In politics, a new chemistry often generates a new arithmetic. This paradox explains the scenario in Tamil Nadu over the past ten days, as the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam pulled their ministers out of the Union cabinet and quit the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance at the Centre.

The BJP’s one consolation is that the Pattali Makkal Katchi, led by S. Ramadoss, remains in the NDA. Thus the departure of the DMK and the MDMK poses no threat to the stability of the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led coalition, for now, at any rate. Even so, the PMK’s continued presence in the NDA is at best cold comfort for the BJP as the next Lok Sabha polls are not far way.

The DMK had been gradually alienated from the BJP ever since the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, headed by J. Jayalalithaa, came back to power in the state in May 2001. But the presence of Murasoli Maran in the Vajpayee cabinet had cemented the DMK’s relationship with the BJP in New Delhi. Maran, as the Union commerce and industries minister, was not just the DMK’s “new icon” in the capital, his equations with the BJP top brass, at least initially, helped soften the blows being rained on the DMK president, M. Karunanidhi, and others, by Jayalalithaa.

But worse was to follow. First, the ideological crisis triggered off in the DMK by the post-Godhra communal riots. Ironically, at around the same time, Jayalalithaa came into her own as chief minister, winning the Andipatti by-poll in February 2002 after the Madras high court had cleared her in the Tansi land deal and Pleasant Stay Hotel cases.

And once Jayalalithaa began wooing Hindu sentiments, first by the temple annadhana scheme and later by enacting a law to ban forcible religious conversions, the state BJP unit’s unabashed appreciation of amma shook the confidence the DMK and the MDMK had reposed in the BJP since 1999. The Centre’s Prevention of Terrorism Act, which was mainly intended to curb cross-border terrorism, had also become a powerful tool in the hands of the Jayalalithaa regime. Its first victim was the BJP’s staunch defender in Parliament, the MDMK leader, Vaiko, in July 2002. Next, the Tamil Nationalist Movement leader, P. Nedumaran, was also netted for speeches made in support of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

The long arm of the anti-terror law also caught up with Nakkeeran editor, R.R. Gopal, who had been the government’s emissary to Veerappan in the negotiations for the release of Kannada actor Rajkumar. All this reinforced the opposition’s case in Tamil Nadu that POTA was being “misused” by the AIADMK to settle political scores and that the BJP at the Centre had done nothing to halt the onslaught.

The BJP, which had a political understanding with the Akalis, swiftly rushed to defend Parkash Singh Badal in Punjab when he was being probed by the Congress government in a disproportionate assets case. But when the houses of former DMK ministers in Tamil Nadu were raided by vigilance officials, there was not even a murmur of protest from the BJP in support of its otherwise “trusted” Tamil Nadu ally, the DMK complained. The BJP also did not respond when the party’s youth wing leader, M.K. Stalin, was stripped of the Chennai mayorship through a speedy legislation by the Jayalalithaa regime.

For the BJP, the need to keep amma happy flowed from its anxiety not to lose the support of its Hindutva constituency in the state. Hence, it was not surprising that both the DMK and MDMK cited the BJP’s “overt and covert support” to the AIADMK over a period of time as one of the main reasons for quitting the NDA, apart from POTA being a major irritant in their relationship.

Karunanidhi partly attributed the delay in quitting the NDA to Maran’s prolonged illness, the DMK chief has now disclosed a more basic reason. That was the BJP’s decision not to back the DMK candidate, Nagoor Hanifa, in the by-election from the Muslims-dominated Vaniyambadi constituency in June 2002 — “because our candidate was a Muslim”, said Karunanidhi. The DMK leader was angry at the “serious violation” of the NDA’s common agenda that decreed that no discrimination would be made on the basis of religion. He was also furious that his complaints to the BJP high command about the state unit’s attitude had no effect.

The situation poses fresh challenges to the NDA. For the BJP, mere insistence on “coalition dharma” — the phrase M. Venkaiah Naidu kept harping on when the DMK announced it would agitate over POTA and other issues — will not help it to tide over “underlying contradictions”. More so, when the BJP’s regional allies feel threatened about the erosion in their social bases as it tries to steal a march.

In this connection, it is important that the DMK has, of late, been insisting that Tamil be declared a classical language by the Centre, instead of being just one of the official languages. It has been reinforcing its commitment to the Tamil language and culture, as much as its concern about the minorities.

Even the PMK, which is a part of the NDA for now, has said that if in the long run, the BJP wants the support of regional allies, then it cannot ignore the demands and aspirations of the people of the respective regions, which only the regional parties reflect. Its leader, Ramadoss, referred to the BJP’s indifference to the plight of the Cauvery delta farmers in Tamil Nadu as an example of this.

On the defensive, Venkaiah Naidu has said that the NDA’s common agenda has been “most flexible”. But that is a matter of debate, especially when it comes to contentious issues like Ayodhya and an uniform civil code.

But what is needed for a viable coalition, as borne out by the latest political turmoil in Tamil Nadu, is a proper conflict resolution machinery, instead of the NDA convenor, George Fernandes, making a last minute dash to sort out issues.

The BJP’s is now in the horns of a dilemma in Tamil Nadu. Should it come to terms with the AIADMK, which seems to be more ideologically compatible, even as its leader, Jayalalithaa, is out to drive a hard political bargain? Or should it tie up with minor parties like the PMK, since the two other important Dravidian parties, the DMK and MDMK, want to “disconnect from an extreme right and communally sensitive outlook”, to save their skin?