top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

The Unequal Cousins

Raj Thackeray’s ‘sacrifice’ saved Shiv Sena (UBT) but sank the MNS Mumbai: In the volatile theatre of Maharashtra politics, the long-awaited reunion of the Thackeray cousins on the campaign trail was supposed to be the masterstroke that reclaimed Mumbai. The results of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections, however, tell a story of tragic asymmetry. While the alliance has successfully helped the Shiv Sena (UBT) stem the saffron tide and regain lost ground, it has left Raj...

The Unequal Cousins

Raj Thackeray’s ‘sacrifice’ saved Shiv Sena (UBT) but sank the MNS Mumbai: In the volatile theatre of Maharashtra politics, the long-awaited reunion of the Thackeray cousins on the campaign trail was supposed to be the masterstroke that reclaimed Mumbai. The results of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) elections, however, tell a story of tragic asymmetry. While the alliance has successfully helped the Shiv Sena (UBT) stem the saffron tide and regain lost ground, it has left Raj Thackeray’s Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) staring at an existential crisis. The final tally reveals a brutal reality for the MNS - Raj Thackeray played the role of the savior for his cousin, but in the process, he may have become the sole loser of the 2026 mandate. The worse part is that the Shiv Sena (UBT) is reluctant to accept this and is blaming Raj for the poor performance of his party leading to the defeat. A granular analysis of the ward-wise voting patterns exposes the fundamental flaw in this tactical alliance. The vote transfer, the holy grail of any coalition, operated strictly on a one-way street. Data suggests that the traditional MNS voter—often young, aggressive, and driven by regional pride—heeded Raj Thackeray’s call and transferred their votes to Shiv Sena (UBT) candidates in wards where the MNS did not contest. This consolidation was critical in helping the UBT hold its fortresses against the BJP's "Infra Man" juggernaut. However, the favor was not returned. In seats allocated to the MNS, the traditional Shiv Sena (UBT) voter appeared hesitant to back the "Engine" (MNS symbol). Whether due to lingering historical bitterness or a lack of instructions from the local UBT leadership, the "Torch" (UBT symbol) voters did not gravitate toward Raj’s candidates. The result? The UBT survived, while the MNS candidates were left stranded. ‘Second Fiddle’ Perhaps the most poignant aspect of this election was the shift in the personal dynamic between the Thackeray brothers. Decades ago, they parted ways over a bitter dispute regarding who would control the party helm. Raj, refusing to work under Uddhav, formed the MNS to chart his own path. Yet, in 2026, the wheel seems to have come full circle. By agreeing to contest a considerably lower number of seats and focusing his energy on the broader alliance narrative, Raj Thackeray tacitly accepted the role of "second fiddle." It was a pragmatic gamble to save the "Thackeray" brand from total erasure by the BJP-Shinde combine. While the brand survived, it is Uddhav who holds the equity, while Raj has been left with the debt. Charisma as a Charity Throughout the campaign, Raj Thackeray’s rallies were, as always, electric. His fiery oratory and charismatic presence drew massive crowds, a sharp contrast to the more somber tone of the UBT leadership. Ironically, this charisma served as a force multiplier not for his own party, but for his cousin’s. Raj acted as the star campaigner who energised the anti-BJP vote bank. He successfully articulated the anger against the "Delhi-centric" politics he accuses the BJP of fostering. But when the dust settled, the seats were won by UBT candidates who rode the wave Raj helped create. The MNS chief provided the wind for the sails, but the ship that docked in the BMC was captained by Uddhav. ‘Marathi Asmita’ Stung by the results and the realisation of the unequal exchange, Raj Thackeray took to social media shortly after the counting concluded. In an emotive post, he avoided blaming the alliance partner but instead pivoted back to his ideological roots. Urging his followers to "stick to the issue of Marathi Manoos and Marathi Asmita (pride)," Raj signaled a retreat to the core identity politics that birthed the MNS. It was a somber appeal, stripped of the bravado of the campaign, hinting at a leader who knows he must now rebuild from the rubble. The 2026 BMC election will be remembered as the moment Raj Thackeray proved he could be a kingmaker, even if it meant crowning the rival he once despised. He provided the timely help that allowed the Shiv Sena (UBT) to live to fight another day. But in the ruthless arithmetic of democracy, where moral victories count for little, the MNS stands isolated—a party that gave everything to the alliance and received nothing in return. Ironically, there are people within the UBT who still don’t want to accept this and on the contrary blame Raj Thackeray for dismal performance of the MNS, which they argue, derailed the UBT arithmetic. They state that had the MNS performed any better, the results would have been much better for the UBT.

