The MVA Experiment: Born of Expediency, Doomed by Reality

The opposition Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi’s rise and fall offers a home truth about Indian politics that convenience may bring parties together, but only conviction can keep them there.

Following the spectacular debacle of the opposition Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) in the Assembly polls in November last year, the cracks in the alliance, steadily widening, are now developing into a yawning schism.

Party spokespersons, once bound by a fragile sense of unity, now issue barbed statements or veiled accusations, adding fuel to a fire that has long been smouldering. And yet, the coalition’s top brass -Uddhav Thackeray of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), Sharad Pawar of the Nationalist Congress Party (SP) and the Congress - have so far resisted the urge to engage in open hostilities. Their silence, however, does not equate to strength; it merely underscores the tenuous nature of their alliance.

Even Thackeray’s tacit support for the Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi’s municipal elections - an act that displeased the Congress and might have deepened fissures in Maharashtra - did little to alter the coalition’s equilibrium. Yet, the question lingers: Is the MVA unravelling for good, or was it never meant to last in the first place?

Political Expediency

From its inception in 2019, the Maha Vikas Aghadi was never an alliance born of ideological synergy. It was a coalition of political expediency, a precarious marriage of political adversaries bound to the objective of keeping the BJP out of power. The Shiv Sena, a party that built its foundation on an aggressive brand of regional nationalism and Hindutva, found itself in the same tent as the Congress, a party with a long history of opposing the Sena’s brand of politics. Sharad Pawar’s NCP, the third pillar of this uneasy triumvirate, played the role of an experienced power broker, mediating the contradictions that inevitably surfaced.

Unlike alliances forged before elections, where shared ideologies or electoral strategies provide cohesion, the MVA came together in the aftermath of a bitterly contested vote. The 2019 assembly elections had handed the BJP and the then-undivided Shiv Sena a clear mandate to rule together. But a dispute over power-sharing - specifically, whether the chief minister’s post should be rotated - led the Sena to sever ties with its long-standing ally. What followed was an extraordinary political pivot: Uddhav Thackeray, whose party had long railed against the Congress and NCP, aligned himself with them to form a government.

For many, it was a move that defied political logic. The Shiv Sena’s core electorate had been cultivated on a steady diet of opposition to the Congress. The Congress, in turn, had spent decades countering the Sena’s brand of street politics. The NCP, an old Congress offshoot, was perhaps the only player that possessed both the experience and the cynicism to navigate such a fragile arrangement. The question then was not whether the coalition could govern but whether it could survive its own contradictions.

From the outset, the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) was a precarious balancing act, its foundation riddled with fault lines. Policy decisions became ideological battlegrounds, seat-sharing talks turned into power struggles, and governance often took a backseat. Uddhav Thackeray, despite being chief minister, was constantly placating allies with conflicting agendas. Sharad Pawar’s NCP wielded outsized influence, leaving Congress sidelined and disillusioned.

Sensing an opening, the BJP steadily chipped away at the coalition’s fragile unity. Eknath Shinde’s rebellion, which split the Shiv Sena and aligned a faction with the BJP, was less a shock than an inevitability. Now, as the MVA fights for relevance in opposition, the real question remains: was it ever a truly unified force?

One of the sharpest criticisms of the MVA was that it had defied the will of the electorate. The MVA’s formation, stitched together in a late-hour manoeuvre, was perceived as a triumph of political expediency over electoral integrity. For many, it reinforced the notion that principles in Indian politics are often secondary to the pursuit of power.

Eknath Shinde’s rebellion that ultimately split the party and led to the formation of a new government with the BJP was an indictment of the MVA’s internal contradictions. Even within the Sena (UBT), there was a growing discomfort with the unnatural alliance, a sense that its ideological core had been compromised beyond repair.

Uncertain Future

With Maharashtra heading into key municipal elections, the MVA’s survival hinges on a clear vision - pre-election strategy, seat-sharing agreements, and a common agenda beyond mere opposition arithmetic. Yet, history suggests that individual ambitions often outweigh collective survival. The recent manoeuvring of leaders like Ajit Pawar and Eknath Shinde, who have defected to align themselves with the ruling BJP, only underscores that in Maharashtra’s politics, power is the currency that matters most.

Unless the MVA presents a cohesive front soon, it risks being little more than a political afterthought.

As Maharashtra’s political dynamics continue to shift, the MVA’s legacy will serve as both a cautionary tale and a political blueprint. The state’s voters may grow more wary of post-election alliances that bear little resemblance to their electoral choices. And politicians, for all their pragmatism, may come to recognize that while short-term gains are tempting, they are rarely enough to secure long-term survival.

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