Nitish Kumar’s breaking away from the Bharatiya Janata Party in Bihar to join Lalu Prasad Yadav’s Rashtriya Janata Dal has put the spotlight on the former deputy CM of the state – Sushil Kumar Modi. Would Nitish have stayed if Modi was involved more? Modi says no; Nitish’s ambition came in the way. In this interview with DH’s Amrita Madhukalya, he speaks about what lies next for the BJP and says that both mandal and kamandal are with the saffron party. Edited excerpts.
Do you think that the moving away of JD(U) could have been averted?
It was difficult to stop the JD(U). There were three important factors, among several others, at play: First, Nitish Kumar’s ambition to be at the national level; second, Lalan Singh (JDU National President) who wanted the position that RCP Singh had at the Centre; third, RJD’s desperation to come to power.
Nitish Kumar had, for long, nursed national ambitions, to be the prime minister, but could not see any scope in that direction as a BJP ally. The BJP has leaders like Narendra Modi, Amit Shah and others. After 18 years as CM of Bihar, he wanted to move up.
In 2020, the RJD with the Mahagathbandhan alliance came close to winning the Assembly elections under Tejashwi Yadav. They are just desperate to win and come to power. So, the ambition of Nitish Kumar, the greed of Lallan Singh and the desperation of Lalu Yadav converged to lead to the current situation.
There was a feeler sent that Nitish be made the vice-presidential candidate, but it was not acceptable to the BJP. There were a few issues here and there, but we could not have stopped him or his ambition. Allegations that Chirag Paswan or RCP Singh were the reasons are not true.
I must also add that, Nitish Kumar’s popularity has taken a beating -- in 2010, he had won 115 seats in the Assembly elections, which was reduced to 71 in 2015 when he was with Lalu Yadav’s RJD. He was reduced to 43 in 2020, which has now risen to 45.
The BJP had said that Nitish’s move came as a surprise, but the word in Patna is that this was brewing for a while. Did you anticipate this?
I would be lying if I say we did not feel something was amiss. Things were a bit uncomfortable between BJP and JDU. We were aware that he was inching closer to Tejashwi Yadav. But we didn’t expect him to join hands with his oldest foe, Lalu. In 1994, he left Lalu Yadav to form his own party. He stood against Congress during the Emergency. He was with the RJD for only two years, and he broke away with them to join us. From 1994 to 2015, he was with the BJP.
What is the plan of action for the BJP in Bihar now?
It’s only been a few days and we are still developing a strategy for the way ahead. We’re clear of one thing – we will fight the next elections in the name of Narendra Modi. People remember the politics of the 80s and 90s and the performance of Deve Gowda and I K Gujral governments then. They will not want a fractured mandate; they will want a government with a majority.
We cannot say what will happen in the next Assembly elections, but people will vote for Narendra Modi in 2024.
The BJP has a strong network at the booth level, and we are working with all classes. Narendra Modi is a symbol of the backward community in Bihar. We can safely say that mandal (indicating backward classes, after the Mandal Commission) is with us, and kamandal (meaning the Hindu votebank) is also with us.
There is speculation that the development in Bihar could energise the Opposition. Do you believe so?
No, on the contrary, there’s now more confusion, because there is a new claimant to the post that already had Mamata Banerjee, Arvind Kejriwal, and KCR as contenders. Now there’s a new competitor, Nitish Kumar. If you look closely, Mamata Banerjee is a taller leader; she’s run the state without an alliance for 15 years. Arvind Kejriwal has governments in two states, with a three-fourth majority in Delhi. KCR has its own government. Nitish Kumar, on the other hand, is piggy-riding on the back of the BJP or RJD. Why would anyone welcome him?
These parties made a broader alliance in Bihar, but in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections in Uttar Pradesh, BSP, SP, and RLD came together with the tacit support of Congress.
The media said that Muslims, Dalits and Yadavs came together; BJP still got 64. Votes don’t transfer so freely, each candidate has, his caste, party and his own votes.
The BJP has faced criticism that it subsumes its regional allies. How do you counter that?
There’s no such reason. Look at the Uttar Pradesh assembly elections – we gave Sanjay Nishad’s Nishad Party a respectable number of seats (10 seats). The criticism has come from Akali Dal, who went away not because the BJP was subsuming it but because they opposed us on the farm laws. Shiv Sena left us because they wanted more seats in their share. The Shiv Sena betrayed us. In the Northeast, the BJP is in alliance with several smaller parties, and they are doing just fine.
Do you think communication between the BJP and the JD(U) was better when you were involved?
These ideas are fuelled by Nitish Kumar’s statements. There’s no denying that situations change when people change, there’s no denying that. But senior ministers like Amit Shah, Bhupender Yadav, and Dharmendra Pradhan were in touch with Nitish; even the prime minister called him occasionally. The main issue is his ambition. How could I have stopped that? It’s not right to say that Sushil Modi would have changed matters.
Deccan Herald is on WhatsApp Channels | Join now for Breaking News & Editor's Picks