The exit of the veteran socialist leader, K. C. Tyagi as the Janata Dal (United) national spokesperson is a big blow to the party’s structural composition and its core values.
Tyagi who was first elected to the Lok Sabha way back in 1984 and worked as key aids to Choudhary Charan Singh, Devi Lal, and Sharad Yadav, has represented the JDU’s central voice in the national capital of Delhi for over 20 years. He resigned as the party’s spokesperson on Sunday (August 31) but he continues to be the party’s chief adviser.
But Tyagi has demitted the crucial role as the national spokesperson at the time when the JDU is suffering from inexperienced political minds at its upper crust. Be it because of his age, ailment or his strategy to keep the cloud of ambiguity in the given situation, Nitish Kumar has been shy of making public statements ever since he switched over to the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) for the third time in January 2024.
There is no doubt that Nitish himself has been known for his socialist ideology rooted in the way Dr Ram Manohar Lohia propounded it in terms of the political situation in India’s context, but he invariably had bigger icons at the top of his party’s structure as a cushion.
The party had George Fernandes – an iconic Socialist leader – as the founding president of Samata Party in 1995 which was the precursor to the JDU. Sharad Yadav, another veteran Socialist figure and prime protagonist of the Mandal Commission report – replaced Fernandes as the JDU president a little after Nitish became Bihar chief minister eighteen years ago.
However, simultaneous with his breaking away from Lalu Prasad Yadav led Rashtriya Janata Dal-Congress Mahagathbandhan and switching back to the NDA for the second time in 2017, Nitish dropped Sharad Yadav from the party who later joined the RJD. Subsequently, he himself became the JDU president.
To be fair to Nitish, he played the dual role as the CM and his party’s president reasonably well. Be it with the company of the Mahagathbandhan or the BJP, Nitish stuck to the formula of ‘triple C (communalism, crime and corruption)’ which he explained to the media with alacrity.
Even while keeping company with the BJP Nitish seldom shied away from speaking about his party’s “core” differences with the Hindutva outfit on uniform civil code (UCC), representation of the minorities in the democratic setup, Waqf Board and other Muslim issues.
JD (U) in the throes of ambiguity opaqueness
The affairs in the JDU have become more opaque and ambiguous, particularly after Nitish broke out from the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) and switched back to the NDA ahead of the 2024 general elections.
The leader of opposition in the Bihar assembly, Tejashwi Yadav explained the phenomena by saying, “The CM is not taking the decisions on his own…a coterie has encircled him”.
Even if one doesn’t give credence to Tejashwi’s words – for the latter is in the opposition now – it’s clear to the watchers of Bihar politics that the JDU is in the throes of ambiguity and opaqueness. Some second rung leaders in the JDU say that K. C. Tyagi was “more aggressive” in speaking on the issues of caste census, lateral entry, Waqf (Board), Palestine-Israel, and the controversial Agnipath scheme which made Narendra Modi led dispensation uncomfortable.
What does it mean? A careful scrutiny of Nitish’s own world view suggests that he himself wished the JDU to look and sound different from the BJP. By putting forth his opinion on the contentious issues, Tyagi simply explained Nitish’s stated position. In fact, by just reiterating Nitish’s stated position on these issues, Tyagi would sound different from the BJP.
For instance, in his role as the spokesperson of the party, what else would have Tyagi said if the media persons asked about the demand of the caste census, an idea that Nitish pioneered by conducting the caste survey and raising the job quota limit for the underprivileged section to 65% in Bihar ahead of Lok Sabha polls?
What should have been Tyagi’s position on the UCC and Waqf Board, when Nitish himself has been advocating for the broader consensus on the minorities issues and his party’s differences with the BJP ever since 1996 is well documented?
What stand should have he (Tyagi) taken on Palestine-Israel issues when India in accordance, with its foreign policy has adhered to the mandate of the UN to support the Palestinian cause against Zionist aggression from the times of Jawaharlal Nehru to A.B Vajapayee to Manmohan Singh?
As a matter of fact, by staying ambiguous on these issues, the JDU will now dilute its own core values which its leadership has guarded painstakingly over the years. The replacement of K.C. Tyagi with a little known Rajiv Ranjan will hardly serve the purpose. It calls for Nitish to himself explain his party’s stand on Waqf Board, UCC, Agnipath, lateral entry and other vexed issues occupying prime space of the national discourse.
Nitish’s Experiments to fill leadership vacuum
It’s not that Nitish didn’t make experiments with grooming the leaders to fill the vacuum in the leadership, particularly in the post-George Fernandes-Sharad Yadav era. He promoted an Indian Administrative Service officer Ram Chandra Prasad Sinha (RCP) and elevated him to the position of the party’s national president and Union minister.
But later he ousted RCP from the party allegedly on the charge of “becoming more loyal” to Narendra Modi and Amit Shah. He elevated the election strategist turned Jan Suraj campaigner, Prashant Kishore to the position of the national vice president but ousted him over his differences on the issues of CAA and NRC.
Recently, Nitish has nominated Sanjay Jha who began his legislative career as nominated member of Bihar Legislative Council (MLC) in 2006 and is now JDU MP (Rajya Sabha), as his party’s working president. Sanjay Jha might be genial in his conduct and also loyal to Nitish. But the young Maithil Brahmin from Mithila is hardly known for his political contributions.
Some second rung JDU leaders who are described as Nitish’s “new coterie” say that Tyagi was speaking on the “sensitive” issues without keeping the party’s “high command in confidence.”
But the party’s high command is Nitish Kumar, who, is largely inaccessible even to the key party functionaries, of late. What should have Tyagi done? Was he supposed to take instruction from Sanjay Jha?
A dexterous operator in Socialist space and known for his nuanced articulation for over 40 years, Tyagi will never answer these questions.
“I am an old man. I am in my 70’s now. Let the new generation take over. I have demitted the office of the spokesperson for personal reasons. Nitish Kumar continues to be my leader and I continue to be in the JDU”, Tyagi says – as cautious with the words as he has been all along.
Nalin Verma is a senior journalist, author, media educator and independent researcher in folklore.
