NDA seat-sharing: Swan song for Nitish Kumar, JD(U)?

The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in Bihar has unveiled its seat-sharing formula for the upcoming state assembly elections, scheduled for 6 and 11 November. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)) will each contest 101 of the 243 seats in the Bihar legislative assembly. The remaining seats are allocated to smaller allies: 29 to Chirag Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) (LJP(RV)), and six each to Jitan Ram Manjhi’s Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) (HAM(S)) and Upendra Kushwaha’s Rashtriya Lok Morcha (RLM). 

On the surface, the equal split between the BJP and JD(U) suggests parity. However, a closer examination reveals a shifting power dynamic that could mark the beginning of the end for Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s JD(U) as a dominant force in Bihar politics.

Mirage of equality

Mainstream media has framed the 101-101 split between the BJP and JD(U) as a sign of equal partnership. Yet, this arrangement belies a more profound truth: it may be the last time Nitish Kumar’s JD(U) manages to negotiate on such terms. Historically, the BJP has outperformed JD(U) in converting contested seats into victories, a trend observable since their alliance began in the mid-1990s. Data from past Bihar assembly elections underscores this disparity.

In the 2000 elections, the BJP contested 168 seats and won 67, achieving a strike rate of approximately 40%. The JD(U)’s predecessor, the Samata Party, contested 58 seats and won 34, yielding a higher 59% strike rate. 

However, as the JD(U) emerged and the alliance solidified, the BJP’s efficiency became more pronounced. In the October 2005 elections, JD(U) contested 141 seats, winning 88 (62% strike rate), while the BJP secured 55 seats from 122 contests (45%). 

By 2010, the NDA’s landslide saw JD(U) win 115 of 141 seats (82%) and BJP take 91 of 102 (89%). The 2020 elections further highlighted the gap: BJP won 74 of 110 seats (67%), while JD(U) managed only 43 from 115 (37%).

Across these elections, the BJP’s average strike rate has hovered between 60% and 70%, consistently outpacing JD(U)’s 50-60%. Despite this, the BJP has often ceded more seats to JD(U) in seat-sharing deals, largely due to Nitish Kumar’s stature as a vote-puller and the JD(U)’s skilled negotiators, such as RCP Singh in his prime. Kumar’s ability to swing votes for the alliance has long justified this generosity. 

Nitish Kumar’s fading star

However, at 74, with questions mounting about his health, administrative grip, and political flip-flops, Kumar’s influence is waning. The 101-101 split, far from parity, signals the BJP’s reluctance to continue propping up a fading partner.

Nitish Kumar, often called “Sushasan Babu” (Mr Good Governance), has been a linchpin of Bihar politics for decades. His ability to mobilise Other Backward Classes (OBCs), particularly the Kurmi community, and his reputation for development-focused governance have made him indispensable to the NDA. 

Yet, cracks are showing. Recent years have seen criticism of his administration’s handling of issues like unemployment, floods, and crime, eroding the “Sushasan” brand. Kumar’s frequent political U-turns—most notably his 2022 exit from and 2024 return to the NDA—have also dented his credibility.

As Kumar approaches the twilight of his career, the JD(U) faces an existential challenge: the lack of a successor with comparable clout. The party’s reliance on Kumar’s personal appeal leaves it vulnerable. Without a prominent Kurmi face to replace him, the JD(U) risks losing its core voter base. The BJP, acutely aware of this, appears to be strategically reshaping the NDA’s internal dynamics to marginalise JD(U) in the long term.

Chirag Paswan’s rising clout

Enter Chirag Paswan, the young leader of LJP(RV), who has secured 29 seats—a disproportionate share given his party’s modest electoral footprint. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, LJP(RV) won five seats, including Paswan’s stronghold of Hajipur. 

In the 2020 assembly elections, the party, then contesting independently, won just one seat but disrupted JD(U)’s prospects by splitting votes in 29 constituencies, indirectly aiding the BJP. Contrast this with 2015, when LJP, contesting 42 seats, won only two, marking a low point.

Paswan’s allocation of 29 seats is a coup, reflecting his growing influence as a Dalit and youth icon in Bihar. His ability to draw OBC votes, particularly from communities overlapping with JD(U)’s base, makes him a valuable asset for the BJP. By bolstering Paswan, the BJP may be laying the groundwork to squeeze JD(U) further, positioning LJP(RV) as a counterweight to Nitish Kumar’s party. This move not only dilutes JD(U)’s electoral strength but also signals the BJP’s intent to cultivate a new generation of leadership within the NDA.

Upendra Kushwaha’s niche appeal

Upendra Kushwaha’s RLM, allocated six seats, plays a smaller but significant role. Kushwaha, a former Union minister, commands loyalty among the Kushwaha caste, a subset of OBCs. His inclusion strengthens the NDA’s appeal to this community, which JD(U) has traditionally relied upon alongside Kurmis. 

However, with Kumar’s eventual exit, JD(U) will struggle to retain these voters without a charismatic leader. Kushwaha’s presence in the alliance further fragments JD(U)’s OBC base, reinforcing the BJP’s long-term strategy to dominate the coalition.

BJP’s endgame

The seat-sharing deal is less about immediate electoral gains and more about the BJP’s vision for a post-Nitish Bihar. The JD(U), heavily dependent on Kumar’s personal brand, faces a leadership vacuum. Once Kumar steps down, the party’s lack of a star campaigner could trigger a mass exodus of leaders and workers to the BJP, which has a robust organisational structure and a deep bench of leaders. 

The BJP’s willingness to give Paswan and Kushwaha significant roles suggests a calculated move to build alternative power centres within the NDA, reducing reliance on JD(U).

This dynamic is not without risks. The BJP’s overt support for Paswan could alienate some JD(U) loyalists, potentially fracturing the alliance’s cohesion in the short term. However, the BJP’s stronger strike rate and organisational depth give it confidence to weather such challenges.

This year's Bihar election may well be the last where JD(U) negotiates as an equal partner. Post-election, the BJP could emerge as the unchallenged senior partner, with JD(U) relegated to a junior role or absorbed entirely.

A swan song for JD(U)?

The NDA’s seat-sharing formula is a microcosm of Bihar’s evolving political landscape. While Nitish Kumar has long been the fulcrum of the alliance, his fading influence and the absence of a clear successor signal troubled times for JD(U). 

Chirag Paswan’s rise and Upendra Kushwaha’s niche appeal underscore the BJP’s strategy to diversify its coalition, preparing for a future without Kumar. The 101-101 split, far from a gesture of equality, is a pragmatic concession to a leader whose star is dimming.

As Bihar heads to the polls, the question looms: Is this Nitish Kumar’s swan song? The JD(U) may still deliver a respectable performance, buoyed by Kumar’s residual appeal and the NDA’s collective strength. But without a charismatic leader to carry the mantle forward, the party risks fading into obscurity, its cadres and voters absorbed by a resurgent BJP. The 2025 elections could mark the end of an era for Sushasan Babu and the JD(U) as we know it.