election fallout

Uttar Pradesh bye-polls: The Gorakhpur loss puts Adityanath at the mercy of the RSS

Coupled with the dismantling of his Hindu Yuva Vahini, this is a massive blow to the chief minister’s clout.

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s stunning defeat on Wednesday in bye-elections in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar may have complicated matters for the party in the Hindi belt. It lost the Gorakhpur and Phulpur Lok Sabha seats in Uttar Pradesh to the Samajwadi Party, which was backed by its arch-rival, the Bahujan Samaj Party. In Bihar, the BJP retained the Bhabua Assembly seat but failed to wrest the Araria Lok Sabha constituency and the Jehanabad Assembly seat from the Rashtriya Janata Dal.

The loss in Uttar Pradesh has left Chief Minister Adityanath totally besieged. Having virtually dismantled his Hindu Yuva Vahini private militia to appease the BJP and its mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Adityanath has now lost his bastion, Gorakhpur, which he ruled like a fiefdom for five consecutive Lok Sabha terms spanning two decades.

The Hindu Yuva Vahini had secured for Adityanath what seemed like near-total electoral invincibility. Gorakhpur was the seat of power from where he exercised hegemonic control over eastern Uttar Pradesh independent of the Sangh and the BJP – the party he has represented since he joined electoral politics in 1998. That was the year he won his first term as Gorakhpur MP.

Losing his army

It all started soon after Adityanath was appointed chief minister in March 2017. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh started exerting pressure on him to dismantle the Hindu Yuva Vahini, which existed outside the purview of the Sangh Parivar, the family of Hindutva groups that owe allegiance to the RSS.

The Sangh feared that with Adityanath as chief minister, the Hindu Yuva Vahini would grow into a parallel Hindutva outfit with independent political ambitions that could possibly clash with those of the BJP at some point. The Sangh Parivar feared that Adityanath’s outfit could create a situation in the crucial state of Uttar Pradesh – which elects 80 of 542 Lok Sabha members – similar to that in Maharashtra, where the BJP has to contend with a rival Hindutva party, the Shiv Sena.

The Hindu Yuva Vahini had ensured Adityanath's near invincibility in elections. (Credit: Reuters)
The Hindu Yuva Vahini had ensured Adityanath's near invincibility in elections. (Credit: Reuters)

Adityanath did not respond to the Sangh’s demand immediately. But when the pressure started mounting, he appears to have agreed to make the organisation inactive and dissolve units that refused to fall in line. Over the past few months, the Hindu Yuva Vahini has been hit by a spate of desertions by members across the state. These members have alleged neglect by the organisation’s senior leaders and pressure from the Sangh. Although the Hindu Yuva Vahini still boasts of a long list of office-bearers, in reality, it has almost ceased to exist in many places.

Seat of power

From its inception in 2002, the Hindu Yuva Vahini was designed to fulfil Adityanath’s electoral aspirations. The communal polarisation it sought to create in Gorakhpur and its neighbouring districts ensured that Adityanath’s victory margin of 7,000 votes in the 1999 general elections grew to 1.4 lakh votes in 2004, and crossed 3 lakh votes in 2009 and 2014. With its dismantling, Adityanath had already given up his main source of strength even before the bye-elections were held.

The loss is all the more stark because Gorakhpur had been under the control of the Gorakshapeeth temple for three decades. Between 1989 and 1998, it was represented in the Lok Sabha by Adityanath’s guru and the former mahant (head priest) of the temple, Avaidyanath.

The loss of Gorakhpur inflicts an almost irreparable damage to Adityanath’s personal clout. (Credit: Deepak Gupta / HT)
The loss of Gorakhpur inflicts an almost irreparable damage to Adityanath’s personal clout. (Credit: Deepak Gupta / HT)

It is because of this that the loss of Gorakhpur exposes not just the vulnerability of the BJP in the Hindi belt but also inflicts almost irreparable damage to Adityanath’s personal clout.

This, taken with the virtual demise of the Hindu Yuva Vahini, practically destroys Adityanath’s fallback option and his independent status in the BJP, leaving him at the mercy of the RSS.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.