Ten reasons why the BJP lost

[shailesh13]

Why the BJP lost Elections-2009


Most media pundits and Bharatiya Janata Party supporters were surprised with the party's performance in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections. It was always in doubt whether the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance would reach the magical figure of 272, but optimists believed that post-electoral alliances could help.

After the death of Lokmanya Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi took total charge of the Congress. Somewhere along the way, he felt that representing Hindus alone would not enable him to be India's foremost leader, so he sought support of the Muslim community by supporting the Khilafat Movement in 1919 (protests by Indian Muslims against the abolishing of the Caliphate in Turkey) and Hindu Muslim unity.

L K Advani was respected by most Hindus. He too felt that the dream of becoming prime minister could be realised only when he became acceptable to the Muslims and allies who had Muslim support. The visible point of his transformation from a Hindutva warrior to a secular person was his visit to the Jinnah mausoleum in Pakistan and his controversial remarks during a visit to Karachi in June 2005. Advani, thus sought to become secular, as the Congress leaders have been, for over 75 years. This required him to ignore Hindu concerns and pain, overlook Islamic terrorism and Christian evangelism.

Ironically the man who coined the term 'pseudo-secularism' for the Congress, became one himself
The joy in the Advani camp was premature

As the foremost critic of secularism as practiced in India, Advani believed that the word 'secular' is not defined in the Indian Constitution, and is a concept borrowed from Europe where being secular meant separation of church from state; yet his ambitions forced an image change.
It was hoped that the makeover would inspire Muslims to vote for an Advani-led NDA. That did not happen. When a politician, actually any human being, has for over 60 years stood for certain values and does an about-turn in the winter of his life, people question the credibility of such a leader.

The joy in the Advani camp on his being nominated as BJP's prime ministerial candidate was misplaced, premature as if he had already become the PM. By virtue of being declared PM in waiting, his opponents had months to design a strategy to counter him, because BJP prepared no satellite-booster to launch him to the winning post! Certainly by virtue of being the tallest leader in the BJP, had the NDA won, Advani would surely have become PM. BJP laid excessive emphasis upon his pre-eminence, while the Congress used the campaign period to cleverly cover up the deficiencies of its five-year rule.
The joy in the Advani camp was premature

As the foremost critic of secularism as practiced in India, Advani believed that the word 'secular' is not defined in the Indian Constitution, and is a concept borrowed from Europe where being secular meant separation of church from state; yet his ambitions forced an image change.
It was hoped that the makeover would inspire Muslims to vote for an Advani-led NDA. That did not happen. When a politician, actually any human being, has for over 60 years stood for certain values and does an about-turn in the winter of his life, people question the credibility of such a leader.

The joy in the Advani camp on his being nominated as BJP's prime ministerial candidate was misplaced, premature as if he had already become the PM. By virtue of being declared PM in waiting, his opponents had months to design a strategy to counter him, because BJP prepared no satellite-booster to launch him to the winning post! Certainly by virtue of being the tallest leader in the BJP, had the NDA won, Advani would surely have become PM. BJP laid excessive emphasis upon his pre-eminence, while the Congress used the campaign period to cleverly cover up the deficiencies of its five-year rule.


Was Advani truly tough?

Then there was the election campaign. A US Presidential type campaign was begun, portraying Advani as a tough no-nonsense man. He called Manmohan Singh the weakest PM ever. Most posters showed Advani only. A new website and blog were designed to connect with the youth. The usual noises of making a Ram Temple, abolishing Article 370 were made. An innovative Information Technology policy was presented.

What went wrong? Was Advani truly tough? When party general secretary Arun Jaitley openly heckled party president Rajnath Singh, causing embarrassment during the heat of battle, the PM in waiting remained mute but appeared to side with his own lackey (Jaitley). When the BJP's Pilibhit candidate Varun Gandhi was arrested for making inflammatory speeches, the party seemed to favour politely dropping him (it told the Election Commission that he was not yet the official candidate.) Then, under the illusion that Varun's outburst would lead to consolidation of Hindu votes, it went ahead with his candidature.

