As we reach almost the end of the first month of the new year, the Congress government in Karnataka completes 20 months in office—a third of its 60-month (five-year year) term. The next 20 months will decide the fate of the government in the state. 

One notices that most regimes in Karnataka tend to slip perilously in the second phase of their terms, often due to a drift in governance and loss of focus. Ultimately, they find it difficult to recover from this non-performance and are shown the door. This explains the revolving-door politics seen in Karnataka since 1985, where no ruling party has been able to secure a clear majority at the end of its term.

Three principles define and decide the success of a state government: efficiency in governance, unity in the ruling party, and social harmony. A review of past governments would indicate that they failed to abide by all or at least two of these principles. 

Respond To Aspirations

There is enough empirical evidence to show that across the country, governments have been returned to power when voters perceive a dispensation to have performed reasonably well on key indicators of governance. A Lokniti post-poll study done in Karnataka after the 2024 Lok Sabha election shows that if the Congress was able to return to its 2014 Lok Sabha tally (nine seats), it had a lot to do with citizens’ perception of the implementation of its key guarantees. Its improved performance among women voters also underlines this trend. The Congress’s clean sweep in the recent by-elections was, along with other significant factors, also largely because of these guarantees. Thus, a focus on governance that responds to the aspirations of different segments of society is a sure route to success.

How public perception changes amid scandals and controversies involving the government and its leaders is also an issue. In the past, this factor has shifted the government’s attention away from governance to fire-fighting and damage control measures. The current government in Karnataka is facing a similar challenge currently. Will the next 20 months see it somewhat tiding over allegations of misuse of power, or will they further dent the image of the government?

Don’t Frustrate Voters

A second crucial element that has in the past derailed ruling parties is disunity. Electoral victories have been won on the basis of party unity. Sometimes, voters, frustrated by incessant infighting within a ruling party, may boot it out of power. The Congress had fought the 2023 assembly elections as a united force. Setting aside differences on who should be the Chief Minister, the focus was on coming to power first and then resolving the issue. On the other hand, divisions within the previous incumbent, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), were all too visible during its campaign for the elections. Now, though the ruling Congress has somewhat managed to resolve the leadership issue within its own ranks with an understanding between the top two leaders, internal strife has reared its head frequently and the top brass has had to intervene from time to time. The shadow boxing, mainly between the supporters of Siddaramaiah and D.K. Shivakumar, is patently visible. What has worked so far to the advantage of the Congress is that the state unit of the BJP is equally bogged down by infighting. 

The next 20 months would be crucial for both players. Past experience has shown amply that incessant internal squabbles can cost parties. While a stable leadership is important, it also needs to be smooth and demonstrate policy continuity.

Build Confidence—And Harmony

The third and final element of governance, social harmony, is a by-product of several factors. It requires maintaining law and order, the safety of women, religious peace, cordial relations between caste groups at the grassroots, and containing social acrimony. Achieving this implies that any ruling party will have to take a proactive approach and build confidence among all stakeholders. In the coming 20 months, one would look for indications of the same. Any lapse here can seriously erode public confidence.

(Dr. Sandeep Shastri is the National Coordinator of the Lokniti Network)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

With less than a week to go before the Maharashtra polls, election fever is intensifying. Both major coalitions have unveiled their manifestos. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has introduced the “Batenge to Katenge” slogan and its refined version, “Ek Hai to Safe Hai“, while the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) is relying on its familiar caste census strategy, promising to lift the 50% reservation cap.

Meanwhile, rebel candidates are flexing their muscles, aiming to disrupt both sides in this fierce contest. In a last-minute move to attract farmers facing agricultural distress, the MVA has promised a Minimum Support Price (MSP) of Rs. 7,000 per quintal for soybean.

After travelling across all six regions of Maharashtra, it remains difficult to determine which side holds the upper hand. The election has evolved into a hyper-local contest. Below are the findings from my journey:

Seat-By-Seat Contest

This election lacks a single overarching theme; instead, it comprises 288 localised battles. It’s a highly individualised contest where the image and accessibility of the incumbent MLA or candidate, local caste dynamics, power structures, and relationships outweigh manifesto promises and government performance. Voters are often undecided, and party symbols may not be significant. For instance, in Shrirampur, the Congress dropped a sitting MLA, who switched to the NCP (Ajit Pawar faction). The Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) has also fielded a candidate who was previously an MLA for two terms on a Congress ticket. All three main candidates share a Congress lineage.

