Is anti-Modi alliance of regional parties viable?

The Modi government has failed to evolve any better coordination with the States that are ruled by its own party. Their position is worse than those that are ruled by non-BJP parties. The non-BJP governments enjoy the autonomy to express their opposition to any attempt to force them to accept the dictates of the Centre

India cannot afford to be a centralised and unitary State. The makers of India have clearly shown their inclination towards federalism, and that is not without reason. Any movement to restore federalism will require strong commitment and unshakable conviction. Does the recent endeavor show it?

RECENT endeavors by West Bengal Chief Minister and Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhara Rao (KCR) has brought back nationwide attention to the issue of Centre-State relation. States were individually quarreling with the Centre and gaining support from others too.

However, the efforts were taking off to the desired level. Now, the energetic response of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin and the activeness of KCR have given rise to some possibility of an alliance of regional parties with Centre-State relations at the core. Rao flew to Mumbai and met Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and asked him to join hands in the effort to make a front against the current political ecosystem created by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP. The reaction of non-BJP ruled States is not without basis.

Who can deny that the Prime Minister has been harsh, at times atrocious, in his dealings with non-BJP ruled States? It would be wrong to think that the Modi government is only due to the political differences between the BJP and the opposition parties. The basic reason behind the confrontation has been the ideology of the BJP and the RSS.

Their politics is aimed at bringing the entire country into its fold and ruling it in a highly centralised manner. It requires the RSS to install BJP governments in all the States. The term "double-engine government," coined by the BJP, spells out its political ambitions. The term, which has never been used by any previous regime, clearly indicates a veiled threat to the people that if they want central assistance to develop their States, they will have to vote for the BJP in both the assembly and Lok Sabha. A modest appeal, instead, could have been made without injuring political pluralism, an essential aspect of Indian democracy. In India, the change of government does not affect the composition of the administration or judiciary. The continuity is best exemplified by the legislative continuity of the Rajya Sabha, which cannot be dissolved. This house represents the States and functions as the protector of the federal structure of the country.

The BJP did not stop at propagating political uniformity as a concept only. It went on to dislodge governments led by non-BJP parties by applying new types of corruption. It engineered defections through mass resignations by a group of opportunist legislatures from the ruling party, which propelled the ruling government into the minority. The technique was applied in many states, including Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Goa. Who can deny that these were done by using money bags?

The attempt to impose the rule of the same party at the Centre and in the States only demonstrates the BJP's disbelief in federalism. It would be wrong to think that by installing its government in States, the party could achieve better coordination between the Centre and the States. Events do not support the assumption.

The Modi government has failed to evolve any better coordination with the States that are ruled by its own party. Their position is worse than those that are ruled by non-BJP parties. The non-BJP governments enjoy the autonomy granted by the Constitution and are also free to express their opposition to any attempt to force them to accept the dictates of the Centre. The BJP governments in States cannot do that. They are not consulted on most of the issues. They have to only follow the Centre's decisions without questioning them.

The note-ban and the corona lockdown were the best examples of centralised decision making in which the Centre completely threw away the idea of federalism. States were completely ignored, and BJP-ruled States were no exception. The Modi government did the same when it came to enacting farm laws. The process was repeated while withdrawing these laws.

In recent years, the use of central investigating agencies, including the ED, the CBI, and the Income Tax department, has been the real irritant in Centre-State relations. The manner in which they are being used exhibits political vendetta. They have become a tool for intimidating rival parties or gaining benefits during election times. Raids on opposition leaders during elections show the level to which these agencies have come down. How can we ignore the fact that a highly placed officer in the ED is now contesting assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh on a BJP ticket?

This is not only the governor of West Bengal who is quarreling against Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, others are also following the same path. But the move to form an alliance of regional parties needs to be examined from a proper political perspective. Is the restoration of federalism the primary goal of these parties? Their past records and current articulation hardly inspire confidence. Both Mamata Banerjee and KCR have supported the BJP in the past. Their role in Parliament, too, does not conform to their recent commitment to federalism. They have been seen facilitating the smooth passage of the Modi government's bills.

They only come out strongly when their own political interests are injured. Their attempt to keep the Congress away from the alliance against the Modi government is also extremely flawed. The party governs some important States, and no national alternative can survive without it. It creates doubt about the intentions of the endeavor and weakens the case.

If issues as big as federalism are concerned, narrow political considerations should take a back seat. Though Chief Minister Stalin has agreed to participate, no clear assurance has come from Uaddhav Thackrey. Sharad Pawar, the senior leader, seems to have rejected the idea of a Modi alliance without Congress in it. He sidestepped the issue and said his meeting with KCR was centreed on the issue of development. India cannot afford to be a centralised and unitary State. The makers of India have clearly shown their inclination towards federalism, and that is not without reason. Any movement to restore federalism will require strong commitment and unshakable conviction. Does the recent endeavor show it?

(The author is a senior journalist. He has experience of working with leading newspapers and electronic media including Deccan Herald, Sunday Guardian, Navbharat Times and Dainik Bhaskar. He writes on politics, society, environment and economy)