Bihar Political Chessboard, Forged Alliances, Faltering Legitimacy, and the Search for a Third Way

Bihar Political Chessboard, Forged Alliances, Faltering Legitimacy, and the Search for a Third Way

The announcement of chief ministerial candidates in Bihar, a state of profound political significance in India, is typically a moment of strategic clarity. It is the point where grand alliances crystallize their public message and present a unified face to the electorate. However, the recent declarations by the two principal rival fronts—the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the Mahagatbandhan (Grand Alliance)—have revealed less about their strength and more about their deep-seated vulnerabilities. The endorsements of incumbent Nitish Kumar and challenger Tejashwi Yadav were not born of conviction but of compulsion, the result of weeks of internal haggling that has exposed the fragile foundations upon which Bihar’s political edifice currently stands. This unfolding drama is more than a pre-election ritual; it is a critical case study in the erosion of political legitimacy, the pragmatism of power, and the potential opening for a new political paradigm in one of India’s most complex states.

The Story So Far: A Theatre of Reluctant Endorsements

For weeks, speculation was rife in Patna’s political circles. Who would be the chief ministerial face for the two major blocs? The delay itself was telling. In a well-oiled political machine, such announcements are made with confidence and speed. The protracted negotiations and eventual, almost grudging, declarations signal that both the NDA and the Mahagatbandhan are coalitions held together not by a shared vision for Bihar, but by the cold calculus of electoral arithmetic and the fear of a fractured vote.

The tentative clarity that has emerged is less a resolution of internal conflicts and more a temporary ceasefire. Both fronts have chosen faces that, while powerful, carry significant baggage and are subjects of intense public skepticism. The campaigns, therefore, are likely to be less about a bold vision for Bihar’s future and more about a defensive play to consolidate existing vote banks while managing irreconcilable internal contradictions.

The NDA’s Dilemma: The Aging Anchor and the Impatient Heir

The dynamics within the NDA are a masterclass in political pragmatism overriding ambition. The alliance, revolving around the axis of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Janata Dal (United) [JD(U)], presented a facade of unity that cracked under the pressure of the impending election.

The BJP’s Calculated Gambit and Retreat:
The BJP, which emerged as the single largest party in the outgoing Assembly, clearly sensed an opportunity. For years, it has played the role of the supportive junior partner to Nitish Kumar’s leadership, despite its national dominance. However, with Kumar showing visible signs of “slowing down” at 74, the BJP began to signal that the chief ministerial post was an “open” question. This was a strategic move to test the waters and assert its primacy. The party saw a chance to finally claim the top post in a state where it has long desired direct control.

Furthermore, the hostility of another NDA constituent, the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) under Chirag Paswan, towards Nitish Kumar added to the pressure. Paswan’s actions in the 2020 election, where he fielded candidates against JD(U) nominees, are widely believed to have been tacitly supported by the BJP to weaken Kumar. The BJP’s initial reluctance to endorse Kumar was a continuation of this strategy.

Why the BJP Ultimately Fell In Line:
Despite its strength and ambition, the BJP was forced into a pragmatic U-turn. The growing public perception that Kumar might be replaced began to actively damage the NDA’s prospects. This highlights a critical, often overlooked, aspect of Bihar politics: Nitish Kumar’s enduring social coalition. While his image may be faltering, his support among Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) and a section of Mahadalits remains a bedrock of the NDA’s social engineering. The BJP concluded that undermining him explicitly before the election risked alienating this crucial voter base, potentially leading to a catastrophic defeat.

Thus, the endorsement of Kumar is a tactical, short-term move. It is a decision to fight the election on the familiar plank of stability and development that Kumar ostensibly represents, while likely planning for a post-election scenario where his advanced age and declining energy could be used to negotiate a leadership change. The BJP has chosen to secure the alliance’s victory first, deferring its own leadership ambitions for a later, more opportune moment.

The Mahagatbandhan’s Conundrum: The Youthful Challenger and the Weight of Surname

On the other side of the political divide, the Mahagatbandhan, built around the Indian National Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), faced a comparable, if slightly different, internal struggle.

The Congress’s Reluctance and Acquiescence:
The Congress party was initially hesitant to anoint Tejashwi Yadav, the young leader of the RJD, as the alliance’s unanimous chief ministerial face. This reluctance stems from several factors. Firstly, the Congress, despite its national stature, is a junior partner in Bihar and aspires to rebuild its own identity. Unconditionally ceding the leadership position to the RJD could further diminish its standing. Secondly, Tejashwi, while energetic and popular among the RJD’s core Yadav base, is a polarizing figure. He is the son of Lalu Prasad Yadav, and his political identity is inextricably linked to his father’s legacy—a legacy that evokes strong reactions, both positive and negative.

The Consolidation Imperative:
The Grand Alliance ultimately concluded that any further ambiguity on the leadership question would be more damaging than embracing a polarizing candidate. By declaring Tejashwi, the alliance is executing a clear two-step strategy:

1. Consolidate the Core: The primary objective is to secure the RJD’s formidable Yadav-Muslim vote bank, which forms the foundation of the alliance’s strength. Presenting Tejashwi as the future CM is the most effective way to energize this base and ensure a high turnout.

2. Attempt to Expand: Only after securing its core does the alliance believe it can attempt to reach out to other communities, particularly those disillusioned with Nitish Kumar’s governance but wary of the RJD’s past, often labeled as “jungle raj.”

