The complex chemistry of coalition governments in India

Coalition governments have become an almost permanent feature of India’s political landscape. As the era of single-party domination fades in many states, alliances stitched together through negotiation, compromise, and sometimes sheer political instinct are shaping governance. Bihar offers one of the most vivid illustrations of this phenomenon. Nitish Kumar’s repeated oath-taking ceremonies, shifts between alliances, and survival in turbulent political waters capture both the strengths and fragilities of coalitional politics. But Bihar is far from the only example. From Maharashtra to Karnataka, from Jammu & Kashmir to Kerala, coalition politics has produced a mixed record—marked by occasional stability, frequent surprises, and constant renegotiation of power equations.

Coalitions often emerge from fractured mandates, reflecting the diversity of social groups and regional aspirations. In principle, this can strengthen democracy by ensuring that governments are more representative. Bihar’s experiments with the JD(U)–BJP alliance in the mid-2000s demonstrated how stable coalitions can deliver real results. Improved roads, better law-and-order, and targeted schemes for women and backward communities lifted Nitish Kumar’s image as a reformer. Similar successes can be seen in Kerala, where both the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the United Democratic Front (UDF) have delivered long periods of stable governance despite being coalitions. Tamil Nadu’s Dravidian parties regularly share power with national allies in Parliament, often using these alliances to protect federal interests and secure resources for the state.

Yet, the same coalitions that promise stability can quickly descend into instability when power balances shift. Bihar’s political story over the last decade reflects this volatility. Nitish Kumar’s alliance with the RJD and Congress in 2015 collapsed within two years amid corruption allegations and rifts in governance style, prompting a dramatic return to the BJP-led NDA. In the last five years alone, he has taken oath multiple times, sometimes resigning voluntarily, sometimes switching partners, always navigating the thin line between political principle and political survival. When alliances begin to serve the interests of leaders rather than voters, they risk eroding public trust.

Other states have faced similar turbulence. Maharashtra witnessed one of the most dramatic coalition breakdowns in recent memory. The post-2019 alliance of Shiv Sena, NCP, and Congress—ideologically mismatched but united in arithmetic collapsed under internal pressure and defections, leading to the split of the Shiv Sena and re-entry of the BJP into power. Karnataka has also struggled with coalition instability; the JD(S)-Congress government formed in 2018 lasted barely over a year before defections toppled it. In Jammu & Kashmir, the BJP-PDP coalition, born out of a deeply divided mandate, fell apart in 2018, sending the state into prolonged central rule. These examples underscore a larger truth: when coalitions are stitched together without ideological coherence or trust, they become vulnerable to political shocks.

Still, coalition governments are not inherently flawed. Their success often depends on the quality of leadership and clarity of shared goals. When alliances are built on clear policy agreements—as in Kerala or Andhra Pradesh under earlier TDP-BJP arrangements—they can combine the strengths of multiple parties and deliver reasonably stable governance. Coalitions also play a crucial role in federal politics. Regional parties gain a meaningful voice, ensuring that issues of local identity, development, and autonomy reach national platforms. This strengthens India’s democratic fabric, preventing the over-centralisation of power.

However, the weakness of coalitions lies in their susceptibility to opportunistic realignments. Bihar’s recent history demonstrates how shifting loyalties can derail administrative continuity. Each time governments fall or change partners, bureaucratic priorities reset, welfare schemes slow, and political uncertainty spreads. A government preoccupied with survival rarely has the bandwidth for long-term planning. Voters increasingly view such volatility as political self-preservation rather than public service, a dangerous trend for representative democracy.

The real challenge, therefore, is not whether India should have coalition governments they are here to stay but how they can be made more accountable and predictable. Clear pre-poll alliances, transparent coalition agreements, and mechanisms to prevent large-scale defections could help stabilize governments. Strengthening anti-defection laws and enforcing internal party democracy may also reduce the temptation for sudden switches driven by personal ambition.

Bihar stands today at a familiar crossroads. With a new NDA government forming after a decisive mandate, the state has another opportunity to pursue its developmental agenda without the distraction of political U-turns. Whether this coalition delivers lasting governance or becomes another chapter in Bihar’s cycle of realignments will depend on the commitment of partners to put stability above short-term political strategy.

Coalitions can be engines of inclusion or instruments of instability. India’s democracy has experienced both. The path forward lies not in resisting coalitions but in refining them—so that they reflect the will of the people, not the whims of political arithmetic.