Maratha vs. OBC, Dhangar vs. ST

The Maratha reservation demand has created a divide between Marathas and OBCs, particularly in Marathwada and parts of North Maharashtra. A clear Maratha vs. OBC polarisation can be observed in Manoj Jarange Patil’s stronghold, Marathwada, where the MVA led in 32 and the Mahayuti in 12 assembly segments in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. However, mixed signals from Manoj Jarangesuch as his withdrawal from the electoral race just 12 hours after announcing his support for specific candidates and accusations from his associates of colluding with Sharad Pawarhave somewhat weakened the movement.

Conversely, OBCs, including the Mali, Dhangar, and Vanjari communities, have rallied behind the Mahayuti after Pankaja Munde’s loss in the Lok Sabha elections. The potential inclusion of Dhangars in the ST list post-election has also caused tension. ST communities, wary of diminishing reservation quotas and disillusioned after the Supreme Court’s rejection of 100% reservation in gram panchayat jobs under the PESA Act, appear to lean towards the MVA.

Marathi vs. Gujarati Asmita

The MVA has invoked the Marathi asmita (pride) card, with Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar accusing the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of undermining regional parties that represent the Marathi identity. While this Marathi-Gujarati rivalry might resonate in urban areas, it is less impactful in rural regions with fewer migrants.

The ‘Betrayal’ Factor

The betrayal narrative, which benefited the MVA in the general elections, has weakened, but it still holds some influence. Research indicates that while the Sharad Pawar-led Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) captured 74% of the unified NCP vote, the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena secured 56% of the undivided Sena vote. In Western and Northern Maharashtra, Sharad Pawar’s support remains strong and could be decisive, especially in head-to-head battles with the Ajit Pawar faction. His sharp criticisms of Chhagan Bhujbal and Dilip Walse Patil, whom he branded as traitors, have put these leaders on the defensive.

Uddhav Thackeray, however, does not enjoy the same leverage over Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. The Thackerays had delegated control of the Thane-Konkan region to figures like Anant Dighe, Eknath Shinde, Uday Samant, and Narayan Rane, weakening their influence. In the 2024 general election, the Mahayuti led 27-12 in Thane-Konkan assembly segments. In Mumbai, Uddhav also faces a tough challenge from the BJP, which has deep roots there, with the MVA holding a 20-16 lead in assembly segments during the Lok Sabha elections.

The Weakening MVA Hold On Muslim And SC Voters

In the general elections, the MVA had consolidated significant support among Muslims (74%) and Dalits (46%). However, parties such as the Samajwadi Party (SP) and the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) are eroding some of this minority support. Additionally, parties like the Vanchit Bahujan Aaghadi (VBA), the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Republican Party Of India (RPI), and smaller Ambedkarite parties are eating into the SC vote share. This weakening hold on Muslim and SC voters compared to the general elections is also reflected in the CSDS pre-poll report.

‘Laadki Bahin” Scheme

Women beneficiaries have shown positive responses to the “Laadki Bahin” Yojana, with around 80,000 women per assembly constituency receiving Rs. 6,000 to Rs. 7,500 over the last five months. It remains to be seen whether this will translate into votes, similar to the experience in Madhya Pradesh. Some women praise Shinde for the cash support, stating that politicians have historically looted state funds, and for the first time, someone is prioritising their needs.

However, other women are critical of the scheme due to high inflation, pointing out that the government is giving with one hand and taking away more with the other, thanks to rising prices of essential commodities. A small fraction also questions the timing of the scheme, likening it to voter bribery before the elections. Some men in families express dissatisfaction with the scheme, as the money is directed to women’s accounts instead of theirs.

Farmers’ Issues Significant, But Regional

Maharashtra’s economic paradox is stark: while it contributes 13% to the country’s GDP, it also accounts for 38% of farmer suicides nationwide. Mahayuti faced significant losses in Vidarbha, leading in only 19 seats compared to the MVA’s 43. Farmers struggling with severe agricultural and rural distress voted in large numbers against Mahayuti, protesting low crop prices. Additionally, in Nashik, farmers voiced anger over the ban on onion exports.

Rebels: A Disruptive Force

Rebels from various parties have filed nominations after being denied tickets, contributing to an average of 14.4 candidates per seat, up from 11.2 in 2019. Smaller parties and independents have historically held influence in Maharashtra, with an average of 25% vote share and winning 25-30 seats over the last five elections. While rebels may only win about 10% of seats, they pose a threat to the main parties by spoiling outcomes in many contests. In 2019, 71 seats were won by margins of less than 5%, and in 108 seats, the runner-up’s votes exceeded the winning margin.