BJP failed to bring forth UPA-rule's shortcomings

Advani took personal digs at Dr Manmohan Singh. But when Singh hit back and questioned Advani's tough attitude citing attacks on India's Parliament, Akshardham etc, Advani went quiet.
Instead, Advani could have said those events happened during NDA rule but the frequency of terrorist attacks was higher under the UPA. Five years of UPA rule saw bomb blasts in Bangalore, Delhi, Mumbai, Ahmadabad, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Gauhati, Varanasi and so on. More importantly the state governments of BJP-ruled Gujarat and Karnataka arrested those behind blasts unlike the Congress-Nationalist Congress Party government in Maharashtra where the trial for July 2006 train blasts is proceeding at a snail's pace. The BJP could have pointed out that 16 years later, those involved in the 1993 Mumbai blasts are still not convicted. The UPA government has not pursued the case in the Supreme Court with the same vigour, as say, those relating to the post-Godhra riots in Gujarat.


Advani could have compared the NDA's response to Pakistan post the attack on Parliament in 2001 vs. the Mumbai attack in 2008. The NDA launched Operation Parakram, the largest mobilisation of the armed forces since the 1971 war. Three strike corps were deployed along the border with Pakistan; waiting for orders to go across. Both fleets of the Indian Navy were combined and deployed off the coast of Pakistan; Pakistan's airlines were denied the right to fly over Indian airspace. These were tough measures.


Conversely, except making a noise and seeking the United States' support, the UPA did not take any concrete measures against Pakistan. The result of their approach is reflected in recent events -- when India expressed displeasure on June 2, after 26/11 mastermind Hafiz Saeed was freed from house arrest by the Lahore High Court, the Pakistan Prime Minister responded, 'Solve Kashmir dispute in accordance with UN (United Nations) resolutions.' The same old story again.

Advani and Vajpayee's approach differed

Ditto for Kandhar. Both Singh and Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi questioned Advani and the NDA on why they exchanged hostages for criminals. Advani is yet to come clean. Media reports indicate that Advani did not agree with the exchange; it was then foreign minister Jaswant Singh who maintained that exchanging criminals for hostages was the best possible option.
Advani could have cited Home Minister P Chidambaram's recent statement that he too would have released hostages, if faced with a similar situation. Or, like Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi said in an interview to Headlines Today, he could have pointed out that an all-party meeting discussed the issue and agreed to exchange hostages for criminals. As the Congress leaders were present at the meeting, it should not now distance itself from a national accord.


Having said that, it must be remembered that the NDA government was headed by Vajpayee, and not Advani. Their approach to various issues differed.


By projecting himself as tough, Advani opened the gates for criticism. He should instead have used past examples to prove the NDA approach and let the public decide who is a weakling?

People dislike doublespeak and want their leaders to come out clearly, accept mistakes, not beat around the bush. Rahul Gandhi admitted errors but praised BJP for the highway development program.


About 15 percent of the Indian electorate is in the age group between 18 to 30. The BJP campaign centered exclusively around an 81-year-old PM in waiting. Notwithstanding a blog, website and a facebook campaign, can a 24 year old to relate to Advani.


Instead, the BJP should have shown Advani with numerous leaders from different age groups, atleast some in the 30's, men and women. It should have trained these young leaders in the nuances of media communication well in advance and given them sufficient media exposure. This would have helped the BJP connect with various age groups, present the right combination of age and experience.

BJP became 'secular' like the Congress of 1990's

By paying lip-service to building a temple at Ayodhya, inspite of being aware that the courts, Muslims and allies would not allow it, BJP once again tried to fool the Hindu voter. A temple already exists period. Lack of credible actions made the voters lose faith in the BJP. Most Hindus do not know the implications of Article 370. Both these issues are steeped in politics of the 1990's.
In an attempt to gain wider acceptance, the BJP became secular like the Congress of the 1990's, meaning it wanted the Hindu vote by default and the Muslim vote by virtue of having now become secular. This alienated its core Hindu constituency and did not bring in the Muslim votes either. The BJP's dilemma is akin to the Congress's in the 1990's - Rajiv Gandhi wanted to keep both the Hindus and Muslims happy. We know what happened!


During its five year tenure, I do not recall any significant action taken by the BJP to create a level playing field for Hindus or assuage Hindu feelings. Why must only Hindu temples be under the control of state governments? In states like Karnataka temple collections become part of the state treasury. Why cannot Hindus, like Muslims and Christians, manage their places of worship? BJP forever referred to the plight of Kashmiri Hindus but did nothing to improve their condition.



The NDA undertook no action to strengthen the provisions of the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act that controls the flow of foreign money into Indian Non Government Organisations. How many people know that between 1993-94 and 2006-07, Rs 64,670 crore was the sum of foreign contributions (external link) received into India NGO's (mostly Christian organisations) and these contributions increased by over 100 percent since the UPA came to power.


Unlike the BJP, the Congress is very clear that the minorities and the Dalits are its principal vote banks and goes out of its way to woo them.

