Jameel Aahmed Milansaar,
Bangalore.
Mobile : 9845498354
Bangalore.
Mobile : 9845498354
In a political theatre as raucous and unpredictable as Bihar, the script rarely follows the expected plot. The latest twist comes from Prashant Kishor, the master strategist who, after years of orchestrating victories for others, was meant to be the protagonist of his own political epic. Yet, just as the curtain was set to rise on his electoral debut, Kishor has abruptly walked off the stage, declaring he will not contest the upcoming assembly polls. This is no mere casting change; it’s a strategic pivot that compels us to look beyond the footlights and question the very nature of the play he intends to direct.
The official line, delivered with Kishor’s characteristic blend of confidence and dismissiveness, is that the party’s collective wisdom prevailed. Contesting a single seat, he argues, would have been a "distraction," a tactical error that would have tethered him to one constituency while the larger battle for Bihar raged on. The party, Jan Suraaj, decided its founder was more valuable as a commander overseeing the entire war than as a soldier fighting in a single trench. This narrative frames the decision as a sacrifice—a leader stepping back for the greater good of the nascent political movement he has painstakingly built through his two-year-long padayatra. But in politics, especially when the strategist is Prashant Kishor, the stated reason is often just the beginning of the story.
The Strategy Behind the Sidestep
Kishor's decision has fundamentally recalibrated his party's electoral strategy. Instead of being the face on the ballot, he now positions himself as the sole architect of the campaign, free to traverse the state and amplify his message. This allows Jan Suraaj to frame the election not as a vote for a single personality, but as a referendum on a new model of governance. The party has audaciously set its target at an all-or-nothing 150 seats, with Kishor vowing that anything less would signify a failure to win the people's trust. By removing himself from the direct fray, particularly a high-stakes, caste-loaded contest against Tejashwi Yadav in Raghopur, Kishor sidesteps a trap that could have defined him narrowly while allowing him to maintain a broader, more ideological appeal.
Future Plans: The Kingmaker’s Gambit
So, what does the future hold for a leader who declines to lead from the front? Kishor’s plan is clear: to pour all his energy into achieving a decisive mandate for Jan Suraaj. He is not hedging his bets or seeking a post-poll alliance. His public pronouncements suggest a binary outcome: a sweeping victory that establishes his party as the dominant force in Bihar, or a marginal presence that sends him back to the drawing board. He has promised that a Jan Suraaj government would prosecute the 100 most corrupt officials and politicians in the state within a month, a populist promise aimed at capturing the electorate's deep-seated frustration. His ambition extends beyond Bihar; he believes a victory here would reorient national politics, making Patna the new center of political gravity.
Political analysts are divided on how to interpret this move. Some see it as a shrewd, calculated retreat. By avoiding a personal contest, Kishor elevates himself above the messy fray of constituency-level politics, preserving his aura as a detached strategist. This view suggests he is avoiding a potential personal defeat that could have fatally wounded his political project before it truly began. It allows him to test his party's organizational strength without risking his own political capital.
Others, however, see a sign of weakness. His critics, particularly from the rival RJD, BJP, and JD(U) camps, have wasted no time in branding him a coward who "accepted defeat even before going to the battlefield". They argue that a true leader leads from the front and that Kishor's refusal to contest reveals a lack of confidence in his own ability to win a popular vote. This camp interprets the decision as an admission that the groundswell of support he claims to have is not strong enough to guarantee his own victory.
The People’s Verdict
While Kishor’s allies within Jan Suraaj have publicly backed the decision as a strategic necessity, the reaction among Bihar's voters is more complex and will ultimately be the only one that matters. For his dedicated followers, this move reinforces his image as a selfless leader committed to a larger cause. They see it as proof that his fight is for systemic change, not personal power. However, for the uncommitted voter, it may sow seeds of doubt. In a state where political leadership is intensely personal, the absence of the main leader from the ballot could be perceived as a lack of serious intent.