Bread-And-Butter Issues Matter

Core issues such as inflation, unemployment, corruption, agricultural/rural distress, development, and infrastructure continue to shape the discourse. Whether these issues will significantly impact voting patterns or if emotional and identity-driven issues will dominate remains to be seen. The urban-rural divide further complicates electoral dynamics and analysis, with 45% of the state being urban.

MVA Loses Edge; Micro-Management Crucial

The advantage MVA had during the general elections has eroded over the past six months. Mahayuti’s course correction, including new schemes and manifesto promises, internal disputes among MVA partners over ticket distribution, and improved preparedness, have contributed to this shift. The contest has become highly competitiveessentially fifty-fiftymaking micro-management and election-day strategy critical for victory. Maharashtra has become a challenging battleground for pollsters and experts.

(Amitabh Tiwari is a political strategist and commentator. In his earlier avatar, he was a corporate and investment banker.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

With just days to go for the U.S. presidential elections on November 5, after what is arguably the most polarised campaign in recent history, it is time to start looking at what the future may hold. In the run-up to the polls, there were surprising turns, including the Joseph Biden-Kamala Harris switch as the Democrat candidate, and the assassination attempts on former President and Republican nominee Donald Trump.

A number of books on the upcoming elections makes it clear there are not two, but three likely outcomes: a Trump win, a Harris win, and a contested outcome that goes to the courts, and possibly the streets. “This is the strangest election cycle I’ve ever seen… I’m telling people, you’re worried about November, I’m worried about tomorrow morning,” says Trump loyalist and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, according to an exchange in War, Bob Woodward’s latest book, out just weeks before election day.

Important conversations

To turn the covers of a Woodward book is to spend hours as a fly on the wall in the White House and other places where important conversations take place in the U.S. capital.

From his iconic start with reporting partner Carl Bernstein on the Watergate scandal that ended the Nixon Presidency, and their book All the President’s Men, Woodward has honed his skill as the ultimate insider-outsider in Washington with more than a dozen books focused on different presidencies. His trilogy on the Trump Presidency (2017-2021), Fear: Trump in the White House, Rage, and Peril (written with Robert Costa), brought out in granular detail the chaos, the unpredictability and the insecurity of the world’s most powerful country, and how that period changed the world.

Woodward’s latest, in that sense, takes off from previous books, Bush at War and Obama’s Wars, to speak about how the Biden years have dealt with three global conflicts: the U.S. pullout from Afghanistan, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and Israel’s assault on Gaza and Lebanon after the October 7, 2023 attacks. The book is remarkably up to date, and provides an insight on the past few years in the Oval office and just outside it. Woodward takes note of Biden’s dogged decision to withdraw all U.S. troops from Afghanistan, something he had failed to convince former President Barack Obama of doing.

He looks at Biden’s unsuccessful attempt at deterring Russian President Vladimir Putin from going into Ukraine, even though the U.S. had remarkable intelligence far ahead of time that Russia would invade. Woodward also observes how the U.S. Presidency has tackled Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a leader that Biden has a long history of run-ins with, while supporting Israel to the hilt.

Woodward’s recording of the profanity used by heads of state is sometimes jarring, but conveys the seriousness of the times: At one place, Woodward recounts Biden saying that Obama never took Putin seriously enough and “f***ed it up” in 2014 with the Crimean invasion, about the same time that Trump says that Biden had “f***ed us up” by not handling Putin better.

A lunch conversation Woodward reveals between U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Biden, where Blinken convinces the President to step down from the campaign is proof of how close the author is to the principals.

Where they stand

While the book is about the Biden Presidency, it is by far the best account of where both former President Trump and Vice-President Harris would likely stand on foreign policy and dealing with Russia and Israel if they come to power. Trump’s obvious admiration for Putin, and easy understanding with Netanyahu comes through in a number of events described in War. One of the most telling chapters deals with Harris’s tough talk with Netanyahu in September this year, where she raises civilian killings in Gaza, and warns that the next generation of Americans may not share the sympathy for Israel’s actions that hers does.

Unfortunately for readers here, War makes little mention of India, with the exception of the White House’s outreach to India, China, Turkey and Israel to send messages to Putin cautioning against nuclear adventurism, and a reference to high levels of illegal immigration from India and China. Even the Indo-Pacific strategy bears scant notice or indication where the Presidential contenders will stand.

What memoirs tell

For those seeking less policy and more personal stories about the candidates, there are several books like Kamala Harris’ updated memoir, The Truths we Hold: An American Journey. This adds more on her worldview in the concluding chapter.

