top of page

By:

Rajendra Pandharpure

15 April 2025 at 7:55:54 pm

The BJP’s Ganesha Gambit

Pune’s Ganeshotsav has become an enormous civic and political stage, and the ruling party has proved adept at occupying it. Pune: The city’s Ganeshotsav is entering its final phase, but the festival has already demonstrated something beyond its extraordinary crowds and familiar spectacle: the extent to which it has become a political stage. This year, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has left a particularly visible imprint on the festivities, using an event that reaches deep into the city’s...

The BJP’s Ganesha Gambit

Pune’s Ganeshotsav has become an enormous civic and political stage, and the ruling party has proved adept at occupying it. Pune: The city’s Ganeshotsav is entering its final phase, but the festival has already demonstrated something beyond its extraordinary crowds and familiar spectacle: the extent to which it has become a political stage. This year, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has left a particularly visible imprint on the festivities, using an event that reaches deep into the city’s neighbourhoods as an opportunity for public outreach. The political appropriation of the festival has not, however, been without a counter-current. Demands were raised for curbs on noise pollution, loudspeakers and the volume of dhol-tasha performances. The argument was not against Ganeshotsav itself, but for moderation - notably, a complete ban on DJ music and limits on the number of dhol and tasha instruments used by performing troupes. Familiar Troubles The festival’s reality has been rather different. Major roads have been occupied by mandaps. Processions celebrating the arrival of Lord Ganesha have unfolded amid punishing noise. DJ music, while subject to restrictions, has continued. Traffic congestion has become a familiar feature of the festival, with the movement of political leaders adding another layer to the city’s already strained roads. The Peth areas have remained crowded deep into the night. The Shrimant Dagdusheth Halwai Ganpati temple has drawn enormous crowds for darshan from the opening day. From the old city to housing societies and neighbourhood mandals, Ganeshotsav touches virtually every part of Pune. For a political party seeking a direct connection with citizens, few occasions offer such a ready-made network of people, institutions and local influencers. The BJP enters this festival with an unusually formidable organisational base. It has two MPs, seven MLAs and more than 100 corporators in Pune. Murlidhar Mohol, one of the city’s MPs, is a Union Minister of State. Chandrakant Patil is a Cabinet minister in the Maharashtra government, while Madhuri Misal is a Minister of State. The party’s presence also extends into the festival’s organisational architecture. Its influence is visible across numerous mandals, large and small. BJP MLA Hemant Rasane is General Secretary of the Shrimant Dagdusheth Halwai Sarvajanik Ganpati Trust. Kunal Tilak, a member of Lokmanya Tilak’s family, is a BJP corporator. The political and cultural histories of Pune therefore intersect in ways that are difficult to ignore. The BJP’s senior leadership has also made the most of the occasion. National President Nitin Nabin visited Pune to seek Lord Ganesha’s blessings, while Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis visited the city before and during the festival. Such visits are about more than religious observance. In a festival watched by millions and embedded in the city’s social life, political visibility comes almost automatically. There is also talk in Pune that the BJP provided substantial financial support to Dhol-Lezim troupes and their organisers, with claims that some major mandals received financial backing as well. These claims would require independent verification, but the perception itself points to the depth of the political contest around Ganeshotsav. BJP workers, according to local observers, have also sought to make their presence more conspicuous than that of festivities organised by housing societies. Useful Expedient The festival arrives at a politically useful moment for the BJP. The party has faced disquiet on several fronts. Young people have been agitated over the paper-leak controversy. Broader public dissatisfaction has been voiced over inflation and unemployment, while government policies relating to ethanol and charges associated with UPI transactions have also generated criticism. While a political party can defend a policy in a press conference and advertise its achievements, during Ganeshotsav, its workers can be physically present in neighbourhoods, among processions, mandals, cultural groups and devotees. Politics thus becomes less about argument and more about visibility. That is the BJP’s advantage in Pune. Ganeshotsav, after all, is not simply a sequence of religious rituals. It is an elaborate civic network involving local organisers, volunteers, cultural groups, businesses, residents and political representatives. Whoever has influence over that network acquires a powerful channel of communication with the city. The BJP appears to understand this particularly well. Its strength in Pune’s electoral politics has been reinforced by a presence that extends beyond elections and into the institutions and social spaces that organise public life. The irony is that the very scale of the festival that makes it politically attractive also magnifies the civic costs. The political value of Ganeshotsav and the civic burden it creates are therefore two sides of the same phenomenon. For Pune, the larger question is not whether politics has entered Ganeshotsav. It has done so for decades. The more consequential question is whether the festival’s extraordinary social capital will remain primarily a vehicle for political outreach or whether the same influence can be used to reconcile celebration with the ordinary civic needs of the city. For the moment, the BJP seems to have understood the first proposition better than most.

