It is rather premature to assess the significance of Mr. Banarsi Das’s election as the leader of the UP Janata legislature party. Indeed, it is even difficult to say whether or not this development has long-term importance. For it is not at all clear whether or not the anti-Jana Sangh alliance, which Mr. Charan Singh has formed right now with the help of Mr. Jagjivan Ram and Mr. H. N. Bahuguna, will last for long. The coming together of the two deputy prime ministers – they have been at odds with each other since the formation of the Janata government and the party – and of Mr. Charan Singh and Mr. Bahuguna – they are bitter rivals in UP politics – is by itself remarkable. As little as a fortnight ago most observers would have found it difficult to believe that it was possible for them to sink their differences even temporarily. In fact, the former CFD group headed by Mr. Jagjivan Ram and Mr. Bahuguna had refused to come to the rescue of Mr. Ram Naresh Yadav, though it approved of his anti-Jana Sangh stance and his order banning RSS shakhas (drills) in public places and Mr. Charan Singh had sent feelers to its leaders. But it is precisely because this development is so unexpected that it may turn-out to be ephemeral.
The above reservation appears justified on some other counts as well. It is, for instance, open to question whether a similar anti-Jana Sangh alliance is feasible in Bihar, and it is beyond doubt that it is not feasible in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh among the Janata-ruled states, in Maharashtra where the party is a partner in the Sharad Pawar ministry, and in some other states. In other words, the non-Jana Sangh elements in the Janata will be pursuing three policies towards this important constituent – boycott as in UP; co-operation with the Jana Sangh functioning as a junior ally as, possibly, in Bihar; and cooperation with the Jana Sangh operating as the dominant partner as in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. Surely this cannot go on for too long. The problem is further complicated by the fact that the architects of the new alliance in UP themselves do not wish to extend it to the Centre.
Mr. Charan Singh’s attitude towards the RSS-Jana Sangh has been ambivalent. Though he was rather critical of its overall personality and approach, he made a deal with it over the division of chief ministerships in the Hindi-speaking states where the Janata won a comfortable majority in the vidhan sabha poll in June 1977. Thus, while it may be fair to say that he has moved against the Sangh primarily because it did not give him the kind of support he expected of it in his clash with the Prime Minister, it will be unfair to deny that he has entertained reservations about the organisation. Mr. Jagjivan Ram’s position is far less clear. In the past 20 months he has been far more critical of the BLD than of the Jana Sangh, and rightly so because the middle castes, who oppress the Harijans in the countryside in north India, are ranged behind the former and not the latter. Why this volte face then on his part? Mr. Bahuguna may be one explanation because he has been a champion of the rights of the Muslims who by and large remain distrustful of the RSS-Jana Sangh. The need to contain Mrs. Gandhi may be another because she, too, is critically dependent on the Muslim vote in the north. The RSS-Jana Sangh frightens the Janata’s other constituents because it continues to function as a fairly tightly knit group. But all this can neither clinch the issue regarding the shift in Mr. Jagjivan Ram’s attitude nor indicate whether or not the new alliance will last.
The Times of India, 1 March 1979