Trump put out a book after surviving the assassination attempt, Save America, which is prohibitively expensive and expectedly bombastic. A more personable account comes from former First Lady Melania Trump’s book Melania, that has, however, been panned as a “tell-nothing” sanitised version of events.

Interesting details of Trump’s beginnings come from his nephew Fred Trump’s All in the Family: The Trumps and How We Got This Way, out recently, and his niece, Mary Trump’s Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man, which is a profile in Trump psychology.

suhasini.h@thehindu.co.in

The euphoria of June 4 has waned. Narendra Modi is no longer seen as ‘vulnerable’. Rahul Gandhi’s seemingly impeccable “strategy” is being questioned, albeit in murmurs. Though no one in Congress can dare to seek his downgrading, when you hear talk of the need for Sonia Gandhi to be active again, it signals disappointment with the present Rahul Gandhi-Mallikarjun Kharge-KC Venugopal-Jairam Ramesh leadership. Priyanka Vadra’s presence in rallies is much sought-after—she had minimal exposure in Haryana—but nobody can suggest that openly within the Congress.

Rahul Gandhi’s image as a possible counter to Modi has been dented after the Congress’s drubbing in Haryana. Also, given that the election saw the Congress facing the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) one-on-one, its dismal performance has now sown doubts among its allies in Maharashtra and Jharkhand, as well as in Delhi and Bihar.

Not New To Defeat

The Congress is not new to assembly election defeats. After the 17th general election in 2019, the party could form governments in only three states: Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka and Telangana. It played at best a supporting role as a junior coalition partner in Tamil Nadu and Jharkhand—a role that it will again reprise in Jammu & Kashmir now as a minor ally of the National Conference government. This is in sharp contrast to its status till 2005, when the Congress had ruled more than half the states in India.

The Congress’s resurgence in this year’s Lok Sabha elections, in which it managed to bag 99 seats, was seen by many as an end to its lasting misfortune since 2014, when it couldn’t muster even the minimum numbers to be recognised as the official Opposition party in the Lok Sabha. On the eve of Gandhi’s US trip in September, Sam Pitroda, the Indian Overseas Congress chief, had even gone as far as to say that Rahul was “more intellectual” than his father, Rajiv Gandhi, and a “better strategist” who had all the qualities to be a “future Prime Minister”. The turnaround this year naturally made Rahul and his aides buoyant; they thought the worst was finally over. But Haryana voters were to soon undo this excitement. Just a month later, on October 8, the Grand Old Party was at pains to figure out how it managed to let slip an almost certain victory.  

Resistant To Dissent

A WhatsApp message circulating in some Congress circles sums up the party’s position: “A fact is information minus emotion. An opinion is information plus experience. Ignorance is an opinion lacking information. And stupidity is an opinion that ignores fact”. The loudest protest in most such party circles today is but just a murmur. Since the days of Indira Gandhi, dissent in the Congress has been muffled. Gandhi got rid of her critics in 1969 and 1978 by splitting the party. Both these splits followed Congress reversals in 1967 and 1977, respectively. Today, bereft of stalwarts who could provide an alternative trajectory, the Congress seems to have again stagnated over the past decade. 

The EVM Complaints

The principal opposition party has time and again voiced its reservations about Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), when, ironically, the system came into being during its own rule in the 1980s. Pointing fingers at the fairness of the electoral process in India, Pitroda said earlier this year that EVMs were violable and that the Election Commission of India was biased towards the ruling BJP. When asked about how his party won in Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and Telangana, he seemed to suggest that they were mere flukes, while the ‘demon’ of ‘rigging’ was a distinct possibility. Rahul Gandhi echoed his views while addressing the National Press Club in Washington DC in September, where he underscored the ‘threat’ to democracy and the Constitution. Supreme Court has dismissed all petitions against EVMs, but the Congress party’s doubts persist.

This time, too, the Congress’s first reaction to the defeat in Haryana was that the result was “against reality”. The party went to the Election Commission on October 10 and, as expected, alleged malpractice. The review meeting at the residence of Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge was held only after the party delegation returned from Nirvachan Sadan. Neither Bhupinder Hooda, Deepender Hooda, nor Selja Kumari—its three Haryana stalwarts—were invited to the meeting. The reason for their exclusion was purportedly Rahul Gandhi’s frustration.

The absurdity of the Congress’s persistent complaints about the EVM system can be understood through simple data. In the latest Lok Sabha election, the BJP’s seat tally plummeted by 63 and its vote share dropped by 0.8 percentage points. In contrast, the Congress gained 47 seats and its vote share rose by 1.7 percentage points. If indeed the Election Commission was being biased and EVMs being manipulated, only a blunderous system could’ve produced such results. 

