If anyone thought that there would be no tussle between BJP and Shiv Sena post the grand success in the 2019 general election, then they are either incredibly positive or are unaware of Maharashtra’s real politics. Not to forget that despite remaining with NDA, Shiv Sena towed the Congress line for almost five years. Even Shiv Sena’s mouthpiece ‘Saamna’ recited the Congress slogan ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’ and also praised Rahul Gandhi. However, reality always bites. Uddhav Thackeray was well aware that SS alone would be decimated in the general election. BJP too knew that its seat numbers will be reduced without an alliance especially when there’s a Congress-NCP alliance. Thus, dire need brought BJP and Shiv Sena together. BJP being accommodative gave a couple of more seats to Shiv Sena and they perhaps agreed to BJP’s demand to contest equal seats in the upcoming 2019 assembly election of Maharashtra.
The problem started now after a BJP member claimed that although both BJP and Shiv Sena are contesting assembly election as an alliance, Devendra Fadnavis will remain as Chief Ministerial candidate. To that Shiv Sena disapproved citing that as per understanding the Chief Ministership will be shared between BJP and Shiv Sena. The issue is not so simple. Shiv Sena, although at present is trailing from BJP in both vote share and seats, is not ready to leave the big-brother status in Maharashtra polity. On the other hand, BJP is aware that it’s the emerging party in Maharashtra polity with the largest vote share. Thus, should the party give away pole position to Shiv Sena? It’s politics, not a charity game!
What will happen and what should happen? But before that let’s do some number crunching to understand Maharashtra politics vis-à-vis rise of Shiv Sena and BJP.
While the Shiv Sena was founded in 1966, it contested Maharashtra assembly election in alliance with BJP only in 1990. Earlier, they had contested independently for Parliament since 1971. They then started participating in General Assembly elections with Goa in 1989. Then they allied with BJP and became a part of NDA in Maharashtra although Shiv Sena contested election in UP, Goa, Haryana, Delhi, Himachal Pradesh and even Odisha on its own. In 1989 it won its lone Parliament seat. Then in the 1990 election, it participated in Maharashtra assembly election in alliance with BJP. It got 52 seats with a vote share of 15.94% whereas BJP got 42 seats with a vote share of 10.71%. BJP earlier contested 1980 and 1985 Maharashtra assembly elections where it got 9.38% and 7.25% vote share respectively getting 14 and 16 seats respectively.
The BJP-Shiv Sena alliance achieved immense success in the 1990 assembly election, winning 94 seats together. This rise continued and in 1995 Maharashtra assembly election the alliance got 138 seats, just 7 seats short of the majority. Thus, they formed the government with the help of some independent candidates and Chief Minister post went to Shiv Sena. (Manohar Joshi). Frankly, Shiv Sena was the larger party of the alliance having 16.39% vote share (73 seats) whereas BJP had 12.80% vote share (65 seats). In 1999 as well as 2004 assembly election, although Congress-NCP alliance won the elections, Shiv Sena and BJP maintained their status-co with loss of just a few seats. In 1999 assembly election BJP had 14.54% vote share an increase of 1.74% whereas Shiv Sena too got 17.33% vote share an increase of 0.94%. In 2004 Maharashtra assembly election BJP got 13.67% vote share around 0.87% less than that of 1999 whereas Shiv Sena increased it’s vote share to 19.97% a further increase of 2.64% from 1999 assembly election. At this point, it was strongly established that Shiv Sena is the big brother of BJP in Maharashtra with around 6.1% vote share more than that of BJP.
However, post-2004 Shiv Sena faced a lot of intra-party issues. Uddhav Thackeray got the Shiv Sena Chief post from founder Bala Saheb Thackeray – he is more ambitious but apparently has fewer leadership qualities. In 2005, Raj Thackeray, who was considered as the best organiser in Shiv Sena and viewed as more capable than Uddhav Thackrey, quit Shiv Sena and formed a new party as MNS. This created a split in the Shiv Sena. That’s why in 2009 assembly election, Shiv Sena’s vote share reduced to 16.06% whereas BJP’s vote share increased up to 14.02%. BJP got 46 seats whereas Shiv Sena got 45 seats. The analysis of the 2009 assembly election also says that due to MNS, both Shiv Sena as well as BJP lost many seats. In fact, NCP-Congress’s win for the third time was ensured by MNS’s participation in the election as a vote cutter.
