AAP’s election defeat highlights the indifference of middle-class voters towards the Centre’s bids to snatch powers belonging to a state or Union territory as long as their pecuniary interests are protected
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is garlanded by BJP MPs after the party won the Delhi Assembly election, in New Delhi, on February 8. Pic/PTI
The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) victory in the Delhi Assembly elections was built upon its strategy of tying up the arms of its principal rival, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), many, many months before the race to win the elections even began. It is a wonder the AAP still ran hard, managing a vote share just 3.6 percentage points less than that of the BJP-led alliance, before eventually stumbling and falling.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Narendra Modi government tied up the AAP’s arms by setting aside Supreme Court rulings through what were, in reality, “backdoor amendments” of the Constitution. For one, it bound the Delhi government to seek the lieutenant governor’s opinion before taking any executive action based on a Cabinet decision. The L-G could delay, and even sabotage, executive measures. For another, the Centre wrested control from the Delhi government over the Union territory’s bureaucracy.
The L-G and bureaucrats combined to impede the AAP government, as the Supreme Court had apprehended, from giving “expression to the will of the people who elected it.” Governance appeared messy and lackadaisical. Bureaucrats defied their political masters with impunity. Funds for popular schemes were denied or delayed. The issues of Delhiites were neglected because of the duel between the AAP and the BJP for supremacy.
Yet 43.57 per cent of the voters rallied behind the AAP, a drop of 10 per cent from the votes the party polled in 2020. Who among the AAP’s 2020 voters stuck to the party and who deserted it? It seems the lower classes/castes used the elections to express their gratitude to the AAP for its welfare measures, and for boosting the healthcare and educational infrastructure. These measures had little appeal for the relatively privileged groups, among whom the BJP is mostly favoured for its Hindutva ideology and economic policies.
The AAP’s defeat should alarm the Opposition, for the Delhi results show voters do not necessarily punish the party ruling at the Centre for eroding federalism and snatching the powers belonging to a state or Union territory. People are willing to live with authoritarianism in exchange for protecting or enhancing their pecuniary interests—and for resolving myriad issues of their daily existence. The more privileged the voter, the more likely his/her indifference to authoritarianism, borne out by their desertion of the AAP. Governors will now feel emboldened to harass Opposition chief ministers.
The AAP’s anti-corruption image was certainly sullied because of the cases the central agencies lodged against Kejriwal and others over their liquor policy. The evidence against them is thin, with the cases based on the statements of approvers, a point the Supreme Court made during a hearing. Nevertheless, the arrest of their top leaders months before the elections paralysed the AAP, apart from fuelling the narrative that it has degenerated into yet another mainstream party. This narrative had more takers among the relatively wealthier groups than those less so, for whom the easing of the harshness of their daily life matters more than corruption.
For the segment of the middle class opposed to the BJP, the AAP ceased to represent idealism—a bunch of citizens sacrificing their careers to build a better India. The plush chief ministerial residence, popularised as Sheesh Mahal, that Kejriwal built during his tenure eloquently symbolised the abandoning of lofty ideals. No longer did the party attract, as it did earlier, middle-class volunteers, whose zeal had contributed to the AAP winning the battle of perceptions. Their absence was tellingly felt this time round, for the AAP didn’t issue, because of the paucity of funds, TV, newspaper or radio advertisements.
It has to be seen whether the AAP will pugnaciously fight back or melt away into oblivion. The silver lining for the AAP in the gloom of defeat is that a segment of its 22 MLAs belongs to its original core team, hardened by street politics. Yet the seemingly insuperable will of Opposition politicians has bent elsewhere in India, out of the fear of Central agencies. The BJP will likely persist in hounding AAP leaders. The impact of the Delhi results on the AAP government in Punjab could unfold in unforeseen ways.
As for the party’s future, much will depend upon the extent to which Kejriwal’s 10 years in power have eroded his capacity for street politics. He will have to ensure that subaltern caste/class groups and Muslims, on whose support the AAP bagged 43.57 per cent of votes, do not drift away from the party. Gleeful at the AAP’s defeat, the Congress believes it can woo back its traditional supporters whom Kejriwal hijacked a decade ago. Both the Congress and AAP will have to countenance the BJP using policies and ideology for consolidating, even expanding, the support base it has acquired in these elections.
Even more significantly, the BJP’s successive victories in three states—Haryana, Maharashtra and now Delhi—have established that its setback in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections was a mere aberration. It will now eye Bihar, where elections are due later this year. Sleuths knocking on Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Yadav’s door should not surprise anyone, for Delhi has shown authoritarianism does not universally anger people.
The writer is a senior journalist and author of Bhima Koregaon: Challenging Caste
Send your feedback to mailbag@mid-day.com
The views expressed in this column are the individual’s and don’t represent those of the paper.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