Shadows of Empire in Africa’s New Power Struggles

As Russia and China carve pathways of influence in Africa, a question that remains unanswered is who will help the ‘dark continent’ to flourish, and at what cost.

Africa

Over the past two decades, the United States, China, and Russia have vied for influence in Africa, a continent rich in natural resources and strategic importance. While none of these powers is new to the region, China’s rise as an economic powerhouse has added new dimensions to the competition, with Beijing seeking to challenge Washington’s longstanding dominance. Meanwhile, Russia, lacking China’s economic clout, has carved out a role as a spoiler to Western interests, leveraging its military and political connections to undermine U.S. influence.


Africa, historically a battleground for global power struggles, particularly since the infamous ‘Scramble for Africa’ which defined the 19th century, has again become a space where these powers face new realities. However, contrary to the popular narrative of Africa as a passive recipient of foreign exploitation, many African nations have used this global contest to assert their agency. A significant shift in power dynamics came following the recent expulsion of French troops from Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger which marked a major turning point in African geopolitics.


Yet, the vacuum of the French exit was filled by Russia’s increasing presence in Africa in form of the notorious Wagner Group, whose African gambit began in 2017, in the aftermath of the Central African Republic’s civil war. Ostensibly peacekeepers, Wagner mercenaries brokered a fragile truce that soon crumbled, leaving them firmly entrenched in the country’s resource economy. From there, they expanded into Libya, where they propped up ‘Marshal’ Khalifa Haftar in his bid to control Benghazi. By 2021, the group was operating in Mali under the pretence of aiding the junta against jihadist groups, a mission that devolved into atrocities.


Even the arid expanse of Mali’s northern provinces—Tinzaouten, near the Algerian border—is not immune to this geopolitical reshuffling. Here, Tuareg separatists, climate refugees from the encroaching Sahara, and jihadist factions converge in a volatile mix of resistance and survival. The Tuareg, long marginalized, have reportedly received covert support from an unlikely ally: Ukraine.


Russia’s role is not the only significant development in Africa. China, with its vast economic resources, has long been a dominant force on the continent. Where Russia brings military support, China offers infrastructure, building railways, ports and roads that connect African countries to the global economy. While these projects have been criticized for fostering dependency, they have also become lifelines for nations struggling with inadequate infrastructure and economic stagnation. In places like Sierra Leone, where a new railway was jokingly said to run “all the way to Beijing,” Chinese investments have created economic interdependence that reshapes Africa’s strategic calculus.


The deeper problem, however, lies within. From the Sahel to the Gulf of Guinea, many African states remain plagued by corruption, poverty, and weak governance—fertile ground for jihadist groups and the geopolitics of exploitation. Boko Haram’s origins in Maiduguri, Nigeria, and its subsequent evolution into a caliphate-seeking terror network, underscore the combustible mix of disenfranchisement and ideology. Jihadist foot soldiers, often young men with little knowledge of Sharia or the Qur’an, are recruited with promises of income and a path to marriage, wielding Kalashnikovs in a cycle of violence that has little to do with faith.


As Africa’s population continues to grow, the stakes for global powers intensify. The continent’s vast reserves of rare minerals and other resources ensure that the geopolitical competition will only increase.


Yet neither Russia nor China is overly concerned with the rampant corruption in many African governments. Both powers prioritize strategic alliances and access to resources, often ignoring the ethical and governance challenges faced by their African partners. In contrast, Western countries, such as the United States and European Union, seem to be losing their influence, weighed down by their own domestic challenges.


The historical trajectory of African states, the struggles for independence, and the lingering effects of colonialism have all shaped the current state of affairs. Yet, Africa’s future does not have to be dictated solely by foreign powers. For the continent to truly flourish, it needs better governance, investment in human capital, and a global commitment to addressing the structural inequalities that perpetuate poverty and violence.


Africa’s rise on the global stage offers a chance for a new kind of diplomatic engagement, one that moves beyond the zero-sum mentality of competition and instead focuses on fostering mutual growth. However, this will require a shift in perspective—from viewing Africa as a mere recipient of foreign aid or intervention to recognizing it as a central player in the geopolitics of the 21st century.


The late President Jimmy Carter once described his foundation’s mission as “Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, and Building Hope.” This ethos feels painfully absent in today’s approach to Africa. As Wagner digs deeper into the Sahel’s soil and China’s infrastructure projects carve pathways of influence, a question that remains unanswered is who will help Africa flourish, and at what cost?

Comments

bottom of page