When the Congress Party lost its position as the dominant national party in the 1989 elections, many people believed that this role would be inherited by the Janata Dal coalition under the leadership of V.P. Singh. However, it proved to be much more unstable than the government under Morarji Desai and very soon the country witnessed the rise of a number of regional (state) parties sporting the name “Janata Dal”. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), under the leadership of Atal Behari Vajyapee, emerged as an alternative to the Congress but it was able to retain its position only for six years and had to revert to its role as the main Opposition after the 2004 general elections.
Even though many Congress supporters take the victory in the 2009 general elections as confirming the return of the Congress as the party of governance at the Centre, the trend of voting in some of the large states in India and the number of seats it had won from 1989 does not give much room for such hopes. The Congress’ strength in the Lok Sabha rose to 405 seats in 1984, but fell to 197 in 1989. It made a partial recovery to 232 in 1991 but the number of seats fell to 140 in 1996, 141 in 1998 and to 145 in 2004. The 206 seats tally in 2009 is no doubt a significant achievement, but not enough to warrant much optimism. The main weaknesses that plagued the Congress from the mid-60s, such as lack of inner-party democracy, poor leadership in states et cetera, continue even now. In fact, the main advantage that the Congress has at the Centre is that its rivals are in a worse position on the criteria of inner-party democracy and state-level organisational strength.
As far as the BJP is concerned, its unity and coherence as an all-India party has been badly shattered by the electoral reverses of 2009. A great blow to the morale of the rank and file of the BJP has been the open display of divisions and rifts among its national level leaders after the 2009 reverses.
More disappointing to those who were entertaining hopes for the emergence of a viable third alternative has been the trend of decline that has set in most of the small parties. Anti-Congressism and anti-Hindutva had provided an ideological platform for the various remnants of the old Janata Dal and a number of Left parties under the leadership of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), but the CPI(M), today, is in much greater disarray and state of decline than the Congress or the BJP had been at any time in the recent past. The question now is whether the CPI(M) will get enough seats on its own to prop itself as the leader of the Left group in any future third front.
The trend of decline in the small parties carrying the label of “Janata Dal” is more conspicuous than that in the CPI(M)-led Left Front. In the early years after its founding, the Janata Party could attract not only the followers of certain castes, in some states, but also a good number of followers committed to the socialistic ideologies of Jayaprakash Narayan. They claimed to be equally opposed to the policies of the Congress and the BJP, but now people don’t know where senior leaders like Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Prasad Yadav stand. They seem to have opted for a very flexible ideology for their parties, guided more by their personal interests than any principles or socialist philosophy. Their sudden shift from anti-Congressism to the position of supporters of the Congress has landed their parties in a “nowhere land” and stifled the idea of a third front even before it was born. Public would find it difficult to accept their leadership for a third front when they are seen to be guided more by convenience than by their commitment to the ideologies claimed by them till now.
The senior functionaries in Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav’s party are members of his own family and he retains a tight control over the affairs of the party without involving the other senior members in the process of decision-making, even on important issues. In Bihar, people will not easily forget the past when Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav could not consider anybody else except his wife to hold the office of chief minister when he had to face certain serious criminal charges. The masses in these states are getting more and more educated and politically enlightened and are no longer convinced about the logic of their top leaders advocating democracy for those outside the party, but practising “one leader dictatorship” within their parties.
Many people who have been watching the record of Nitish Kumar as chief minister of Bihar had developed great admiration and respect for him as a good and clean administrator. In fact, many think that the third front will have a worthy leader in Mr Kumar if Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav and Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav are unable to retain leadership in the Opposition front that comprises of small parties. However, the manner in which he has treated Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi has now created serious doubts about his potential to develop into an all-India leader.
One can understand his dislike of the poster of his shaking hands with Mr Modi on the latter’s visit to Bihar recently but this is not an adequate reason for denying Mr Modi the basic courtesies due to a visiting chief minister. Worse still was the decision of Mr Kumar to return the Rs 5 crores donation that the government of Gujarat had generously given to for the flood-affected people of Bihar. There may be many in the country who do not agree with the way Mr Modi handled the Godhra riots, but one doubts whether they would endorse the methods chosen by Mr Kumar to display his dislike to a visiting dignitary.
Many admirers of Mr Kumar would be disappointed by these developments and one can only hope that a person who tries hard to provide good governance to his state will also become an example for politeness and courtesy in pubic relations, particularly to visitors from outside, however great may be the dislike for the alleged wrong-doings of the visitor in controlling communal riots in his state.

P.C. Alexander is a former governor of Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra