Sound and Fury in the Deccan

Amid the din of Maharashtra’s politics, the loudest beneficiary may well be the BJP, its quietest player.

Maharashtra’s politics has rarely been short of drama. Yet the current season feels particularly cacophonous. As leaders dart between Delhi and Mumbai and television studios throb with indignation, each day yields a fresh provocation.  And yet, for all the noise, there is a curious absence of weight. Beneath the surface tumult, there is little sign of a sustained ideological contest or a coordinated challenge to the government. The stage is crowded but the script is thin.

The paradox defines the moment. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) presides over a state that appears politically hyperactive but strategically subdued. The Opposition speaks often, but seldom in chorus. The result is an opposition busy with manoeuvre yet unable to mount a coherent assault.

Fragmented Opposition

Consider the campaign mounted by Rohit Pawar, an MLA from the NCP (Sharad Pawar faction). He has pressed questions about what he calls the suspicious circumstances surrounding the accident involving his uncle, Ajit Pawar. Armed with documents and figures, he has addressed the media in both Delhi and Mumbai, ensuring that the issue does not fade from public view. The strategy seems to be that repetition sustains relevance.

Yet motives in Maharashtra are rarely singular. Admirers see in Pawar a dogged seeker of accountability. But critics detect a calculating mind. By invoking Ajit Dada’s name repeatedly, they argue, he binds his own political fortunes to a figure whose influence remains formidable. In a State where visibility is currency, becoming the loudest voice in the room has its advantages. Whether this gambit matures into durable capital is another matter. Politics, after all, is governed as much by mood as by message.

The contrast with the reticence of Ajit Pawar’s immediate family has not gone unnoticed. Their relative silence has allowed Rohit Pawar to occupy the moral high ground by default. When one actor dominates the narrative and others demur, public perception tilts accordingly. In such asymmetry, intra-party equations shift subtly.

That is where the BJP’s interest lies. A divided opposition is the ruling party’s most reliable ally. If rival factions within the broader Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) space expend their energies sparring with one another, the government faces less concentrated resistance. Senior figures in Ajit Pawar’s camp, notably Praful Patel and Sunil Tatkare, have firmly rejected any merger between the two NCP factions. Whether their resistance is rooted in ideology, arithmetic or personal stake is open to conjecture. But the effect is that the Opposition remains fragmented.

Such fragmentation has become a recurring feature of Maharashtra’s politics where alliances are fluid and yesterday’s adversary may well become tomorrow’s partner. The moral clarity of denunciation often dissolves into the pragmatism of power-sharing. Leaders who once castigated Ajit Pawar later found common cause with him. In this climate, principle and convenience intertwine so thoroughly that voters struggle to disentangle them.

Upper House polls

The impending Rajya Sabha nominations have sharpened these tensions. The BJP and its allies appear numerically comfortable. The strain is concentrated within the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA), the uneasy coalition of opposition forces. Realistically, the alliance may have the strength to secure only a single seat. The suggestion that Sharad Pawar himself could be that candidate has injected gravitas and complication into the deliberations. His stature is unassailable. Yet generational impatience stirs elsewhere. Aaditya Thackeray is said to favour his party fielding its own nominee, a reminder that alliances are transactional as much as sentimental.

Here, Supriya Sule emerges as a pivotal broker. Her task is a delicate one: to persuade allies to subordinate ambition to arithmetic. Coalition politics in India rewards negotiation and punishes rigidity. The Indian National Congress, though diminished in numbers, retains leverage. Support in one contest can be bartered for accommodation in another, perhaps in the forthcoming Legislative Council elections. Every vote is both a statement and a bargaining chip.

Meanwhile, Ajit Pawar’s faction contemplates projecting Parth Pawar to the Rajya Sabha as its face in Delhi. Such a move would signal generational transition and national aspiration. Yet youth at the Centre will require guidance from seasoned hands like Patel and Tatkare. For Sunetra Pawar, balancing responsibilities between state and capital will demand organisational discipline in a party still adjusting to schism.

Through all this, the state’s Budget Session has proceeded with surprising smoothness. The opposition’s interventions have been episodic rather than strategic. There has been no sustained, united offensive on policy. In parliamentary systems, coordination is force. When opposition parties converge on a single theme, they amplify one another. When they scatter, the government advances largely unimpeded. For the BJP, the present disarray is less a threat than a cushion.

None of this implies that Maharashtra lacks political vitality. On the contrary, ambition abounds. Leaders calculate, factions manoeuvre, and alliances are tested daily. But vitality is not the same as vision. The larger questions about governance, economic direction and public welfare struggle to command attention amid the tactical skirmishes. The chessboard is crowded with pieces in motion; the endgame remains obscure.

In such circumstances, the beneficiary is often the actor who expends the least energy. By allowing opponents to dissipate theirs, the BJP consolidates quietly. Power in Maharashtra today does not roar; it endures. The state’s politics may look feverish, but until the opposition finds unity of purpose, the real contest remains oddly absent. In the theatre of sound and fury, silence can be the most effective strategy of all.

(The writer is a political observer. Views personal.)