Buddha Smiles

There was never any doubt that the Left Front (LF) would win the Assemblypolls comfortably and form the government for the seventh consecutive time inWest Bengal. But the landslide victory surprised many, including even ChiefMinister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, who told reporters that bagging 233 (out of294) seats was "beyond all our expectations". That the LF posted suchan impressive win despite a few odds is remarkable. And, thus, this couldperhaps be the sweetest and most significant victory for the LF so far.

The 'TINA' factor

What undoubtedly aided the LF victory was the lack of any crediblealternative. The opposition parties had no leader who could match the charismaof Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee. Nor did they offer any alternatives to the policiesand programmes pursued by Bhattacharjee's party and government. Trinamool chiefMamata Banerjee urged people to vote for a change. The Left Front, she said, hadbeen in power for too long and it was time for a change. But why was such achange required? What alternative policies would be in place? Which directionwould the state take in that case? She did not - and perhaps, could not -provide answers to these crucial questions. No wonder, then, that theTrinamool's tally plunged from 60 seats in 2001 to just 30 this time.

As for the Congress, even its leaders like Sonia Gandhi who campaigned,albeit half-heartedly, for the party, had little to say against the Left. Otherslike Pranab Mukherjee and Priya Ranjan Das Munshi didn't seem too enthusiasticin campaigning vigorously for their party. Even in its strongholds, the Congresswas a badly divided house. One of its firebrand and controversial MPs - AdhirChoudhary - propped two Independent candidates against the party's officialnominees whom he had personal differences with. The two Independent candidateswon, one of them trouncing even the Congress Legislature Party chief AtishChandra Sinha.

That Congress and the Trinamool failed to enter into an electoralunderstanding to prevent a division of the anti-Left votes was another factorthat helped the CPI(M). But not to a large extent, claimed CPI(M) partysecretary Biman Bose. "The division in anti-Left votes did help us in a fewconstituencies. But according to our preliminary analyses, even if the Congressand the Trinamool would have struck an alliance, we would have won verycomfortably," Bose said. So much so that even the Left-backed RJD managed to open its account in West Bengal with its victory in Non-Bengali-dominated Burrabazar.

Political pundits say that the disunity in the Opposition ranks, theOpposition's failure to project anyone as a viable alternative to BuddhadebBhattacharjee, their failure to come up with a set of policies and programmesfor the state's development different from the Left's and the abysmal lack ofany talented persona in the Opposition ranks made even anti-Left voters to votefor the Left or, at best, stay away from the hustings.

The 'Buddha' factor

There's no doubt over yet another thing: the LF owes its landslide victory toBuddhadeb Bhattacharjee. The man who, seven years ago (when he took over thereins of the state from Jyoti Basu in 1999), seemed to be in the shadows of histowering predecessor, has emerged as perhaps a more popular politician thanJyoti Basu. His simplicity, transparency, commitment to good governance, hisempathy for the poor and suffering masses, his liberal policies and wooing ofcapital, his stress on infrastructure development, his hard stance againstmilitant trade unionism, his unequivocal rejection of dogmas that hindered thestate's progress and his frank admission of past mistakes - all these combinedto make him the darling of all sections of the people.

He found supporters among even the upper middle and affluent classes -- thetraditional anti-Left voters. A steady stream of industrialists feted him, PrimeMinister Manmohan Singh said he was "India's best Chief Minister".Bhattacharjee's approachability, democratic temperament, flexibility,willingness to listen to others, ability to feel the pulse of the people and hissimplicity put him in stark contrast to his haughty, overbearing, imperious andinscrutable predecessor. Basu, as the people of Bengal had started realizing,had presided over the state's steady decline and downfall. It was time for achange. And Bhattacharjee, rather than any opposition politician, arrived on thescene to seize that opportunity for change, to harness the people's quest forchange and to effect a dramatic turnaround in the CPI(M)'s (and, by extension,the LF's) policies to bring about that change. Bhattacharjee emerged as thesincere face of that change.

Over the past five years, things have changed for the better. Investmentshave poured in, jobs have been created, infrastructure has improveddramatically, the liberal policies has led to growth of consumerism and urbancentres have started sporting those typical landmarks -- shopping malls,multiplexes, amusement parks, lounge bars, gourmet eateries, salons et al --while, overall, the face of the state and the impression it evokes in the restof the country and the world have started improving. Bhattacharjee is thearchitect of this change. Bengal's electorate knows this change has to continue.So why vote against the Left? For -- and this applies to even ardent critics ofthe Left -- voting against the Left would mean voting against Bhattacharjeewho's become synonymous with Bengal's progress.

Bhattacharjee himself admitted that the massive mandate received by the LeftFront is a mandate to carry on the policies and programmes he's been pursuing."It is a mandate for more industrialisation, for more jobs, for moreprogress," he told reporters in the afterglow of Thursday's victory. Everthe simple and humble person, he added: "But these are not my policies.They are that of the Left Front. It is the party that's emerged victorious, notme. Even in my constituency (he nearly doubled his 2001 margin and won by morethan 53,000 votes this time), I would not have been able to win without thesupport of my party and workers. It is the party that's supreme".

