The panchayat results have rattled the Left. The malaise runs deeper than just the symptoms of Singur and Nandigram. Had the Congress & Trinamool fought together, the Left would have been trounced...
For, of the 3178 gram panchayats (GPs)—the lowest level of the three-tierpanchayat system—in Bengal, the CPI(M)-led Left Front could gain control ofonly 1562 panchayats. That is, the Left could win a majority of the seats injust 49.15% of the total gram panchayats (GPs) in Bengal, while the Congress andTrinamool won 1340 GPs (42.16 percent). Compare this to the last polls in 2003when the Left gained control of 2303 GPs.
More significantly, the gulf between the number of GPs controlled by the Leftand the opposition parties (the Congress & Trinamool) was 1612 in 2003; thistime, the gap has narrowed down to 225. For the record, while the Congress had385 GPs under its belt the last time, it has 519 now and the figures for theTrinamool are 306 and 818 respectively. And if one were to take into account the276 GPs where the Left and opposition have won an equal number of seats, theLeft's edge of 225 GPs over the combined opposition could vanish.
Also, one needs to take into account the 600-odd GPs that the Left wonuncontested—here, opposition candidates were threatened and either preventedfrom filing their nomination papers or forced to withdraw from the fray. At thegrassroots level, thus, the CPI(M)-led Left Front has actually lost or, at best,emerged neck-and-neck with the combined opposition.
Reports coming in from rural Bengal indicate that in vast swathes, voterssilently defied the CPI(M)'s diktats and braved the party's threats to vote foropposition candidates. This happened especially at places where the oppositionput up a brave fight and inspired confidence in the voters that they wouldn't bedriven out of their homes or punished by a vengeful, defeated CPI(M).
Against the Left's slide, look at the impressive gains made by the Congressand the Trinamool: the Congress bagged 519 GPs this time as compared to 385 thelast time (an improvement of nearly 35 percent), while the Trinamool score ofGPs went up from 306 to 818 (an improvement of a whopping 167 percent!). TheLeft's loss stood at 32 percent.
These micro-level results definitely take the sheen away from the Leftmanaging to retain control over Zila Parishads (ZPs), the highest tier in thepanchayat system, in 13 of the 17 districts. And at this level, too, the Left'stally of ZP seats came down from 619 in 2003 to 516 (a decline of nearly 17percent), while the Congress improved its performance by 46% and the Trinamool,once again, by a massive 707%!
Here, too, in all the districts save for Murshidabad where its tally of seatswent up from 27 to 32 (amidst charges of massive and blatant rigging that waseven captured by lensmen of the print and electronic media) and Burdwan, whereits tally (63 seats) remained the same, the Left score came down in all thedistricts.
A close analysis of the results reveals that had the Congress and Trinamoolfought the elections unitedly, the Left would have been easily trounced in mostof the districts. Cooch Behar, Jalpaiguri, South Dinajpur, Hooghly, WestMidnapore and Birbhum are, perhaps, the only districts where the Left would havewon a majority of the ZP seats in the face of a straight contest with a combinedopposition. The division in opposition votes is a major reason for the Leftgaining control of 13 of the 17 Zila Parishads.
The panchayat results have rattled the party apparatchik like no other eventshas in 30 years. This nervousness was apparent from the fact that party chiefPrakash Karat flew down to Kolkata to participate in the CPI(M) state committeemeeting, an event he would never ever have attended otherwise. It would be a bitsimplistic to blame the CPI(M)'s losses and the opposition, primarily theTrinamool's, gains on the ham-handed and high-handed land acquisition at Singurand Nandigram.
As party leaders said in a rare moment of facing the truth, the landacquisition issue provided an outlet to years of pent-up anger and frustration.But why this frustration and anger among the rural masses, the very people whosesolid support the CPI(M) claims to be enjoying? CPI(M) leaders would do well todelve into the reasons behind the disconnect with the masses. To others, ofcourse, the answers are apparent: the party machinery has become venal,high-handed and autocratic.
The CPI(M)'s vice-like grip on all aspects of a person's life, including hissocial life, in rural Bengal has bred ill-will and turned many into silentopponents of the party. At the grassroots level, party leaders and workers havebecome a highly corrupt lot. Their high-handedness and arrogance has alienatedlarge sections of the people. Also, the fact that the party, and the stategovernment it leads, has done precious little to develop rural Bengal and itseconomy has only recently dawned on the poor folks and this realization has,naturally, turned them against the Left. At many places, informal understandingsbetween the opposition parties also caused upsets for the Left. The neglect ofMuslims, as brought out in the Sachar Commission report, was driven home to theminorities very effectively by Jamiat-e-Ulema Hind.
Given Mamata's track record of irresponsible behaviour, senior Congressleaders' deep complicity with the CPI(M) (they've been scuttling oppositionunity moves to help the CPI-M win elections) and the CPI(M)'s own reputation foreffective 'damage control', chances are that Buddhadeb's smiling visage would beplastered all over the front pages of newspapers after the 2011 Assembly polls.The 2008 panchayat elections would have then been relegated as a minoraberration in the Left's eighth successive win in Bengal's Assembly elections.