However, it’s a fact that since then Shiv Sena became weak due to intra-party frictions. In 2012, Bala Saheb Thackeray passed away. Then the condition of Shiv Sena worsened as many veteran and mass leaders quit the party since 2004. Many started apprehending Shiv Sena’s future as a political force in Maharashtra.
Then came the 2014 general election. Banking upon Narendra Modi’s popularity and upon anti-UPA wave, Shiv Sena and BJP got historic numbers in term of seats and vote shares. BJP got 23 seats out of 24 it contested with a vote share of 27.3% whereas Shiv Sena won 18 out of 20 seats with a vote share of 20.60%. The success was viewed as a success of BJP and Narendra Modi. BJP thought that it has now better vote share and better popularity than Shiv Sena. Thus, it asked at least equal seats to contest in 2014 state assembly election – to which Shiv Sena under Uddhav Thackeray refused. Because of disagreement on seat sharing both BJP and Shiv Sena decided to contest the election unaccompanied. Same was the situation with NCP and Congress. Thus, for the first time, four parties contested the Maharashtra assembly election 2014 individually to know their status in the polity. Voters too intimated who is at what position. BJP got 27.8% vote share with 122 seats whereas Shiv Sena got 19.8% vote share with 63 seats. Congress and NCP got 18% and 17.1% vote share respectively. That established who is at what position.
However, Shiv Sena wasn’t aggregable to its present position and constantly demanded that it should be treated as a bigger brother in Maharashtra state polity. In 2019 general election also, BJP got 27.53% vote share with 23 seats out of 25 seats whereas Shiv Sena got 23.29% vote share with 18 seats out of 23 seats it contested. Shiv Sena got 2.60% vote share more than that of 2014. Then it’s a fact that Shiv Sena contested in three more seats compared to 2014 and then 2019 general election win is considered a win for Narendra Modi and not of any other.
Now the question arises – what will lead to the 2019 state assembly elections? No doubt, Shiv Sena will demand the Chief Minister’s post at least on sharing basis (2.5 years each). On the other hand, BJP is not likely to agree with that. BJP will ask for equal seats of balance seats after allotting to smaller allies along with BJP’s CM. BJP has another advantage that Maharashtra Congress is crumbling and most Congress leaders are trying to join BJP as first choice or NCP as the second choice. On the other hand, NCP is also not in a good situation especially due to the frictions among family members as well as party members. Thus, I won’t be surprised if BJP and Shiv Sena again go solo in the assembly election. BJP will hope that it will capture spaces from Congress and NCP while Shiv Sena will harp on possible anti-incumbency of Devendra Fadnavis. What will be the result? Well, only time will tell that!
However, if you ask what should happen, I would predict that both BJP and Shiv Sena should do a compromise on some give and take terms. BJP should keep CM post whereas Uddhav Thackeray might be given some important central cabinet portfolio like ‘Agricultural Ministry’ or ‘Railway Ministry’ etc. If Uddhav Thackeray desires to be the CM, he must agree for the division of Maharashtra. There’s a long pending demand to divide Maharashtra into three states – Vidharba, Marathwada and Bundelkhand along with giving Mumbai a state status. It’s Shiv Sena who is opposing such division tooth and nail. Thus, Mr.Uddhav Thackeray, if you want to be a CM then agree to the division of Maharashtra else remain sulking forever. Not to forget that Lalu Yadav finally agreed for Jharkhand bifurcation in 2000 as RJD couldn’t get the required number to form government. It agreed to JMM and BJP’s demand for Jharkhand and was thus able to make Rabri Devi Chief Minister for the third time as minus Jharkhand MLAs, RJD got the majority. Thus, in politics, there’s always give and take. If Maharashtra can be divided it would be good for governance as too big states are difficult to govern. Will Uddhav Thackeray think positively?