So, the 11-year old coalition between the Biju Janata Dal and the Bharatia Janata Party (BJP) ended with bitter notes from both the sides. The coalition, once regarded most powerful, unbreakable and undefeatable was eventually collapsed ahead of the crucial Assembly and General elections drawing new equations both at the state and centre politics.

Public memory may be very short, but those who are close to Naveen Patnaik can not forget the blunder that his father late Biju Patnaik committed in 1995.

Biju joined hands with Left parties in the 1990 Assembly election and claimed a landslide victory for the Janata Dal. The Janata Dal-Left ally won 125 of the 147 Assembly seats. He was elected Chief Minister for the second term.

In 1995 Assembly election, he snapped ties with Left parties and fought alone. Despite popular waves across the state, Biju could not come to power because Janata Dal had to accept defeat in more than 50 constituencies where the dominance of the Left parties was strong. And Biju’s dream run for third time CM was shattered. Now, his son Naveen took a similar step by ignoring importance of BJP for the forthcoming elections. Before jump into any conclusion, let me present a brief profile of BJD.

BJD is a different entity. Unlike other political parties in India, BJD is not a product of political movement or revolution. It is largely based on Biju legacy, the legacy withhold Congress supremacy in Orissa, which is otherwise referred as political laboratory for the grand old party. The BJD was formed in 1997 to keep the legacy vibrant.

Apart from Naveen’s clean image as projected in the media, BJP’s association with BJD in 1998 was another strong factor for the growing popularity of the regional outfit in the state. Both BJD and BJP were united to topple their enemy number one- Congress and they did it a number of times.

In the 1998 general elections, its first, the BJD won nine of the 12 seats it contested and the BJP seven of nine seats. In the 1999 Lok Sabha polls the BJD won 10 of the 12 seats it fought and the BJP all the nine it contested. In the February 2000 Assembly elections, the alliance bagged 106 of the total 147 seats - the BJD winning 68 of the 84 seats it contested and the BJP 38 of 63. Despite dual anti-incumbency factors both at the centre and state, the coalition recorded record victories both in the Assembly and General elections in 2004.

Thus, Naveen’s unilateral decision to break the alliance with BJP seems to be a blunder considering the fact that the recent development has taken the state towards a triangular battle where BJD is bound to face strong competition from both Congress and BJP.

Unlike previous elections where ‘development’ was the major issue, the 2009 elections will be fought on religion. And undeniably Kandhamal violence will become the major issue for the political parties.

After the pogrom against the Christian community, Naveen realized that the BJP could turn out to be an electoral liability in some parts of the State. Despite its initial failings, the Patnaik government came out with a rehabilitation package for Kandhamal victims and allowed Christian voluntary organisations to distribute relief in the affected areas in an effort to heal the wounds.

When both the parties sit for seat sharing, Naveen was very tactful. He remained firm on his demand to field BJD candidates in nearly 80 percent of the Assembly and Lok Sabha seats, even though a series of efforts led by BJP high commands for compromise.

Going by Naveen’s track record, it is clear that the BJD chief has always scored over crisis. His latest move is aimed at distancing his party from the communal agenda of the BJP and the Sangh Parivar.

More