 | « Back to article | Print this article |
Udhayanidhi's 'untimely' elevation as deputy CM may be used against the party, for critics to argue that the DMK's 'first family's is not concerned about anything else but their clan's welfare.
If packaged and delivered properly, some of the sting may stick at election time, predicts N Sathiya Moorthy.
Despite twin celebrations by party cadres, Tamil Nadu's DMK Chief Minister M K Stalin may be risking too much, too early, in the elevation of minister-son Udhayanidhi Stalin as deputy CM and re-induction of jailed former colleague V Senthil Balaji at the earliest opportunity after the Supreme Court had granted him bail in a money-laundering case from his AIADMK past.
The reasons are not far to seek. Udhayanidhi's elevation has already drawn social media criticism over 'family rule' in the DMK, which party men, however, do not seem to have any problem about.
As for Senthil Balaji's re-induction, customary critics of the DMK and Stalin 'caution' that any Supreme Court reversal of his bail for violation of the bail conditions, leave aside his conviction by the trial court in Chennai, can irreparably damage the party's image even more.
Of equal significance is the restoration of sensitive and equally crucial energy and excise portfolios to Senthil Balaji, which again he had held in Jayalalithaa's AIADMK government.
This may have bugged some seniors, yes, but then, party men see it as a reward for his standing by the party and the leader, while in prison for 471 days.
As they point out, elsewhere in the country, politicians of his class had cracked at the very mention of the ED, I-T or CBI -- of course, barring in Delhi's AAP-led government of Arvind Kejriwal.
The immediate question is if these two decisions have the potential to add to the inevitable anti-incumbency against the state government, which can be touched and felt in a score of areas, from law and order to corruption to misgovernance.
If so, will they impact the assembly elections that are due in the summer of 2026 -- how and how far?
DMK veterans point to the BJP's poor performance at the Centre in the 2019 Lok Sabha polls when its ally the AIADMK under chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami was in power in the state, and later in the 2021 assembly polls when the two had parted company.
In both, the DMK-led combine, including the Congress and the rest, won comfortably.
According to them, there is no reason to believe that the results could be otherwise in the assembly polls, and point to the series of welfare programmes unveiled by the DMK government in the past three years and may be rolling out between now and the assembly elections.
Supporters of the DMK are confident that the AIADMK is unlikely to re-energise and re-unify enough to pose a fresh threat.
They have written off the BJP-NDA, claiming that its brand of Hindutva has not sold in Tamil Nadu, which they too concede is otherwise as 'religious' a state as any other.
Yet, the claims and confidence sound over-simplified, especially in the light of actor-politician Vijay's newly-launched Tamizhaga Vetri Kazhagam (TVK) entering the electoral fray in 2026.
The TVK's first state-level conference will sound the bugle for the assembly polls, and is expected to attract youth from across existing political parties, possibly barring the BJP but not necessarily its allies from the failed Lok Sabha elections earlier this year.
In context, there are murmurs from within about the wisdom of the chief minister dropping a ministerial colleague, Mano Thangaraj, from the southern-most Kanyakumari district.
As an actor, Vijay has had a huge fan following from that part of the state, and denial of ministerial representation for the district midway, whatever the reason and justification, can be problematic for the party-led alliance -- or, so goes the argument.
Old-timers are also point to the forgotten route that Stalin had to take to reach where he is now, both within the party and outside.
Apart from putting in possibly the longest term as an apprentice for a 'political heir' in his place, Stalin, since associating with the DMK from his students days, had to spend long years in the youth wing until his age became an embarrassment, when alone he was inducted into the parent party, where too he faced competition from elder brother M K Azhagiri, who was a late entrant into politics and party affairs.
So, when the inevitable showdown between the brothers happened, the party was with him, starting with the late general secretary K Anbazhagan to the last member of the 1,200-member general council.
They were the ones who either directly or otherwise prevailed upon M Karunanidhi to elevate Stalin as deputy chief minister, the first one in the state's history.
Udhayanidhi is the third in the list after three-time chief minister O Panneerselvam became deputy to his successor, Edappadi K Palaniswami, 2017-2021.
