Calling Mamta Banerjee's bluff!? - updated

Today is going to be interesting. It looks like Congress has called Mamta's bluff and has dared her to quit the government. It looks odd when a dominant partner in an alliance totally takes a minority partner for granted. The problem is not in the actual act but the psychology of what it means to the snubbed person and others watching the game play out.

I love these type of game theory scenarios. Lets bite in a bit: so what are Mamata's options and the consequences of those options, and the betterment and possibility by fulfilling those options.

1. Quit the Govt

2. Partially pull back from Govt

3. Do nothing

In case Mamta decides to quit govt the damages are the most to the offender (Congress) and in case she decides to hang on the damages are most to the projector (Mamta). The best option for either is the second one, where there is a "symbollic" walkout of the government with lots of media and propaganda to satisfy all the consituencies. However, what we do have and are not factoring in this simple equation are the Emotions, Ego and Perceptions. It can be well argued that Mamta's chances are much better if she indeed takes the chance a makes a full walkout. Congress will be badly damaged. And more interesting would be how the other partners in the coalition take the lead. If one person moves out, this whole pack could crumble unless - they have something to fight for as a single entity and fall for the misdeeds of others. If shown a way, will others bite the apple too?

[It can and should be equally argued that Congress would not issue such statements unless there was an explicit backing or deal with Mamta already reached or favors traded. As said before, if this is the case, all they have to do is to play to the media and gallery.]

The Ego and Perception part is the most difficult one to analyse. Emotions just cannot be, as it can be completely bought out. Ego and Perception can be bought only to an extent. Imagine this, would Mamta, who after decades of sterling political rise in her moment of glory be called a toothless dog? Would she be called a person who barks and never acts, even if that is what her constituents want? Point simply is: is Mamta ready to risk it?

There are several other ways to look this event. Its going to be interesting. Whats going to be more fascinating is how the fence-sitters will react. There would be some drop-off, some defending, and even some poaching! Would be an interesting day.

[Not going deep for the lack of time, but will come back to this later]

Update:

Actually, there are several other possibilities or motivations than the simple three presented.

More I read the emphatic statements from the senior ministers, more I feel that Congress wants Mamta to go out! Is that a possibility? Yes. From the perspective of Congress, Mamta has been a real pain who has not allowed any substantial legislations or reforms to be passed. She has threatened and blocked at every available time, even against her own ministers. So, to reform the image of ‘reformist government’ Congress have to cut the apron strings and let Mamta loose. Are we seeing this in progress? Quite possibly.

Is it possible that Mamta too is at a point of no return, where the Wolf has been cried a thousand times? Is it time to act on the threat or be permanently be branded as bite less canines? Quite possibly. With the sufficient deterioration of their government’s perception with common people, Mamta is unlikely to gain much in aligning with them. However, splitting from them has one painful fact, it will split the Anti-communism support between her party and what Congress may field with the eventual unexpected winner being CPI. Mamta would not want that to happen, irrespective of how much she may hate Congress policy and how much suffocated she might feel in their coalition.

Also, it seems quite possible that Congress would have calculated the loss of Mamta’s support. Have they worked out something else, especially in states that are going into polls next year? Given the confidence (or their bluff?) they look quite contented.

Conclusion:

Looks like the best option is indeed the second one for all parties. For Mamta it is to make usual drumbeats and play to the gallery as she stages a mock walkout, while still attached to the apron strings of UPA to keep the CPI at bay. (The important equation is Mamta would not care for anything beyond West Bengal, her sphere of influence and desire remains within West Bengal.) Cutting loose will create more problems for Mamta while giving her a stature of a people-oriented politician, one that she has lost in past. This would be the only boost she will get presently, and one that she has use to maximum advantage when the polls arrive. But would these cards be worth it?

For Congress too, it looks best to ‘get rid’ of Mamta, as she has been constantly a pain for the hardcore reforms. UPA can never do a big bang reform with Mamta on board. For Congress to face its elections (a much larger gambit than Mamta’s) has to take hard stances and look beyond temporary setbacks. It looks like Congress has already planned out such a exit strategy (even Mamta’s total exit from the government)