![]() Friday, Jan 31, 2003 |
| National | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | National
By Our Special Correspondent
Although the reason Mr. Mahajan gave in defence of this decision was ``broader interest and unity of the DMK-led alliance'' it is more than obvious that this would certainly help the AIADMK which moved closer to the BJP. Under the seat-sharing arrangement between the DMK, the BJP and other parties in the alliance, Sattankulam was contested by the BJP in the last Assembly elections, and so this time also it was the BJP which should have contested it. It is also being pointed out that with the DMK having announced that it would ``boycott'' the byelection, in other words it would not campaign at all (not even for the BJP, if it were to contest, was the sub-text of the story) the BJP was aware that it may not be in a position to even save its deposit. Deciding not to contest the seat means winning brownie points from the AIADMK while talking about the ``interest of the unity of the DMK-led alliance.'' By not contesting, the BJP has been able to continue its political tightrope walking in Tamil Nadu doing nothing to break the alliance with the DMK while inching closer to the AIADMK.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|