Cracks Within: How AIADMK’s Internal Discord Could Redefine Tamil Nadu’s Political Balance

A month ago, when actor Vijay’s rally in Karur ended in tragedy, leaving 41 people dead, the opposition’s reaction was unusually restrained. Both the AIADMK and the BJP chose not to turn the calamity into political ammunition. Instead, they blamed the government’s administrative lapses. For the AIADMK supremo Edappadi K. Palaniswami, the restraint was also strategic. In the weeks that followed, he was seen sending out subtle signals to Vijay, whose political entry had become the most-watched subplot in Tamil Nadu’s political theatre. The BJP, too, sought an ideological bridge with the actor, hoping to bring him into their fold. But those quiet manoeuvres have since lost steam. With dissension deepening in the AIADMK and unease brewing within the BJP, the opposition’s bid to appear united and resurgent against the DMK now looks increasingly fragile as the state moves towards the 2026 Assembly elections.

Ever since the AIADMK rejoined the NDA fold, the BJP has been quietly nudging its ally to bring back leaders who had drifted away in recent years. Figures like O. Panneerselvam and T.T.V. Dhinakaran were waiting on the sidelines, hoping for a political homecoming. But Edappadi K. Palaniswami resisted the idea — perhaps wary that reopening the party’s doors would dilute his hard-won control over the AIADMK. The situation came to a head when senior MLA K.A. Sengottaiyan openly urged the leadership to readmit all former leaders. Palaniswami saw it as a direct challenge to his authority. Unfazed, Sengottaiyan pressed on, even meeting Union Home Minister Amit Shah and senior BJP leaders — sparking speculation that he was acting with the BJP’s tacit encouragement. But Palaniswami, undeterred by the mounting pressure from both allies and within his own ranks, held firm and eventually expelled Sengottaiyan from the party.

Exuding confidence amid internal turmoil

The party’s troubles, however, did not end there. Manoj Pandian, an MLA from Alangulam in Tenkasi district and a known loyalist of O. Panneerselvam, resigned from both the AIADMK and the Assembly to join the DMK. His defection, coming at a time when the party is trying to project unity ahead of the polls, has deepened the perception of internal instability.

But disquiet is not limited to the AIADMK. The BJP, which hopes to breach Tamil Nadu’s Dravidian bastion, is grappling with its own contradictions. Former state president K. Annamalai’s increasingly defiant posture has exposed the fault lines within the state unit, complicating the party’s strategy to position itself as a credible alternative to the two Dravidian giants.

Still, with elections only months away, the AIADMK continues to put on a show of confidence. Rajya Sabha MP C. Ve. Shanmugham attributes the churn to the machinations of O. Panneerselvam and his loyalists. “Leaders owing allegiance to O. Panneerselvam getting expelled cannot be treated as dissension,” he insists. “The party remains united and functions as a cadre-based structure. All talk of bickering is propaganda engineered by the DMK and those who have deserted the movement.” He tells Outlook.

Yet, the frequency of defections and the defensive tone of the leadership suggest a deeper malaise. The AIADMK’s attempt to appear undivided may conceal the anxieties of a party struggling to retain its identity and relevance in a post-Jayalalithaa era—especially when its principal rival and its national ally both seem to be capitalising on its disarray.

Vijay as a disruptor of the duopoly

Vijay’s political foray has come at a time when Tamil Nadu’s Dravidian landscape is showing signs of fatigue. For decades, the state’s politics revolved around two towering personalities—Jayalalithaa and Karunanidhi—whose charisma and welfare politics defined public allegiance. With both gone, their respective parties are struggling to reinvent themselves in a post-personality era. The DMK, under M.K. Stalin, has consolidated its position through continuity and welfare-driven governance, while the AIADMK continues to search for a unifying narrative and leadership identity.

The emergence of Vijay and the TVK directly threatens the AIADMK’s traditional vote base—particularly the youth and lower middle-class segments who once rallied behind Jayalalithaa’s populism. His appeal as a “clean” outsider and his rhetoric of meritocracy and Tamil pride allow him to tap into a latent disillusionment with conventional Dravidian politics. By declaring the next election a contest between the DMK and the TVK, Vijay has not only asserted his political intent but also challenged the AIADMK’s claim to be the principal opposition in Tamil Nadu.

