top of page

By:

Abhijit Joshi

31 August 2024 at 10:09:24 am

The Pawar Paradox Never Ends

As speculation over Sharad Pawar’s equations with the NDA resurfaces, Maharashtra is reminded that its most enduring political constant has always been uncertainty. There is an old Mumbai saying that seasoned political observers have long enjoyed repeating: “Ghode ki laath aur boss ki baat par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never trust a horse’s kick or a boss’ word; either can come without warning). If Maharashtra’s politicians were updating the proverb today, one more cautionary line would...

The Pawar Paradox Never Ends

As speculation over Sharad Pawar’s equations with the NDA resurfaces, Maharashtra is reminded that its most enduring political constant has always been uncertainty. There is an old Mumbai saying that seasoned political observers have long enjoyed repeating: “Ghode ki laath aur boss ki baat par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never trust a horse’s kick or a boss’ word; either can come without warning). If Maharashtra’s politicians were updating the proverb today, one more cautionary line would surely be included: “Sharad Pawar ke siyasi faisle par kabhi bharosa mat karna” (never assume you know Sharad Pawar's next political move). Few leaders in independent India have reinvented themselves as often, confounded both allies and adversaries with equal regularity, or remained politically relevant across nearly five decades quite like Sharad Pawar. Every major realignment in Maharashtra has, in one way or another, borne his imprint. Backstairs Intrigue That reputation has once again set the state’s political circles buzzing. A late-night meeting between senior NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar) leader Jayant Patil and Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, followed by indications that Pawar's party could extend conditional support to the Centre's proposed Delimitation Bill, has revived speculation that Maharashtra may be headed towards yet another political reshuffle. Supriya Sule has firmly dismissed suggestions that her party is preparing to join the NDA, insisting that any support for the Delimitation Bill would depend entirely on safeguards ensuring fairness for every state. Yet, the rumours persist. That, perhaps, is the enduring ‘Pawar effect.’ In Maharashtra, a single meeting involving Sharad Pawar is often enough to trigger discussions of an entirely new government. Pawar’s political career has consistently demonstrated that certainty is an illusion. In 1978, barely 38 years old, he engineered one of Maharashtra’s greatest political upsets. Breaking away from the Congress, he toppled the Vasantdada Patil government and stitched together the Progressive Democratic Front, or Pulod, by bringing together parties separated by ideology but united by arithmetic. He became the state’s youngest Chief Minister, a distinction that still defines his public image. That episode also revealed the two principles that have shaped his politics ever since. Ideology, for Pawar, has rarely been an immovable barrier. Political arithmetic has almost always mattered more. Equally, power has never been viewed as permanent. The pattern repeated itself through the decades. Pawar moved between Congress politics and regional politics with remarkable ease, served as India’s Defence Minister, broke away to establish the Nationalist Congress Party in 1999 over Sonia Gandhi's foreign origin, spent nearly fifteen years governing alongside the Congress, and then stunned the political establishment yet again in 2019 by helping construct the Maha Vikas Aghadi. Few believed the Shiv Sena, Congress and NCP could coexist under one roof. Pawar proved otherwise. Even the dramatic dawn swearing-in of Devendra Fadnavis and the late Ajit Pawar in November 2019 ultimately enhanced Sharad Pawar’s reputation. Within days, he had reunited most of his fractured party and succeeded in installing Uddhav Thackeray as Chief Minister. What initially appeared to be his biggest setback became another demonstration of his political resilience. Today, the Sharad Pawar-led NCP is no longer the formidable organisation it was before the split of 2023. While he retains considerable public goodwill, national stature and a respectable parliamentary presence, his legislative strength within Maharashtra has diminished considerably, prompted questions about the party’s future. Reports suggest that sections within the NCP (SP) are increasingly uncomfortable with the prospect of remaining in perpetual opposition and favour exploring some form of understanding with the BJP. Pawar himself is believed to have resisted such suggestions, while Supriya Sule has repeatedly ruled out any immediate shift. Yet the existence of internal debate appears difficult to dismiss. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has publicly asserted that there is no question of new entrants joining the Mahayuti. His statement reflects political logic. The BJP already enjoys numerical dominance alongside Eknath Shinde’s Shiv Sena and Ajit Pawar’s NCP. Bringing Sharad Pawar into the alliance may strengthen the NDA externally, but it could also generate fresh leadership ambitions, competing centres of influence and unnecessary internal tensions. Issue-Based Cooperation If there is any movement, therefore, it is more likely to begin with issue-based cooperation in Parliament than with an immediate formal alliance. That explains why the Delimitation Bill has assumed such significance. Supriya Sule has indicated that her party could support the legislation provided the Centre guarantees a uniform 50 percent increase in parliamentary seats for every state. The position differs from that adopted by several INDIA bloc partners and has naturally fuelled speculation. Yet issue-based support should not automatically be interpreted as political surrender. Sharad Pawar has rarely subscribed to the idea that opposition requires opposing every government initiative. Throughout his career he has maintained working relationships across party lines, often separating legislative cooperation from electoral competition. That flexibility has repeatedly helped him preserve political relevance even when his party's electoral fortunes fluctuated. If, despite present denials, Pawar eventually chooses to support or formally align with the NDA, the consequences would extend well beyond Maharashtra. For the INDIA bloc, it would represent perhaps the most damaging psychological blow in western India, depriving it of one of its most experienced strategists and consensus-builders. Congress would lose a veteran ally at precisely the moment it is attempting to rebuild its organisational strength in Maharashtra. Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena (UBT) could find itself increasingly isolated, forcing a reassessment of both alliances and political strategy before the next Assembly election. And for the BJP, it would amount to the political neutralisation of perhaps its most accomplished regional rival. Sharad Pawar’s greatest political strength has always been his refusal to close any door before absolutely necessary. Strategic ambiguity has been one of its principal instruments. At 85, he remains among the last practitioners of an older style of coalition politics, where negotiation often counts for more than confrontation, and where tomorrow’s ally may well have been yesterday’s fiercest opponent. (The writer is a political observer. Views personal.

