Amit Shah taking over from LK Advani: Move marks shift in strategy for a party that has struggled to find talent in its ranks

The decision to replace LK Advani with Amit Shah perhaps tell us more about the Bharatiya Janata Party than any analysis ever will. Truth be told, it wasn’t much of a shock as the saffron unit rolled out on Thursday its first list of party candidates for the 2019 Lok Sabha election. In as much as it signals the formal end of the road for the 91-year-old warhorse, instrumental in transforming BJP’s fortunes from a fringe player to a dominant force in national politics, the move is epochal.

Equally, however, the development merely reflects the trajectory of BJP under Narendra Modi and Amit Shah where no one is more important than the party, and long-term planning drives every decision.

In criticising BJP’s decision to drop Advani — who played mentor to Modi in politics — the Congress has quipped that if BJP cannot respect elders such as Advani, how can it respect the country? Congress’ reaction is fatuous. It reveals the difference between the two parties. The grand old party is so devoid of leadership at the top that it must field Sonia Gandhi from Rae Bareilly despite her indifferent health and stated desire to retire from active politics. Why? Because her son — the party president and perpetual coming-of-age Rahul Gandhi — lacks acceptability among allies as a leader who can take everyone along. Ask Mamata Banerjee.

In the words of Sonia’s biographer Rasheed Kidwai , “Sonia had toyed with the idea of retiring from politics in 2016 when she turned 70… For the past one year, Sonia had almost stopped meeting Congress leaders, telling them to call on Rahul. However, political compulsions or the doctrine of necessity due to the post-Pulwama and surgical strikes scenario has forced her to junk her own desire…”

While Congress has turned to Sonia to help fix the mess that Rahul has created in firming up alliances ahead of an existential battle for the grand old party, BJP’s decision to field Shah from Advani’s traditional constituency Gandhinagar is organic, forward-looking and timely.

Media reports indicate that before the decision was finalised, the BJP’s central leadership had sent observers to interact with local leaders, cadres and grassroot workers in Gandhinagar, and most of them “favoured Shah”. The call was for someone from central leadership to replace a national leader, as one observer was quoted , as saying.

Gandhinagar Lok Sabha constituency in Gujarat includes Naranpura, from where Shah had won the Assembly election in 2012. Since Modi has decided to contest only from Varanasi this time and drop Vadodara from his schedule unlike in 2014, getting Shah to contest from Gujarat will help in energising the cadres. The move also paves way for the BJP chief to take a more pivotal role in the government should Modi return for a second stint. This marks a shift in strategy and holds importance for a party that has struggled to find enough talent in its ranks to fill Cabinet berths.

The move, at another level, is also a marker of the philosophy that drives the party. Advani, the iron man of Indian politics, built the saffron unit from ground up, gave it political and ideological muscle. He has now been replaced by a man who has taken BJP’s organisational strength to the next level. Advani’s superannuation was never in doubt and has now been merely formalised, but it is debatable whether he himself would have been willing to appear for yet another stint in active politics.

Media reports indicate that there was no communication between the party or the veteran on contesting from Gandhinagar, a seat that he had won for the first time in 1991 and retained in 1998, 1999, 2004, 2009 and 2014. It appears that Advani was open to the suggestion that someone younger should take over from him this time and Shah’s nomination makes it apparent that his progenies will not be replacing him in Gandhinagar.

This is yet another pointer to the inner democracy that guides BJP’s decisions. In Congress, the seat would have probably gone to either Advani’s daughter Pratibha or son Jayant, but the decisions in BJP are rarely motivated by dynastic principles. There is some confusion in public space over what constitutes a dynastic principle in politics. For the daughter or son of a leader to contest elections and move up in ranks in the party cannot be called a dynastic succession. But it qualifies as one when the succession follows entitlement — as Rahul’s taking over of the role of Congress chief exemplifies. Shah replacing Advani also reinforces, in this respect, the difference between the two parties’ philosophy.