top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This...

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This development, confirmed by high-ranking party insiders, follows the realization that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) effectively ceded its claims on the Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation (KDMC) to protect the alliance, facilitating a “Mumbai for BJP, Kalyan for Shinde” power-sharing formula. The compromise marks a complete role reversal between the BJP and the Shiv Sena. Both the political parties were in alliance with each other for over 25 years before 2017 civic polls. Back then the BJP used to get the post of Deputy Mayor while the Shiv Sena always enjoyed the mayor’s position. In 2017 a surging BJP (82 seats) had paused its aggression to support the undivided Shiv Sena (84 seats), preferring to be out of power in the Corporation to keep the saffron alliance intact. Today, the numbers dictate a different reality. In the recently concluded elections BJP emerged as the single largest party in Mumbai with 89 seats, while the Shinde faction secured 29. Although the Shinde faction acted as the “kingmaker”—pushing the alliance past the majority mark of 114—the sheer numerical gap made their claim to the mayor’s post untenable in the long run. KDMC Factor The catalyst for this truce lies 40 kilometers north of Mumbai in Kalyan-Dombivali, a region considered the impregnable fortress of Eknath Shinde and his son, MP Shrikant Shinde. While the BJP performed exceptionally well in KDMC, winning 50 seats compared to the Shinde faction’s 53, the lotter for the reservation of mayor’s post in KDMC turned the tables decisively in favor of Shiv Sena there. In the lottery, the KDMC mayor’ post went to be reserved for the Scheduled Tribe candidate. The BJP doesn’t have any such candidate among elected corporatros in KDMC. This cleared the way for Shiv Sena. Also, the Shiv Sena tied hands with the MNS in the corporation effectively weakening the Shiv Sena (UBT)’s alliance with them. Party insiders suggest that once it became clear the BJP would not pursue the KDMC Mayor’s chair—effectively acknowledging it as Shinde’s fiefdom—he agreed to scale down his demands in the capital. “We have practically no hope of installing a BJP Mayor in Kalyan-Dombivali without shattering the alliance locally,” a Mumbai BJP secretary admitted and added, “Letting the KDMC become Shinde’s home turf is the price for securing the Mumbai Mayor’s bungalow for a BJP corporator for the first time in history.” The formal elections for the Mayoral posts are scheduled for later this month. While the opposition Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA)—led by the Shiv Sena (UBT)—has vowed to field candidates, the arithmetic heavily favors the ruling alliance. For Eknath Shinde, accepting the Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai is a tactical retreat. It allows him to consolidate his power in the MMR belt (Thane and Kalyan) while remaining a partner in Mumbai’s governance. For the BJP, this is a crowning moment; after playing second fiddle in the BMC for decades, they are poised to finally install their own “First Citizen” of Mumbai.

Maharashtra Mandate: It is MVA’s defeat more than Mahayuti’s victory

Updated: Dec 2, 2024

Maharashtra Mandate

BJP-Shiv Sena-NCP alliance aka Mahayuti bagged a whopping 232 out of a total 288 assembly seats in Maharashtra in recently concluded assembly election. While this certainly is a vote in favour of the Eknath Shinde government, though some other factors like consolidation of Hindu votes, have led to this massive victory, one needs to take a closer look whether this is really the victory of the Mahayuti or is a defeat of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi aka MVA?


On the voting day, initially it appeared as if there would be a tough contest between the two alliances. However, as the voting percentage grew towards the end of the polling day, it became clear that the people have voted decisively. An attempt to gather the reasons why there was a landslide victory in favour of the Mahayuti leads us to following reasons.


Firstly, “defeat Modi” was the single point agenda during the Lok Sabha polls. However, the MVA failed to come to such a single point agenda during assembly polls. Congress leader from Mumbai Bhai Jagtap said that the three alliance partners in MVA were contesting as individual entities while the Mahayuti was able to pose a united face. Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar appeared to be more concerned about defeating the breakaway groups while Congress treated the assembly elections as the next act of Lok Sabha polls and Rahul Gandhi continued speaking about Constitution leaving aside other issues.


Another key factor was the MVA’s inability to elevate the ‘pride of Maharashtra’ narrative into a unifying campaign agenda. Instead, the alliance leaned on Uddhav Thackeray’s poorly conceived Gujarat-versus-Maharashtra rhetoric, which came across as both emotive and clumsy. This lack of focus and coherence ultimately underscored their failure to galvanize voters. The overall callousness also reflected in the MVA manifesto and it appeared more like a cheap second copy of the Mahayuti manifesto.


The MVA’s failure to spotlight pressing issues such as soybean and cotton prices proved costly. Addressing these concerns could have cornered the Mahayuti, yet the alliance squandered an opportunity to channel the frustration of farmers, particularly in Vidarbha and Marathwada—regions that could have shaped the election narrative in its favour. This oversight left space for activist Manoj Jarange-Patil’s Maratha agitation to dominate the discourse, shifting the focus to caste and religion. In the run-up to the election, however, Jarange-Patil’s erratic positions (like his decision not to field candidates after threatening to do so) eroded the MVA’s credibility and compounded its electoral missteps.


The Mukhya Mantri Ladki Bahin Yojana (MMLBY) attracted the masses. The MVA had to go back on its initial criticism of the scheme. The scheme also helped the women to come forward and vote for the MVA beyond restrictions, if any, inflicted on them by the caste, religion or community.

On the other side, the Mahayuti was firmly united and aggressive. Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar clearly and cleverly refuted the ‘gaddar’ (traitor) tag assigned to them by the MVA constituents. In addition, people accepted Shinde as real Shiv Sena because unlike Thackeray, who never really tried to refute charges of inaction and complacency against him, Shinde actively refuted charges against him.


After its abysmal Lok Sabha performance, the BJP led by Fadnavis showed steely resolve, contesting the polls with its trademark aggression with its leaders setting the agenda that the MVA was compelled to follow. There were issues like the Badlapur case and the collapse of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Statue that the MVA ought to have made capital of. However, the opposition failed to hold on to them while the Mahayuti cleverly built its arguments to make people forget these issues.


The MVA also failed to instil confidence among its voters that it shall provide a stable government in the state. This led to its complete rout in 11 of the 36 districts of Maharashtra.


Several factors explain the MVA’s defeat. After their earlier success in the Lok Sabha elections, the alliance appeared complacent, assuming the mandate would carry over to the assembly polls without significant effort. In contrast, the BJP, shaken by its Lok Sabha setback, mobilized swiftly, reaching out to diverse constituencies, addressing grievances, and steering voters towards the Mahayuti. The MVA made no comparable effort; Congress leaders continued their reliance on their ‘Save the Constitution’ rhetoric—a strategy effectively neutralized by the Mahayuti in the months following the Lok Sabha elections.


The fiery war of words between Shiv Sena (UBT)’s Sanjay Raut and MPCC president Nana Patole only deepened voter disillusionment with the MVA. After five years of political turbulence, Maharashtra’s electorate craved stability and economic revival - neither of which the fractious alliance seemed poised to deliver. These public spats left little doubt that the MVA was ill-equipped to govern cohesively. Had it avoided such self-inflicted wounds, its tally might have looked more respectable. Ultimately, this was less a triumph for the Mahayuti than a damning verdict on the MVA’s dysfunction.

Comments

bottom of page