Ethnicity Versus Nationalism In Maharashtra... And Elsewhere?

Three political parties. Two ideological streams. But one visceral common fear that binds them together.

The formation of the Shiv Sena-led government in Maharashtra, supported by the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party, has confused many political observers and commentators. It is difficult to fathom how secularism can reconcile with the sharply vicious Hindutva that the Shiv Sena has practised in the past, how the Congress-NCP could forget the party’s role in the demolition of the Babri Masjid and the bitterest riots that followed which cost it a government in 1995.

The Shiv Sena is still unable to let go of its Hindutva as seen in its partial support to the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha last week, when it walked out in the Rajya Sabha. But it has meekly accepted the Congress’ insistence on describing the Maha Vikas Aghadi government in Maharashtra as a ‘secular’ government committed to the poor people of the state. The Congress was opposed to the CAB, yet it did not utter a word in reprimand to the Shiv Sena over its partial support to the bill.

The most facile explanation for their contradictory stands is that power is the glue that is binding them together. But that is not quite the whole of it.

Shiv Sena’s Convenient Hindutva

The Shiv Sena does not have a secular vision for the country, state or party. Even its Hindutva is far more lumpen than the BJP’s as seen from its role in the 1992-93 Mumbai riots following the demolition of the Babri Masjid which, contrary to the common perception and some of its more recent claims, it did not help to bring down. Bal Thackeray knew that fact very well for it was he who had ordered all Shiv Sainiks out of Ayodhya on December 5, 1992, a day before the demolition of the mosque, over a petty ego clash with the BJP top brass. But he was wont to claiming credit for anything that enhanced his current reputation – he kept up this particular pretence until he thought he would get into trouble with the Allahabad High Court hearing the demolition case. Whereupon he accused the BJP of lacking courage to accept its role and of shifting the blame on to the Shiv Sena.

Sadhus present a momento to Uddhav Thackeray in Ayodhya, on Nov. 24, 2018. (Photograph: PTI)

Now this lack of conviction on the part of the Shiv Sena is strangely what seems to have finally persuaded the Congress leadership to give in to the urgings of its state leaders to ally with the Sena. If you keep clinging to ideology and secularism, there will be neither secularism nor a party left at the end of five years to defend or uphold that ideology, those opposed to the alliance were told.

It is thus a basic existential crisis that has brought all three together.

Is Ethnicity > Religion And Nationalism?

While that explains the decisions of the Congress and the NCP, what of the Shiv Sena which was already an ally of the BJP and would have been automatically part of its government? It becomes increasingly obvious that the insistence on chief ministership for two and a half years was just a red herring – they knew it was a condition impossible for the BJP to accept.

Narendra Modi and Amit Shah needed a docile man in the office of the chief minister to forward their agenda without question – and this is where it gets complicated. For their agenda was not Hindutva alone, it was also the decimation of all opposition and that included the Shiv Sena which was preventing its complete domination over Maharashtra.

This is where Uddhav Thackeray recognised the danger to his party’s existence in the nick of time – so it is not the BJP he was opposed to per se but to the Modi-Shah agenda that raised the spectre of the crushing of the Marathi identity and brought into play the fears that had been originally responsible for the creation of the Shiv Sena in the 1960s.

Entwined with it was the old dislike and fear of Gujaratis, that in recent years Modi-Shah personify, and are seen as reasserting the Gujarati presence in Mumbai.

What Modi and Shah seem to fail to understand—as is obvious from the events unfolding in the North East in response to the Citizenship Amendment Act—is that ethnicity often has deeper roots and could override both religion and nationality in the common interest of various castes, classes, religions, and ideologies.

So if the Shiv Sena is asserting Marathi ethnicity against the Gujaratis, the Congress and the NCP are seeking to recapture their Maratha moorings that have been shaken up by the BJP over the past five years. But with them too it is clear that the BJP bothers them less than do Modi and Shah.

Narendra Modi pays tributes to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj during an election rally in Mumbai, on Oct. 18, 2019. (Photograph: PTI)

Pawar Play, Sonia’s Shift

Consider the position taken by NCP president Sharad Pawar, the mastermind behind this government. Through many of his statements, Pawar has revealed his obsession with the duo but more particularly Shah. With Modi, he still professes a friendship, though it is increasingly clear to him that neither leader is interested in helping him retain his base among Marathas and co-operatives in the state. To him, both are bent upon decimating his party altogether. He knows that, like the Shiv Sena, an attempt at friendship with Modi-Shah will be doubly dangerous for his survival.

Conversely, self-preservation was also the reason why Ajit Pawar, albeit foolishly, allied with the BJP. He too had to safeguard his interests, if not from outside then in alliance with the BJP. At the time when Ajit Pawar offered support to the BJP, it did seem as though the MVA alliance would not really come through because of the intransigence of the Congress leaders who were stuck on secularism and not budging from their ideological position.

However, if one relooks at Congress interim president Sonia Gandhi’s address to the Congress Parliamentary Party a few days ago, she never mentioned the letters ‘BJP’ even once in her speech. All her references were to “the Modi-Shah government”.

Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi, Narendra Modi, Amit Shah, and other political leaders, at Parliament, in New Delhi, on Dec. 13, 2019. (Photographer: Arun Sharma/PTI)

Also Read: Pawars And Thackerays: Bitter Rivals And Best Friends

MVA’s Glue: Each Ally’s Weakness... And Modi-Shah

So beneath the obvious and beyond the incomprehensible, it is clear that it is the Modi-Shah duo that worries all three parties more for different reasons. At least in the case of the Shiv Sena and the NCP—if not the Congress which is more national—there is a subliminal sub-nationalism that is asserting itself in the interest of all three to forge an alliance for their very survival.

All three parties are weak at the grassroots, so there is no danger of their alliance coming apart unless and until one surges ahead of the other two, which may not happen very soon.

NCP workers stage a protest to condemn the registration of a money laundering case against Sharad Pawar, in Mumbai, On Sept. 25, 2019. (Photograph: PTI)

The BJP may be strong nationally but in Maharashtra with three parties ranged against it, it is equally weak, given that even with the Shiv Sena on its side, it could not win enough seats to form a government.

The Maha Vikas Aghadi is thus likely here to stay. For sub-nationalism and ethnicity will always have a stronger appeal than Hindutva, secularism, or nationalism. As Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray tweeted, “Everything the BJP does cannot be labeled patriotism, everyone who opposes what they do is not anti-national.”

That is a harsher criticism than the Congress or NCP have ever offered and a cue for all opposed to the BJP.

Sujata Anandan is a political journalist and the author, most recently, of ‘Maharashtra Maximus: The State, Its People and Politics’.

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BloombergQuint or its editorial team.