A contest of personalities

IN TAMIL NADU, where over the past quarter of a century electoral politics has acquired a virtual bipolar dimension with the DMK and the AIADMK serving as the rallying points for others - including the national parties - the battle of the ballot has almost invariably been a clash of personalities and egos of the presiding deities of the two Dravidian outfits, and this is much more so when the mandate at stake happened to be for governing the State. This time around, as in 1996, it is Mr. M. Karunanidhi versus Ms. Jayalalitha. Somewhat unique however is that the spotlight of an animus-filled, highly personalised campaign has been almost exclusively on the AIADMK supremo, what with the rival camps vying with each other to draw the maximum electoral mileage from the legally contentious issues related to her `disqualification' flowing from her conviction in corruption cases by projecting them from their own standpoints. The palpable obsession of the two sides with Ms. Jayalalitha-centred concerns - the rejection of her nomination papers and the uncertainty over her eligibility to head a Government (as a non-member under an enabling Constitutional provision) and the legitimacy of it - appeared so complete that the various substantive ideological and other issues affecting the national polity were overshadowed.

Of the two main formations, the DMK-led Tamil Nadu chapter of the National Democratic Alliance is an amorphous entity, having in its fold over a dozen caste-based outfits that had mushroomed ahead of the elections. If the `open door' policy adopted by the DMK in regard to these groups betrayed a sense of desperation, the enlarged coalition became doubly divisive - on the two counts of communalism and casteism. In fact, the roping in of nondescript caste groups in the name of strategic partnership - apparently at the instance of the Chief Minister's son and Chennai Mayor, Mr. M. K. Stalin - did not seem to have gone down well with some sections in the higher echelons of the party itself, not to speak of quite a few of the NDA constituents, although such sentiments remained muted; the snap `retirement from active politics' announcement by a piqued Mr. Murasoli Maran was at least partly attributed to this factor. An offshoot of what were widely seen as Mr. Karunanidhi's calculated moves to ensure the smooth passing of the party mantle to Mr. Stalin was the exit of Mr. Vaiko's MDMK from the DMK-led front in the State; his party, which is in the fray for 200-plus seats, may play the spoiler to the DMK at least in parts of the southern districts.

The rival AIADMK-led secular front, which includes the Tamil Maanila Congress, the Congress(I) and the two Communist parties, although formidable looking, has its own quota of problems and weaknesses. For instance, the patent contradictions such as the conflict of political interests between the PMK and the Congress(I) and the political space and legitimacy the pro-LTTE and Tamil extremist elements were provided by the alliance. The delinking of Pondicherry might have saved the alliance in Tamil Nadu but is unlikely to carry conviction with the people, much less ensure its cohesive functioning or mutual transfer of votes. With Ms. Sonia Gandhi choosing to skip Tamil Nadu for no apparent reason and Mr. G.K. Moopanar's mobility getting severely restricted by ill-health, the entire burden of campaigning was borne by Ms. Jayalalitha. That corruption as a factor - one that caused her precipitous fall in 1996 - has lost much of its sting is indeed good news for her. But the crucial question is whether Ms. Jayalalitha will succeed in her effort to field the `personal vendetta' and `victim of persecution' cards in order to generate a sympathy wave that is strong enough to carry her through, given especially that there is reportedly no strong anti-incumbency factor to work to her advantage.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Budget integrity
Next     : Missile defence and India