Under M K Stalin, Tamil Nadu finds its voice, but will the Centre listen?

On Tuesday, chief minister M K Stalin reached out to 12 chief ministers of non-BJP ruled states seeking to jointly mount pressure on the Union government for a loan moratorium for MSMEs. The letter he wrote to them ended with an emphasis on the need to demonstrate the ‘combined strength’ of opposition states.
This move is seen as a bid by Stalin to emerge as the anti-Narendra Modi focal point in the national arena, becoming more than a DMK or a Dravidian leader.
In doing so, Stalin seeks to mount a challenge to the Centre and strengthen the federal structure. The contrast in the actions of the Tamil Nadu government in the past 30 days compared to the previous four years could not be missed.
The Edappadi K Palaniswami-O Panneerselvam dispensation, an ally of the BJP, was cordial with the Centre to the extent that it invited criticisms that the state government was subservient to the politicians in Delhi.
The DMK government is now taking a strong position against the Union government’s stand more often than not.
When the vaccine supply to the state dried up, the DMK gave a jolt to the Centre declaring that vaccination would be suspended as stocks ran out, forcing the Centre to rush a consignment immediately.
TN finance minister P T R Palanivel Thiagarajan’s tough stand at GST council, in contrast to the softer approach of former finance ministers from the state, is a reflection of the state’s non-comprosmising stance.
The latest controversy was over the state government referring to the Centre as ‘ondriya arasu’ (Union government) breaking away from the earlier convention of calling it central government, sparking furious rebuttals from the BJP in TN.
"DMK has started using this term after the election victory. This is a childish act," said BJP spokesman Narayanan Thirupathi. Two days ago, the state appointed J Jeyaranjan, a vocal critic of Centre’s policies, for the state development policy council.
Madurai CPM member of Parliament S U Venkatesan said the DMK government’s firm approach was inevitable to win the rights of the state. "The Union government had curtailed the state’s rights on many fronts, imposing centralisation and autocracy. It was against the federal system and the Constitution," he said. Venkatesan said the actions of Tamil Nadu as well as other states ruled by opposition parties were only a reaction to the Centre’s decisions. "We can see chief ministers of various states speaking in one voice to win back the state government rights, guaranteed in the Constitution,’’ he said.
Many leaders in the DMK as well as the opposition AIADMK say Stalin was measured in his actions and was not impulsively confrontational in his approach. DMK Rajya Sabha MP Tiruchy Siva feels the CM is not confrontational at all. "The CM’s focus is only on the development of TN. Whatever we need from the Union government, we are approaching them through proper channels and getting it done."
Insiders, however, say Stalin is following a calculated strategy where he doesn’t want to be seen as a belligerent leader, but as one with statesmanship qualities who could be humble but firm. While Stalin would be measured in his responses, keeping communication channels open with the Centre, his cabinet colleagues and government authorities would tailor their actions and reactions to the Centre appropriately.
Nevertheless, the state’s actions have sparked a war of words between the DMK and the BJP. Irked over the formation of experts committee to study the impact of NEET, BJP Tamil unit president L Murugan openly expressed his anguish by terming it "needless" and "egoistic politics". He had also issued a statement, asking Stalin to maintain a cordial relationship with the Centre for the welfare of the people of Tamil Nadu. As a result, Tamil Nadu’s political arena is filled with heated exchanges between the BJP and the DMK members, whereas the principal opposition appears to have taken a backseat.
Political pundits draw parallels with Dravidian leaders, such as C N Annadurai, M Karunanidhi and J Jayalalithaa, and their approach towards the Centre to point out that TN did well even when it took on the Union government. Stalin’s actions are an extension of the Dravidian legacy which his father practised — build cohesion among state governments and pose a joint opposition against the Centre to uphold the rights of states. Former AIADMK MP K C Palaniswamy said, "The state government’s approach towards the Centre is similar to that of Amma (J Jayalalithaa). It may not be that aggressive like Amma, but it is not like EPS and OPS who knowingly or unknowingly created an image that they are subservient to BJP."
Political analyst Ramu Manivannan says the growing contention between the state and Centre was quite natural as one (Centre) wants control and the other (state) wants to resist. "It is a historical necessity," he said blaming the Union government for creating a trust deficit and leaving the states to fight for their rights.