Turning Round Bihar, Better Believe it
Nitish is doing the Impossible, turning round Bihar
Nitish Model Prevails Over Modi Model
Soroor Ahmed
(Bihar Times) When Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar clasped his hand with the Gujarat counterpart Narendra Modi in Ludhiana on May 10––after the election was over in his own state––he was roundly criticized. However, what needs to be eulogized is that he maintained an arms distance from the ‘BJP’s Prime Minister-in-waiting for the 2014’ Lok Sabha election.
Nitish did not allow Modi to enter Bihar though he addressed election rallies in neighbouring Jharkhand. That was the master-stroke because now it is clear that in most of the states where the Gujarat chief minister visited during the election campaign the BJP performed poorly. This happened even in those states where the performance of the state governments of the BJP was as good as Nitish’s. Modi toured the heartland of India, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Punjab etc and the party’s result is there for everyone to see. Only in Jharkhand the BJP managed to revive but that was mostly because of the great vacuum created by the ‘secularists’ and tribal parties.
The irony is that even in his home state Gujarat the BJP got 0.9 per cent less votes in comparison to 2004 Lok Sabha election. There is now serious debate within the NDA circle that Modi is becoming a liability of a sort outside Gujarat.
The second thing that Nitish Kumar did was that he quickly blasted Varun Gandhi for his hate speech in Pilibhit thus taking the wind out of the sail of his opponents. Though Lalu talked of running roller over Varun’s chest even his ardent supporters did not approve the language. He ended up only facing criticism.
Thirdly the Janata Dal United distanced itself from the BJP’s decision to resurrect the Ram Mandir issue.
So while voters, to some extent got polarized in some of the constituencies in neighbouring Uttar Pradesh and many several states, in Bihar, where there is 16.5 per cent Muslim there was much less scope of pre-poll polarization. Had Nitish allowed Modi to campaign in Bihar the result would have been quite different.
Though the first ‘secular’ partner of the BJP––since 1996 when only Shiv Sena and Akali Dal were with it––the Janata Dal United (earlier called Samata Party) never allowed any leader of the Sangh Parivar to even talk of the Modi Model in the home state here. Whenever any BJP men would talk of the Gujarat like development the Janata Dal United would counter it with the Nitish Model.
What many observers failed to notice is that even the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP, Lal Krishna Advani, did not address much public meetings during this campaign in Bihar. In comparison to the past very few BJP leaders from the Centre addressed rallies and they all spoke in measured tone.
Polarization––be it communal or caste––buries serious debates and people are carried away by emotion. Nitish did not let either Lalu nor the BJP–– though his partner––to exploit these issues at the time of the election.
What many urban-centric public opinion makers fail to appreciate is that mere development or law and order do not ensure victory in the election. Better political management are equally essential. Nitish knew this better than many in the BJP.
With weak BJP at all India level and Nitish winning the election on his plank, rather than on the Hindutva slogan, it is to be seen how the politics in the state heads.
The above is from the Bihar Times.
I agree with the writer.
If development work does not reach the poorest of the poor, what is the use of development.
I admire both Narendra Modi as well as Nitish Kumar.
Modi is more into Industrial development, is media savy.
Nitish is a silent worker and allows his work to speak for itself.
If the BJP is to rise, they will have to adapt both Modi's and Nitish's models.
Modi has another advantage.
He does not have to cope up with annual flooding of his state. Rather, he has the opposite problem, scarcity of water.
Of course the Kosi floods were man made.
Previous engineers, as is the habit in Bihar, probably spent only 10 to 15% of the sancioned funds and siphoned of the rest.
Nitish suffered because of their sins.
Even those floods could not dampen the faith the people of the state had on Nitish, inspite of the adverse propoganda war launched by Lalu and his men.
Congratulations Nitish!
Soroor Ahmed
(Bihar Times) When Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar clasped his hand with the Gujarat counterpart Narendra Modi in Ludhiana on May 10––after the election was over in his own state––he was roundly criticized. However, what needs to be eulogized is that he maintained an arms distance from the ‘BJP’s Prime Minister-in-waiting for the 2014’ Lok Sabha election.
Nitish did not allow Modi to enter Bihar though he addressed election rallies in neighbouring Jharkhand. That was the master-stroke because now it is clear that in most of the states where the Gujarat chief minister visited during the election campaign the BJP performed poorly. This happened even in those states where the performance of the state governments of the BJP was as good as Nitish’s. Modi toured the heartland of India, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Punjab etc and the party’s result is there for everyone to see. Only in Jharkhand the BJP managed to revive but that was mostly because of the great vacuum created by the ‘secularists’ and tribal parties.
The irony is that even in his home state Gujarat the BJP got 0.9 per cent less votes in comparison to 2004 Lok Sabha election. There is now serious debate within the NDA circle that Modi is becoming a liability of a sort outside Gujarat.
The second thing that Nitish Kumar did was that he quickly blasted Varun Gandhi for his hate speech in Pilibhit thus taking the wind out of the sail of his opponents. Though Lalu talked of running roller over Varun’s chest even his ardent supporters did not approve the language. He ended up only facing criticism.
Thirdly the Janata Dal United distanced itself from the BJP’s decision to resurrect the Ram Mandir issue.
So while voters, to some extent got polarized in some of the constituencies in neighbouring Uttar Pradesh and many several states, in Bihar, where there is 16.5 per cent Muslim there was much less scope of pre-poll polarization. Had Nitish allowed Modi to campaign in Bihar the result would have been quite different.
Though the first ‘secular’ partner of the BJP––since 1996 when only Shiv Sena and Akali Dal were with it––the Janata Dal United (earlier called Samata Party) never allowed any leader of the Sangh Parivar to even talk of the Modi Model in the home state here. Whenever any BJP men would talk of the Gujarat like development the Janata Dal United would counter it with the Nitish Model.
What many observers failed to notice is that even the prime ministerial candidate of the BJP, Lal Krishna Advani, did not address much public meetings during this campaign in Bihar. In comparison to the past very few BJP leaders from the Centre addressed rallies and they all spoke in measured tone.
Polarization––be it communal or caste––buries serious debates and people are carried away by emotion. Nitish did not let either Lalu nor the BJP–– though his partner––to exploit these issues at the time of the election.
What many urban-centric public opinion makers fail to appreciate is that mere development or law and order do not ensure victory in the election. Better political management are equally essential. Nitish knew this better than many in the BJP.
With weak BJP at all India level and Nitish winning the election on his plank, rather than on the Hindutva slogan, it is to be seen how the politics in the state heads.
The above is from the Bihar Times.
I agree with the writer.
If development work does not reach the poorest of the poor, what is the use of development.
I admire both Narendra Modi as well as Nitish Kumar.
Modi is more into Industrial development, is media savy.
Nitish is a silent worker and allows his work to speak for itself.
If the BJP is to rise, they will have to adapt both Modi's and Nitish's models.
Modi has another advantage.
He does not have to cope up with annual flooding of his state. Rather, he has the opposite problem, scarcity of water.
Of course the Kosi floods were man made.
Previous engineers, as is the habit in Bihar, probably spent only 10 to 15% of the sancioned funds and siphoned of the rest.
Nitish suffered because of their sins.
Even those floods could not dampen the faith the people of the state had on Nitish, inspite of the adverse propoganda war launched by Lalu and his men.
Congratulations Nitish!
|
|
