Why Sasikala can't replace Jayalalithaa and rule AIADMK

For the last couple of days, the national media has been getting excited over Sasikala Natarajan’s purported “coup”.

Every time Tamil Nadu makes the prime time on English news channels, those of us who are from the state wonder why their local bureaus are either so disconnected with reality, or so hesitant to disillusion their colleagues from Delhi about how the state works as to latch on to such sensationalism.

As it happens, the anchors who have been pronouncing Jayalalithaa’s debut film Vennira Aadai (which refers to widows’ whites) as “vennira adai” (which means white rice-and-legume dosa) are now theorising that a woman who has never held an official position in politics could become Tamil Nadu’s next chief minister.

There are several things one must take into consideration while speculating on who will take over the leadership of the AIADMK.

First among these is that coups are not the party’s – or indeed any Dravida party’s – style. When there is dissent, the party splits. And that is why there are so many Dravida parties in place of the Dravida Kazhagam.

The AIADMK cannot afford to split. The 2016 elections were won by a slim margin, and with 89 seats in the Assembly, the DMK could be a threat to the party’s five-year mandate. The threat would loom large if upset AIADMK leaders were to defect to the Opposition.

None of these parties has had more than one power centre. If there is conflict between two forces, one is invariably sidelined. Take the case of Stalin and Azhagiri in the DMK. Take the case of Jayalalithaa herself and RM Veerappan in the ADMK.

On a related note, there would have been no need for a “coup” in order to ensure O Panneerselvam’s selection as chief minister. He has regularly taken over as interim chief minister when Jayalalithaa had to leave office – he took charge in 2014 when Jayalalithaa was imprisoned, and he took over when she was hospitalised in September.

Second, secrecy at meetings is not an aberration for the AIADMK. It is, in fact, the norm.

Third, Sasikala is not a political novice. While she has held no official position in the party, she has been Jayalalithaa’s confidante for nearly three decades. Her husband Natarajan has been actively involved in politics since the 1970s.

Fourth, politics in Tamil Nadu is caste-driven. Only leaders who were already luminaries in their own right before they entered politics can divorce themselves from their caste labels, and even so, not always with success.

While Sasikala and O Panneerselvam are from the Thevar community (and from different sub-castes within it), most prominent members of the AIADMK belong to the Gounder caste and many to the Vanniar caste.

Rumours are that the Gounder leaders are in favour of Lok Sabha deputy speaker M Thambidurai or former minister KA Sengottaiyan taking over the post of general secretary, while the Vanniyars are keen to have veteran strategist Panruti S Ramachandran in that seat.

While “anonymous sources” have been feeding these names to journalists, everyone who is willing to be quoted by name insists that there is no tussle, and that decisions will be made once the seven-day mourning period ends.

Typically, sources ask to remain anonymous when they are not authorised to speak, when they have an axe to grind, or when are worried about repercussions. All of these take away from their credibility.

The party’s USP has been loyalty to Jayalalithaa, and since dissent of any kind at this time would be political suicide, chances are that its members will present a united front.

The latest development is a meeting on Thursday, Decmeber 8, at Poes Garden, between Sasikala and chief minister O Panneerselvam, along with several senior ministers of the AIADMK.

The meeting reportedly lasted between 11.20am and 1.05am. Those in attendance included cabinet ministers Dindugal Srinivasan, Edappady Palaniswamy and P. Thangamani. No official statement was made after the meeting, and O Panneerselvam did not interact with the waiting media.

The Tamil media has put forward various theories – the meeting may have been called to decide on the succession; or it may have had to do with problems with dissenters; it may even have had to do with the demand from Jayalalithaa’s supporters that her Poes Garden home be converted into a memorial.

It is not likely that we will know what transpired in the meeting anytime soon.

News of even the most dramatic occurrences within the AIADMK – including Sasikala’s expulsion in 2011 – is usually conveyed in cursory statements on its official channel, Jaya TV.

But those who have followed Tamil Nadu’s politics over the last five decades will know that aides rarely become leaders. Lieutenants with leadership potential – such as Jayalalithaa in MG Ramachandran’s time and Karunanidhi in CN Annadurai’s – are projected as the future, endorsed by the leaders. They are also a generation younger than the leaders themselves.

