|
THE NATION: NDA
State Of Mistrust
Was it only Manipur politics that caused a flare-up between the BJP and
Samata? Or do the reasons stretch to positioning games at the Centre?
By Ashok Malik
Rendered into English,
the word Manipur means "land of gems". Over the past week, the
tiny north-eastern state shone, if that be the word, on the national firmament
for a peculiarly bizarre set of reasons that could only be described as
politics. At one level, it was simple enough. A coalition government headed
by Radhabinod Koijam of the Samata Party had been defeated in the legislative
Assembly. Among those who voted against the man who had been chief minister
for three months were 24 of the BJP's 26 MLAs-18 of them having merged
with the saffron party as late as May 13.
Since the Samata and the BJP are together in
the National Democratic Alliance, the fires in faraway Imphal could have
singed Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's regime in Delhi. The Samata
functionaries-"The party has more leaders than MPs," muttered
a senior BJP minister-suitably went into a huddle, came out of it looking
both betrayed and enraged and sought the reinstatement of Koijam. As Jaya
Jaitly, former Samata president, put it, "It is difficult for the
party to accept that the crisis was a localised affair. The breach of
trust has been at the Centre, not the state. You cannot topple an ally."
|
|
|
|
FRIENDS IN NEED: Fernandes (right)
and Krishnamurthy have to address apprehensions of Samata Party
MPs who feel that they are being taken for granted by the Vajpayee
regime in through the out door
|
|
George Fernandes, former defence minister, was
given the job of negotiating with the BJP. After a meeting with Vajpayee
and BJP President Jana Krishnamurthy-also present was Padmanabha Acharya,
the BJP secretary who holds the key to the organisation in the North-east-it
was decided to defer the finale to May 28.
The "crisis"-a word the use of which
has grown exponentially since the advent of TV news channels-seemed to
have passed. Yet it left in its wake two questions.
One, how and why did the BJP and the Samata,
good cow-belt parties, come to occupy political centrestage in Manipur?
They are, after all, anything but traditional forces in an insular if
complex polity.
Two, why did the Samata react with the ferocity
it did? At the best of times, most of its 12 MPs have a world view limited
to Bihar. So was there a larger cause for friction?
The past week's events have to be seen in the
context of Manipur's political history. The ruling cartel in the state
gravitates towards the party in power at the Centre. An area that finds
mention in the Mahabharata-Chitrangada, one of the wives of Arjun, was
the princess of Manipur-is today ravaged by "17 extremist groups"
and a "client state economy".
It also makes for a very "lucrative government".
As a cabinet minister at the Centre points out, "When I went to Manipur
a year ago, I found that Central transfers to the state amounted to about
Rs 1,000 crore a year. Internal generation was a fraction of that."
A document released by the Ministry of Programme Implementation says that
in 1999-2000, Manipur was given Rs 943 crore in Central assistance, tax
share and grants. The state's own revenue was a measly Rs 105 crore. A
friendly Delhi is therefore a prerequisite for any state government.
In the old days, this equation benefited the
Congress. In 1996, Wahengbam Nipamacha Singh, then Speaker of the assembly,
split the ruling Congress, formed the Manipur State Congress Party (MSCP)
and became chief minister. In 1998, he allied with the NDA. His party
colleague, T. Chaoba Singh, joined the Vajpayee Ministry.
In the 2000 assembly election though, the MSCP
and the BJP-Samata were in opposing alliances. Nipamacha won 23 seats
but strung together a majority by inducing MLAs from Sharad Pawar's Nationalist
Congress Party, Laloo Yadav's Rashtriya Janata Dal and the Janata Dal-every
national party lends its name to a branch office in Manipur.
In a replay of history late in 2000, Sapan Dhananjay
Singh, the Speaker, became the rallying point of dissent against the chief
minister. MLAs elected under the banners of the Congress (12), BJP (six)
and Samata (one), joined him. As the government increasingly became less
effective, one by one Nipamacha's allies left him. The Centre considered
President's rule but needed the Congress' ratification in the Rajya Sabha.
"In January," recalls Jaitly, "Advani spoke to Sonia Gandhi
thrice but she said no to President's rule."
The Congress president probably expected her
party to form a government. Instead, 11 of her 12 MLAs, led by Koijam,
joined the Samata. Next, the MSCP split into the Chaoba and Nipamacha
factions, both declaring their support to Vajpayee and Chaoba remaining
Union minister of state for food processing.
In February this year, Koijam walked across
to the discredited Nipamacha, struck a deal with him and replaced him
as chief minister. The BJP says it was hesitant about the arrangement
but came around when the Samata's top leadership insisted. So Koijam put
together a farcical 34-strong ministry, backed by the entire House save
the solitary Congress MLA. The new chief minister, who his detractors
accuse of being soft on the drug mafia, called it a "sample of a
future national government".
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
