The Opposition’s biggest enemy is not Modi; it is itself

Indian politics has often demonstrated that electoral success is not merely about defeating an opponent; it is equally about preserving organisational cohesion and adapting to changing political realities. Some parties illustrate this better. The Telugu Desam Party (TDP), which survived some of the most dramatic internal upheavals in modern Indian politics, emerged stronger each time.

For decades, August was considered an inauspicious month for TDP. It faced two defining crises that could easily have destroyed it but ultimately became examples of political resilience.

The first came in August 1984. While Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister and TDP founder N T Rama Rao (NTR) was in the United States undergoing open-heart surgery, his trusted lieutenant Nadendla Bhaskara Rao staged a political coup. With the support of the Congress establishment at the Centre and Governor Thakur Ram Lal, Bhaskara Rao claimed majority support among legislators. On August 16, NTR’s government was dismissed and Bhaskara Rao was sworn in as Chief Minister.

What followed became one of the most significant democratic mobilisations in India’s political history. NTR rushed back to India. Led by his son-in-law N Chandrababu Naidu and supported by leaders such as M Venkaiah Naidu, the TDP protected loyal legislators from poaching, organised public opinion and demonstrated its majority before the President of India. Public outrage forced a reversal, and exactly one month later, NTR was reinstated as the Chief Minister.

A decade later came the second August crisis. Internal tensions over the growing influence of NTR’s second wife Lakshmi Parvathi had created deep unease within the party. In August 1995, Chandrababu Naidu led a rebellion against his father-in-law. Legislators were housed at Hyderabad’s Viceroy Hotel while a bitter power struggle unfolded. Naidu eventually secured overwhelming support from party legislators and assumed both the chief ministership and party leadership.

The turmoil did not end there. Soon after the coup, another rebellion emerged. Daggubati Venkateswara Rao, NTR’s other son-in-law, along with several loyalist legislators, challenged Naidu’s leadership. Yet that revolt too eventually fizzled out. The TDP endured because its organisational structure, cadre network and ideological commitment remained stronger than individual rivalries.

Even when Chandrababu Naidu himself was arrested in September 2023, the party remained intact and eventually returned to power. The lesson is simple: strong leadership, organisational discipline and ideological clarity help political parties survive storms that would otherwise destroy them.

Contrast this with the situation confronting several opposition parties today.

The Shiv Sena led by Uddhav Thackeray is facing what many observers describe as a June crisis. Defections continue to weaken the party. Members of Parliament, legislators and local representatives are leaving in significant numbers. Similarly, the Trinamool Congress in West Bengal is witnessing internal unrest and desertions and is on verge of being decimated.

It would be too simplistic to ignore the role of political engineering and defections allegedly encouraged by rivals like the Eknath Shinde group which is now part of NDA. In the case of Shiv Sena, allegations of horse-trading by BJP have been repeatedly raised. Yet blaming external forces alone is an inadequate explanation.

Political parties become vulnerable when internal confidence collapses.

Leaders and workers rarely abandon a party that appears confident, united and electorally viable. Desertions usually reflect deeper concerns about leadership, direction and future prospects. The uncomfortable truth is that many opposition parties have spent more time attacking the BJP than introspecting about their own shortcomings.

The INDIA bloc was conceived as a grand coalition capable of challenging the BJP nationally. Yet within a short period it has become a collection of competing regional interests rather than a coherent political alternative. Personal egos, conflicting ambitions and contradictory narratives have prevented it from evolving into a credible national platform.

Instead of developing a common minimum programme that addresses employment, economic growth, governance reforms, education, healthcare and national security, many opposition parties remain trapped in reactive politics. Their campaigns frequently revolve around attacking Narendra Modi rather than presenting a compelling vision of their own.

Voters eventually get tired of negativity when it is not accompanied by a practical alternative.

Even now, opposition parties often appear disconnected from the broader public mood. Some continue to focus on issues that resonate only within limited political circles. Others remain preoccupied with rebranding exercises.

The Congress party’s continued effort to project Rahul Gandhi as the face of the opposition reflects this dilemma. Political leadership cannot be manufactured through repeated relaunches. Public acceptance must be earned through electoral performance, organisational success and a persuasive vision for the future. On June 18 they tried to relaunch 56-year-old Rahul as cool PM. A day later, on his 56th birthday, Congress went on overdrive and projected him as Parushram and performed milk abhishekam to his posters which had invited criticism from many. What does Congress want? Can they win Hindu votes by such cheap tactics? Are they ready to lose minority votes? Is this not hypocrisy?

The other opposition parties like the Samajwadi Party say Rahul should first perform and get results before dreaming to be a cool PM or Parshuram. The left says Rahul needs to become more mature.

Over the years, Rahul Gandhi has employed increasingly aggressive rhetoric against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Terms such as “Narender Surrender,” warnings of institutional revolt, claims that the economy is dead and repeated personal attacks have generated headlines but have not translated into sustained electoral gains. Politics is ultimately measured at the ballot box, not on social media or television debates.

Similarly, contradictions within the opposition have repeatedly undermined its credibility.

During Operation Sindoor, sections of the opposition enthusiastically embraced U S President Donald Trump’s claim that he had brokered peace. But they refuse to recognise the fact that it took over 100 days to arrive at a sustainable peace formula in the war over Iran. Rahul Gandhi called Trump a bully and while these attacks continued, the Congress government in Telangana led by A Revanth Reddy chose to honour Trump by naming a road after him.

Such contradictions confuse voters. They raise questions about whether opposition parties are guided by principle or merely by immediate political convenience.

This inconsistency extends beyond foreign policy and political rhetoric. Opposition parties frequently accuse the Modi government of undermining institutions, democracy and federalism. Yet they often struggle to maintain internal democracy within their own organisations. Many remain personality-driven entities where dissent is discouraged, and succession planning is absent. The result is a cycle of fragmentation, defections and decline.

A healthy democracy requires a strong ruling party, but it also requires a strong opposition. The absence of a credible opposition weakens democratic accountability. Yet credibility cannot be built through slogans alone. It requires organisation, discipline, leadership and policy innovation.

If the opposition genuinely hopes to challenge the BJP in 2029, it must move beyond grievance politics. It must develop a workable common programme, contest elections with greater unity, reduce personality clashes and offer solutions rather than merely criticism.

Most importantly, it must convince voters that it is capable of governing.

The TDP survived multiple crises because its leaders understood that survival depended on adaptation and organisational strength. Today’s opposition parties face a similar test. The question is whether they will learn from history or continue blaming circumstances for failures that are increasingly self-inflicted.

The road to 2029 remains open. But time is running out. Unless the opposition reinvents itself, presents a united front and offers a credible alternative vision for India, it risks spending yet another election cycle complaining about defeat rather than preparing for victory.

(The author is former Chief Editor of The Hans India)