Why Modi won't sack Amit Shah if BJP loses Bihar

The verdict from the impending Assembly elections in Bihar may have a bearing on government policy and personal rating of Prime Minister Narendra Modi but is unlikely to have any impact on the fortunes of Bharatiya Janata Party president, Amit Shah. An odd murmur may indicate that a "regular" term for Shah as party president - he is currently "completing" Rajnath Singh's tenure scheduled to end at the turn of this year - may be in jeopardy in the event of the BJP's failure to steal a victory. But a closer reading of the internal equations within the party, and its larger political fraternity, suggests that the do-or-die principle of life is applicable only in its first half for Shah. He must do but shall not die if the efforts do not yield desired results.

The complex clauses regarding the BJP president's tenure stipulates a maximum of two full consecutive terms. In the event a sitting president is unable to complete her or his tenure, the person who is given charge first completes the remaining part of the tenure as Rajnath Singh did when he assumed the mantle from LK Advani in 2005. Shah, it may be recalled, was nominated (there is no election of president if change of guard happens mid-term) to the post after Rajnath Singh stepped down owing to the one-man-one-post principle that the BJP has followed mostly scrupulously. Shah's elevation from the post of general secretary removed any doubt that the party will sing a tune different to Modi's.

In many ways, his nomination was decided the day Modi declared Shah as the "man of the match" after leading the BJP to victory in the parliamentary polls. His appointment to the post also sealed Modi's complete control over both government and party. The proximity of Shah and the fact that he, along with Arun Jaitley, emerged as the two closest aides of Modi generated heartburn in the party but barring Arun Shourie and Shanta Kumar no one voiced this. Given the present equation in the party, any decision to deny Shah a full-term for three years would indicate that Modi's supremacy is under challenge. A defeat or two in state Assembly elections is not yet going to result in anyone remotely challenging Modi's leadership.

There is another factor going for Shah - that of fairly good relations he has built with the leadership of the Sangh Parivar. After he became president, in a prudent decision, Shah decided not to short circuit Nagpur and conveyed the impression that though his strength stemmed from Modi's unbridled support, he kept the RSS top brass in good humour. Consequently, Shah has wasted no opportunity to either visit Nagpur or interact with the top brass even if there was no pressing urgency. By all accounts, whenever significant decisions were taken, Shah always ran it past the RSS, to ensure that leadership did not learn about the decision from media reports.

Modi, his core team and the RSS leadership have learnt from the experience of the Vajpayee government when acrimonious relations between Delhi and Nagpur contributed to the unsettling of the regime. Relations between the Modi government and the RSS are also more cordial even due to the personal warmth that Modi shares with Mohan Bhagwat because they go back to their youth. This is in contrast to the generational gap that existed for the major part of the Vajpayee regime when KS Sudarshan was Sarsanghchalak. In the present regime, there has been better coordination between party, government and the RSS and was best exemplified by the Samanvay Baithak, also attended by Shah.

However, there is no denying that in the likelihood of a second successive electoral defeat after the rout in Delhi, Modi's position will come under attack. Given the fact that Modi is a quintessential combatant, he would not allow his position to get eroded and at best will agree to give greater power to ministerial colleagues. In such a situation, it would be doubly important for Modi to retain control of the party organisation. This can be ensured only if a trusted person is at its helm. Among the crop of present leaders, there is no one besides Shah that can be considered a complete loyalist and qualifies to occupy the post. Because removal of Shah will raise several questions regarding Modi's authority, such likelihood appears fairly improbable at this stage.