‘I have no problems with Ajit dada or Sharad Pawar, only with Uddhav’s back-stabbing’

Maharashtra deputy CM Devendra Fadnavis on the first year of his government with Eknath Shinde, its accomplishments, the future of Mumbai, his growing bonhomie with the Pawars and why he will never reconcile with Uddhav Thackeray

You came to power under exceptional circumstances. What have been the big wins in this one year?

“Shiv Sena will never merge with the BJP, it will remain independent. We have no interest in killing that party. You need all kinds of parties to accommodate the voter base,” said Devendra Fadnavis, in an interview with Hindustan Times. (Anshuman Poyrekar/ HT Photo)

Maharashtra, which had come to a near standstill, has been given a fresh momentum. Take Mumbai, for example. When I was the CM (2014-2019) I had given approval for 337 kilometers of Metro but the Metro 3 (from SEEPZ in Andheri east to Colaba) was stalled after that. Work on the Mumbai Trans-Harbour Link was slowed down, the bullet train project was stalled. We have removed all the road blocks. Part of the coastal road will be operationalised by the end of the year and so will the Trans-harbour Link. The new airport at Navi Mumbai will start next year while the Mumbai-Nagpur Samruddhi Highway is already operational. We have already started two Metro lines in Mumbai and another four lines are scheduled next. There is not a single project that they (MVA) can showcase. But even more tragically, for 30 months that they were in power, the cabinet sub-committee on investment did not sit, not a single investment proposal was approved by them. Surely, Covid can’t be held responsible for that. We have, in one year, cleared proposals for ₹1.5 lakh crore and MoUs for a similar amount are being negotiated. I am satisfied with the momentum that we have generated.

There is a feeling or call it a belief that Mumbai is rapidly losing out to Gujarat.

When India is growing at the rate of 7.5%, it’s not only on the back of Maharashtra, other states are growing too. For the longest time, we did nothing about our infrastructure and which is why we lost out on the IT boom because Mumbai became unaffordable. The thumb rule for IT companies is that they cannot afford rent that’s higher than ₹50 per sq ft. But five years down the line, especially after MTHL is operational, Navi Mumbai will become the hub of IT, AI, life sciences and bio-tech because land will become affordable; 65% of India’s data centre capacity is created in Navi Mumbai. Bengaluru will eventually lose out on account of the same problem that beset Mumbai--they have not created the infrastructure.

But for all this to happen smoothly, political stability will be the pre-requisite. The Shiv Sena, as we knew it, no longer exists; the MVA is fairly formidable while BJP, of course, is the central pole. Everything points to a major political churn. What do you see emerging from this?

Maharashtra sees this kind of churn every 15-20 years. It happened in the late 70s, in the late 90s, and the same happened in 2019. Parties come and go all the time. We are in a state of ‘sankraman’ (transition). Something good will emerge from this.

In 2019, when your falling out happened with the Shiv Sena, was it only about chief ministership? Four years on, you are in power with a faction of the Shiv Sena and a Sainik is chief minister.

There had been no discussion (in 2019) about chief ministership for Uddhav Thackeray. It was clear that we were fighting the election under my leadership. Modiji, Amit bhai, Naddaji and he himself had said that Devendra Fadnavis would be CM. But he changed later (after a fractured mandate). Had we accepted his terms at that time, we would have looked like a weak party, we couldn’t afford to be taken for granted. Politics is all about perception. It could have affected us in other states too.

You have said that Uddhav Thackeray refused to take your calls at that time. But if Amit Shah or Prime Minister Modi himself would have called, things could have been different perhaps?

Main koi chhota aadmi hoon? Chillar aadmi hoon? (Am I a small fry?). You’ve been my partner for 5 years, I have been leading the alliance, you’re not taking my calls, why would my leaders call you?

Were you surprised by his eventual stance to go with the MVA?

Totally! If there are ten things that are apparent, another ten go on in the background in politics. The things that I may have done for him, some work he may have asked me to do for him, some personal matters that I may have taken care of. After all that…if I had been in his place I would have picked up the phone and said that Modi or Amit Shah should speak directly to me. Utna toh courage dikhao, but to not even take calls! Pawar saab and I fight every day but we speak often.

In a recent interview you said Sharad Pawar betrayed you after initially agreeing to form the government in 2019. But it wasn’t Sharad Pawar alone who betrayed you. Ajit Pawar too went back after being sworn in as your deputy. Would you trust him ever again?

I don’t blame Ajit Pawar. We had decided to form the government in consultation with Pawarsaab. But then Mr Pawar backed out and the SC verdict was such that the MLAs who came with him would have been disqualified. He said, ‘Tell me what to do, If you want I can do (political) suicide.’ He had honoured his end of the bargain so we asked him to carry on, we don’t blame him.

You formed a government without Sharad Pawar having given any final commitment?

