The ongoing saga of local body elections in Maharashtra has thrown up two startling political sub-plots that defy national narratives and expose a core puzzle of Indian politics. In a dramatic display of ground-level pragmatism, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) entered into brief but significant alliances with its arch-rival, the Congress, and later with the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), solely to gain control of municipal councils.
The Strange Bedfellows of Ambernath and Akot
In Ambernath, located in the Thane district, local BJP units took everyone by surprise by stitching together the 'Ambernath Vikas Aghadi' in partnership with their sworn enemy, the Congress. The sole objective of this unlikely coalition was to keep the Shinde faction of the Shiv Sena, which is the BJP's ally in the state's ruling 'Mahayuti' alliance, out of power in the municipal council.
Simultaneously, in Akot, within the Akola district, the local BJP crossed a significant ideological red line. It openly partnered with the AIMIM, a party often labeled as a 'Muslim' party, to form the 'Akot Vikas Manch'. This move was a clear calculus to secure a majority in the local civic body, putting aside the party's national rhetoric.
National Backlash and Local Maneuvering
These strikingly unconventional local alliances collapsed almost as quickly as they formed once they came under the harsh glare of the national spotlight. Senior leadership from all three parties—BJP, Congress, and AIMIM—expressed loud dismay and indignation. They issued warnings and showcause notices to their local cadres for overstepping ideological boundaries.
The aftermath in Ambernath took a further twist. After the Congress suspended all its corporators involved in the pact, they promptly defected and joined the BJP. However, this move still did not secure control for the BJP. The Shinde Sena outmaneuvered them by successfully luring corporators from other parties to its side, showcasing the fluid and unpredictable nature of municipal-level politics.
The Great Indian Political Switcheroo: Fuzziness on the Ground
At one level, these episodes highlight the distinct political compulsions and calculus at each tier of India's multi-layered democracy. The local view often does not align with the state or national picture. They also point to the sometimes-limited control national party leaderships have over their local units, a phenomenon more pronounced in the Congress than in the BJP's centralized machinery.
However, the larger takeaway is a pervasive puzzle. Despite the intense rhetoric and reality of political-ideological polarization at the national level, there remains a significant fuzziness and flexibility down below. Reporting on elections across states routinely reveals a normalized smudging of party lines on the ground. Candidates frequently have histories in opposing parties, switch sides multiple times, and often face no electoral penalty for such defections.
Maharashtra is a prime example of this 'Great Indian Political Switcheroo'. The state has witnessed large-scale political 'tod-phod' (breaking and making), cloak-and-dagger government formations, splits in regional parties under the shadow of central agencies, and a dramatic reset of alliances. Furthermore, it is now pioneering a potentially dangerous trend: a large number of non-BJP candidates withdrawing from municipal polls, leading to BJP or its allies winning seats unopposed.
Navigating the Contradiction: Ideology vs. Expansion
This presents a critical challenge for parties, especially the BJP and Congress: how to project ideological sharpness at the national level while simultaneously blunting it at the local level to accommodate non-ideological actors for expansion.
The analysis suggests the BJP has navigated this dichotomy more effectively. It maintains a strong ideological core for its cadres through a powerful vocabulary of symbols—such as the Somnath Swabhiman Parv, the abrogation of Article 370, the issue of 'ghuspaithiya' (illegal immigrants), 'love jihad', and beef politics. It also uses emblems of the ideological opposite, like 'JNU', to define itself against. This allows it to rise above the ground-level messiness in the public eye.
In comparison, the Congress appears hobbled. It lacks the organizational muscle to make decisive incursions in the local free-for-all and simultaneously struggles to project a cohesive, ideologically primed set of symbols nationally. Its historical amorphousness, once a strength for coalition-building, now leaves it at a disadvantage against a shrewd opponent that plays the game from both ends.
The events in Ambernath and Akot, though short-lived, serve as a powerful reminder. They underscore the complex, two-tiered nature of Indian politics where high-decibel national polarization comfortably coexists with pragmatic, often unprincipled, alliance-making in the quest for local power.
