Stalin’s Dilemma: Between Deep Gorge and Steep Cliff

 

For the past three elections, I have watched M.K. Stalin and the DMK dominate Tamil Nadu politics by positioning themselves as the strongest opponents of the BJP’s Hindutva politics. But as I see the political landscape shift, it is clear that Stalin himself realises his old strategy may not work for a fourth time. The Hindutva wave is no longer just a northern phenomenon—it is making inroads across India, and Tamil Nadu is not immune to it.  

So, what does a politician like Stalin do when his tried-and-tested formula begins to lose its edge? He looks for a new battle to fight. And now, he has found two—delimitation and the so-called imposition of Hindi. These issues, in my opinion, are not about protecting Tamil Nadu’s interests but about manufacturing an emotional narrative to keep his political base engaged.  

Stalin is aggressively claiming that if delimitation is implemented, Tamil Nadu will lose parliamentary seats. But here’s the problem: Amit Shah has clearly stated, both inside and outside Parliament, that delimitation will not lead to a reduction in seats for southern states. 

More importantly, delimitation is not a decision taken by the central government or the Supreme Court—it is conducted by an independent constitutional body, the Delimitation Commission. Its recommendations are final and cannot be challenged by either the Centre or the judiciary.  

If Stalin truly believed this was a threat, why hasn’t he brought it up within the INDI Alliance? Instead, he is writing letters to the Chief Ministers of southern states and states like Odisha, Punjab, and West Bengal. The reason is obvious—his stance directly contradicts Rahul Gandhi’s “jitni abadi utna haq” (rights proportional to population) campaign.  

If Stalin says delimitation should not be based on population size, he is rejecting Rahul Gandhi’s key argument. 

If Rahul Gandhi sticks to his agenda, it means Tamil Nadu will not get additional representation in Parliament. This is where the Congress finds itself in a huge dilemma.If it supports Stalin, it weakens its own political positioning. If it ignores him, the DMK might reconsider its alliance with Congress—something that could wipe out Congress from Tamil Nadu politics altogether.  

The second issue Stalin is raising is the so-called imposition of Hindi under the National Education Policy (NEP). But if I look at the facts, the NEP does not impose Hindi on any state. It merely allows students to study two additional languages apart from their regional language. Tamil Nadu is free to choose Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam, or any other language.  

And yet, Stalin keeps bringing up “Hindi imposition” as if it were a real threat. This is despite the fact that many private schools in Tamil Nadu already teach Hindi as a third language. What’s more, Amit Shah has directly challenged Stalin, asking him: if he is so concerned about Tamil, why doesn’t his government introduce engineering and medical courses in Tamil? Who is stopping him?

This, to me, exposes the hypocrisy of the DMK. They use Tamil identity as a political tool but do little to actually strengthen the language in professional education.  

Beyond his battles with the BJP, I see another major reason why Stalin is pushing these issues—to prevent a future alliance between AIADMK and the BJP. If AIADMK decides to align with the BJP, Stalin knows he will have a tougher fight on his hands. By aggressively playing up delimitation and Hindi imposition, he hopes to corner AIADMK into a position where they cannot support the BJP’s stance without facing a backlash from Tamil voters. 

There is also an interesting twist to this delimitation debate—its connection to women’s reservation. The Women’s Reservation Bill, which guarantees 33% reservation for women in Parliament and state assemblies,requires delimitation to be implemented. That means opposing delimitation is the same as opposing women’s reservation.

I have to ask: Will Congress and the opposition dare to oppose women's reservation? If they do, they risk being seen as anti-women. But if they support it, they will have to admit that delimitation is necessary—completely undercutting Stalin’s argument.

I believe Stalin is now trapped in a classic political dilemma—on one side, a deep gorge; on the other, a steep cliff. 

If he continues opposing delimitation, he risks exposing the contradictions within his own alliance.  

If he backs down, he loses a key issue that he hoped would consolidate his voter base.  If Congress distances itself from him, it risks losing its foothold in Tamil Nadu.

For now, Stalin is going all in, hoping that these narratives will carry him through the next election. But as I see it, he may have set himself up for a bigger problem—navigating the contradictions within his own alliance while keeping his voter base engaged.

The coming months will decide whether this gamble pays off—or backfires.