Notwithstanding the calls against politicising an anti-terror operation, the air strikes in Balakot is arguably one of the biggest political issues in the country ahead of a crucial election. Both the government and the Opposition have been using it as a campaign issue since the Indian Air Force said it bombed a Jaish-e-Muhammed camp in Pakistan on 26 February, in retaliation for the JeM-claimed Pulwama terror attack.
From praising Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman in his home state to attacking the Opposition for questioning the strikes’ effectiveness, PM Modi has using the strikes in his campaign speeches.
But in Karnataka, his strategy has been different. Prime Minister Modi has addressed two rallies in the state so far – one before the air strikes and one after. In both speeches, his main argument has been the alleged difference between the Congress and the JD(S).
Two reasons are cited for PM Modi sticking to the anti-coalition argument in Karnataka; firstly, hyper-nationalism has rarely been a decisive election issue down south. Secondly, highlighting any chinks in the armour of the coalition in Karnataka would support his case against the Mahagathbandhan at the national level, said analysts.
PM Modi addressed his first political rally in Karnataka on 10 February in Hubballi-Dharwad in North Karnataka. The emphasis of his speech remained the “growing differences” between alliance partners Congress and JD(S). Making this his reference point, Modi said the Opposition wants to impose a similar “Majboor Sarkar” (helpless government) at the Centre.
Modi’s second rally in Karnataka on 6 March – just eight days after the Balakot strikes when the issue was still roiling national media – was much the same. The only reference to terrorism he made during the speech was a fleeting word to show that a stable government has worked in New Delhi.
The entire rest of the speech was once again focused on the coalition government. This time, he called CM Kumaraswamy a “remote-controlled chief minister”.
According to political analysts, hyper nationalism has rarely influenced voters in Karnataka. Sandeep Shastri, a political analyst and pro-vice-chancellor of Jain University told The Quint that traditionally, local politics has been a decisive factor in Karnataka.
The difference between South and North when it comes to hyper-nationalism is attributed to the south Indian states being much further away from international borders and the constant threat of terrorism. Although there have been terror attacks in South India, security hasn’t been the biggest poll issue.
Talking about Modi’s decision to attack the coalition, A Narayana, political analyst and faculty at the Azim Premji University, said a coalition government is perceived as a blueprint for the Opposition alliance. Even though the BJP was not able to break this alliance, to prove that the coalition government is on shaky ground is important for the BJP. “Since Modi is taking on an Opposition alliance, it is important to showcase the difference in the coalition in Karnataka,” he said.
Although Modi has not brought the issue of terrorism into his Karnataka campaign, the two experts believe that the trend could change when it comes to the urban constituencies. Even during the assembly elections in Karnataka, Modi who had started his campaign Gujarat with promise of development, eventually spoke of a Pakistani attempt to assassinate him, pointed out Shastri.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)