For the BJP, meanwhile, Vijay’s rise complicates its own strategy. While the party has been trying to position itself as a national alternative capable of breaking the Dravidian duopoly, Vijay’s entry captures the very anti-establishment sentiment the BJP hoped to harness. As a result, the AIADMK and the BJP now find themselves competing not only against the DMK but also against a new populist force that could rewrite the grammar of Tamil Nadu’s politics.

Though several political analysts Outlook spoke to agree that Vijay’s entry could absorb a section of the anti-incumbency sentiment in Tamil Nadu, most caution against writing off the AIADMK just yet. Political commentator Priyan Srinivasan argues that the party’s core problem lies in its leadership vacuum. “The AIADMK today lacks a leader who can stand up to M.K. Stalin. Because of the paucity of politicians with stature, the party may fail to capitalise on the anti-incumbency that exists despite the DMK government’s extensive welfare measures,” he observes.

According to Srinivasan, the AIADMK’s strategic choices have also narrowed its options. “Had the party distanced itself from the BJP, there could have been space for a tactical understanding with Vijay’s outfit,” he says. “But for reasons best known to its leadership, the AIADMK remains determined to stay within the NDA fold.”

Disillusioned Annamalai,a chick in BJP's armour

Leadership troubles are not confined to the AIADMK alone. The BJP, too, finds itself mired in internal discord, with former state president K. Annamalai openly challenging the party’s current leadership. Annamalai, who had initially opposed bringing the AIADMK back into the NDA fold, later argued that if the alliance were to continue, the party should reintegrate figures such as O. Panneerselvam and T.T.V. Dhinakaran to project a united front. This suggestion, however, ran contrary to the position of the AIADMK leadership and was met with resistance.

According to sources within the BJP, Annamalai has grown increasingly disillusioned with the state unit’s functioning, particularly after being sidelined from key decision-making roles. His diminishing influence, they say, has not only created a leadership void within the Tamil Nadu BJP but also exposed the fault lines between the party’s central and state leaderships. The public airing of these differences has weakened the BJP’s attempt to present itself as a disciplined, expanding force in the Dravidian heartland—leaving its Tamil Nadu strategy adrift at a crucial political juncture.

When Outlook contacted K. Annamalai, he declined to offer a detailed response. “A time will come soon to react,” was his terse reply — a remark that only fuelled further speculation about his strained relationship with the party leadership and his possible future moves within Tamil Nadu’s shifting political landscape.

“We are working together, and all talk of the BJP’s interference in our internal affairs is bogus,” asserted C. Ve. Shanmugham, downplaying reports of friction within the alliance. He added that the prevailing anti-incumbency sentiment is so strong that “no amount of public relations campaign will save the government.”

However,  senior journalist Tharasu Shyam offers a more sobering assessment of the AIADMK’s current position. He believes that the recent turmoil within the party could prove costly, especially in the southern districts — traditionally a stronghold of leaders like O. Panneerselvam. “The AIADMK may lose 10 to 15 seats compared to its 2021 tally,” he predicts. “In the Kongu region, its alliance with the BJP might help retain a few seats, but any gains made by Vijay’s TVK will inevitably erode the AIADMK’s support base.”

Shyam’s assessment underscores a growing consensus among observers — that the AIADMK, once the fulcrum of opposition politics in Tamil Nadu, is facing a three-front challenge: from the ruling DMK’s welfare consolidation, the BJP’s assertive ambitions, and the disruptive rise of Vijay’s populist appeal.

Tamil Nadu’s politics has long been defined by the cyclical alternation of power between the DMK and the AIADMK — a rhythm broken in 2016, when Jayalalithaa defied the state’s anti-incumbency trend to secure a consecutive term. But in the post-Jayalalithaa era, the AIADMK’s internal disarray — with multiple leaders pulling in different directions and competing for dominance — has had a debilitating effect on the party’s organisational coherence and public perception.

The entry of actor Vijay and his Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam adds another layer of complexity. His appeal among younger and first-time voters could siphon off a crucial share of the anti-incumbency vote that the AIADMK once relied on. For a party already struggling to reclaim its ideological clarity, the continuing alliance with the BJP—whose brand of nationalism sits uneasily with the state’s Dravidian ethos—poses yet another challenge. Whether the AIADMK can reconcile these contradictions and reposition itself as a credible alternative to the DMK will be the defining question as Tamil Nadu moves toward the next Assembly election