The Janata Dal (United)’s (JD(U)) decision to withdraw its support from the BJP-led government in Manipur is a move that holds more symbolic weight than immediate political significance. With just one MLA, Md. Nasir, representing the party in the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly—a 60-member house—the withdrawal of support is unlikely to cause any immediate instability for the ruling BJP led government in the state. However, the move cannot be dismissed entirely, as it signals deeper fractures in the relationship between the JD(U) and the BJP, potentially affecting the national political landscape.
The JD(U) had six MLAs elected to the Manipur Assembly in 2022, but five defected to the BJP shortly after the elections. Their defections are currently under review by the Speaker’s Tribunal under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution, which addresses anti-defection laws. This left the JD(U) with a solitary MLA, Md. Nasir, who now sits in the Opposition Bench.
The decision to withdraw support in Manipur aligns with JD(U) Chief Nitish Kumar’s broader strategy of opposing the BJP at the national level. The JD(U)’s inclusion in the INDIA bloc—a coalition of opposition parties formed to challenge the BJP in the 2024 General Elections—underscores this shift. By pulling its symbolic support in Manipur, the JD(U) reaffirms its allegiance to the INDIA bloc and its stance against the BJP’s dominance.
From a practical standpoint, the withdrawal will have little to no effect on the BJP-led government in Manipur. The BJP enjoys a comfortable majority in the Assembly, bolstered by the defection of the five JD(U) MLAs. The lone JD(U) MLA’s move to the Opposition Bench does not alter the power dynamics in the state.
However, the JD(U)’s action raises pertinent questions about the political ethics surrounding defections and the role of the Speaker’s Tribunal. The prolonged delay in adjudicating the defection cases highlights the inadequacies in enforcing anti-defection laws. Such delays undermine the sanctity of the electoral mandate and contribute to public disillusionment with democratic processes.
The JD(U)’s withdrawal in Manipur may appear inconsequential locally, but it carries symbolic significance on the national stage. Nitish Kumar’s directive to sever ties with the BJP in Manipur is part of a calculated move to distance his party from the NDA. The JD(U) has historically been a key ally of the BJP, especially during the formation of the Modi government in 2014 and its subsequent re-election in 2019.
The JD(U)’s departure from the NDA reflects the growing unease among regional parties over the BJP’s perceived centralization of power and dominance within alliances. Nitish Kumar’s leadership within the INDIA bloc and his vocal criticism of the BJP’s policies demonstrate his intent to reassert regional parties’ significance in shaping India’s political future.
While the JD(U)’s decision aligns with its commitment to the INDIA bloc, it also exposes the challenges facing the opposition coalition. The INDIA bloc’s strength lies in its ability to unify diverse regional and national parties against the BJP. However, this unity is fraught with internal contradictions, differing regional interests, and leadership ambitions. The JD(U)’s withdrawal from the Manipur government is a step in asserting opposition unity, but its practical impact on the BJP’s national standing remains to be seen.
For the BJP, the defection of the five JD(U) MLAs in Manipur highlights its effectiveness in co-opting opposition members to consolidate power. This strategy, though successful in maintaining political dominance, risks alienating potential allies and deepening mistrust among regional parties. The BJP’s emphasis on a strong central leadership and its approach to coalition politics may face resistance as regional parties grow wary of its hegemonic tendencies.
The JD(U)’s withdrawal in Manipur should prompt introspection on several fronts. For the INDIA bloc, it is an opportunity to project unity and a commitment to ethical governance. Ensuring that cases like the defection of JD(U) MLAs are addressed promptly and transparently will be critical in building public trust.
For the BJP, the development serves as a reminder of the importance of coalition politics and the need to address the grievances of its allies. The party’s dominance in national and state politics should not come at the expense of undermining the federal structure and alienating regional players.
While the JD(U)’s withdrawal of support in Manipur may have little immediate impact on the state’s political scenario, it is a significant move in the broader context of Indian politics. It underscores the growing polarization between the BJP and opposition parties and highlights the challenges of maintaining a cohesive opposition front. As the country approaches the 2024 General Elections, such developments will continue to shape the narrative and strategies of both the ruling and opposition camps.
The JD(U)’s withdrawal of support: Political symbolism over practical impact in Manipur
114