A stumble or strategy from India’s ‘common man’ party?

The Aam Aadmi Party's decision to quit after a meteoric rise to power in Delhi has divided opinion over what its leader, Arvind Kejriwal, plans to do next.

Arvind Kejriwal speaks to the media during a sit-in protest in New Delhi last month. He announced his resignation as Delhi’s chief minister on February 14 to protest the blocking of an anti-corruptionShow more

NEW DELHI // The abrupt end to the tenure of Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal has illustrated the problems that independent, idealistic new parties face when confronted with the realities of Indian politics.

Mr Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) was barely a year old when it performed so well in elections last December that it was able to form the New Delhi government, with outside support from the Congress party.

When he was sworn in as chief minister, Mr Kejriwal was pragmatic about how long such an arrangement would last. In one speech, he predicted that his government would not be allowed to function for more than 48 hours.

He ended up lasting 49 days.

On Friday, however, Mr Kejriwal chose to quit, arguing that the Congress, the ruling party in the federal government, and the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were obstructing his efforts to pass anti-corruption legislation.

The AAP’s election manifesto had overwhelmingly focused on passing the anti-graft Jan Lokpal bill, named after the anti-corruption ombudsman it aimed to create. Once in office, the party tied its reputation to the passage of the bill.

“We have clearly said we are not wedded to power,” Prashant Bhushan, a senior AAP leader, said last week. “What is the point of hanging on to power if the centrepiece of our manifesto is obstructed?”

The fall of Mr Kejriwal’s government showed the limited prospects for a powerful third party in India, said Rohit Pradhan, a political analyst based in the United States.

“He doesn’t have access to a group or community which will blindly vote for him,” Mr Pradhan told The National. “Therefore, embracing an anti-establishment argument was his only option.”

Mr Kejriwal was forced to argue that the Congress and the BJP were part of the same permanent political establishment, Mr Pradhan said. This position was reflected even in the manner in which Mr Kejriwal resigned, claiming that the Congress and the BJP were colluding to block the Jan Lokpal Bill

Some analysts have said Mr Kejriwal’s resignation may be strategic – a way to project himself as a martyr and simultaneously free himself up to prepare for the upcoming elections to the Lok Sabha, the lower house of India’s parliament.

The party has already said it will field candidates for more than 350 of the Lok Sabha’s 543 seats.

But Mr Kejriwal’s methods may prove counterproductive, given that he achieved little during his brief stint as chief minister.

“You have to offer people more than the fight against corruption. You need to offer them hope,” Rajdeep Sardesai, the editor-in-chief of the CNN-IBN news channel, said during a panel discussion on Friday. “But the chief minister was constantly playing negative politics. He needs to clearly tell us what he wants to deliver in Lok Sabha.”

“Kejriwal’s primary argument was that he was going to change the system,” Mr Pradhan said. “Not just tinker with it but substantively change it. If that is the basis of evaluation, then he has been a failure.”

However, Mr Kejriwal and his associates claim to be patiently trying to achieve what they claim to stand for.

Mr Pradhan called Mr Kejriwal’s resignation a brave act, given the distinct possibility that he may never become a chief minister again.

“This suggests Kejriwal thinks of himself as a long-term prospect,” Mr Pradhan said. “He is prepared to bide his time and take huge risks. Whether he can pull it off no one can say for sure but you can definitely argue that Arvind Kejriwal thinks that his party is a serious player at the national level.”