No Seat Vacant, Yet No Victory Certain: BJP’s Bihar Dilemma and the Nitish Conundrum

When Union Home Minister Amit Shah declared from the stage in Darbhanga that “CM ya PM koi seat khali nahi hai” — a pointed jab at the opposition’s leadership ambitions — it was more than a rhetorical flourish. It was a calculated signal, a political maneuver aimed at stabilizing the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) narrative in Bihar, where the electoral ground is shifting faster than the party’s slogans can catch up.

By reaffirming Nitish Kumar as the Chief Ministerial face and Narendra Modi as the Prime Ministerial anchor, Shah sought to project continuity and certainty. But behind this public assertion lies a deeper anxiety within the BJP’s Bihar unit — an anxiety that has been growing louder with internal surveys, grassroots murmurs, and the unmistakable absence of a credible CM face from the BJP’s own ranks.

The statement, while appearing confident, came in response to a growing perception that the BJP is struggling to hold its ground in Bihar without a clear leadership projection. The Mahagathbandhan, despite its internal contradictions, has Tejashwi Yadav as a visible and energetic face. The Congress, though weaker, continues to ride on Rahul Gandhi’s national visibility. In contrast, the BJP, after parting ways with Nitish Kumar in 2022 and then re-aligning with him in 2024, has found itself in a leadership vacuum in the state.

Internal surveys conducted by the party reportedly show a worrying trend: without a declared CM face, the BJP’s vote share is slipping — especially in rural and youth segments where Tejashwi’s welfare messaging is resonating.

This is the context in which Shah’s endorsement of Nitish Kumar must be read — not as a show of strength, but as a reluctant masterstroke. The BJP, which once prided itself on expanding independently in Bihar, has now circled back to the very alliance it once broke, acknowledging that without Nitish, the path to Patna is perilous.

But this endorsement is not without its complications. The Janata Dal (United), led by Nitish Kumar, has not publicly reciprocated the warmth with equal enthusiasm. Within JDU circles, there is skepticism about the BJP’s long-term intentions. Many remember the 2020 assembly elections, where the BJP ran a parallel campaign undermining Nitish even while being in alliance. The scars of that betrayal haven’t fully healed.

Moreover, the BJP’s sudden embrace of Nitish raises questions about its own bench strength in Bihar. After two decades of political investment, the party still lacks a mass leader in the state who can command cross-caste appeal and administrative credibility. Leaders like Nityanand Rai, Giriraj Singh, and Sanjay Jaiswal have regional influence but lack statewide traction. The party’s over-reliance on Modi’s national charisma has not translated into a robust state-level leadership pipeline. This vacuum has forced the BJP to fall back on Nitish, despite ideological differences and past friction.

The chaos that followed Shah’s statement among BJP cadres and Bihari voters is telling. Many within the party’s rank and file were expecting a generational shift, a new face, or at least a symbolic assertion of BJP’s autonomy in Bihar. Instead, the re-endorsement of Nitish has been read by some as an admission of electoral vulnerability. The optics of the move — coming just weeks after reports of internal surveys showing BJP’s declining edge — suggest that the party is reacting, not leading.

There are also whispers of deeper strategic calculations. Some believe that the BJP’s endorsement of Nitish is a temporary arrangement, a tactical move to consolidate votes in the short term while preparing for a post-election realignment. Others see it as a signal to fence-sitters within the JDU, nudging them toward a merger or defection in the event of a fractured mandate. But such calculations are fraught with risk. Bihar’s electorate has shown time and again that it punishes opportunism and rewards clarity. The BJP’s shifting stance — from breaking with Nitish to embracing him again — may confuse more voters than it convinces.

The opposition, meanwhile, has seized the moment. Tejashwi Yadav has mocked the BJP’s U-turn, calling it a sign of desperation. Rahul Gandhi, too, has used the opportunity to highlight what he calls the BJP’s “hollow nationalism” that bends for power. The Mahagathbandhan’s narrative — that the BJP cannot win Bihar on its own — is gaining traction, especially among first-time voters and backward caste groups who feel alienated by the BJP’s upper-caste-heavy leadership.

In the end, Shah’s declaration that “no seat is vacant” may be technically true, but politically, it reveals a seat of uncertainty within the BJP’s Bihar strategy. The party may have moved its masterstroke, but whether it is a checkmate or a desperate gambit remains to be seen. The real test will come not in the rallies, but in the ballot boxes, where voters will decide whether the BJP’s alliance with Nitish is a sign of strength or a confession of weakness. Until then, the seat may not be vacant — but the mandate is still very much up for grabs.