A Divisive Victory

Correspondent
Jan 14, 2025
3 min read

Zoran Milanović’s landslide re-election reflects Croatia’s fractured politics and casts uncertainty on the country’s trajectory within the EU and NATO.

Zoran Milanović

Croatia’s incumbent president, Zoran Milanović, has secured a resounding mandate for a second five-year term, defeating his rival Dragan Primorac by a landslide. With nearly three-quarters of the vote in Sunday’s runoff, Milanović, 58, cemented his position as a polarizing yet formidable figure in Croatian politics. His victory underscores deep divisions within the nation’s political landscape and the challenges awaiting a country straddling Western alliances and domestic turbulence.


Milanović’s re-election was quite extraordinary. Emerging as a fierce critic of NATO and the European Union, his positions have often placed him at odds with Croatia’s pro-Western establishment, particularly the governing Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) party. This antagonism was on full display during the campaign, as his conservative opponent, Primorac, portrayed him as a “pro-Russian puppet.”


Primorac, a former science and education minister, struggled to mount a credible challenge with his campaign failing to resonate in a nation weary of political rhetoric and disillusioned with perceived corruption in the Plenković government.


Although Croatia’s presidency is largely ceremonial, it wields considerable influence in foreign policy, defence, and security. Milanović’s re-election signals potential friction in these domains, given his scepticism towards NATO and reluctance to align with Western military initiatives. His controversial decision to block the deployment of Croatian officers to NATO’s Ukraine mission highlights his divergence from the pro-Western stance championed by Plenković’s government.


This ideological clash reflects broader societal divides in Croatia, a country that joined the EU in 2013 but has struggled to reconcile its Western ambitions with the realities of domestic governance. While Milanović denounces NATO’s involvement in Ukraine, he has also condemned Russia’s invasion—walking a fine line that appeals to Croatia’s mixed sentiments on foreign policy.


Milanović’s confrontational style draws comparisons to figures like Donald Trump. His penchant for fiery rhetoric and unfiltered criticism has earned him both staunch supporters and fervent detractors. His critics argue that his populist tactics and inflammatory remarks exacerbate divisions rather than fostering solutions. His dismissal of NATO initiatives and criticism of Western allies risk isolating Croatia at a time when regional stability is increasingly fragile.


Milanović’s victory is part of a broader narrative of Croatian presidential politics since the nation declared independence in 1991. His predecessors, from FranjoTuđman to Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović, have reflected Croatia’s evolving identity as it transitioned from a war-torn post-Yugoslav republic to an EU member state.


Tuđman, the nation’s founding president, embodied the nationalist aspirations of a newly independent Croatia. Subsequent leaders navigated the challenges of post-war recovery, EU accession and economic modernization. Milanović’s ascent in 2019 marked a shift towards a more populist, combative presidency, reflecting global trends of discontent with traditional political elites.


Croatia’s presidency, with its limited executive powers, has often served as a platform for symbolic leadership rather than concrete policymaking. Milanović’s ability to leverage this platform for political battles underscores his skill as a shrewd strategist. His scepticism towards NATO and EU policies could complicate Croatia’s role in regional diplomacy and security, particularly as tensions simmer in the Balkans.


Domestically, his victory underscores the enduring appeal of anti-establishment rhetoric in a nation grappling with economic challenges and political disillusionment. Croatia’s economy, heavily reliant on tourism, has struggled to recover from the shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical instability. Milanović’s ability to address these issues will likely define his legacy. Internationally, Milanović’s re-election raises questions about Croatia’s trajectory within the EU and NATO.


While Milanović’s victory is decisive, it reflects a divided electorate. Voter turnout, at just 45 percent, suggests widespread apathy or disillusionment. The triumph of a polarizing figure like Milanović signals not only his personal appeal but also the absence of a compelling alternative. In this moment of triumph, Milanović’s greatest challenge lies in proving that his resounding mandate can translate into meaningful progress.

Comments

bottom of page