The latest statement by Jana Sena Party chief and Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan that his party would not accept any unilateral decision on seat allocation for the local body elections, and that the matter was not in the hands of Telugu Desam Party working president Nara Lokesh, is being viewed as a sign of a changing political posture by the alliance partner.
By making the statement at a party meeting, Pawan sent a strong message to the TDP that he cannot be taken for granted and that his party is not going to play second fiddle to the “big brother” in the alliance.
The Jana Sena Party chief’s assertive stand appears to be not just about the upcoming local body elections, but also about establishing a larger political space for Jana Sena within the ruling alliance.
Pawan sought to allay apprehensions among Jana Sena workers that the party would be restricted to a fixed percentage of seats in the forthcoming local body elections.
Pawan’s remarks came after TDP general secretary Nara Lokesh reportedly spoke about allocating around 15 per cent of local body seats to Jana Sena.
Jana Sena Political Affairs Committee chairman and Minister Nadendla Manohar had also advised party workers to focus on seats where they had a strong chance of winning, rather than contesting a large number of constituencies.
Pawan Kalyan made it clear that Jana Sena would not accept the 15 per cent formula as a predetermined arrangement.
“Jana Sena’s seats cannot be decided by Lokesh. That is not within his purview,” he said, according to party sources.
He told Jana Sena workers that they were free to negotiate locally with TDP leaders and arrive at arrangements based on local political realities. There would be no rigid formula prescribing a particular percentage of seats for Jana Sena.
“If TDP leaders come along, fine. Otherwise, we can have a friendly contest,” Pawan said.
He also told party workers that they should not hesitate to contest local elections merely because victory was not guaranteed. Contesting elections itself would be a step forward for the party, he said.
“I am not going to have any seat-sharing talks with TDP president and Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu. I shall leave the issue to the local leadership,” he said.
Pawan’s statement has given a clear indication that he is not going to accept any seat-sharing formula thrust upon him by the TDP leadership, particularly by Lokesh.
He recalled how he had voluntarily extended support to the TDP and had personally visited Chandrababu Naidu when the latter was imprisoned.
Pawan said the decision had required Jana Sena to make sacrifices in terms of seats and had caused dissatisfaction among sections of the party cadre.
However, he maintained that the sacrifices were made in the interests of the people and the state, rather than because Jana Sena lacked political strength.
“If our goodwill is being mistaken for weakness, we should demonstrate what our strength is,” he told party workers, thereby sending a message to the TDP that Jana Sena is not a weak partner and can assert itself if necessary.
The Jana Sena chief’s call for local leaders to negotiate directly and contest seats where they believe they have strength could create situations in which TDP and Jana Sena candidates face each other, despite the parties remaining alliance partners at the state level.
The TDP leadership has so far not reacted to Pawan Kalyan’s statement, but sources said Lokesh was not happy with the development.
“However, he knows that any sharp reaction could lead to disturbances within the alliance, which would ultimately help the YSR Congress Party,” sources said.
It is learnt that Naidu, being a shrewd politician, has advised Lokesh to exercise restraint for now and leave it to him to handle any possible revolt from Jana Sena.
The TDP leadership is expected to assess the local dynamics and take a call on how to respond to Jana Sena’s demands.
The coming negotiations over local body seats are likely to indicate how effectively the coalition can balance alliance discipline with the individual political interests of its constituent parties.