The Hindutva tango

One reasons for BJP's ascent was its exposure of the intellectual bankruptcy of the Congress. Let us take some examples. Every time the BJP raised any issues concerning Hindus, the Congress claimed it was pursuing the policy of Hindutva to get votes. Has any BJP leader asked the Congress or the media to define Hindutva? Did the BJP say, 'Why does speaking for Hindu rights upset you? Do only minorities have the right to protest?' After all, the Congress openly espoused the minority cause for decades! Secondly all UPA leaders said their aim was to keep the communal forces (BJP) out of power. Did any BJP leader stand up and ask the UPA to define secularism?
Now take the Pakistan PM's recent statement on resolution of the Kashmir dispute in accordance with UN resolutions. The world knows that the UN resolutions require Pakistan to vacate Pakistan Occupied Kashmir first before any talk of implementing the resolution. I do not recall any Congress leader telling the Pakistani government this!


Management of the BJP allies has left a lot to be desired. Wherever the BJP has a regional ally, the ally has invariably weakened the BJP. It had pockets of support in West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh. The tie-up with the Trinamool Congress and the Telugu Desam Party in 2004 decimated the BJP. Biju Janata Dal chief Naveen Patnaik used the BJP to get into power, consolidate his position and left BJP in the lurch. Janata Dal-United chief Nitish Kumar in Bihar may go the Patnaik way.


On the other hand Rahul Gandhi showed the Samajwadi Party-Rashtriya Janata Dal their place by making the Congress fight the UP, Bihar elections on its own steam. The results say it all.


Why on earth did Jaswant Singh fight the election from Darjeeling and support Gorkhaland? The clamour for this new state has created enough problems since the 1990's; no Bengali can support Gorkhaland. This one seat alienated Bengalis in the entire state.
BJP did not attack Congress

The BJP did not attack the Congress's poor record of governance. Inspite of ruling India for most of independent India's sixty years, over 20 percent of her population continue to live below the poverty line. Thirty seven years ago Indira Gandhi's slogan was 'Garibi Hatao.' Sonia Gandhi said pretty much the same thing in 2004 and 2009, the slogan being 'Aam Aadmi'. Advani could have accused the Congress of having a vested interest in keeping India poor, backward just the way Lalu Prasad did in Bihar for three terms.
Deep down, Advani knew that this was the last fight of his life, a fight to make his dream come true. Spiritually speaking, when a person gets too attached to the fruits of his action, the object of desire becomes more and more difficult to achieve (ma phalesu kadachana).


The BJP-led NDA government did some excellent work but leaders did not talk about it:


The 1998 nuclear tests marked a turning point in India's post independence history and compelled the world to look at her differently.


Yashwant Sinha inherited a difficult fiscal situation after Chidambaram's dream budget of 1997 but left the government of India finances in a very healthy situation in 2004. The fiscal deficit for March 2009 could be as high as 7 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. As Foreign Minister Sinha urged Indian industrialists to acquire foreign companies abroad, rather than focus on the domestic market only.

The NDA government conceived the project to convert and strengthen existing national highways to four-laned ones and followed it up with quick progress on National Highway Development Program. Their contribution is widely acknowledged across the political spectrum. The UPA record on NHDP was dismal; the BJP-Shiv Sena government conceived and implemented India's first expressway from Mumbai to Pune.


After Sukh Ram's disastrous stint in the telecom ministry, Arun Shourie oversaw the creation of a regulatory framework for telecom companies.


The BJP could have used its past performance and medium term vision to communicate a clear message to the voting public. It did not use plain statistics to criticise the Congress.

It could have promised Hindus a level playing field in all areas that do not concern Muslims or Christians, thereby avoiding conflict.








Somehow one got the feeling that the BJP had not kept a detailed record of the UPA regime's misdeeds. Collection, analysis and dissemination of the UPA government's performance should start now and be regularly done for the next five years.


The BJP has to decide what it stands for and then live with it through thick and thin. It cannot keep oscillating like a pendulum. All along it opposed the nuclear deal with the US, then suddenly during the elections it changed tack and said it would not renegotiate the deal if voted to power. Where was the need for this statement considering that the nuclear deal was a non issue?


The BJP must realise who its principal opponents are. One is the media and two the Congress. A short to long term strategic plan needs to be designed accordingly. Execution is the key.

[Suresh Rao]

This is in response to the views put forth by mnnandan at the start of this topic. This is not to counter his views but to straighten some facts. Let the unexpected defeat not send BJP in witch hunting mode. There is a need for self introspection among the top leaders. Let them not try to find out some soft target within the party to pass on the buck. Over the years, the Party is moving away from its ideology and is becoming a carbon copy of Congress. Let us not forget on what plank BJP once swept UP and other adjacent belts. The same plank by the local leaders allowed BJP to come in power in many states like Gujarat, MP, Chhattishgarh, Karnataka etc. The Party could retain its hold in these states on the same plank added with development and other inclusive plans. While sticking to its original plank of Hindutva, let BJP not also be seen as an anti-minority party. While quoting the point-wise views of the author of this topic, I put forth my views below each of the points as under:

POINT RAISED

1. Disconnect with urban middle class

The Bharatiya Janata Party was once the darling of the educated urban middle class. Today, neither the BJP nor the NDA won in any of the following important cities: Chennai, Hyderabad, Mumbai, New Delhi, Pune, Mysore, Thiruvananthapuram, Chandigarh, Kolkata, etc just to name a few. In many of these constituencies they were not even second. Mumbai and Delhi alone make up 13 seats. The urban middle class cares about jobs, security and involvement of young leaders. They like a constructive opposition – not one that opposes for the sake of opposing. For instance, the urban voters seemed to broadly support the nuclear deal with the US. The BJP could have joined hands with Congress on the issue, helped fine tune the negotiations and thereby take partial credit for the deal. Instead, they did not explain in layman’s terms why they were opposed to it in the first place. This gave the impression that they opposed it simply because they were in the opposition.

On a different note, voters, especially the urban ones, do not subscribe to religious extremism. While the BJP itself may not have engaged in extremism, may other groups like Bajrang Dal or Ram Sena did. They were not a part of the BJP – but the people thought they were and BJP did little to correct the perception. This was fatal. The lack of young leaders was another area that alienated the urban voters.

BJP’s core vote bank – the urban middle class no longer resonates with the party.

MY VIEW POINT: BJP’s inability to win a seat in a few cities, does not indicate that the BJP has lost the support of the urban middle class. Where is BJP in the cities like Kolkata (West Bengal), Chennai (Tamilnadu), Thiruvanthapuram (Kerala), Hyderabad (AP)? The party is yet to have its foothold in these states and it is certainly not possible to win seats without a sound organizational set up. Still the party candidates in these cities secured sizeable number of votes. Further, defeat of the BJP candidates in some cities are not on similar grounds. Take the case of Mumbai, the BJP narrowly lost four of the seats due to MNS factor. In Delhi, it is mainly due to consolidation of the Muslim votes where all the LJP candidates of Ram Vilas Paswan withdrew in support of the Congress. Another, Muslim BSP candidate also followed suit. Delhi is no longer a city of Babus and displaced persons from West Pakistan. It is now having huge population living in slums and unauthorized colonies. They have practically no concern on National issues. A few hundred bucks and a bottle of wine still influence them to vote for a particular candidate. Most of the urban middle class, on the other hand, do not vote. They may participate in protest candle marches but not in voting. We also cannot overlook the fact that BJP has won from the cities like Bangalore, Mangalore, Ahmedabad etc where its root is strong. What I want to say is that defeat in some cities can not be said to be due to alienation of the urban middle class towards BJP. Issue like nuclear deal is not relevant to the urban middle class. How many of them are really aware of the ins and out of the deal to support or reject it? But in general, BJP should have highlighted in public meetings about the draw backs in the deal and its resolve to get them rectified if voted to power. But a statement by Jaswant Singh on the issue during the course of campaign gave the opposition a chance to attack. Such things must have to be avoided. No doubt, Advaniji had said that if coming to power corrective measures will be taken to safeguard India’s interest. No one should find fault with BJP if they did not support the deal having some serious flaws. One should not forget the manner in which the Government signed the deal. Any how, the deal was never a prominent poll issue.

It is true that no one likes religious extremism. But why to single out Bajrang Dal or Ram Sene alone on that count? What about SIMI and other similar groups? Bajrang Dal has never been involved in anti-national activities unlike SIMI. So far, there is no instance that the Dal has attacked other communities except reacting under great provocation. As far as Ram Sene is concerned, BJP had clearly said that the party has no connection with it. BJP Government in Karnataka even took strong action against its leaders under the law. This caused Ram Sene to oppose BJP in the Lok Sabha Election. Had the BJP not been on the right path, how the people of Mangalore would have overwhelmingly voted for the BJP candidate? Our misfortune is that we tend to form our opinion based on the biased media.

POINT RAISED

2. Appearing communal

In politics, being correct is not adequate - it is all about appearing to be correct. In Kandhamal and Mangalore, the BJP was not directly involved in the violence. Publicly the party condemned the violence. Yet some leaders spoke in two voices – and tried to justify the happenings in some manner. What they needed to do is to unanimously condemn violence – no questions. They could have debated it or brought it up in parliament. The violence by VHP or Bajarang Dal was clearly unacceptable.

When Varun Gandhi made his alleged hate speech, the BJP initially condemned it. Then, over a period of time it looked like they were confused about what they should do. Finally towards the end, some leaders were defending Varun. What a costly mistake! They should have announced instead that Varun has claimed that the tapes were fabricated and that he would approach the court to look into the matter. However, until the issue has been resolved, Varun will not contest the elections on a BJP ticket. Would that not have taken the ammunition off the congress? Varun may have won his seat, but he surely cost the BJP votes in several other places. Contrast this with what the Congress did when Sikhs protested against Jagdish Tytler. They played safe and asked him to step down. It made them appear more ethical.

One fails to understand what the BJP hoped to gain by supporting Varun. The hardline-Hindu voters would have voted for them anyway regardless of BJP’s stand. On the other hand, the moderate voters, especially the younger generation, probably got turned off by this. The minorities, of course, consolidated behind the congress.

The BJP has to realize that being pro-Hindu is one thing, but appearing to be anti-minority is a whole different story.

MY VIEW POINT: BJP is a nationalist party and its strength comes from its pro-Hindutva ideology. This does not mean it is a communal party. It never distinguishes the people based on their religion. But if it tries to save the Hindus from extinction, it can not be blamed as communal.

Our idea about Kandhamal issue is based on the media reports and the reaction of the Church leaders, because we generally never try to find out the truth of our own. To know the details about Kandhamal issue, one must have to go through various independent reports on the issue. One should at least read a study report by a fact finding committee headed by Sardar G S Gill, Additional Advocate General, Rajasthan and released by the Justice On Trial on 7-2-2008. How can you stop people from reacting if provoked? If your relations, friends are being attacked - killed, you will certainly react for self defence. Let us therefore not join the chorus to condemn VHP or Bajrang Dal on that count for each and everything.

Regarding Varun Gandhi episode, the BJP leadership certainly committed blunders. Without listening to Varun, how they could condemn him? The corrective action that they took subsequently was also half hearted. When Varun came out of Jail, he was kept idle days after days. He was subsequently given limited space in the campaign. But he had polarized the voters in and around Pillibhit. The crowd that followed him on the day of his surrender in Pillibhit Court comprised mostly from the young generation. In the crowd, we even found a young congress leader, son of a Congress MLA from Maharashtra, speaking in praise of Varun to the media. I do not think denial of a ticket to Varun would have been justified and BJP would have won many seats. In that case, any one would have to be dropped based on mere allegation of delivering hate speech. Varun’s case is not similar to that of Tytler. The later is accused of inciting and leading the rioters to kill the innocent Sikhs. Both the cases are therefore not comparable. It is incorrect to assume that hardline pro-Hindu voters would have voted for BJP regardless on its stand on the issue. In fact, many pro-Hindu voters are getting disillusioned with BJP for its soft stand. BJP by taking its core ideological votebank for granted committed the cardinal sin.

It appears that we are obsessed with the word “secular”. How the Congress having allies like Muslim League, which is responsible for division of the country based on religion, can claim to be secular? Manmohan Singh even had an MP from that party in his cabinet. How the parties like MIM in Andhra Pradesh or Jamat-E-Hind, AUDF can be called secular parties? But they are aligned with one party or the other who claim to be secular and we are made to believe that. BJP has failed to harp on this and expose these so called secular parties. BJP is a pro-Hindu party. Its rise is also on this plank. But its attempt to appear as secular is costing the party heavily.


POINT RAISED

3. Infighting within the party

In the run up to the elections, there were so many incidents of one BJP member taking potshots at another. Shekawat vs Advani, Jaitley vs Sudhanshu Mittal, Vasundhara Raje had problems in Rajasthan, Gopinath Munde was unhappy in Maharashtra, Yediurappa had dissidents in Karnataka, Kalyan Singh joined SP. Such incidents have gone on for too long. Probably this was a price to pay for having internal democracy.

People vote for leaders. When leaders rebel, voters follow. The BJP had to either mollify the rebels or trounce them the way Modi did. Modi is going through a rare phase where he is in perfect sync with his voters. Not many leaders enjoy that kind of support. It is therefore important to address this issue soon. In fact, the infighting may only just be warming up. The race to succeed Advani will probably be quite spectacular.

