Maharashtra’s politics is once again entering a decisive and intriguing phase. The rallies planned by Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena and Raj Thackeray’s Maharashtra Navnirman Sena are not just shows of strength — they mark an attempt to recapture the emotional and linguistic core of the Marathi voter. Behind this visible mobilisation, however, lies a quieter but far more complex political design being shaped by Devendra Fadnavis, the real strategist behind the BJP’s enduring influence in the state.
Fadnavis has, over the years, mastered the art of weakening regional parties not by frontal confrontation but through calculated fragmentation. He first worked to break the strongholds of the Congress and NCP, then turned towards the Shiv Sena when it began drifting away from the BJP’s fold. What appeared to be a setback after the 2019 election — when Uddhav Thackeray chose to ally with the Congress and NCP — was, in fact, the beginning of a new game. Fadnavis used the moment to split the Sena, elevate Eknath Shinde, and reclaim power for the BJP through an alliance that appeared secondary but was deeply tactical. It allowed the BJP to maintain its dominance while letting the Sena fight its own identity battle.
Now, that same strategy seems to be entering its next phase. With Shinde having served his political purpose, the BJP’s focus appears to be on shrinking his influence and isolating him from both ends — emotionally from the Marathi base that sees him as a betrayer, and politically from the BJP’s core that views him as a temporary ally. Several of Shinde’s key associates, once aggressive and vocal, have quietly lost ground or public relevance. The initial enthusiasm of the breakaway faction has faded, replaced by an unease that Fadnavis seems to have calculated perfectly.
In contrast, Uddhav Thackeray, despite his diminished numbers, retains emotional legitimacy among a section of traditional Shiv Sainiks and the urban Marathi electorate. This makes a potential future understanding between BJP and Uddhav Sena not just possible but strategically advantageous. For the BJP, this would mean a return to the traditional alliance that once anchored its rise in Maharashtra — but this time, on its own terms. The Thackeray faction, exhausted by isolation, may be more amenable to negotiation, and Fadnavis, with his ability to combine tactical patience with political timing, would be the natural architect of such a reunion.
At the same time, Fadnavis has maintained a deliberate silence over Uddhav’s recent outreach and the growing restlessness within Shinde’s camp. It is the silence of a chess player who knows the next few moves are his to make. His strength lies not just in electoral management but in controlling the psychological tempo of Maharashtra’s politics. While others react, he plans. While others campaign, he reconfigures alliances. His ability to dismantle power structures without overt conflict has made him the state’s most formidable political operator in decades.
If this trajectory continues, Eknath Shinde’s faction is likely to fade into political irrelevance — too estranged from the Thackeray legacy to reclaim its roots and too dependent on the BJP to claim independent identity. The Marathi vote that once split between pride and protest may again consolidate, and the BJP, under Fadnavis, would emerge as the stabilising force capable of bridging both ends.
