AFTER over a month of pretence at negotiations over seat-sharing, both the major alliances in Maharashtra finally announced their split on September 25. The Shiv Sena-BJP communal combine which was formed in 1989, broke up after 25 years; and the Congress-NCP alliance which was formed in 1999, split after 15 years. With all these four parties now contesting the state assembly polls separately, it is a completely new situation in Maharashtra today. The Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) is contesting most of the seats; and so also is the BSP. There are, of course, a large number of rebels and independents in the fray for the election, the voting for which is slated on October 15 and the counting on October 19. In the light of this unprecedented free-for-all fight for the Maharashtra Vidhan Sabha, most of the Left, democratic and secular parties in the state have come together to form the Maharashtra Lokshahi Samiti (Maharashtra Democratic Front). They include the CPI(M), CPI, Peasants and Workers Party (PWP), Janata Dal (Secular), Bharatiya Republican Party-Bahujan Mahasangh (BRP-BM) led by Prakash Ambedkar, Republican Sena led by Anandraj Ambedkar, Lal Nishan Party (Leninist), Lal Nishan Party, Satyashodhak Communist Party, Shivrajya Party and other small Republican groups. The seat-sharing among all these multifarious constituents has been successful to a large extent and the front is contesting most of the 288 state assembly seats. It is, of course, true that this front has been built on the eve of elections and has not evolved through people’s struggles, as it ideally should have been. The CPI(M) is contesting 20 seats in the state as part of this front. SPLIT IN SHIV SENA-BJP COMMUNAL COMBINE The split in both the major alliances had its immediate roots in the results of the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, although friction in both alliances had been building up over several years. When the Shiv Sena-BJP communal combine was formed in 1989 on the so-called basis of Hindutva, the Shiv Sena became the first electoral partner of the BJP in the country. Bal Thackeray and Pramod Mahajan were the architects of this alliance. After Pramod Mahajan, it was his brother-in-law Gopinath Munde who kept the alliance with the Shiv Sena intact. Today all these three figures are gone and the political compulsions have changed. The understanding reached at the time of forming the Shiv Sena-BJP communal combine was that the BJP would fight more seats for the Lok Sabha and the Shiv Sena would fight more seats for the Vidhan Sabha. For the Vidhan Sabha, the original proportion was 171 seats for the Shiv Sena and 117 seats for the BJP. It was on the basis of this proportion that the communal combine won the state assembly elections in 1995 and formed the state government for the first time. However, seeing their performance the people threw out this regime at the first opportunity in 1999 and refused to give them a chance in 2004 and 2009. In the 2009 state assembly elections, in spite of contesting 169 seats, the Shiv Sena could get only 42 MLAs elected; while the BJP which contested 119 seats, could get 44 MLAs elected. One major reason for this was the ‘spoiler role’ played by the MNS, which put up its candidates mainly against the Shiv Sena in that election. Thus the post of leader of the opposition for the last five years went to the BJP for the first time. This has never ceased to create heartburn in the Shiv Sena camp. In the results of the last Lok Sabha elections, the BJP-Shiv Sena combine swept 42 out of the 48 Lok Sabha seats in Maharashtra for the first time. Of these the BJP won 23, the SS won 18 and their ally won one seat. Besides, the BJP won a clear majority in the Lok Sabha. It was this that fuelled its hopes of spreading its wings in Maharashtra and wresting the chief ministership. Hence it demanded that it be allowed to contest 144 of the 288 assembly seats in the SS-BJP alliance and also that it be given the chief ministership. Both these claims were contemptuously rejected by the Shiv Sena whose last offer was 151 seats for itself, 123 for the BJP and 14 for the smaller partners in the combine. The BJP probably wanted to break the alliance from day one after the Lok Sabha election results were out, and it has now done so. The Shiv Sena, on its part, was probably encouraged by the recent results of the state assembly by-elections in several states, in which the BJP received a drubbing in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and even in Narendra Modi’s home state of Gujarat. The BJP, by virtue of the fact that it controls power at the centre, has been able to attract four smaller partners in the alliance, viz. RPI led by Ramdas Athavale, Swabhimani Shetkari Sanghatana led by Raju Shetty, Rashtriya Samaj Party led by Mahadev Jankar and the Shivsangram Party led by Vinayak Mete, by offering them some seats and other plums. Both the Shiv Sena and the MNS have launched a vitriolic attack on the BJP and are using the Marathi chauvinist card against Narendra Modi and Amit Shah - both of whom are Gujaratis. The Shiv Sena has also openly accused the BJP of wanting to break up Maharashtra with its demand for a separate state of Vidarbha, which the SS has opposed. All this has put the BJP on the defensive. It is realising that things will not be easy. BREAK-UP OF THE CONGRESS-NCP ALLIANCE With the drubbing received by the Congress in the last Lok Sabha polls, the fate of the Congress-NCP alliance was also sealed. Of the six seats won by the alliance in Maharashtra, four were won by the NCP and only two by the Congress. The NCP began saying that it had suffered due to its alliance with the Congress and hinted that it would go it alone. The other factor was Ajit Pawar’s ill-concealed desire to wrest the chief ministership. The NCP has always felt that it is the Congress that has come in the way of this ambition. The current chief minister Prithviraj Chavan, by targeting the NCP leadership and particularly his deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar over the irrigation scam and the co-operative bank scam, certainly made things worse for the NCP. Consequently, there has been a running battle between the Congress and the NCP. Maharashtra is now being treated to the entertaining spectacle of Congress and NCP leaders trading corruption charges against one another! Like the BJP, the NCP also now demanded 144 of the 288 seats (the earlier 2009 formula was 174 for the Congress and 114 for the NCP) and a rotating chief ministership. The Congress rejected both these claims and was willing to go up to the 164:124 limit but not beyond. As a result the NCP broke up the alliance and decided to go on its own. That is what the Congress also wanted in any case. With the break-up of both fronts just three days before the last date for filing nominations, there was an unprecedentedly mad rush not only for filing nominations but also for securing election tickets of the major bourgeois parties. Already during the last four months after the Lok Sabha polls, there had been some exodus from the Congress and NCP to the Shiv Sena and BJP. In the last three days of nominations, throwing all semblance of principles and ideology to the wind, there was a disgusting spectacle of Aya Rams and Gaya Rams in all the five bourgeois parties. FAVOURABLE SITUATION FOR PROGRESSIVE FORCES The performance of the Congress-NCP state government during the last 15 years of its rule has been dismal, to say the least – in terms of both anti-people policies and corruption scandals. This will certainly lead to a high degree of anti-incumbency against both parties. But the people are also gradually realising that the BJP-led central government of Narendra Modi is also cut from the same cloth. Price rise, unemployment, peasant suicides, attacks on the working class and other such phenomena continue unabated in the first four months of the BJP central regime as well. In addition are its poisonous communal conspiracies. Along with these crucial national issues, the equally important question of the entire socio-economic developmental trajectory of Maharashtra is also being vigorously taken up as part of this election campaign by the Left, democratic and secular forces. Time constraints of this election campaign do not permit an elaboration of these vital issues. There is no doubt that the present situation in Maharashtra is favourable to the progressive forces. Wherever they have a reasonably strong base of support that has been built up through sustained struggles and a firm organisation, they have every chance of making headway in these elections. Thousands of activists of the CPI(M) in Maharashtra are sparing no efforts to ensure that the performance of the Party in these elections brings it credit.