Document Number 9 and China’s Ideological Cold War

Xi Jinping’s secret manifesto against ‘Western values’ still shapes the Party’s battle to preserve its grip on power.

In April 2013, the General Office of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) circulated a secret document to Party members entitled ‘Communiqué on the Current State of the Ideological Sphere’. The ninth document issued by the General Office that year, this document has since come to be better known as Document Number 9.


Secret though this document was meant to be, it was soon posted online and then translated into English by the US-based Chinese language news outlet Mingjing Magazine and published in September of 2013. Initially there was some debate whether this document was genuine, whether it properly reflected the thinking of Xi Jinping and the leadership of the CCP or perhaps just a faction within the Party. But twelve years on there seems to be little doubt that Xi Jinping meant every word.


Xi Jinping and others in the CCP were fearful perhaps, and remain fearful to this day, that the loss of control by Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) back in 1991 that led quickly to the Soviet Union’s sudden collapse might well be replicated within China. Not to mention the more recent so-called colour revolutions that aimed to install Western-style democracies in some of those post-Soviet states – revolutions propelled by protesters and activist NGOs making powerful use of an unrestricted internet to ‘undermine’ incumbent authoritarian governments.

China’s unease with alien ideologies long predates the Communist era. In the late Qing dynasty, reformers such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao sought to graft Western constitutionalism onto Confucian tradition, only to be crushed by conservative mandarins who feared the dynasty’s unravelling. The May Fourth Movement of 1919, when students demanded “Mr. Science” and “Mr. Democracy” was another episode where imported ideas threatened established authority. Document Number 9, in this sense, is heir to a centuries-old reflex of treating foreign philosophies not as enrichment but as existential contagion. 


So, what does Document Number 9 actually say? 


Essentially the document is a blueprint for the CCP’s defence against what it sees as ‘Western values’ – values that if left to take root in Chinese society could potentially lead to the CCP’s demise. 


Document Number 9 lays out seven political ‘perils’: the promotion of Western constitutional democracy; the promotion of ‘universal values’ (for example, democracy, human rights, freedom etc.); the promotion of ‘civil society’; the promotion of neoliberalism; the promotion of the West’s ideas of journalism; the promotion of historical nihilism (meaning that the only true history is that which is written by the CCP); and, finally, questioning Reform and Opening and the socialist nature of socialism with Chinese characteristics (which basically means questioning anything that China does). Document Number 9 instructs all Party members, especially those in government at any level, to pay close attention to the ‘ideological sphere’ and always to adhere to the CCP’s total control of the media. 


It seems strange in 2025 to look back on comments regarding the Internet made by former US president Bill Clinton, the late Nobel prize-winning Chinese dissident Liu Xiabo, and even the artist Ai Weiwei, for example, how each of them thought the Internet could not be controlled, that the Internet would finally bring freedom to China. Indeed, with the launch of Sina Weibo in 2009 – China’s equivalent of Twitter, as was – the prophecies made by people such as Bill Clinton, Liu Xiaobo, and Ai Weiwei seemed for a time to be coming true. Weibo brought an unprecedented opening-up of the public sphere in China, people utilising Weibo to criticize the Government (and therefore the CCP), tired of all the corruption and, as they saw it, bureaucratic incompetence. 


By 2012, the CCP had had enough. Censorship of the Internet in China – what has come to be known as the Great Firewall of China – had begun years before. Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube had all been banned in China back in 2009. But now it was decided, that if the CCP was going to survive in power, it had to take full control if it was going to prevent any further encroachment of ‘Western values’ into China. This is the context in which Document Number 9 was drafted in secret in 2012 and then circulated to every Party member in April 2013 (the Internet explicitly mentioned in the document), leading to the CCP reasserting its control over all messaging and media, as well as every other aspect of civil society. 


Document Number 9 should not be seen as a watershed moment in Chinese politics – just CCP policy and intention made suddenly clear for all Party members to see. The reaction of Xi Jinping and the CCP to the new freedoms promised by the Internet and the encroachment of ‘Western values’ was years in the making. It had already begun under Xi Jinping’s predecessors. Some China watchers continue to point out the vulnerabilities of the CCP, that China’s internal contradictions and moments of public unrest – more common than might initially be imagined – must eventually bring about its demise. But the CCP doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon. Under Xi Jinping the crackdown on journalists, human rights lawyers, NGOs, and activists has been merciless – and very effective. And the strengthening of the CCP’s influence in local governments, the legal system, and the military continues apace to this day. The ideological Cold War is here to stay, Document Number 9 as relevant now as it was back in 2013. 


At the age of 71, the outspoken journalist Gao Yu was convicted in April 2015 of leaking state secrets (meaning Document Number 9) to foreign news media. She denied being the source of the leak – as did Mingjing Magazine. Document Number 9 had already been posted online at the time of the supposed leak. But Gao Yu had been a longtime critic of the CCP elite and despite her ill-health and advanced age – the elderly being usually venerated in China and often treated leniently under the law – the CCP took its chance to make an example of her. In November 2015 she suddenly confessed to the crime and expressed her regret. Her sentence was reduced to five years and she was allowed to spend her imprisonment in her own home.


The Party is in charge – and no one in China is allowed to forget it. 


(The author is a novelist and retired investigator with an abiding passion for Chinese history. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page