top of page

By:

Rajendra Joshi

3 December 2024 at 9:20:26 am

Rajesh Kshirsagar walks into a political trap

The Shiv Sena MLA has chosen confrontation over the Shaktipeeth Expressway risking political isolation Kolhapur: Shiv Sena MLA Rajesh Kshirsagar’s aggressive support to the proposed Shaktipeeth Expressway has brought him face-to-face with former MP Raju Shetti. But the political fallout has not stopped there. In quick succession, he has taken on Congress leader Satej Patil, questioned the position of fellow Mahayuti legislator Chandradip Narake and criticised his own party colleague, Public...

Rajesh Kshirsagar walks into a political trap

The Shiv Sena MLA has chosen confrontation over the Shaktipeeth Expressway risking political isolation Kolhapur: Shiv Sena MLA Rajesh Kshirsagar’s aggressive support to the proposed Shaktipeeth Expressway has brought him face-to-face with former MP Raju Shetti. But the political fallout has not stopped there. In quick succession, he has taken on Congress leader Satej Patil, questioned the position of fellow Mahayuti legislator Chandradip Narake and criticised his own party colleague, Public Health Minister and Kolhapur Guardian Minister Prakash Abitkar. That is a lot of political fronts for one MLA to manage simultaneously. The immediate question, therefore, is not whether Kshirsagar has the courage to fight. He clearly does. The more important question is whether he has calculated the political cost of fighting everyone at once. The Shaktipeeth Expressway has become one of the most contentious political issues in Kolhapur district. Raju Shetti has turned the proposed acquisition of agricultural land into a farmers’ rights issue and has built a sustained campaign around it. His politics has always thrived on confrontation. His rise from the sugarcane farmers’ movement to the Assembly and then the Lok Sabha was built on his ability to convert farmers’ grievances into political mobilisation. Kshirsagar has now chosen to meet that politics head-on. His controversial warning against Shetti, in response to the latter’s aggressive rhetoric on land acquisition, transformed a policy disagreement into a personal political duel. Supporters of both sides have since taken the confrontation to the streets. This is precisely where political calculation becomes important. Supporting a flagship project backed by the Chief Minister can certainly send a message to the leadership in Mumbai. Kshirsagar is willing to stand by the government when the going gets difficult. But the same position can create political liabilities at home, particularly when the project affects constituencies where local MLAs are under pressure from farmers. Different Question Kshirsagar’s decision to attack Satej Patil raises a different question. Patil remains one of the most influential political figures in Kolhapur. Suggesting that he may struggle to win the next Assembly election is not routine political criticism. It is an open challenge. That challenge may energise Kshirsagar’s supporters. It may also consolidate his position among those within the ruling establishment who see Patil as a principal political adversary. But there is a danger in confusing political visibility with political strength. Every additional opponent creates another front that has to be managed during an election. And Kshirsagar has already opened several. The most politically revealing part of Kshirsagar’s criticism of Chandradip Narake and Prakash Abitkar. Narake represents a constituency through which the Shaktipeeth project passes. His opposition, therefore, has an obvious electoral logic: he has to respond to the concerns of his voters. Kshirsagar’s criticism of Narake puts him in a difficult position. He is effectively asking another ruling-party MLA to subordinate constituency politics to the government’s larger project. Then came the attack on Abitkar. To publicly accuse the party’s Kolhapur Guardian Minister of failing to strengthen the organisation amounts to washing the party’s dirty linen in public. Ministerial Ambition There is another possible explanation for Kshirsagar’s increasingly combative posture: the unresolved question of ministerial ambition. A three-time MLA would naturally expect that electoral experience and political seniority might eventually translate into a Cabinet berth. Instead, when the opportunity came, Eknath Shinde chose Prakash Abitkar and gave him an important Cabinet portfolio. Kshirsagar was left outside the ministry. His present position on the State Planning Board gives him a role, but it is not the same political currency as a Cabinet berth. It would be simplistic to suggest that every recent statement is merely an expression of that disappointment. But it would be equally naïve to ignore the possibility that political frustration has influenced his increasingly assertive posture. The Shaktipeeth issue may simply have provided the trigger. Kshirsagar should also be looking closely at the arithmetic of Kolhapur North. The constituency has a history of surprising political outcomes. Its old-city peth culture is blunt, politically conscious and capable of producing results that defy conventional calculations. The last Assembly election demonstrated this dramatically. Madhurimaraje Chhatrapati’s withdrawal as the Congress candidate left the Opposition scrambling just weeks before polling. Satej Patil then backed municipal corporator Rajesh Latkar, who entered the contest with barely 15 days to campaign. Yet Latkar secured nearly 81,000 votes. Kshirsagar won by around 23,000 votes, but the number that should concern his camp is not merely his winning margin.

Gatecrash Politics

Rahul Gandhi’s decision to stage a protest outside the Prime Minister’s official residence was a spectacle that exposed a troubling decline in political responsibility. A Leader of the Opposition has every right to question the government, mobilise public opinion and demand accountability. But democratic protest does not mean abandoning every norm of institutional dignity.


Gandhi comes from a family that has occupied the highest office in the country for generations. His father, grandmother and great-grandfather served as Prime Ministers of India. He understands, perhaps better than most, the constitutional importance and security sensitivities attached to the Prime Minister’s residence. To deliberately sit at its gates, without permission and in disregard of established protocols, was not a demonstration of democratic maturity but a calculated act of provocation.


The issue at hand - the NEET paper leak and the concerns of affected students - certainly deserves serious attention. Millions of young Indians depend on fair systems to secure their future, and any failure demands stern investigation and concrete reform. But legitimate grievances are weakened when they are converted into political theatre.


The Congress appears to have chosen this path. The government has accused Gandhi and his party of repeatedly shifting demands and moving the goalposts even after opportunities for discussion were offered. Instead of using Parliament, the most appropriate forum for debate between the government and Opposition, Gandhi opted for a street confrontation outside the Prime Minister’s residence.


That choice raises a larger question of what exactly is the purpose of such protests? The protest, spearheaded by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), has descended into violence and hooliganism in the capital, causing around 120 policemen to be injured. It has also exposed the credibility of many of the ‘elite’ protestors. The students whose futures are at stake have already disappeared behind the cameras and slogans.


Opposition politics is essential to democracy. A strong Opposition strengthens governments by forcing scrutiny and exposing failures. But responsible Opposition requires a mature understanding that democratic institutions cannot function if every disagreement is turned into a spectacle.


Ironically, the politics surrounding the protest also exposed divisions within the Opposition with Aam Aadmi Party leaders accused the Congress of being in cahoots with the BJP.  The irony is hard to miss. A movement claiming to represent students has ended up becoming a contest over political posturing among Opposition parties.


Indian democracy needs leaders who understand that the dignity of institutions matters, even when challenging those who occupy them. Rahul Gandhi’s protest at the Prime Minister’s residence was not a triumph of dissent. It was a textbook reminder that political theatre can overshadow the very cause it claims to champion.

Comments

bottom of page