In China, many years ago, there was the Tiananmen Square incident. Police firing took place, and a massive student protest movement shook the Communist authoritarian government at that time.
Even today, I remember the analysis made by CPI(M) leader Prakash Karat about China. He had said that China tried to open the window, but immediately, some mosquitoes entered the room through that window, and those mosquitoes bit them, eventually causing malaria.
Looking at the current political situation in West Bengal and the condition of the Trinamool Congress, that old Tiananmen Square analogy suddenly came back to my mind. I believe it is not an irrelevant comparison. The present situation in West Bengal is not simply that TMC MPs, MLAs, councillors, and local leaders are leaving the party and moving towards the BJP. The bigger issue is that many of them are experiencing a sense of relief after openly criticising the leadership. More than their anger against Mamata Banerjee, there is a growing expression of dissatisfaction and anger against Abhishek Banerjee.
Naturally, the question arises: how did so many people suddenly become disloyal?
One or two people can become dissatisfied, but when a large number of leaders start expressing resentment, it indicates a deeper problem within the organisation.
There are still many people inside TMC who have stayed back. Among them, there is also a section that the BJP does not want to approach. There are TMC leaders whom the BJP does not want to bring into its fold. At the same time, there are also some TMC leaders who are maintaining communication with the BJP.
The BJP believes that keeping some of these leaders inside the TMC may actually be a better strategy than bringing them directly into the party. By staying within TMC, these leaders can continue creating internal pressure and damage the organisation from within. They can weaken whatever remains of the existing structure of the party.
This is the peculiar situation that has emerged.
However, the TMC leadership is only blaming the BJP and saying that the BJP is responsible. But why is the BJP being blamed entirely?
I am not supporting whatever the BJP is doing. As a journalist who has covered West Bengal politics for more than forty years, I am not saying that everything the BJP is doing is correct or that whatever the TMC is doing is wrong. But TMC must also understand that the BJP is simply playing its own political game.
In today’s politics, whether one likes it or not, this is the politics of pragmatism. This is Machiavellian politics. Amit Shah’s strategy involves planning, tactics, and political calculations.
The real question is: why are Mamata Banerjee and Abhishek Banerjee not accepting that there are serious issues within their own system?
There is a question of internal party democracy. There is also a question of internal disturbance and dissatisfaction. The discussions that many TMC members are now openly having indicate that they felt suppressed earlier, and now they feel they have the freedom to speak.
That possibility cannot be ignored.
When the RG Kar case happened, if MPs, MLAs, or leaders openly criticised the leadership and directly attacked Abhishek Banerjee, they could have been labelled as disloyal. During that time, party loyalty was expected above everything else.
But after an election, there has to be a process of introspection. There has to be “manthan”, a serious internal discussion and self-analysis.
A political party has to examine its mistakes.
The BJP will attack you. Power politics will continue. Opposition parties will create pressure. But a party must still look within itself.
I also remember that in 1998, Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the Prime Minister and L.K. Advani was the Home Minister. At that time, there was an attempt to split the Trinamool Congress. This was after Naveen Patnaik’s BJD had separated and formed its own political identity. The BJP leadership believed that regional parties could be weakened by creating internal divisions.
The strategy was supported by Advani and the RSS network because they believed that if sections of regional parties could be brought closer to the BJP, it would expand their political influence.
At that time, Sudip Bandyopadhyay was approached. But Sudip did not betray Mamata Banerjee. He informed her about the situation. There was an opportunity for him to become a Cabinet Minister, but he did not take that route.
Later, when the Rose Valley corruption case began, Sudip was in Parliament. There were opportunities for him to meet the Prime Minister and seek political protection. Mamata Banerjee advised him not to surrender politically and said that they would fight the battle together.
Sudip respected Mamata’s advice and continued with her. That loyalty was remembered for many years.
But today, after the election, there is a different atmosphere. The anger and frustration that people had kept inside for years are now coming out.
During an election, genuine party workers often remain silent because speaking against leadership can be considered betrayal. But after the election, there must be reflection and correction. A party cannot survive only by blaming external forces. It must also analyse its own internal weaknesses.
The BJP may be using opportunities. Power politics may continue. But the responsibility of protecting and strengthening the party organisation ultimately lies within the party itself.
