India’s Opposition at the Crossroads: Merger, Unity, Ideology, and the Struggle to Survive

Columne by:  Saifur Rahman

These days, Indian politics is witnessing a turbulence in which the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) appears pleased after winning Bengal and benefiting from major defections among victorious TMC legislators. Yet despite this satisfaction, the BJP leadership remains deeply anxious about its future because public debate in the country has now shifted toward fundamental issues—whether it is the recurring paper leaks, unemployment, the rising cost of education, soaring inflation, or the weakening of the country’s economy.

Under such conditions, repeated efforts are being made to push public discourse back onto the BJP’s traditional pitch—that is, the politics of “Muslim, Muslim, Muslim.” However, over the past few days, discussions and controversies built around those themes have not generated any particularly strong public response.

In such a situation, the ruling BJP can see that control may gradually slip from its hands and, despite having command over the broader state apparatus, retaining power could become increasingly difficult.

One possible route that appeared visible was to reshape the demographic character of Lok Sabha constituencies through delimitation, but this too appears difficult because such a proposal has already collapsed once in Parliament, and even in preparation for introducing it again, the BJP and NDA remain far from securing the required one-third numerical strength.

Even with nearly nineteen TMC MPs joining and possible defections from the Shiv Sena (Uddhav faction), the government would still remain short of the necessary numbers.

Against this backdrop, a renewed enthusiasm appears visible within Congress and particularly within its most prominent leader, Rahul Gandhi. In recent months, Congress has worked toward consolidating South India as its stronghold, including political shifts in Karnataka and ongoing efforts to bring Jagan Mohan Reddy into alignment in Andhra Pradesh.

At the same time, Rahul Gandhi appears to be focusing on states where Congress directly faces the BJP, such as Rajasthan, where rapid political adjustments and preparations to hand greater command to Sachin Pilot are reportedly underway.

Congress has also begun efforts to reactivate the INDIA Alliance, including a meeting held on 8 June and a decision to conduct alliance meetings every alternate month moving forward.

One significant development in the INDIA Alliance meeting was that, following TMC’s defeat and internal fragmentation, alliance parties now appear more willing to walk together rather than compete against Congress or one another.

The second major development was that Rahul Gandhi delivered a clear message to allies, opposition parties, leaders, and party members: under the current system, resistance has become the only path forward.

Rahul Gandhi’s statement reflects an acceptance of what is presented as the country’s current reality. According to this view, the powers embedded within today’s Indian system differ from previous Congress, Socialist, or even BJP governments. Rather, authority has become concentrated in the hands of a small group and a particular ideological bloc.

Today, the executive, judiciary, and even the country’s security agencies appear to represent one dominant force, while the education system, media, and film industry increasingly appear to function like extensions of the ruling party and its ideological organisations.

Doubts surrounding the electoral system are no longer merely suspicions; rather, it increasingly appears openly visible that the Election Commission is functioning to ensure victories for the ruling party, crossing established norms and boundaries in the process.

At such a time, Rahul Gandhi’s acceptance of this reality and his call for resistance carry major significance because resistance and sacrifice, according to this argument, are now the only means of preserving constitutional supremacy in India and safeguarding the political future of opposition parties and their leaders.

However, resistance cannot merely mean holding conferences under slogans such as “Save the Constitution.” It must involve building movements from urban streets to village lanes.

For this, the first requirement is a strong team, which demands two major steps.

The first step is the proposal put forward by Shiv Sena (Uddhav) leader Sanjay Raut: parties that originally emerged from Congress should return to Congress—such as TMC in Bengal, NCP in Maharashtra, and YSRCP in Andhra Pradesh.

Such mergers would need to occur on a large scale. Congress should work systematically to persuade the leadership of all parties that originated from Congress and bring them back with dignity and respect.

Similarly, smaller regional parties lacking clear ideological foundations should also be encouraged to merge into Congress, including efforts to engage groups associated with both Sharad Pawar’s and Ajit Pawar’s NCP factions.

This, according to the argument, is necessary both for preserving the existence of those parties and securing the political future of their leaders and workers, while strengthening Congress for meaningful resistance.

Additionally, the numerous communist parties operating across India should consolidate into the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Failure to do so, it is argued, may result in the disappearance of Left politics and weaken the struggle to preserve constitutional values.

Thus, CPI(M) should begin working toward overcoming minor differences and transforming fragmented Left forces into one stronger communist party.

Likewise, parties rooted in socialist traditions—such as RJD, Samajwadi Party, INLD, BJD, and RLP—should take a bold step similar to the era of V.P. Singh and move toward building a national socialist party with a strong federal internal structure.

This is considered necessary for preserving the future of socialist thought and political tradition.