In Haryana, the Congress’s vote share went up from 28% in 2019 to 39% this year—a rise of 11 percentage points—while the BJP’s vote share rose by 3 percentage points, the same jump as in 2019. The Congress lost one seat by a mere 32 votes. The BJP’s data-based narrative trumped Rahul’s litany of complaints, which seemed to lack teeth. 

Forever Leaning On Allies?

Addressing BJP workers on October 8, Modi described the Congress as a ‘parjeevi‘, or a ‘parasite’, dependent on the largesse of its regional allies. In poll-bound Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Delhi and Bihar, the Grand Old Party will again likely be leaning on this largesse. Haryana was the last opportunity where it could have proven its mettle in a one-on-one battle against the BJP. Having failed, it has now tasked a fact-finding committee to find a scapegoat for absolving the Rahul-Kharge-Venugopal-Ramesh quartet of their inability to assess the ground reality.

(Shubhabrata Bhattacharya is a retired editor and a public affairs commentator)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

The Congress party is gearing up for the Haryana assembly elections, which will be held on October 5 with results announced on October 8. The party is finalising its candidate list and has decided not to announce a chief ministerial candidate, opting instead for a combined leadership model.

The Congress has also resumed talks with the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) regarding a potential alliance. Although the two previously contested the 2024 general elections together, early indications suggested they would go their own ways in the assembly polls.

Confident after its strong performance in the general elections, where it matched the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with five seats each, the Congress believes it has a good chance in state elections.

In the general elections, the BJP led in 44 assembly segments, the Congress in 42, and the AAP in four. In terms of vote share, the BJP received 46%, the Congress 44%, and the AAP 4% votes.

No CM Face to Curb Factionalism

After the CEC meeting on Monday, Congress leader Ajay Singh Yadav announced that the party would not project a chief ministerial candidate for the upcoming Haryana assembly elections. The final decision on the chief ministership will be made by the high command after the elections.

AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh emphasised that defeating the BJP should be the priority for the INDIA bloc. He noted that the party’s National General Secretary (Organization) Sandeep Pathak would engage in talks with Congress if the proposal gained momentum. “The final decision will be made by Arvind Kejriwal,” Singh told reporters.

AAP’s Haryana chief, Sushil Gupta, stated his personal opinion that the party should not settle for four to five seats but left the final decision to Delhi Chief Minister and AAP National Convenor Kejriwal. Reports also indicate that AAP Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha is involved in back-channel negotiations with Congress leadership.

Appealing To Broad Groups

Currently, former Haryana Chief Minister Bhupender Singh Hooda is leading the Congress effort, but a faction including Kumari Selja and Randeep Surjewala is reportedly unhappy with Hooda consolidating power.

Kiran Choudhury, who was part of this faction, left the party for the BJP after her daughter was denied a ticket in the Lok Sabha elections. The decision to not announce a chief ministerial candidate is seen as a move to curb factionalism and appeal to a broader electorate.

This strategy aims to avoid a Jat versus non-Jat contest. The Congress, under Hooda’s leadership, is perceived as representing Jat interests. The BJP has exploited Jat versus non-Jat dynamics to its advantage in previous polls. Congress is focusing on a coalition of Jats, Dalits, and Muslims. Dalits, who make up 20% of the population, are crucial. Kumari Selja’s role as a Dalit face and the non-announcement of a CM candidate help maintain hope within the Dalit community.

According to a CSDS post-poll study, 64% of Jats and 68% of Dalits voted for the INDIA bloc in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The Congress hopes this decision will help retain the majority of Dalit votes.

Possible Alliance With AAP

The Congress-AAP alliance performed well in the general elections, winning five seats and securing a 48% vote share. Although AAP contested the Kurukshetra Lok Sabha seat and lost, it led in four assembly segments and garnered a 4% vote share. The AAP’s solo run could split the opposition vote and potentially benefit the BJP.

The Congress aims to avoid a repeat of the 2019 scenario when the Jannayak Janata Party (JJP), led by Dushyant Chautala, seemingly spoiled its chances. The JJP’s 10 seats, largely from Jat-dominated areas, hurt the Congress’s prospects.

Both parties initially planned to go solo, but last-minute discussions at the high command level revived talks. The AAP is reportedly demanding 10 seats, while the Congress is currently offering two to three.

The Bania community, comprising 4% of the population, Aroras/Punjabis/Khatris (7%), and Sikhs (5%) are significant demographics in Haryana. The AAP has pockets of influence among these groups in Delhi and Punjab and is expected to gain some support in Haryana as well.

