![]() |
|
The political landscape of Bihar is witnessing a renewed period of turbulence, fueled by the increasingly vocal dissent of Union Minister Chirag Paswan against the Nitish Kumar-led NDA government. Paswan's recent pronouncements, specifically his condemnation of the “deteriorating law and order” situation in Bihar and his subtle allusions to “political constraints” hindering his support for the current administration, have reverberated across the state's political spectrum. These statements have not only elicited strong reactions from the Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), a key ally within the NDA, but have also placed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in an awkward and precarious position. This internal discord within the ruling coalition provides fertile ground for the opposition parties, primarily the Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), to capitalize on the perceived weaknesses and amplify their criticism of the Nitish Kumar government. The situation highlights the inherent complexities and delicate power dynamics within coalition politics, particularly in a state like Bihar, where social equations and historical rivalries play a significant role in shaping political alignments.
The opposition parties have seized upon Chirag Paswan’s critique as a validation of their long-standing claims that Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is losing his grip on the state's administration. The RJD, in particular, has been quick to highlight the perceived resurgence of crime and lawlessness in Bihar, citing recent incidents such as the Gopal Khemka and Paras Hospital murders as evidence of a deteriorating security situation. RJD spokesperson Mritunjay Tiwari asserted that Chirag Paswan was merely “reinforcing” the opposition's narrative and urged the NDA not to adopt an “ostrich-like attitude” towards the escalating crime rate. This strategy aims to dismantle the NDA's narrative of Bihar's transformation from the era of “jungle raj” allegedly associated with the RJD's past governance. The Congress party echoed similar sentiments, with spokesperson Asit Nath Tiwari emphasizing that Chirag Paswan’s concerns were reflective of the broader anxieties felt by the people of Bihar. By amplifying the criticisms of a prominent figure within the ruling coalition, the opposition seeks to erode public confidence in the government's ability to maintain law and order and provide effective governance.
Chirag Paswan's grievances, articulated during his visit to Gaya, centered on his deep concern over the “poor” law-and-order situation in Bihar. He expressed his disappointment in supporting a government under whose watch crime had “spiralled out of control.” Paswan highlighted a series of recent criminal incidents, asserting that the state administration appeared to be “bowing down before the criminals.” He questioned the efficacy of arrests alone, demanding answers as to why such incidents continued to recur. His words carried a veiled threat, suggesting that if the situation remained unchecked, Bihar could face a “dreadful situation.” Paswan's strategy involves a calculated risk of potentially destabilizing the NDA alliance while simultaneously positioning himself as a champion of public safety and a voice for the marginalized. By openly criticizing the government, he aims to distinguish himself from the perceived failures of the ruling coalition and present himself as a viable alternative.
Paswan further suggested that the escalating crime rate could be a deliberate attempt to “malign the government” during the election season, adding another layer of complexity to the situation. He emphasized that regardless of the motive, it was the administration’s responsibility to maintain order. He pointedly questioned whether the administration was colluding with criminals, attempting to cover up crimes, or had simply become incompetent. This multi-pronged critique effectively casts doubt on the government's integrity and competence, regardless of the actual cause of the alleged increase in crime. It allows him to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters who are concerned about law and order, regardless of their political affiliations.
However, Chirag Paswan's strategic goals extend far beyond mere political bargaining or securing a “good number of seats” in the upcoming Assembly polls. According to sources within the Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) (LJP(RV)), his overarching objective is to “assert ourselves as a political party” and address the demands of the party cadre. Paswan's ambition is to expand the party’s voter base to approximately 15%, positioning the LJP(RV) as a “key stakeholder” in Bihar’s politics. The party aims to consolidate its support among the Paswan community (5.3%), while also attracting a significant portion of votes from the Ravidas community (5.2%) and the Mushahar and Bhuiyan voters (around 3%). The LJP(RV) is also actively working to cultivate support among upper-caste voters, particularly from the Bhumihar community. This multi-pronged strategy underscores Paswan's ambition to transform the LJP(RV) from a caste-based party into a broader-based political force capable of influencing state-level policies.
Arun Bharti, the LJP(RV)'s Bihar in-charge and Jamui MP, attempted to downplay the significance of Chirag Paswan's criticism, framing it as the fulfillment of an ally’s role in a coalition by providing constructive criticism. He emphasized that increasing crime rates were not merely the concern of one party or individual but rather the “pain of the entire state.” Bharti argued that the “fundamental duty” of a coalition government was to prioritize the needs of the people and take concrete steps to address their concerns. He also pointed out that the “zero tolerance towards crime” was not only part of the alliance’s common minimum program but also a promise made to the people. According to Bharti, Chirag Paswan was simply reminding the government of its obligations and adhering to the ethical principles of coalition governance. This perspective attempts to mitigate the damage caused by Paswan's harsh critique and portray the LJP(RV) as a responsible and concerned ally.
Bharti further asserted that the purpose of the coalition was not solely to remain in power but to work towards making Bihar a safe and developed state. He emphasized the responsibility of allies to bring the concerns and suffering of society to the government’s attention, arguing that fulfilling this responsibility was a true indicator of loyalty. Bharti downplayed the perception of Paswan's statements as criticism, instead framing them as an attempt to strengthen the alliance's shared goals. He challenged the conventional view that questioning the government was a sign of dissent or rebellion, advocating for a coalition culture that values open dialogue and acknowledges the importance of hearing the voices of the people. This interpretation attempts to reframe the narrative and present Chirag Paswan as a conscientious ally who is committed to the well-being of Bihar.
The JD(U), however, responded to Chirag Paswan's criticism with considerable animosity. Its chief spokesperson, Neeraj Kumar, accused the LJP(RV) chief of wanting “the best of both worlds” and suggested that he was free to join an alliance with “tainted people” if he was dissatisfied with the current arrangement. Kumar questioned Paswan's silence on law and order during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit, implying that his criticism was opportunistic and politically motivated. This response reveals the growing tension and distrust within the NDA alliance, as the JD(U) perceives Paswan's actions as a betrayal of coalition solidarity.
The BJP offered a more cautious and measured response. While acknowledging the LJP(RV) as an ally, BJP spokesperson Manoj Sharma maintained that the police were effectively addressing the recent law-and-order issues. He suggested that Chirag Paswan could discuss his concerns with the BJP through appropriate channels. This approach reflects the BJP's attempt to mediate the conflict and prevent the situation from escalating further. The BJP's desire to maintain stability within the NDA alliance is driven by its strategic interests in Bihar's political landscape.
Even as Arun Bharti hinted that Chirag Paswan himself might contest from an Assembly seat in the Shahbad or Magadh regions, the LJP(RV) is reportedly eyeing seats in the Saran, Siwan, and Champaran belt in North Bihar, as well as Bhagalpur and Munger in South Bihar. This suggests a strategic focus on areas where the party believes it has a strong chance of winning or where it can significantly influence the outcome of the election. The JD(U), according to party insiders, is concerned that the LJP(RV) might be targeting seats where the JD(U) finished as the runner-up in the 2020 polls. In that election, the then-united LJP contested 134 seats alone but won only one. However, it managed to damage the JD(U)'s prospects in several constituencies. Currently, the LJP(RV) has five MPs but no MLAs, as the lone winner defected to the JD(U) in 2021. This historical context underscores the potential for the LJP(RV) to disrupt the existing political dynamics in Bihar and reshape the state's political landscape. The situation remains fluid, and the coming months will determine whether Chirag Paswan's gamble will pay off or whether it will further destabilize the already fragile political equation in Bihar.
Source: Behind his biting criticism of Nitish govt after ambulance rape, Chirag Paswan’s game plan