How do you know that? It was in fact beyond that. Portfolios, guardian ministers everything had been worked out with him.

So, what went wrong?

Double play.

So you were first betrayed by Uddhav Thackeray and then betrayed again by Mr Pawar…

(Cuts in) I have no problems with Mr Pawar. He was not an ally, he was just being an opportunist. We are in politics, and that’s what we do. My ‘gilein-shikwein’ (complaint) is with Uddhavji. What he did was back-stabbing.

Well, in the last one year you have annihilated his party.

Well, if you do wrong to someone you have to pay the price.

So, no question of ever politically reconciling with Uddhav Thackeray?

No chance.

Is that also because you think he’s a spent force politically?

I won’t say that. I think he’s not a serious politician.

Why do you say that?

I don’t say it. Pawarsaab himself has written this in his memoirs. If a seasoned politician like him, who is also his ally, is saying that, it must mean something. Pawarsaab has said he (Thackeray) doesn’t have political acumen, he never went to Mantralaya…

And you agree with Pawarsaab?

I do (laughs).

So, there’s great bonhomie between you and Mr Pawar now?

We agree only on this, on the rest we have our disagreements.

You said you’re not against Muslims but only against the policy of appeasement, then why is the communal temperature in the state rising? You, who have been so measured in your public speech, have been intemperate saying things like Aurangzeb ki aulaad etc.

What I actually said was that Aurangzeb cannot be a hero in India. Certain Muslim-dominated areas started eulogizing Aurangzeb. His posters began appearing, processions were carried out in his name. That is when I said, he who killed thousands of Hindus, desecrated temples, cannot be a hero of any nationalist Muslims. In that context I said, ‘Yeh Aurangzeb ki aulaadein kaha se aa gayi,’ and I added that this was being done by design. I didn’t use that for all Muslims.

One argument is that this is in response to the Sakal Hindu Samaj rallies. Isn’t polarization being stoked in Maharashtra?

These rallies were in response to instances of ‘love jihad’ in places like Ahmednagar. When (aggrieved) people went to the police-- this was in MVA’s time -- they would not take them seriously. That’s when the morchas started. There was no violence in SHS rallies, barring one. Although, certain inflammatory speeches were made in some of the rallies and we acted against them. We gave notice to the organizers too.

When you took over as a young, fresh-faced chief minister in 2014, you had seemed so progressive, but now one gets the sense that you have changed.

This is a perception created by the media. I can give you 200 instances of decisions I have taken that are genuinely progressive, but no one talks about them while one statement I make, is twisted out of context. Unfortunately, whether it’s the media, or us politicians, we only talk on narrative rather than basic issues.

The whole political discourse has become so coarse in Maharashtra.

I squarely blame Sanjay Raut for lowering the political discourse in Maharashtra. Every morning, the Marathi channels reach his house and he holds forth talking rubbish. We too have to then respond in a similarly low fashion because in politics if someone hits you, you cannot offer the other cheek. But why is the media interested in what a chillar paper like Saamana writes?

What is your relationship with Mr Eknath Shinde like?

We complement each other. His strength is his work on the grassroots level while I am seen as a (good) administrator. The most important part of our relationship is that in my behaviour I am always mindful of protocol, always one step behind him. In his behaviour too, he never makes it seem as if I am his deputy. There is mutual respect.

You said in an interview that you were shocked when you were made deputy CM.

It was my proposal that Mr Shinde should be made CM. I had told the PM and Amit bhai that only if he was CM would the government be stable, and his people will have faith in us. After some deliberation they agreed and asked me what I’d like to do. I said, either I could be state BJP chief or part of the national executive. This was agreed upon. I was euphoric and then Amit bhai called saying I had to be part of the government, that Naddaji was going to make an announcement to the effect. ‘It can’t be,’ I said. ‘People will think of me as greedy for office.’ The PM then called and said, ‘This government is not an experiment, if you stay out of the cabinet even your own party colleagues will not listen to you.’. My wife was abroad, I had no one to turn to, I called my mother for advice. ‘If Modiji has said so, then you must join the government,’ she told me.

There is some talk of Mr Shinde’s party eventually merging with the BJP.

It will never merge with the BJP, it will remain independent. We have no interest in killing that party. India is a diverse country and Hindus are also diverse. You need all kinds of parties to accommodate the voter base.

You mentioned your wife. She is a vocal, independent person which is unusual among political wives.

I don’t agree with all her views and nor do I like or appreciate all her views, but then she may think the same about my views. She has her own identity and personality. Though I do tell her that the society we live in expects you to be quiet and if you don’t want to be quiet then you have to be ready for the consequences. Unfortunately, people expect that I should control her but we are not living in some past century. The one thing on which I have serious disagreements with her is that since she’s not in politics, she should not air her political views.