The appointment of Amit Shah loyalist Vijay Rupani as the new Chief Minister of Gujarat is viewed as a victory for the Bharatiya Janata Party president.
But is it really?
Rupani, like Shah, belongs to the Jain community and is known for his proximity to the BJP president. However, the sudden resignation of Anandiben Patel, which led to Rupani’s elevation, hints at the serious dent Shah has suffered in the last few days.
Outsmarted
Shah was clearly outmanoeuvred by outgoing Chief Minister Anandiben Patel, who announced her decision to step down publicly through a Facebook post in Gujarati.
It is no secret that Shah wanted Anandiben to leave the post before the next Assembly elections in Gujarat that are scheduled towards the end of 2017.
But what is also known in BJP circles is that Shah was not in a hurry to get rid of her. He wanted to effect the change of guard sometime in February or March next year. By then Anandiben would have turned 75 years (her birthday is on November 21), the age an unwritten rule says BJP leaders should step down from important posts.
More importantly, the politically crucial Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh would have ended. This would have allowed Shah to take over as Gujarat chief minister from Anandiben – a fact every leader of significance in the BJP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh seemed to be aware of.
In fact, it was because of this plan that despite getting a second term as the BJP president in January, Shah has still not reconstituted the party’s central office bearers.
Until recently, his close associates used to suggest that the delay was directly linked to Shah’s plans to return to Gujarat so that the new president could have his own team of office-bearers.
However, Anandiben thwarted Shah’s calculations in one stroke.
Not only did she resign several months before turning 75, she also did so in such a manner that neither Shah nor Prime Minister Narendra Modi had the opportunity to persuade her to follow the script.
In her Facebook post, Anandiben wrote that she would turn 75 in November and therefore wanted to step down as chief minister so that the party leadership could find a replacement who would get the time to prepare for next year’s Vibrant Gujarat summit and the state elections.
Coming in the midst of preparations for the crucial Uttar Pradesh elections, the BJP president had no option but to settle for the second best choice available to him – to secure for his loyalist the post that he had coveted.
BJP internal divide in Gujarat
It’s clear from the events of the last few months that the BJP’s Gujarat affairs could have been handled in a much more amicable manner without exposing the divide inside the party. The fact that it wasn’t is seen as Shah’s failure, not Anandiben’s.
Earlier this year, Anandiben’s close aides had complained that those close to Shah were fuelling speculation in the media that a change in guard in Gujarat was imminent ahead of the Assembly polls in the state.
In May, the speculation had assumed such serious proportions that Anandiben had to tell the media that “nothing like that is on”.
There is a widespread perception in BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh circles that the situation in May could have easily been avoided if Shah had acted more skillfully. His inability to do so is believed to have added to the woes of the Anandiben government, which was already struggling with the Patidar unrest and the more recent Dalit agitation.
Apart from being a statement on Shah’s leadership abilities, it was this failure of Shah that seems to have first turned Anandiben belligerent and then led her to outmanoeuvre the party leadership by announcing her resignation unilaterally.
Thus, despite installing his man as the new chief minister, Shah has lost out in Gujarat – a state from which he draws his strength.
It is not surprising, therefore, that Shah, who consulted almost all important Gujarat party leaders during the last two days ahead of the BJP legislature party meeting on Friday, found no time, nor the need, to even talk to the outgoing chief minister regarding the transition of power.