What is happening in Karnataka for the last few weeks is not only bizarre, but also extremely sordid. The results that were thrown up during the last assembly elections led to a completely fractured legislature.
There was a three way division of the seats almost on an even basis. This was so much so, that there was no possibility of the formation of a government, let alone a stable one without two of the major three groups coming together.
The first government that was formed was on the basis of Congress and JD(S) coming together. At some point in time, the JD(S) withdrew its support and went ahead to strike an understanding with the BJP.
The understanding was premised on the division of the 40-month period available to the combination divided equally for Chief Ministership to be held by the two parties alternatively. The JD(S) had the first 20 months with H D Kumaraswamy occupying the Chief Ministerial position. There was a severe friction between the two parties, as and when, the JD(S) tenure was coming to an end.
There is no need for going into the specific details of what went wrong, but the fact is that JD(S) refused to support the BJP. All the three major groups took a public position that they wanted a mid-term election to take place.
After all these, now in a 180 degree reversal of its position, the JD(S) has decided to support the BJP unconditionally. The final call of the Governor is now awaited. Only two possibilities remain – either the Governor concedes the joint plea of the BJP and the JD(S) to swear-in a government with BJP Chief Ministership or to dissolve the House and facilitate fresh elections.
Regardless of whatever outcome ultimately emerges, the question remains that the people are thoroughly disillusioned with this inexplicable behaviour of the major political formations. The major question, however, is how do we explain such political skulduggery.
Who is to be blamed? Were the people of Karnataka wrong in fracturing their mandate to the extent of making a government formation impossible without two groupings coming together? The fact of the matter was, the people could not muster enough confidence in any one of the formations, to give them a clear mandate.
Even though, we do not know as to how the people hardened by this sordid experience will show their electoral preference in the next assembly elections – whenever they take place – the possibility of a fresh fractured mandate cannot be completely ruled out.
The Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, has recently remarked that fractured mandates are becoming big impediments in governance and to a large extent undermining the capacity of governments to take suitable decisions at an appropriate point in time.
Though the Prime Minister has been misrepresented by the mainstream media in terms of contextualising his observations, it is important to properly scrutinise his formulation.
While there may be some element of truth in the assessment that there are difficulties in the decision making process in a coalition arrangement, the implicit suggestion is really open to question. The first issue is whether coalitions in general are to be construed as a progression or a regression in the evolution of democratic principles?
The second question is whether in India marked by diversity in ethnicity, language, culture, unevenness of economic development, social hierarchy – a “one size fit all” solution is possible and acceptable to the people?
The third question is – the difficulty that the PM has referred to was actually with reference to “economic reforms” and not the “nuclear deal” as the media widely reported. Therefore, a question arises as to whether the “economic reforms” itself is not leading to an impact which affects the life and livelihood of a large section of the people?
On all these three counts, the emergence of coalition arrangements have been a natural course of development at the national level. In fact, in some of the states as well, these are emerging. In spite of the earlier antipathy of the two large parties – Congress and BJP – in the past, towards such a course of development, now even they are theoretically reconciled to this emerging reality.
But the problem with both these parties lie in the fact that though formally reconciled to coalition, they are yet to fully assimilate the practice and paradigm that would make coalitions work on a sustainable basis. Flashes of unilateralism generate friction which at times threaten to bring the coalition processes to a grinding halt. This is precisely the reason for the PM’s discomfiture.
However, due to the increasing level of realisation regarding this processes in our national polity, dialogue and engagement has come to the centre stage.
This basic attitudinal problem has also led to the present instability in Karnataka. This in no way defends the opportunism showed by the JD(S). So, the solution for the Karnataka uncertainty has to be through a fresh people’s mandate.
But the people themselves, as well as, the political formations will have to draw essential lessons from the failed and opportunistic alliances that have been struck at various points in time. Though it may sound anachronistic in the present Karnataka context, coalitions have come to stay for some time to come.
(The writer is a Central Secretariat member of the CPM.)