In the 2024 general elections, the BJP led in 19 of 23 urban seats, while the Congress led in only four. In rural Haryana’s 60 seats, the Congress led in 34, and the BJP in 22. The AAP is believed to have considerable influence in urban areas, particularly those bordering Delhi and Punjab, where Congress’s weak seats are located.

This strategy allows Congress to focus on strengthening its position in its strong Jat-dominated region while leveraging AAP’s influence in weaker areas to maximise gains in the assembly elections.

(Amitabh Tiwari is a political strategist and commentator. In his earlier avatar, he was a corporate and investment banker.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

With the election dates announced for Jammu & Kashmir, frantic political activity has begun in the state. This will be the first election after the abrogation of special status.

The founder of the J&K Apni Party has joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), while there are unconfirmed reports of Ghulam Nabi Azad making a gharwapsi to the Congress.

Can the opposition form a united bloc against the BJP, or will the National Conference (NC) and Congress at least continue with their Lok Sabha alliance in the state elections? Or, will all the four main parties go it alone? The answer to this question will determine the course of these elections.

In the last three polls in the state, no party secured a simple majority of its own. In 2002, the Congress and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) joined hands post-poll to form a government. In 2008, the Congress backed the National Conference in a post-poll arrangement. In 2014, the PDP and the BJP came together to provide a government for the people of J&K.

Multi-Cornered Battles

Quadrangular contests have made it tricky for any party to cross the halfway mark. The structure of the assembly is such that it makes it difficult for any party to win. Pre-delimitation, the Kashmir valley had 46, Jammu 37, and Ladakh four seats.

In Kashmir, which has a Muslim majority, the main contest is between the two regional parties: the Mufti family’s PDP and the Abdullah family’s NC. In Jammu, which has a Hindu majority, the main contest is between the two national parties, the Congress and the BJP.

Post-delimitation, the total assembly seats have increased from 87 to 90, with Kashmir having 47 (+1) and Jammu 43 seats (+6). The proportion of seats in Hindu-dominated Jammu has increased from 42.5% to 47.8% post-delimitation.

In the 2014 Vidhan Sabha elections, the PDP had won 28 seats with a 23% vote share, the NC got15 with 21% votes, the BJP 25 with 23% votes, and the Congress won 12 with 18% votes.

While the BJP almost doubled its vote share, the PDP gained 8% and the NC lost 2%. The BJP and the PDP gained largely at the expense of others (independents and smaller parties). While the BJP won 25 of the 37 seats on offer in Jammu, the PDP won 25 of the 46 seats in the Valley.

The BJP withdrew support from the government in June 2018. In the 2019 general elections, the NC and BJP won three seats each, with the former sweeping Kashmir and the latter winning in Jammu and Ladakh.

In August 2019, the Central government revoked the special status of Jammu & Kashmir. Parties in the Kashmir Valley, including the NC, PDP, and a few others, soon formed the Gupkar Alliance in response, demanding the restoration of Article 370.

The Recent Lok Sabha Elections

In the recently concluded general elections, the NC won two seats, the BJP got two, and an Independent candidate won one seat. Both ex-chief ministers Mehbooba Mufti and Omar Abdullah lost the elections. The PDP’s influence declined in the Lok Sabha as it couldn’t win any seat and recorded just 8.5% vote share. The BJP didn’t contest in the Kashmir valley and tactically backed Sajjad Lone’s party, the People’s Conference. 

A section of the voters is looking for new parties or leadership, ideologies, and fresh perspectives, away from the traditional parties. There is confusion over the opposition alliance too. Though both the NC and Mehbooba Mufti’s PDP are national allies of the Opposition INDIA bloc, their traditional turf rivalry in Jammu & Kashmir, particularly in the Valley, may prevent them from forming an alliance in the Assembly elections, just as they didn’t in the recent Lok Sabha election.

Can There Be A United Opposition?

Despite Farooq Abdullah’s statement that the National Conference would contest the Jammu & Kashmir Assembly elections alone, the  Congress is pushing his party for a wider alliance for the assembly polls, stressing that the idea is to defeat the BJP and thus all like-minded forces should come together.

A united opposition could spell trouble for the BJP. The party hopes that the opposition will ultimately fail to stitch up an alliance. This will allow the BJP to sweep Jammu, while seats in the Kashmir valley will be split. It is thus backing proxies in the valley, such as Sajjad Lone.

