question_answer

It has become a ritual after every bitterly fought election for armchair pundits to assert that our political culture has plumbed the depths. Thanks to its location as the media capital of India, elections in Delhi tend to be over-scrutinised and over-interpreted - and more out of logistical convenience than political importance. Consequently, the rhetorical excesses of national leaders in a local setting tend to be blown out of proportion. Additionally, What Sapp and social media platforms allow rival camps to circulate particularly spicy clips from what may otherwise be drearily routine campaign speeches.

After the counting of votes is completed on February 11, the extent to which sharp political interventions played a role in moulding voting preferences will be known. That people vote differently in national and local elections has already become an established feature of Indian politics. To that extent, if Aam Aadmi Party recovers from its 2019 drubbing in the general election, the assembly outcome will not constitute a departure from an established trend. A BJP victory, however, will. To that extent, the significance of the election campaign lay in the attempt by the ruling party at the Centre to overcome its local weakness and give a spirited fight to Arvind Kejriwal’'s party.

Of particular importance was the lead role played by home minister Amit Shah in galvanising his troops, grabbing the headlines and forcing national issues to the forefront of a battle that should, ideally, have been confined to local issues. In terms of tactics. Shah carefully focused on a fringe phenomenon - the ongoing dharna by a section of the Muslim community in Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act - to raise larger questions centred on Indian identity. By raising the emotional pitch of the campaign. Shah also sought to shift the focus away from the Kejriwal government’s success in subsidizing water and electricity charges.

As a campaign strategy it was legitimate and certainly galvanised the committed BJP voter. The flashes of anger by the minority community after the CAA was approved by Parliament may have had the endorsement of some middle-class intellectuals and left-wing students, but it didn'’t have the endorsement of ordinary citizens. Opinion polls indicate that the anti-CAA mood is not as widespread as its advocates believe. Had it been a truly popular movement, Delhi’'s chief minister would himself have associated with the well-publicised dharna, ostensibly organised by Muslim women. He did not and was careful to keep his distance from Shaheen Bagh. What the BJP craftily tried to do was link AAP and Congress to the protests by a political fringe. The results will reveal the extent to which this gamble - born out of the BJP’s weaknesses at the local level - paid dividends.

It is possible that the aggressive BJP campaign may not yield the necessary returns. If it doesn’t, it will not be because there is widespread solidarity with the Shaheen Bagh protesters but because local issues normally prevail in an assembly election. Much will also depend on the remarkable extent to which the Congress has made itself irrelevant in Delhi.

The BJP’'s big weakness in this Delhi assembly election was its inability to both connect with local issues and project a candidate who could be the alternative to Kejriwal. These are big failings, but they stem from a political over-dependence on the national leadership.

How important was CAA in the election?

A) Anger among minority didn’t have the endorsement of ordinary citizens

B) The ordinary citizens and middle-class intellectuals were together

C) It created a wave of anger across the nation

D) CAA was the most important issue in the election