ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

The Third Front?

A third front is wishful thinking, more wishful than thinking. The Communists are still at it, chasing a shadow. But the political climate has changed. The voters have moved away from the concept, which was born out of disillusionment with both major parties -- the Congress and the BJP

The V P Singh phenomenon in 1989 was essentially anti-Congress. The Janata Dal, his creation, was able to get people's support because it took up the issue of corruption. The Bofors gun kickbacks were synonymous with dishonesty in higher places. That paid dividends.

In a way, it was a repeat of what Gandhian Jayaprakash Narayan had done in the 'seventies. He had reminded people of the clean standards which were followed before the advent of Indira Gandhi. His own example -- and the appeal -- harked back to values which V P Singh emulated to some extent.

When the Janata Dal again came to power in 1996 and 1997 under Deve Gowda and Inder Kumar Gujral respectively, it was not because of the numbers it had. By then, in fact, the Janata Dal had been reduced to some 26 members in the Lok Sabha as compared to the 90 during the VP Singh period. But then all non-BJP parties were imbued by the same motive: to stall communal forces that the BJP represented.

The Congress, which supported the Janata Dal governments, had much greater strength than the Janata Dal's. Yet standing by the secular forces was the overriding consideration. The Congress was not willing to join the coalition and the other parties were opposed to its leadership of the government. True, both the Janata Dal governments were at the mercy of the Congress which pulled the rug from under the feet of first Deve Gowda and then Inder Gujral, making its own political calculations. Still the arrangement reflected an ideological harmony as long as it lasted.

What is there now to fire the people's imagination for a third front? They have learnt from their experience that the rulers of such a formation are no different from the leaders in the Congress and the BJP. What do the voters look forward to: caste, corruption or compromise? The communists have dropped their objection even to corruption. Is it the right objective to pursue?

Former Bihar chief minister Laloo Prasad Yadav, who has treated the state as if it is his personal fiefdom, is now much sought after in the third front. So is Mulayam Singh Yadav, who has propagated caste in UP as Laloo Yadav has done in Bihar. True, without them, the numbers will not tally. But the message it sends out is that the combination matters more than the commitment.

The reason why the third front had failed time and again is that mere anti-Congress or anti-BJP sentiment is not the glue which can hold the disparate elements together. There has to be something positive. The constituents of the third front made a hash of the principles which it said it would uphold.

That the BJP represents communalism or that the Congress reflects authoritarianism goes without saying. But if the third front is to tilt towards caste bigotism or rank corruption, what purpose will it serve even when formed? Can it give a better government? That is the crux of the problem. The mere pulling down of a government is not a lofty idea. What it replaces is important. And it cannot be a formation which reflects opportunism.

People have also been disillusioned by the running battle among the third front constituents. They quarreled openly, although their decisions at the Cabinet were reportedly unanimous. There was crisis all the while. This could not have endeared them to the people. It is surprising that the communists and some goody-goody persons have the impression that the front has only to be formed and the voters will come running to it. Apart from other factors. It cannot happen so long as there are the same old faces which the public has come to despise.

People are not happy over the prospect they face -- either the BJP or the Congress. The BJP has not abandoned its agenda of Hindutva. It has been done for the time being. BJP chief Kushabhau Thakre has said that they will continue to follow the national agenda which the BJP led coalition adopted when it assumed power. Nowhere has he announced, for example, that the BJP will not build the temple where the Babri Masjid once stood. The party will not press the demand at present. That is all, it has the option to pick up the thread from where it has left off whenever the party so desires.

Not many people will disagree with the statement that Atal Bihari Vajpayee is a cut above the rest in the BJP in temperament or attitude. He is opposed to fundamentalists. L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi, the hardliners, are not even a patch on him. But then Vajpayee says that the RSS is his soul. How can its philosophy of the Hindu Rashtra accommodate his liberal outlook? He is only mukut (mask) as an RSS ideologue has said. If it is so, why should people vote for him? He will have to publicly sever his relations with the RSS for the sake of credibility.

On the other side are the Congressmen, who fall head over heels at the mere mention of the dynasty name, however remote. Sycophancy is the trait of the party. Sonia Gandhi is the icon they worship. The party meant something under Jawaharlal Nehru and Lal Bahadur Shastri. It followed a moral code and stood firmly against communalism and corruption. Now it has been reduced to a combination of self-seekers, jostling each other for the luxury of office. They are the same old lot, sullied by scams and scandals.

In fact, the Congress looks like a party which wants to gain power by hook or by crook. It wants to be everything to everybody for the sake of votes. Not long ago, the party passed a resolution to placate the Hindutva supporters. It said: "Hinduism is the most effective guarantor of secularism." What should the minorities, which are trying to return to the Congress, infer from it? Where is Nehru's ethos of secularism?

When idealism lessens, many compromises are made. Even ethical considerations are pushed into the background. And leaders without qualities begin to stalk the land. India is going through such a phase. It does not, however, mean that one set of undesirable people should replace another set of undesirables. The beginning for a change can be small but it cannot be dubious. For quick results, the future cannot be jeopardised. The third front cannot be a carbon copy of the BJP or the Congress. Anything built without values will come crashing down, as it has happened.

That an alternative both to the Congress and the BJP is needed is generally accepted. But a third front cannot be on the old lines. In the past, the non-BJP and the non-Congress elements were brought on the same platform, however wanting in their credentials. A similar effort will be of no avail. A new liberal democratic front should be built de novo under the leadership of West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu. NGOs, not looking for money or blessings from abroad, will become part of it. There are thousands of young men and women, who are working voluntarily at the grassroots in the fields of health, education, environment and human rights. They can all be strung together. They, in turn, will bring in their experiences and contacts to make the front more meaningful.

The communists, as their approach suggests, are keen on roping in all such elements as are outside the orbit of the BJP and the Congress. This is a faulty approach. This information will evoke neither enthusiasm nor new thinking. The voters will remain distant. If still the front is formed, it will be an affront to the intelligence of the nation.

Kuldip Nayar