MY VIEW POINT: Infighting in BJP is a serious issue which needs to be curbed strongly whatever may the stature of the leaders. Jaswant Singh, Sekhawat worked against the party’s interest in Rajasthan during Assembly election. Finally, it was BJP and not Vasundhara who lost Rajasthan. But no action was taken against these leaders. In Uttarakhand, the dissidence also came open. Now we have seen its result when BJP lost all the five LS seats. The Party should be regarded as the supreme. Individual leaders’ interest should never be allowed to be above the interest of the Party. Only the people having faith in party’s ideology have to be trusted and given the leadership. Let there be no attempt to have groups or sub groups within the party.

Moreover, party candidates elected as councilors/Panchayet Members, MLAs and MPs should concentrate in the developmental activities in their respected areas and they should be seen and be accessible. They must also build up good organizational network.


POINT RAISED:

4. Excessive dependence on Narendra Modi

Modi has proved to be an efficient administrator, a good orator and is seen to be personally incorruptible….Modi campaigned far and wide and drew crowds, but that did not translate into seats. In Uttar Pradesh, he campaigned in 30 constituencies of which the BJP only won 3. Why did this happen?... Stop relying on individuals. At the end of the day a Modi is not a Gandhi. At least not until he has successfully buried the ghosts of Godhra.

MY VIEW POINT: Narendra Modi was given the responsibility for Maharashtra, Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu and Goa beside Gujarat. BJP has certainly performed well in these areas compared to last time. In Maharasthra, the performance would have been further better had not BJP lost some seats by a small margin because of MNS factor. Modi had even addressed in Karnataka and Chhattishgarh where the performance of BJP was spectacular. He had visited UP and drew huge crowds. But if it failed to bring adequate votes for BJP, it is not Modi’s fault. The party failed to reorganize itself after the last assembly election. After all, Modi is not expected to do the local canvassing. The top leaders of the party from UP alone are to be blamed for this, since they did little to work at the grass root level. Modi is certainly the future of the party. Let us not be influenced by the biased propaganda of the media and try to condemn him. Godhra is not at all an issue. It is now only an excuse for the pseudo-secular parties to rouse the passion of a particular community.

POINT RAISED

5. Inability to suggest solutions for everyday issues

When Mumbai was attacked, BJP struck back heavily on the government. The people thought it was opportunistic politics. Instead, the BJP should have expressed solidarity with the government at least for a few days and then gradually explained how they would handle the situation better if voted to power. The people instead witnessed a frustrating blame game. So much so, they simply became indifferent. …The BJP had to point out the weaknesses of the present government instead of mounting personal attacks on the Prime Minister. Urban voters were aware that the present economic conditions were not isolated to India… It was not enough to explain the party’s grand plans in the party manifesto which no one except journalists read. People want solutions - not questions. The voters already knew what the questions were! They wanted to know how BJP would have handled the situation differently.

MY VIEW POINT: Regarding the Mumbai attack, if we remember correctly, it is Advaniji who first phoned Manmohan Singh immediately after the incident and expressed support of the Party to tackle the situation. But the Government in the centre was so ill-prepared to tackle such a situation that it took more than ten hours to send commando forces from Delhi to Mumbai which allowed virtually a free hand to the terrorists to kill innocent people. If the unpreparedness of the Government is criticized, BJP cannot be said to be wrong. I feel that many people fell to the prey to our media which propagated that the statement on Man Mohan was a personal one. What Advaniji tried to impress upon by describing Man Mohan Singh as a weak PM was that he had to get direction from Sonia Gandhi on each and every issue and was unable to take any decision of his own – even though he was the country’s PM. If the media twist the statement and some people start believing in that, BJP can not be held responsible for it.

It is no excuse to avoid taking responsibility for economic slowdown by stating that economic meltdown is a global development and India cannot escape from its impact. Here only the economic policy comes into picture. BJP certainly had an answer. If we say that we fared better compared to some western countries, we are perhaps distancing ourselves from the ground reality. Many MNCs in India had issued pink cards to their employees and there were retrenchments too. People became seriously concerned on their job security. It is again the media which reported that the people were after the Government or PSU jobs even though the salary being paid was less. Job loss in India might have been less, since here privatization is yet to come in a big way. Sizeable jobs are still in the Government sectors. Government or PSUs do not retrench people, they absorb the financial loss. In western countries, where the jobs are predominantly in private sector, the private companies went for job cuts. It also remains the fact that many export oriented companies in India were closed down which resulted in huge job loss.