The Election Commission's role

First, there was the Election Commission that imposed a slew of toughmeasures, including holding the polls over an unprecedented five phases. The ECdeployed a large number of observers from the initial process of revision ofelectoral rolls and this resulted in deletion of 25 lakh names from the rolls.These (25 lakh voters), the opposition alleged, were the army of 'false voters'that would help the LF post victories year after year. The state police werekept in the periphery and central para-military forces deployed to conduct"free and fair" polls. The Opposition parties welcomed the toughmoves, but the CPI(M) reacted angrily, calling the EC's steps an"insult" to the people of Bengal. At the grassroots level, itmobilized more people through its impressive party machinery to exercise theirfranchise. This resulted in an increase in turnout from the usual 75 percent toa high 82 percent. While pundits were divided on who bagged those extra votes,it's now clear that it was the CPI(M) that had gained from the rise in pollpercentage.

What was an apparent adversity -- the EC's strict glare and conduct of polls-- was turned around deftly by the CPI(M) to its electoral advantage. Many alsowere taken in by the CPI(M)'s campaign against the EC -- the "insult toBengalis" line struck a chord among many, especially in the rural andsemi-urban areas -- and the party leaders' statements against the EC and itsobservers only strengthened the resolve of the party workers to pull out allstops and ensure a large turnout of party supporters and sympathizers outsidethe polling booths. The opposition and critics who have been crying themselveshoarse about "scientific rigging" by the CPI(M) have been silencedthis time, perhaps forever.

What lies ahead

The impressive LF victory, thanks to Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, is no doubt avictory for the liberal lobby within the CPI(M). Bhattacharjee's critics withinthe Left Front -- they range from some of his senior ministers who'vevociferously opposed measures like handing over farmlands to industries as wellas his liberal policies, to party apparatchik, CITU leaders who're dead againstthe CM's zero-tolerance for militant and irresponsible trade unionism as well ashis opposition to trade unionizing the IT sector and allies opposed to policieslike wooing private capital -- had strategically positioned the just-concludedpolls as a referendum on his policies. Had the LF's tally of seats slipped below175 (from the 199 in 2001), they'd have reared themselves and taken onBhattacharjee, urging the LF to get back to its old, dogmatic policies. But thisvictory has sealed the lips of such critics within the Left and made Buddhadeband his aides like industries minister Nirupam Sen (a liberal who's now set tobecome a member of the CPI-M politburo) much stronger.

It can, thus, be said that the seventh Left Front government in Bengal willpursue policies of liberalisation and industrialisation with greater vigour."But it'll not be unbridled liberalisation. For instance, we don't wantwhole-scale privatization of PSUs. We don't want FDI in the retail sector. Wewant labour law reforms, but not provisions that'll make it easy for employersto hire and fire employees. Policies have to have a human face. They should beaimed at bringing about equitable development. All sections, including the poorin the backward rural areas, have to benefit from policies of liberalisation andindustrialisation. Our policies will not benefit only a small section and makethe rich richer," he clarified. 'Reforms with a human face' isBhattacharjee's mantra.

How will these policies be different from those pursued by the UPA governmentor by some other states? CPI(M) leaders cite an example. "Land has to beprovided for new industrial units. We can't cut down forests and there's verylittle vacant land in West Bengal. So this has to be agricultural land. We haveto provide land for new townships, for roads, for hospitals and even forentertainment parks. But the original owners of these farmlands won't be givenjust adequate cash compensation. We'll upgrade their skills, ensure that theyget jobs, provide subsidized housing to them, make them stakeholders in projectsthat come up on their lands, provide free education to their children and extendvarious other benefits to them. We won't leave them in the lurch after simplyproviding cash for the land acquired from them. That's development with a humanface. That's equitable development," explained a senior CPI(M) functionary.

What it means for the UPA

Since the LF victory in Bengal is a victory for the liberals, and not thehardliners who've been relegated to the sidelines here, Dr Manmohan Singh andthe UPA can perhaps heave a stifled sigh of relief. Singh and Bhattacharjeeshare an excellent rapport and are know to be mutual admirers. This friendshipand genuine mutual admiration has helped Bhattacharjee win many favours andconcessions from the union government. Singh, in turn, has tapped Bhattacharjeeto restrain the CPI(M) hardliners. On many an occasion, Bhattacharjee hadintervened to ensure that the knives the hardliners had started brandishing atDr Singh and the UPA government were sheathed. A stronger Bhattacharjee (and theCPI-M politburo will, soon, get a few more liberal faces like Nirupam Sen) couldtranslate into greater relief for Dr Singh.

But that doesn't mean the sparring would end dramatically. It may actuallyonly increase as the voices emanating from Delhi indicate. But ultimately, andespecially if push comes to shove, Dr Singh can (and would need to) tap intoBhattacharjee to pacify the CPI(M) hardliners. Significantly, when asked byreporters on Thursday evening if the LF victories in Bengal and Kerala wouldembolden his party to sharpen its attack on the UPA, Bhattacharjee replied:"We don't believe in and pursue such policies. We operatetransparently". For good measure, and as if sending a message to thehardliners, he added: "I'm one who believes in allowing a multiplicity ofopinions. Everyone has a right to have an opinion and my opinion is notnecessarily always right or one that should prevail. I may be wrong. Listeningto others' opinions can help me improve or take a better course of action".He also said policy differences with the UPA would exist. "But suchdifferences will always be resolved across the table in a spirit of give andtake and mutual adjustments," he said.

But as the pressure mounts Perhaps Dr Singh can take some cold comfort fromthe fact that at the end of the day, Bhattacharjee would just be a phone callaway. How much clout Calcutta would have on Delhi of course remains an openquestion.