Similarly, in Tamil Nadu, actor-politician Vijay—having positioned himself within the Dravidian ideological tradition—should work toward bringing smaller Dravidian parties and SC/ST and Christian community-based groups under his TVK banner while attracting dissatisfied leaders from AIADMK to establish a stronger Dravidian platform.

At present, BSP’s political presence appears significantly weakened while Chandrashekhar Azad’s Azad Samaj Party is expanding its grassroots base. Yet the broader reality remains that Dalit political leadership appears increasingly fragmented.

Therefore, it is argued that Azad Samaj Party, Prakash Ambedkar’s Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi, Bahujan Mukti Party, various BAMCEF-linked political wings, and groups such as VCK should come together under one umbrella to establish a powerful Ambedkarite political force.

Similarly, Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren’s party should move forward and unite tribal political formations under one platform.

Within the Muslim community, political awareness has increased, but a strong political party is still absent. Therefore, groups such as SDPI, ISF, AIUDF, Peace Party, Ulema Council, IMC, MMK, INL, MBT, WPI, NL, Muslim Majlis and others should attempt to merge into a single organised political formation with a clear ideology, structured organisation, cadre system, and long-term roadmap.

In these merger efforts, Sanjay Raut should also prepare a roadmap not only to prevent fragmentation within Shiv Sena (Uddhav) but also to bring Shiv Sena (Shinde) back from the NDA and reconcile Raj Thackeray in order to establish a unified Shiv Sena.

At the same time, the Uddhav Thackeray camp should reinterpret Hindutva—offering an alternative to the RSS-BJP formulation—one that rejects the varna system, upholds women’s dignity, rejects hostility toward other religions, embraces India’s secular, democratic, socialist Constitution, and incorporates Gandhian principles.

This vision should be developed through research, engagement with religious scholars, and revival of Maharashtra’s regional identity while ensuring harmony with Indian nationhood.

This large-scale process of mergers, the article argues, is India’s first major necessity.

The second necessity is genuine unity.

Since its formation, the INDIA Alliance has lacked real internal cohesion. Yet despite this, the opposition fell short of the NDA by only around forty-five seats in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections and narrowly missed forming government.

With 2029 approaching, there is now a need to institutionalise real alliance structures nationally and locally so that cooperation reaches villages and grassroots workers.

Future municipal and state elections should also be fought collectively, with “friendly fights” reduced except in limited cases such as Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

Continuous cadre workshops, public campaigns, and resistance movements should be jointly organised.

The alliance should also break its internal ego barriers and bring in additional regional and ideological forces led by leaders from Dalit, Adivasi, Muslim, Christian, Communist, Sikh, and Socialist backgrounds.

At the same time, it must be understood that no political battle can be fought without cadres and organisation.

The BJP’s greatest strength today lies in its organisational machinery and the nationwide cadre network associated with the RSS and its affiliated organisations.

Most opposition parties remain far behind in this respect.

Therefore, these parties must rapidly build organisational structures down to the panchayat level and activate youth, student, women’s, and legal wings.

The fourth major necessity for the INDIA Alliance is ideological work.

Ideology remains the foundational force of politics.

The BJP became powerful because it invested in Hindutva, spread it across society, trained cadres through it, mobilised public support around it, and developed governance around it.

Opposition parties lacking ideological clarity have often shown organisational fragility.

Therefore, parties without clear ideological foundations should reconsider their direction, while ideologically rooted parties should establish systematic political education and leadership training programmes from national committees down to local structures.

This work should continue constantly through ideological and leadership workshops.

Such ideological clarity may create internal resistance and expose dormant divisions, but the argument presented is that the future of parties and democratic politics depends upon it.

These four priorities—merger, alliance-building, cadre and organisational development, ideological clarity, and political education—are described as essential for the INDIA Alliance and opposition parties just as water, food, and air are essential for human life.

The time has come, according to this argument, for Congress leadership, INDIA Alliance parties, and opposition forces to begin acting on these priorities immediately.

Finally, alongside all these points, Rahul Gandhi’s statement during the INDIA Alliance meeting—that “just as Congress adopted resistance before independence, the same path must be adopted today”—is presented as a reality that cannot be ignored.

Accordingly, resistance must extend from the streets to police stations and courts in every case of hate crime.

Opposition parties must raise a united voice in Parliament, maintain coordinated messaging in the media, continue public awareness campaigns, and build sustained resistance movements around inflation, unemployment, paper leaks, hate crimes against Dalits, Adivasis, Christians, Muslims, and backward communities, harmful policies, sexual violence, crime, corruption, human rights concerns, and economic decline.

And such a movement, it concludes, must be one in which people are prepared for sacrifice, imprisonment, and prolonged struggle until systemic change becomes inevitable.

The Author