silence over the issue. He has mentioned Pakistan only in context of security of India. He is not the first one to do it, before him his political mentor, who led Ramjanbhoomi- Babri Masjid movement in 1992, and miffed BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani has used almost similar tactics to woo Muslim voters. Mr LK Advani visited Pakistan in 2005 and deliberately made a statement that MA Jinnah was a secular man. The debate is not whether Jinnah was a secular or not; the political ideology which he has represented for almost six decades viscerally considers Jinnah as a villain of India’s national movement. Following LK Advani’s footsteps, his former colleague Jaswant Singh came out with a book Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence. He too construed Jinnah in a way that is different from his previous political ideology.
Right wing leaders have changed their political tunings to make individual gains, others are not laggard. Bihar’s chief minister Nitish Kumar may concoct many reasons for his Pakistan visit, but the hidden motive was to consolidate Muslim votes in Bihar.
It is unfortunate that instead of addressing the socio-economic challenges of the Muslim community, the political class is ready to try any gimmick to garner their votes.
India is still a traditional society, which might be modernizing, but it is primordial identity that largely determines voting behavior. Revolution in Communication Technology (RCT) has aided in consolidation of ‘we’ and dissemination of differences between ‘we’ and ‘they’. The electoral victory of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in 2013’s Delhi assembly election challenged the existing determinant. Up to what extent the AAP formula of using day to day issues instead religion, caste or community equations to win polls succeed in India is going to be determined in the 2014 general elections. It is this existing identity based voting behavior that could stop Narendra Modi from becoming Prime Minister of India.
To fulfill Modi’s political dreams, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) has to win about 190-200 seats. Then, with a support from its allied partners, Narendra Modi can lead a new government. Anything less may help the BJP led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) to form the next government, but not Narendra Modi to be the next Prime Minister of India.
[quote]Religion plays a significant role in India's elections[/quote]
In the post-election alliance, due to his alleged role in 2002 Gujarat pogrom, regional parties with substantive number of Muslim populations in their states will shy away from extending their support to him. This was the reason why, after his name was announced as the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP led NDA, a trusted ally, Nitish Kumar-led Janta Dal-United (JD-U), moved out from the ominous alliance. The use of political issues to attract Muslim votes in India is not a new thing in Indian politics. In 1977 when Janta Party government came into power, Prime Minister Morarji Desai secretly invited an Israeli leader Morshe Dayan to New Delhi. When this aberration from India’s pro-Arab position was exposed in 1980, Indira Gandhi exploited it as an issue in her victorious campaign to return to power. The point sold among Muslims voters was JP government’s step to establish relations with Israel was a betrayal that would hurt the political interests of Indian Muslims.
From 1996 to 2004, BJP managed to form and run a coalition government only due to ‘liberal’ Atal Behari Vajpayee as its Prime Minister. Most of its coalition partners wanted to maintain their Muslim vote bank, so they agreed on his name. These two, out of many, are just examples. This equation can be changed only when short term political interests of a regional party prevail over long term popularity.
As religion plays a significant role in India’s elections, Pakistan is being used as a means to make electoral gains. To placate the right wing Hindu voters, Pakistan is being depicted as a sole threat to the Indian nation’s security, and the only way to fight against it is to have a security obsessed government in India. Another portrait of Pakistan is being painted by those who believe that Indian Muslims are tied to their co-religionists from other side of the border. This perception justifies the two nation theory which was given by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, and became a reason for India’s partition in 1947. Both perceptions have been practiced as alternatives by almost all political parties.
The rising political participation and awareness among the Muslims have compelled even the right wing leaders to amend their political vocabulary, though only for electoral reasons.
Narendra Modi, in his many past speeches used vitriolic against Pakistani leadership and people, has maintained an eerie silence over the issue. He has mentioned Pakistan only in context of security of India. He is not the first one to do it, before him his political mentor, who led Ramjanbhoomi- Babri Masjid movement in 1992, and miffed BJP leader Lal Krishna Advani has used almost similar tactics to woo Muslim voters. Mr LK Advani visited Pakistan in 2005 and deliberately made a statement that MA Jinnah was a secular man. The debate is not whether Jinnah was a secular or not; the political ideology which he has represented for almost six decades viscerally considers Jinnah as a villain of India’s national movement. Following LK Advani’s footsteps, his former colleague Jaswant Singh came out with a book Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence. He too construed Jinnah in a way that is different from his previous political ideology.
Right wing leaders have changed their political tunings to make individual gains, others are not laggard. Bihar’s chief minister Nitish Kumar may concoct many reasons for his Pakistan visit, but the hidden motive was to consolidate Muslim votes in Bihar.
It is unfortunate that instead of addressing the socio-economic challenges of the Muslim community, the political class is ready to try any gimmick to garner their votes.