The prospect of Sasikala taking over as general secretary is complicated by her largely negative image in public opinion. While Jayalalithaa’s authoritarianism was resented by most, it did not detract from people’s faith in her intellect and efficiency.

Since the 1990s, when Jayalalithaa first came to power, Sasikala’s “influence” has been blamed by the public and political commentators alike for Jayalalithaa’s excesses.

The tumultuous relationship between “Amma” and “Chinnamma” (as Sasikala was sarcastically called by party members) has passed several tests, but none as severe as the 2011 mass expulsion of Sasikala and 18 of her relatives from the AIADMK. Jayalalithaa did not elaborate on the reason for her decision.

In an article I wrote at the time for The India Site, I listed the members who had been expelled and the positions of importance they had held both in the party and in the various private companies jointly or individually owned by Jayalalithaa and Sasikala.

I also detailed the rumours that were making the rounds at the time. These included a plot by Sasikala’s family to usurp power from Jayalalithaa, trusted advisors urging the CM to cut ties with Sasikala since she was likely to be convicted in a corruption case, and allegations that the family was drugging and even poisoning Jayalalithaa’s food.

Despite Jayalalithaa’s promise to the General Council and Executive of the party 11 days later, on December 30, that there would be no reconciliation, most of Tamil Nadu rolled its eyes.

There had been rifts earlier, only to be followed by tearful reunions. Sure enough, Sasikala was back in March 2012. She announced that she had been the victim of a conspiracy by her own family, and was breaking off contact with all of them, including her husband Natarajan.

The “Mannargudi clan”, as Sasikala family is dubbed (though there are those, including Subramanian Swamy, who refer to them more alliteratively – as the “Mannargudi mafia”), was back en masse. Her husband Natarajan was seen giving instructions to party workers throughout the funeral. He was even introduced to prime minister Narendra Modi, after the latter had stroked Sasikala’s head to comfort her.

And the whispers have begun again.

If Subramanian Swamy and Cho Ramaswamy were vocal about Sasikala’s “influence”, less prominent figures have been circulating conspiracy theories.

Since Sasikala is believed to have been Jayalalithaa’s healthcare agent, the sudden reversal of her reported progress towards discharge from hospital has become the subject of these whispers.

The importance of Sasikala within the party was largely due to Jayalalithaa’s personal friendship with her and fondness for her. When their leader was willing to forgive Sasikala, the workers did not have a choice.

When the leader is no longer alive, will they trust Sasikala to have known Jayalalithaa’s will and wish for the party’s succession?

There are several AIADMK leaders – including ministers – who had a direct line to Jayalalithaa and refused to interact with Sasikala.

Even among the public, the friendship between the two women – who referred to each other as “udanpiraa sagodhari (sister who was not born in the same household)” – was accepted only grudgingly.

It was well known that Jayalalithaa had distanced herself from her own family and adopted Sasikala’s.

It was also known that the Mannargudi clan gave her a support system when she was at her lowest ebb.

They had been introduced in 1982, when Jayalalithaa, then propaganda secretary of MGR’s ADMK, made a trip to Cuddalore. The district collector VS Chandralekha was a common acquaintance. Sasikala and Jayalalithaa immediately took to each other.

Jayalalithaa had often spoken of her own loneliness within her family – she lost her father as a toddler; she spent much of her childhood in Bangalore, aching for the company of her mother who was busy with acting assignments in Madras; she was forced into the film industry by pecuniary circumstances. She eventually fell out with her brother.

MGR was her protector for as long as he was alive, but Jayalalithaa became vulnerable to personal attacks immediately after his death in 1987. She was pushed off the gun carriage which bore his body to the burial site.

She was mockingly called “Anni” (sister-in-law) by her political opponents, a snide allegation that she had had an affair with MGR. Her darkest day came in March 1989, in arguably the ugliest incident in the history of the Tamil Nadu Assembly.

When Jayalalithaa told the story, she said she had called Karunanidhi a “Kutravali (criminal)”, to which he retorted by referring to her as “thevidiya (whore)”.  Members of the two parties clashed, and Jayalalithaa walked out of Assembly. Despite party workers forming a protective cordon around her, Durai Murugan – a minister in the DMK government – broke through and lunged at her. She said he and other members of the party assaulted her, tearing at her hair and pulling her saree.