Prashant Kishor has rolled the dice. He has traded the uncertain glory of a personal electoral battle for the ambitious goal of conquering the entire state from the command center. He has chosen to be the author of the story, not its hero. Whether this leads to a political bestseller or a forgotten manuscript will be decided by the people of Bihar in the coming weeks.
The official line, delivered with Kishor’s characteristic blend of confidence and dismissiveness, is that the party’s collective wisdom prevailed. Contesting a single seat, he argues, would have been a "distraction," a tactical error that would have tethered him to one constituency while the larger battle for Bihar raged on. The party, Jan Suraaj, decided its founder was more valuable as a commander overseeing the entire war than as a soldier fighting in a single trench. This narrative frames the decision as a sacrifice—a leader stepping back for the greater good of the nascent political movement he has painstakingly built through his two-year-long padayatra. But in politics, especially when the strategist is Prashant Kishor, the stated reason is often just the beginning of the story.
The Strategy Behind the Sidestep
Kishor's decision has fundamentally recalibrated his party's electoral strategy. Instead of being the face on the ballot, he now positions himself as the sole architect of the campaign, free to traverse the state and amplify his message. This allows Jan Suraaj to frame the election not as a vote for a single personality, but as a referendum on a new model of governance. The party has audaciously set its target at an all-or-nothing 150 seats, with Kishor vowing that anything less would signify a failure to win the people's trust. By removing himself from the direct fray, particularly a high-stakes, caste-loaded contest against Tejashwi Yadav in Raghopur, Kishor sidesteps a trap that could have defined him narrowly while allowing him to maintain a broader, more ideological appeal.
Future Plans: The Kingmaker’s Gambit
So, what does the future hold for a leader who declines to lead from the front? Kishor’s plan is clear: to pour all his energy into achieving a decisive mandate for Jan Suraaj. He is not hedging his bets or seeking a post-poll alliance. His public pronouncements suggest a binary outcome: a sweeping victory that establishes his party as the dominant force in Bihar, or a marginal presence that sends him back to the drawing board. He has promised that a Jan Suraaj government would prosecute the 100 most corrupt officials and politicians in the state within a month, a populist promise aimed at capturing the electorate's deep-seated frustration. His ambition extends beyond Bihar; he believes a victory here would reorient national politics, making Patna the new center of political gravity.
Political analysts are divided on how to interpret this move. Some see it as a shrewd, calculated retreat. By avoiding a personal contest, Kishor elevates himself above the messy fray of constituency-level politics, preserving his aura as a detached strategist. This view suggests he is avoiding a potential personal defeat that could have fatally wounded his political project before it truly began. It allows him to test his party's organizational strength without risking his own political capital.
Others, however, see a sign of weakness. His critics, particularly from the rival RJD, BJP, and JD(U) camps, have wasted no time in branding him a coward who "accepted defeat even before going to the battlefield". They argue that a true leader leads from the front and that Kishor's refusal to contest reveals a lack of confidence in his own ability to win a popular vote. This camp interprets the decision as an admission that the groundswell of support he claims to have is not strong enough to guarantee his own victory.
The People’s Verdict
While Kishor’s allies within Jan Suraaj have publicly backed the decision as a strategic necessity, the reaction among Bihar's voters is more complex and will ultimately be the only one that matters. For his dedicated followers, this move reinforces his image as a selfless leader committed to a larger cause. They see it as proof that his fight is for systemic change, not personal power. However, for the uncommitted voter, it may sow seeds of doubt. In a state where political leadership is intensely personal, the absence of the main leader from the ballot could be perceived as a lack of serious intent.
Prashant Kishor has rolled the dice. He has traded the uncertain glory of a personal electoral battle for the ambitious goal of conquering the entire state from the command center. He has chosen to be the author of the story, not its hero. Whether this leads to a political bestseller or a forgotten manuscript will be decided by the people of Bihar in the coming weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment