Why Amit Shah made Delhi election his fight rather than Modi's or Kiran Bedi's

Whichever way the Delhi election goes - with a win, a loss or an indeterminate result like December 2013 - the BJP must learn two lessons from it: one, every state election is different; and two, the use of the Prime Minister’s political capital must be focused on states where this can deliver maximum impact. It cannot be frittered away in every election. The fact that the BJP won three state assembly elections (Haryana, Jharkhand, Maharashtra) in a canter using Narendra Modi’s charisma and development credentials, and managed to perform creditably in a fourth (J&K) lulled the party into a false sense of complacency that he can pull off the same miracle everywhere, including Delhi. But Delhi is different. The fact that the BJP’s Delhi unit was reluctant to go in for another election even after the party’s thumping win in May 2014 should itself have told Amit Shah that it was not sure of positive results against Arvind Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party. [caption id=“attachment_2071733” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Reuters[/caption] Delhi was always going to be different from the other four assemblies for one simple reason: in those states, the BJP was benefiting from a clear anti-incumbency factor. When the basic mood of the electorate was turning against the parties in power, Modi’s appeal and campaigning provided the winning edge to the party. The BJP’s top leadership presumed - wrongly - that a similar anti-incumbency would operate against Kejriwal, thanks to his 49-day misadventure and dalliance with misgovernance. But Kejriwal managed to quickly put that behind him by apologising to his voters. With the BJP ruling Delhi by proxy through the Lt Governor for eight months, there was no anti-incumbency factor available for Modi to become the tipping factor in this election. When, earlier this month, the BJP came to the same conclusion, it immediately knew that Modi had to be kept at an arm’s length from the Delhi election, even if was to be used for campaigning. This was the primary logic of bringing in Kiran Bedi as the chief ministerial candidate – much to the consternation of the local party. Over the last few days, as at least one poll seemed to indicate the possibility of an AAP win , and two others predicting a close fight, Amit Shah has certainly got the message. In moves that should be seen as putting further distance between Modi and the Delhi elections, he has roped in 19 ministers, some 120 party MPs and large batches of RSS cadre to do the party’s work in the slog overs of the match. The PM will, of course, address four rallies, but this is normal. The critical change that Amit Shah has brought about is to convert the fight from Kejriwal versus Modi in the first instance to Kejriwal versus Bedi in the second. In one more shift in tactics, he has made it Kejriwal versus Amit Shah and Bedi. Today’s newspapers provide further evidence of the direct role he has assumed, with both The Times of India and Hindustan Times featuring interviews with Amit Shah. While most commentators have jumped to the conclusion that this amounts to panic in the BJP leadership, the fact is the party has decided on this high-risk strategy precisely to claw back any advantage Kejriwal may have derived in the last two months when the BJP was missing in action and there was a leadership vacuum. But the most important result of Amit Shah taking charge of the Delhi polls directly is that it insulates Modi from any loss of political capital in this bruising fight. Shah will take the blame if AAP manages to score, but Modi’s reputation will remain intact. He is also staking his all to win Delhi as any loss here can only strengthen Modi’s political opponents. Far from being just about panic (there is panic in AAP as well, as it is now talking mysteriously about stings that may target them), Amit Shah’s entry is the BJP’s best decision so far. Even if Shah is bruised in the fight, he can bounce back. However, the BJP is in luck after Delhi. Henceforth, all the forthcoming elections will again play to BJP’s and Modi’s strengths. Bihar (end-2015), West Bengal and Tamil Nadu (mid-2016) are all states where the anti-incumbency factor will benefit the BJP. In Bihar, the party already has a clear state leader (Sushil Modi), and in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, apart from latching on to anti-incumbency, the party can push hard with Modi in the lead. It has nothing to lose and everything to gain as the party’s current strength is almost zero in these state assemblies. A strong Modi campaign will help his party without costing him much political capital. This may be the case in Uttar Pradesh too, but UP (with polls in 2017) will not play out like Bihar, West Bengal or Tamil Nadu. The BJP not only does not have a local face, but the state’s politics is different. There are other players too who can gain from anti-incumbency (Mayawati, for instance, in a tie-up with Congress). In UP, thus, Shah should be grooming a fresh face for state leadership and it cannot be the likes of Yogi Adityanath. I would think more on the lines of Varun Gandhi, for which the latter too must seek to gain Modi’s and Shah’s confidence. This is currently missing. To get back to where we started, the BJP leadership realised that Delhi was different a bit too late in the day to expect a walkover. But if there is anyone who can pull it off, it is Amit Shah.