But sweeping Jammu is not so easy. Here, a resurgent Congress emboldened after its national performance in the Lok Sabha elections could give the BJP a run for its money. Jammu also has many districts with a high Muslim population, such as Rajouri, Poonch, and Ramban. This is why the NC and the PDP have been winning a few seats from here, while the BJP has never won a seat in the Valley.

A very polarised election is on the cards. All eyes are on the voters of the state, who have delivered fractured mandates in all the recent elections -2002, 2008, and 2014. Will they deliver a clear mandate this time, or will post-poll arrangements again define this election? Only time will tell.

(Amitabh Tiwari is a political strategist and commentator. In his earlier avatar, he was a corporate and investment banker.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

As was widely expected in the UK elections, the Labour Party has registered one of its biggest victories, inflicting a huge defeat on the Conservative Party.

No one had expected this seismic outcome just a few years ago. But Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, who is going to be the next British Prime Minister, is being hailed by everyone for changing the fortune of the party. He promised to get Britain out of economic stagnation and claimed he would fix the ailing National Health Services. He even reached out to ethnic communities, including the Indian diaspora.

‘Namaste’, Starmer

In the last days of the election campaign, Keir Starmer visited the Shree Swaminarayan Mandir Kingsbury, a prominent Hindu temple in London, and said “namaste” with folded hands. His charm offensive included him wearing a tilak on his forehead and a floral garland around his neck. Starmer may have looked out of place, but it was an attempt to placate angry Indian diaspora voters, the majority of whom were expected to favour the Conservative Party. The temple visit was also intended to send out a strong signal of friendship with India.

Also Read | Labour Sweeps UK Polls, Rishi Sunak’s Party Ousted For 1st Time In 14 Years

Despite his awkwardness, Starmer knew he had to perform this political act, not only because his visit underscored Labour’s commitment to embracing and celebrating diversity within the UK, but also because he needed to repair relations with the influential Indian diaspora, and, by extension, India. It had been clear for quite some time that his party was returning to power after a hiatus of 14 years and he was going to be the next UK Prime Minister; that is why he needed to undertake an India outreach before assuming office.

The Baggage Of The Past

Starmer’s gesture of visiting the temple was particularly significant given the events of September 2019, when during its annual conference in Brighton, the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership had passed a motion addressing the situation in Jammu and Kashmir. The motion declared that there was a humanitarian crisis in the region and asserted that the people of Kashmir should be granted the right to self-determination. Additionally, it had called for the deployment of international monitors to the area to ensure the protection of human rights and the assessment of the situation on the ground.

Needless to say, the Labour Party had gone too far. And despite the clarification issued by Jeremy Corbyn, the damage was done.

The motion was met with significant backlash from the Indian diaspora, who felt that it was one-sided and did not consider the complexities of the Kashmir issue. The event marked a turning point as many members of the Indian community began to shift their allegiances to the Conservative Party.

Also Read | “This Is A Massacre”: Conservative Leader As Labour Heads For Massive UK Win

The Indian government also responded sharply to the Labour’s motion. It was reported that the Indian High Commission in London took the unprecedented step of cancelling a scheduled dinner for Labour leaders, signalling its strong disapproval. The Indian government officially rejected the motion, emphasising its concerns about what it viewed as interference in its internal affairs.

In an effort to mend relations, Starmer attempted to address the situation last year, when he asserted that the Labour Party would strive to maintain strong relations with India, indicating a desire to rebuild trust and cooperation. Despite these efforts, the episode highlighted the fragile nature of Labour’s relations with India and underscored the significant political influence of the Indian diaspora in the UK.
Labour’s image makeover under Starmer

A Changed Labour

Indeed, the Labour Party has now made a triumphant comeback, securing a thumping majority. We should keep in mind that the party is a much-changed one under Starmer. It wants to inject more depth and substance into Britain’s strategic partnership with India.

India is most likely to carefully monitor Labour’s policy stance on Kashmir, immigration and the proposed Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The Indian government may have apprehensions about Labour’s views on its internal matters, but on balance, the India-UK bilateral relations will not change much under Starmer. In fact, Labour supporters in the Indian community believe that under him, the relations are likely to improve. It is being claimed that the number of Indian-origin Labour MPs would double from the current six members in the outgoing Parliament. 

Will The Ties Improve?

Academics in the UK at times tend to romanticise the bilateral ties between the two countries, looking at it chiefly from the prism of colonial nostalgia. We are led to believe that it is in India’s interest to have a deeper strategic partnership with Britain. To be honest, however, India sees Britain as a middle power, whose influence on the global stage has been on the wane for long. One can only blame the Conservative Party for it, a beleaguered and divided house which presided over 14 years of stagnation. India under Narendra Modi, who was born after the country’s independence, is, whether rightly or wrongly, not in awe of its erstwhile colonial masters.