Durai Murugan denied this, but the media had pictures of a dishevelled and tearful Jayalalithaa getting into a car. A photograph taken at her home, of Jayalalithaa holding up the pallu of her saree to show a gaping hole, was published in The Indian Express the next day.

Jayalalithaa knew she would face misogyny and thuggery for the rest of her political career. She was right. This would continue into the millennium, when Karunanidhi would respond to her taunts about his “minority government” with personal insults.

Jayalalithaa needed protection, and she found it in Sasikala, who installed herself in Poes Garden along with her relatives and reportedly ran the home, administering everything from the hiring of domestic help to granting access to Jayalalithaa.

From the time Jayalalithaa came to power in 1991 to her death on December 5, Sasikala struck with her through thick and thin. Insiders have told the media that she did indeed cut off all her relatives in 2012, not objecting even when her husband was arrested in a land grabbing case.

In the meanwhile, Jayalalithaa seemed to break all contact with her own family. Her brother Jayakumar, whose family had lived with Jayalalithaa in her Poes Garden home, moved out abruptly in 1995.

As always, there were only theories about why. Some said he had wanted a position in politics, and Jayalalithaa had refused. Others said they had fought over Sasikala’s nephew Sudhakaran’s extravagant wedding, which Jayalalithaa had funded.

Yet others said it was to shield his family from the fallout of the court cases against Jayalalithaa.

Jayakumar passed away soon after, and his family faded into oblivion. Until December 2016.

His daughter Deepa, who was born in the Poes Garden home, told the media she had made 25 attempts to meet her aunt in hospital since September 22 and had not been allowed into hospital. She even said policewomen had manhandled her on the last day. She made a short appearance at the interment, and created a flutter for her resemblance to Jayalalithaa. The police quickly hustled her away, saying it was to protect her from being mobbed.

Jayakumar’s son Deepak was seen performing the last rites, a symbolic cremation, alongside Sasikala.

Deepak’s appearance fuelled speculation that the party might have turned to Jayalalithaa’s blood relatives to consolidate its strength.

Journalists quoted Amma’s supporters exclaiming that they could see their beloved leader’s face in that of her niece.

The idea that Jayalalithaa’s estranged family could suddenly join politics seems far-fetched. Deepa told reporters that her aunt had not even attended her wedding in 2012, and that “barriers” had cropped up between them.

She also said Jayalalithaa had loved the two of them very much, and that it was either the “people around her” or the chief minister’s busy schedule that had kept them apart.

However, the bond between aunt and niece is limited to hearsay.

Dynastic succession has not been a feature of Tamil Nadu politics. Karunanidhi may be something of an exception, but his squabbling progeny have divided the DMK faithful and failed to strike a chord with the public.

The future of the AIADMK’s leadership is anyone’s guess at the moment.

But to surmise that Sasikala may have staged a “coup” by forcing or tricking the party’s MLAs into accepting Panneerselvam as chief minister seems ridiculous.

For one, anyone who understands Tamil Nadu politics would know that following democratic processes of nomination for succession goes against the grain of tradition. Dravida parties have a culture of unquestioning obedience to the leader, and the fact that Jayalalithaa had handed over the reins to Panneerselvam was sanction enough.

If Sasikala does indeed dream of taking Jayalalithaa’s place, she cannot have the political acumen Jayalalithaa believed her friend did.

Jayalalithaa’s charisma softened the image of a despot; her “iron lady” persona was seen as necessary for a single woman to succeed in a man’s world; allegations of corruption could be countered by evidence of her straightforwardness, such as her refusal to draw a chief minister’s salary saying she had made enough money during her film stardom.

In her rare interviews to the media, she displayed courage, articulateness, intelligence, and wit. Occasionally, she showed glimpses of the girl she had once been, shared the dreams she was forced to abandon.

Sasikala cannot hope to fill the shoes of her friend or the hearts of Amma’s legions of fans.

Also read - The cult of Amma: Why Jayalalithaa is so beloved