Tejashwi’s campaign in the 2020 elections, which focused squarely on unemployment and economic issues, had shown a glimmer of this expansionist potential. The Mahagatbandhan is hoping to replicate and amplify that message, using Tejashwi’s youth to project him as an agent of change against the “faltering” Kumar.

The Crisis of Legitimacy and the Voter’s Dilemma

The central problem for both fronts is a profound crisis of legitimacy surrounding their chief ministerial candidates.

• Nitish Kumar represents stability but also stagnation. His numerous political flip-flops—alternating between the NDA and the Mahagatbandhan—have earned him the epithet “Paltu Kumar.” Voters question his credibility and his ability to deliver on a new vision, given that he has been in power for most of the last two decades. His age and perceived declining vigor are significant liabilities.

• Tejashwi Yadav represents energy but also carries the heavy baggage of the RJD’s controversial past. For many non-Yadav OBCs and upper-caste voters, his candidacy evokes fears of a return to the law-and-order issues and perceived governance deficit associated with his father’s rule. His relative inexperience and ongoing corruption cases further fuel public skepticism.

This leaves the average Bihari voter in a quandary. The election is shaping up not as a choice between two compelling visions, but as a selection between the perceived “lesser of two evils.” Neither front is in a position to push for new possibilities in leadership or a transformative vision for the state’s chronic problems of migration, unemployment, and industrial underdevelopment.

The Prashant Kishor Factor: A Long Shot with a Potent Message

It is precisely this vacuum of credible alternatives that creates an opening for a third force. Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party is attempting to position itself as the platform for those tired of both Kumar and Yadav. A master political strategist who has worked with both the NDA and their rivals, Kishor brings a unique understanding of the political landscape.

His message of clean governance and a development-focused agenda, decoupled from caste-based politics, is designed to appeal to the disillusioned urban middle class and the youth. While his party is still a “long shot” in terms of winning a significant number of seats, its potential impact cannot be dismissed. It could act as a spoiler, particularly in seats where the contest between the two main alliances is tight. More importantly, it signals a growing, if unorganized, public yearning for an alternative that moves beyond the politics of the last 30 years.

Conclusion: An Election of Managed Contradictions

The Bihar assembly election is shaping up to be one of the most consequential in recent times, not because it offers a clear path forward, but because it highlights the exhaustion of the existing political models. The NDA and the Mahagatbandhan are not marching into battle as unified armies; they are fragile coalitions, each trying to manage its internal divisions while projecting an image of strength.

The announcements of Nitish Kumar and Tejashwi Yadav as chief ministerial candidates are not symbols of confidence but admissions of weakness. They represent the least worst option for both alliances to keep their respective social coalitions intact. The real story of this election may not be which alliance wins, but the margin of victory and the performance of any emerging third force. The delays, the confusion, and the eventual, reluctant clarity all point to one undeniable truth: all is not well in the political heart of Bihar, and the voter may be ready to demand more than what the established alliances are currently offering.

Q&A: Unpacking Bihar’s Political Landscape

Q1: Why did the BJP, despite being the larger party, ultimately agree to Nitish Kumar as the NDA’s chief ministerial face?
A1: The BJP’s decision was driven by pure political pragmatism. While the party desired the CM post, it realized that publicly undermining Nitish Kumar was damaging the NDA’s electoral prospects. Kumar continues to command a loyal following among Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) and Mahadalits, which are crucial for the alliance’s victory. The BJP calculated that winning the election with Kumar was preferable to risking a loss by pushing its own candidate. This is likely a temporary arrangement, with the BJP positioning itself for a leadership change after the polls.

Q2: What are the main strengths and weaknesses of Tejashwi Yadav as the Mahagatbandhan’s CM candidate?
A2:

• Strengths: He is a youthful and energetic campaigner who effectively connects with the RJD’s core Yadav and Muslim vote base. His focus on issues like unemployment in the 2020 election resonated with many young voters, showing potential to expand beyond his traditional support.

• Weaknesses: He is a deeply polarizing figure due to his association with his father Lalu Prasad Yadav’s legacy. Many non-Yadav voters fear a return to the law-and-order problems and governance deficits of the “jungle raj” era. This makes it difficult for the alliance to build a broad, inclusive coalition.

Q3: What does the prolonged delay in announcing the CM candidates reveal about the state of both alliances?
A3: The delay is a clear indicator of significant internal divisions and a lack of consensus. It suggests that the leadership was not a settled matter and was the subject of intense bargaining and one-upmanship. The candidates are a result of “compulsions rather than any convergence of minds,” revealing that both the NDA and Mahagatbandhan are fragile coalitions where partners have conflicting ambitions and misgivings about their standard-bearers.

Q4: How does Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party fit into this political equation?
A4: Prashant Kishor’s party is attempting to capitalize on the crisis of legitimacy facing both Nitish Kumar and Tejashwi Yadav. It positions itself as a “third option” for voters disillusioned with the existing choices and tired of caste-based politics. While it is a long shot to form a government, it could play the role of a spoiler by cutting into the vote share of both major alliances, particularly in competitive seats, and could signal the beginning of a new political movement in Bihar.

Q5: What is the “crisis of legitimacy” referred to in the context of this election?
A5: The crisis of legitimacy refers to the fact that both chief ministerial faces—Nitish Kumar and Tejashwi Yadav—are viewed with significant skepticism by large sections of the electorate. Kumar is seen as an aging, indecisive leader who has failed to bring transformative change despite his long tenure. Yadav is perceived as an inexperienced candidate carrying the heavy baggage of his party’s controversial past. This leaves voters without a candidate who is both widely trusted and seen as capable of delivering a new vision for Bihar.