Also Read | UK’s Labour Party Commits To Stamping Out “Anti-India Sentiments”

Yes, the bilateral trade in goods and services is growing steadily, and stood at £39 billion last year, with the balance of trade heavily in India’s favour. Yes, we have a vocal, upwardly mobile Indian diaspora, which acts as a bridge between the two countries and it often works to India’s advantage. But the oomph factor in bilateral relations has been missing for a long time. For example, India and the US warmed up to each other and became trusted partners only after the Civil Nuclear Agreement between the two countries was brokered under President George W. Bush. It was a pivotal moment that added significant “oomph” to bilateral ties and transformed the dynamics of the relationship, fostering deeper strategic, economic, and technological cooperation. It set the stage for an enduring partnership in the 21st century. Even during the Obama and Trump administrations the bilateral ties never ran out of excitement. 

One cannot say the same about India-UK relations, which badly need to be injected with energy, excitement and a mega-deal. 

FTA: Starmer’s First Challenge In India-UK Ties

With regards to India, one of the first tasks on Starmer’s desk will be to reach a Free Trade Agreement. He has maintained his commitment to completing the FTA, but it is not going to be easy. India’s priority appears to be to finalise an agreement with the European Union (EU) first. The bilateral trade in goods and services last year stood at €113 billion. The two sides relaunched the negotiations in 2022 and the progress is said to be satisfactory.

According to a group of researchers, another stumbling block in the India-UK FTA is “the opposition in the UK to Indian demands for more visas for intra-company transfers and particularly to demands that social security contributions from Indian workers during such transfers be reimbursed”.

Immigration Policies

Brexit has led to record levels of Indian immigration. Of the 6.85 lakh immigrants in the UK today, the majority come from India. The Labour Party’s stated aim is to reduce legal immigration and curb illegal immigration. Many of the legal Indian immigrants are IT professionals on work permits, contributing to the UK’s technology sector. There is a small number of illegal immigrants from India as well.

The party’s policy seeks to balance the economic benefits of skilled migrants with the goal of controlling overall immigration numbers, reflecting broader political and economic priorities.
Human Rights and Citizenship Laws

Historically, the Labour Party has been vocal about human rights issues in India, particularly on laws like the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The Labour Party’s criticism has been viewed by the Indian government as interference and a misrepresentation of India’s internal policies aimed at addressing specific security concerns. Starmer will be under pressure from domestic human rights organisations to put forward liberal British perspectives. His diplomatic skills are bound to be tested in the coming months and years.

The relations between the UK’s Labour Party and the Indian government are complex, influenced by historical ties, diaspora politics, and divergent policy priorities. Addressing such challenges will require nuanced diplomacy, mutual respect, and an understanding of the sensitivities involved on both sides.

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

Udupi:

Residents of a village in Kapu assembly segment of the Udupi-Chikkamagaluru Lok Sabha constituency have decided to boycott the upcoming election, in protest against the poor civic amenities there.

The decision was taken by the villagers of Kattingeri, which is part of Moodubelle Gram Panchayat. They declared their refusal to partake in any forthcoming electoral processes, including the Lok Sabha elections, until their demands are met.

The villagers were aggrieved that Kattingeri grapples with a dearth of essential amenities such as roads, bridges, and functional public transport connectivity.

They lamented the lack of progress despite previous engagements with authorities, including a visit by the deputy commissioners in the past, which failed to yield tangible solutions.

Former President of Belle Gram Panchayat Shivaji S Suvarna highlighted the significant voter base in Kattingeri, estimating around a thousand eligible voters with substantial participation in past elections.

However, the absence of basic infrastructure remains a glaring issue, particularly the absence of roads and bridges, impeding access to vital services for the past six years, he said.

Former Taluk Panchayat President Devdas Hebbar underscored the unwavering resolve of the villagers, noting previous instances where boycotts were rescinded due to assurances from elected representatives.

However, this time, the villagers have stood firm against external pressures and enticements, and have committed to the decisions made at the meeting.

Ranjani Hegde, former President of Belle Gram Panchayat, informed PTI of the non-negotiable stance of the villagers that they would vote in the elections only if roadworks are completed and bus services to Kattingeri are resumed.

Expressing disillusionment with the local MLAs and MPs due to their apparent disregard for the village, Hegde said efforts were being made to garner attention to their problems, especially through correspondence with the District Election Officer and the State Election Commission about the boycott.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)