Solution to the economic problem is a Government job. Unless you are in the Government, how could you act to solve the problem? This is an area where practical application will show the result – not the theoretical statements. However, the issue was not highlighted by the BJP to the extent it was actually required.


POINT RAISED:

6. Not fielding second rung leaders for Lok Sabha elections

In 1999 when the 3rd Vajpayee Government took office, the BJP boasted of a number of young leaders. Some of them became ministers in Vajpayee’s cabinet. There was Arun Jaitley, Pramod Mahajan, Venkaiah Naidu, Rajiv Pratap Rudy, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Sushma Swaraj, Rajnath Singh, Ananth Kumar and so on?.... The one young leader they fielded, Varun Gandhi, scored a self goal. Did he not discuss with the party leadership on what he would speak with his electorate? And if he did, why was the party so short sighted to let him make such a provocative speech? The BJP needs young, educated, multilingual leaders who are articulate and intelligent enough to lead the party when their turn comes. Unless BJP urgently addresses this issue very soon, Rahul and co are here to stay for a long long time. And yes, when BJP’s young non-dynastic leaders are ready, gently remind the electorate that every single young leader in the congress is the product of a dynasty.

MY VIEW POINT: It is incorrect to say that BJP did not field young leaders. But they may not be known to many, because they are not the sons/daughters of party big wigs. So they could not find place in TV discussions. Sachin Pilot, Milind Deora, Jyotiraditya Scindia, Priya Dutt or Sandeep Dixit are better known as sons/daughters of who and who in the Congress party than on their own rights. The TV watchers also remember them as the sons or daughters of so and so and not as the young leaders of Congress. Let BJP at least not pick up young leaders on family background. It is not always necessary that all known leaders of the party should contest elections. Persons are also required at the Organizational level to be available for the full time campaign and management. There is nothing wrong if a few leaders like Jaitley, Naidu did not contest the election. Let us also not be made to believe, as propagated by media and BJP’s adversaries, that Varun did a `provocative speech’ and therefore to be treated as a condemned person. In fact, the speech made in an obscure constituency was recorded by a Congress supporter and relayed 24*7 by the ‘secular’ media. Moreover, his exoneration in the NSA case clearly proves his innocence and his ability to withstand psychological and physical pressure. He is certainly a young face of BJP with immense potential and possibilities. Perhaps, the BJP would have done better by exposing the jihad laden speeches of Ulema councils and Shahi imams which expressed support for Congress

POINT RAISED

7. Negative campaigning

The BJP was seen to have run an increasingly negative campaign. Actually they ran an Obama-like campaign. Just like Obama blamed Bush for all the ills of the country, BJP blamed Manmohan….. Clearly, the voters forgave or may be even supported the Congress for responding back. The moral of the story is that the electorate appreciate progressive and a positive campaign.

MY VIEW POINT: It is the biased media and the Congress which propagated as if there was personal attack on Man Mohan. His inability to take decision of hiss own was the issue. Normally, the power centre for the Government is the Prime Minister’s Office. But here for each and every issue decision used to come from 10 Janpath i.e. Sonia’s residence. This only reflected the weakness of Man Mohan to take decision on issues as Prime Minister. His so called clean image is an absolutely farce when ministers like Sheesh Ram Ola and D Raja were indulging in sensational scams and alleged criminals like Taslimuddin and Shibu Soren were sharing his cabinet. It is not a personal attack when one tells the truth but unfortunately the BJP could not establish a connection with the public due to the media’s obfuscation tactics. [Unlike the US media which shared Obama’s perception of the Bush administration]


POINT RAISED:
8. Being content with a junior status in states ruled by allies
Perhaps one of the biggest flaws of BJP was making a hero of a chief minister that did not belong to their party and then depending on that person to help them sail through. By doing so, the BJP lost the alpha status and became subservient to the alliance partner……BJP would probably be wiped out of Bihar too. The way out of this is to either have a BJP Chief Minister or ensure that the credit goes to the government as a whole and not just the CM.

MY VIEW POINT: It is agreed that as a National Party, BJP has to assert itself even when jointly running a Government with other parties as its junior partner. It has to widen its organizational base to bring more people under its fold. It has to tell the people about their contribution in the good work done. No single party in the coalition be allowed to take all the credits for any good work done. Otherwise, there is a danger of being sidelined and dumped. This will be too costly. Unfortunately, BJP appears to be unconcerned on this issue. This allows the party like Akali Dal to advise BJP to improve its image whereas this party actually needs to improve its own image. It is seen as a party of a particular family and their relations which is being charged of huge corruption.