In Udhayanidhi's case, he entered direct politics only five years back in 2019, became an MLA in 2021, minister a year and a half later, and deputy CM, now.
Through this period, he was also the party's youth wing secretary.
Appearing in casual wear, of jeans and white shirt, he does have an appeal for the youth, who can also relate to his style of chatty platform speeches, against the previous generations' alliteration-filled tongue-twisters, for which grandfather Karunanidhi was the prime example and inspiration for many.
However, DMK functionaries are confident that they would still make it on the strength of their existing alliance, including the Congress in the national-level INDIA combine -- and also for want of a strong and credible alternative (as they concede in private).
In this context, they argue that Udhayanidhi's elevation would be a dampener to Vijay's ambitions, given the fact that both belong to the same age group, have a filmi background, and starting with their informal attire, their body language is relatable for the millennial voters and those a generation earlier.
To the fact that Udhayanidhi lacked the kind of long years of experience that his father had under the tutelage of the late party and family patriarch M Karunanidhi, the argument is that those like the late Vijayakanth earlier, Seeman now and Vijay in the coming months lacked even that much of exposure before launching their respective political parties.
To them, Udhayanidhi has inherited the DMK as a vehicle and he needed only to ride it, but the others had to create theirs in the first place.
Sustainability over the short, medium and long terms was the issue for others, not for Udhayanidhi with the DMK.
Or, that is another of the arguments favouring the new deputy CM.
Therein lies the counter. As is being pointed out, the other three mentioned, or even 'superstar' Rajinikanth who was toying with the idea of entering electoral politics directly, could afford to lose but not Udhayanidhi and the DMK.
Going by the DMK's experience, after charismatic star-politician, the late M G Ramachandran broke away and formed the rival AIADMK, Karunanidhi could return to power only after the former's death in 1987.
The DMK then alternated in power with the AIADMK under MGR's successor and filmi heroine, Jayalalithaa, until the latter stabilised.
The DMK, then in Stalin's control, had to wait for the exit of both Jayalalithaa (2016) and Karunanidhi (2018) in quick succession, to be able to win elections convincingly (2019 and 2021) and in a row.
Truth be acknowledged, after the DMK's successive electoral victories in 1967 and 1971, this was the first time that the party had performed so very convincingly and comfortably.
The anticipation is that the 'untimely' elevation of Udhayanidhi may be used against the party, for critics to argue that the DMK's 'first family's is not concerned about anything else but their clan's welfare.
If packaged and delivered properly, some of the sting may stick in election-time.
Talk of Udhayanidhi's elevation did whip up the revival of the Sanatan Dharma controversy centred on him last year.
It has not reached a crescendo, as earlier.
It remains to be seen if the BJP's MoSha combine will try to re-ignite the issue during the current campaigns for assembly elections in J-K, Haryana and Maharashtra.
If it happened it would be after their whipping up the Kachchatheevu issue that is linked to the larger India-Sri Lanka fishermen's dispute during the Lok Sabha elections, that too after polling in Tamil Nadu had ended.
However, DMK veterans point out how the Sanatan row against Udhayanidhi, or the traditional anti-DMK, anti-Karunanidhi social media attacks by political Hindutva forces did not gel with the Tamil voter, who is as much god-fearing and temple-worshipping as his brethren elsewhere in the country.
They, however, seem to forget that more than the controversy kicked up by Udhayanidhi -- whether it was blown up, out of context or not, by critics -- it was the Supreme Court's observations that hurt the DMK's image more.
Hearing his plea for an order for all cases against him in the matter to be heard in the same court, Supreme Court judges remarked how the TN minister should have considered the consequences of his utterances before making them.
It is this that critics now claim could be problematic for Udhayanidhi and the DMK, as and when the Supreme Court holds further hearings in the case.
But then ask his supporters in the DMK: 'Does his elevation make a difference to the status of the case or the way the SC is hearing his case?'
And pat comes the reply: 'When that is not the case, why confuse issues, especially after the TN voter has not entertained such complaints and observations in the past?'
N Sathiya Moorthy, veteran journalist and author, is a Chennai-based policy analyst and political commentator.
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff.com