Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has secured a third consecutive term in a much tighter general election than anticipated. This outcome, while not a clear majority for his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the 543-seat parliament, is a significant development. The emergence of coalition partners, gaining additional seats, has played a crucial role in bolstering the BJP’s position.
In the general election results, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) secured a total of 292 seats, while the opposition INDIA alliance garnered 233 seats. Notably, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) achieved a good victory by obtaining 240 seats on its own, surpassing the combined total of the INDIA alliance. This outcome underscores the BJP’s dominant position within the NDA and its robust support base, further solidifying its influence in the Indian political landscape.
This outcome marks a personal setback for Mr. Modi, who has previously won majorities in elections both as chief minister of Gujarat state and as India’s prime minister. He has dominated Indian politics for a decade, making the reduced seat count a significant blow.
The election results have defied expectations, with the Congress Party-led INDIA opposition alliance experiencing an unexpected resurgence. This outcome, which sharply diverged from exit polls and pre-election surveys, has raised questions about the factors that led to this surprising turn of events.
The recent general election in India was monumental, with over 640 million participating in the seven-week marathon. This massive turnout, which election authorities hailed as a ‘world record,’ underscores the importance of the election and the people’s voice, making it a significant event in the country’s political history.
Mr. Modi’s experience mirrors that of many world leaders who face more arduous contests in their third-term elections. Despite this, the BJP remains India’s largest party by seats. Mr. Modi has secured a third term with his coalition allies; he will now match the record of Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister.
The BJP’s significant loss of over 50 seats in the recent general election has important implications. This underperformance, particularly in light of Mr. Modi’s ambitious campaign target of 400 coalition seats, necessitates a deeper analysis of the strategic missteps and external factors contributing to the BJP’s shortfall. This has led to jubilation in the Congress camp and disappointment within the BJP. Despite emerging as the largest party, the unmet expectations of the BJP’s supporters could potentially have far-reaching consequences for the party’s future.
Supporters of Mr. Modi attribute his third-term victory to several factors: stable governance, the appeal of continuity, efficient welfare programs, and the perception of an enhanced global image for India. To his Hindu nationalist base, Mr. Modi has delivered on crucial manifesto promises such as revoking the autonomy of Indian-administered Kashmir, building the Ram temple in Ayodhya, and implementing a controversial citizenship law. Additionally, many BJP-ruled states have enacted laws tightening regulations on interfaith marriages.
However, the BJP’s significant seat drop may be linked to joblessness, rising prices, growing inequality, and a controversial army recruitment reform. Although many infrastructure projects have transformed India, including the GDP and over USD 700 billion in its reserve, Mr. Modi’s message did not resonate with the voters. It alienated many voters who were more interested in their local problems instead of bridges, bullet trains, and roads.
The party faced its most significant setback in Uttar Pradesh (UP), a state larger than the United Kingdom and three times as populous. With 80 parliamentary seats, UP holds considerable sway in national politics and is often considered the gateway to Delhi. Both Mr. Modi and Rahul Gandhi hold seats there.
Mr. Modi’s ambitious slogan, “Ab ki baar, 400 paar,” aiming for more than 400 seats for his NDA alliance, may have backfired. Such a massive majority may have raised fears of constitutional changes among many voters.
The BJP’s inability to secure the 400 seats it aimed for can be attributed to several key factors.
Firstly, the centralization of campaign management under Amit Shah hindered local leaders from conducting effective campaigns. In contrast, the Indian Alliance empowered Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Uttar Pradesh leaders to run their campaigns independently, yielding visible results.
Secondly, the BJP overly relied on projecting Modi as a national and international figure, assuming this alone would sway Indian voters. Conversely, the Indian Alliance refrained from naming a potential prime minister, focusing instead on collective leadership.
Thirdly, Amit Shah’s micromanagement and reluctance to delegate authority restricted the campaign’s effectiveness. Allowing leaders like Yogi Adityanath in Uttar Pradesh more autonomy could have yielded better outcomes.
Fourthly, connecting directly with the voters was not the same as in the 2019 general elections.
While Narendra Modi has secured a third term as India’s prime minister, the reduced majority highlights the challenges ahead and signals a shifting political landscape.
The I.N.D.I.An alliance did not have a central figure like Amit Shah, who directed the general election strategies for the NDA; instead, the I.N.D.I.An Alliance empowered its local leaders by providing them with proper support and autonomy to connect with voters effectively. This grassroots approach has been a significant factor in its surprising success.
In contrast, the BJP could have benefited from a similar voter engagement strategy. The BJP should have focused more on connecting with voters in the manner that the I.N.D.I. An Alliance successfully allowed the local leaders to conduct the election campaigns. Prime Minister Modi must reconsider Amit Shah’s role, particularly considering the perceived failure to control and direct the campaign effectively.
The BJP’s ambitious goal of securing 400+ seats underscored a reliance on past successes and a belief in the infallibility of their campaign strategies. This assumption did not account for the electorate’s dynamic sentiments, which are influenced by many factors, including economic conditions, social issues, and campaign conduct. Moreover, the practical grassroots approach of the opposition INDIA alliance, which empowered local leaders to connect directly with voters, contrasted sharply with the BJP’s more centralized strategy. This grassroots engagement resonated more with the electorate, showcasing the importance of staying attuned to the needs and voices of the people.
Many democratic governments must heed the critical lesson of not taking voters for granted in any election. The repercussions of such complacency can be severe, as evidenced by the recent general election in India. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a major political force, entered the election with high expectations, confidently projecting a sweeping victory with over 400 seats. However, this overconfidence was a miscalculation, as the BJP fell short of a majority, highlighting the unpredictable nature of democratic processes.