POINT RAISED:
9. Not taking the moral high ground
“Clothes maketh the man”. BJP has clearly underestimated now much opinions count. If Varun Gandhi made a hate speech, he had to be shown the door. If Ram Sena attacked women, they had to be punished. If someone in Orissa attacked nuns, they had to be tracked down and sent to jail……After all the BJP claimed to be a party with a difference – what happened to that claim? I can’t stress how important it is to appear sincere. The BJP has to learn this important lesson.

MY VIEW POINT: I do not consider that in the name of taking high moral ground, the BJP should be on the back foot.. It has to investigate into the matter and do the needful as it did about Mangalore pub incident. That is why the voters of Mangalore supported BJP despite the Christian and Muslim clerics spitting venom against the BJP. In Kandhamal, the person who is an accused in the incident and put behind the bar got elected on BJP ticket to the Assembly. This clearly indicates that the affected people in the area think otherwise. So far the murderers of Swami Laxmananda Saraswati (and four of his ashram inmates including a woman and two children) are on the run proving the ineffectual face of the Navin government.


POINT RAISED:
10. Appearing confused about their main issue

What was Obama’s main issue in the US election? The economy ….Both Narasimha Rao and Vajpayee provided better governance and still lost! It clearly proves that the present government won because of the opposition's inexplicable campaign strategies. BJP needed a rude awakening and they got one. It is time to wipe the tears away, stand up and do things differently. Doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results is sheer insanity.

MY VIEW POINT: BJP has certainly raised the issues like farmers’ suicide, terrorism, infrastructure etc during campaigning. But these were mainly in the public meetings, but not on TV shows. There was no special debate on these issues in the TV. If Varun Gandhi, Ram Sene, Kandhamal, Gujarat riots etc were discussed in TV, how BJP could help? After all, it is the channels which decide the issues and not the parties. When the issues are raised, how BJP could avoid a debate on that? Moreover, every country has its own aspirations derived out of its own tumultuous past. Your naïve and simplistic worldview fails to take cognizance of the fact that America is not India. Islamic and Missionary aggression are not issues in the US and neither is basic development. Similarly, issues like gay rights and equal participation of women in the workfield, anti trade monopoly will not become major issues concerning the Indian electorate in the near future.
Yes, BJP has got the rude awakening. But it will commit a historical blunder leading to its terminal decline if it:
(1) continues its futile effort to prove that it is also a so called secular party,
(2) leaves its pro-Hindutva policy, though there is no wrong in asserting that it does not believe in religious discrimination and wants people of all faiths to remain in the main stream,
(3) fails to take aggressive posture on national and local issues,
(4) does not bring up the organization in all states,
(5) remains as leader based party without mass followings,
(6) fails to curb indiscipline in the party – mainly in the leadership,
(7) fails to assert why an uniform civil code, as once advised by the Supreme Court, is required in the country,
(8) fails to make a point why Article 370 of the constitution has to be repealed in the National interest,
(9) fails to impress upon the countrymen about introduction of a stringer anti-terrorist law,
(10) fails to take up the issue of growing Naxalite activities,
(11) fails to expose the so called civil rights activists and their organizations which are posing danger to country’s integrity and welfare,
(12) fails to create awareness among the people about the danger from large scale infiltration from neighboring countries,
(13) fails to create opinion against continuous forced conversion,
(14) fails to concentrate on the welfare activities – specially in the panchayets, municipalities, states ruled by it,
(15) fails to have an effective media management, own/supported TV channels and News papers etc to reach out to the people.
(16) fails to coordinate with the alternate view intellectuals, historians, educationists, social activists and other professionals.
(17) fails to spread the Organization in rural areas and strengthen its students, youth, Women and trade union wings.
(18) fails to have better coordination and interaction among its different wings and like minded Organizations.

EXCELLENT AND VERY , VERY DETAILED ANALYSIS. SH L K ADVANI, PLEASE TAKE OUT PRINTS OF THIS ANALYSIS AND CIRCULATE IN YOU NEXT PARTY MEETING AND ACT ON IT . I AMSURE THAT BJP WILL COME TO POWER IN 2014

[Manasa Radhakrishnan]

Hi..,
I'm a student... I open my view... Up to my knowledge the reason why BJP lost is because of talking about Ayodhya issue again and again... Thing is people like BJP ruling India, but they hate talking about the issue...