Sharad Pawar and the politics of possibility: Why everyone in NCP (SP) is starting to understand each other again. india news

Last updated:15 July 2026, 14:56 IST

Supriya Sule’s comments on NDA’s support for key bills were an echo of Sharad Pawar’s trademark politics – neither yes nor no, leaving every political camp guessing.

By Parimal Piyush

Supriya Sule’s clarification on her party’s possible support for some key NDA laws presented a familiar Sharad Pawar moment. This was neither an endorsement nor a denial, there was just enough ambiguity in it for every political camp to get entangled in it.

Sharad Pawar has rarely been a politician with definite answers. For decades now, the Maharashtra stalwart has built his career on something far more valuable in coalition politics – keeping each side guessing enough to ensure they keep talking to him.

On Wednesday, the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar) once again demonstrated that political tendency. Despite speculations rising over the meeting between leaders of both NCP factions and Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis late on Tuesday evening, the Sharad Pawar camp neither closed the door on the NDA nor went ahead with it.

Rejecting reports that the Sharad Pawar-led party has already decided to support the delimitation bill, which the Center may bring back in Parliament, NCP (SP) working president Supriya Sule termed it a “storm in a teacup”.

“I got a message from a media person. In response, I said, ‘If the 50 per cent limit is discussed we will consider it.’ This was a personal conversation with the media person, because this person is a friend. How can a private WhatsApp conversation be made news?” Expressing surprise, he clarified that his party has not yet taken any official stand on the matter.

However, he also said that the party will examine the proposal if the Center is willing to discuss a 50 per cent increase in the number of seats for each state after delimitation. “If the government is ready to discuss the 50 per cent limit then NCP (SP) will think about delimitation.”

This was a familiar moment of Sharad Pawar. Neither support nor denial, just enough ambiguity to keep every political camp invested.

Delhi Arithmetic

The speculation is not really about Maharashtra. It is about Delhi. According to sources, the discussion is not focused on NCP (SP) joining the NDA, but revolves around whether Sharad Pawar’s party can provide issue-based or external support to the Narendra Modi-led government at the Center on the implementation framework of select constitutional legislation, especially the proposed Delimitation Bill and the Women’s Reservation Act.

That distinction is politically important. Joining the NDA will fundamentally change Pawar’s position within the India block. It may not be possible to support specific bills while outside the coalition.

In fact, it fits neatly into the political philosophy that Pawar has been following for decades – cooperate where appropriate, oppose where necessary and never give up strategic autonomy.

Why do eight MPs suddenly matter?

At first glance, the NCP(SP) hardly seems inevitable. Following Ajit Pawar’s rebellion the party lost most of its MLAs, lost the party’s original name and symbol, and is no longer the dominant force in Maharashtra it once was.

But Parliament tells a different story. Sharad Pawar’s faction has eight Lok Sabha MPs, making it one of the largest among the regional opposition parties.

Ordinarily, eight MPs will not determine the fate of a government. But constitutional amendments are different.

Under Article 368, a constitutional amendment bill requires not only a majority of the total strength of the Lok Sabha (currently at least 272 members) but also the support of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting.

Unlike common law, where a simple majority is often sufficient, constitutional amendments require political consent. And consensus is built one regional party at a time. That’s why every block matters.

Eight MPs cannot guarantee passage of a constitutional amendment. But they could be the difference between a comfortable victory and a politically embarrassing loss.

Will BJP give importance to external support?

The Modi government is widely expected to revive the politically consequential law related to delimitation and women’s reservation during the monsoon session. These are not routine bills but these are bills that can redefine the political architecture of India.

The Women’s Reservation Act has already been enacted, but its implementation is linked to the completion of the census and delimitation exercise. Any new constitutional framework around delimitation is likely to trigger intense political competition, especially from southern states concerned about parliamentary representation.

Therefore, the challenge for the government is not merely legislative. This is political. Achieving numbers demonstrating that support extends beyond the NDA will strengthen the legitimacy of such reforms. Issue-based support from Sharad Pawar’s party will help in achieving this accurately.

Why does this suit Pawar also?

There is another account. The Shiv Sena split has fundamentally changed the way we look at the internal cohesion of regional parties. The rebellion led by Eknath Shinde showed how prolonged uncertainty could eventually lead to organizational fractures. Sharad Pawar had a similar experience when Ajit Pawar left with most of the NCP MLAs.

Despite that setback, the NCP (SP) has retained its parliamentary strength. Sources indicate that there is little appetite within the leadership to allow ideological ambiguity over national legislation to become a source of discomfort among its MPs. And supporting select constitutional measures while staying out of the NDA provides a political middle path.

This allows the party to claim that it is working in the national interest rather than changing ideological camps.

Vintage Sharad Pawar

If this sounds familiar, it’s because Sharad Pawar has spent nearly six decades perfecting this very style of politics. In 1978, he defected to the Congress and became the youngest Chief Minister of Maharashtra, but returned to the oldest party in 1987. In 1999, he again left the party because of Sonia Gandhi’s foreign origins, and formed a government with the Congress months later.

In 2019, after the BJP and Shiv Sena parted ways, Pawar cobbled together the ideologically impossible Maha Vikas Aghadi by bringing together the Shiv Sena, Congress and NCP. A few days ago, the BJP had admitted that Ajit Pawar’s rebellion had brought it to power. Within 80 hours, Sharad Pawar had reclaimed the narrative.

Every episode reinforced the same principle of never closing any political door before it is needed.

Perhaps the biggest misconception about Sharad Pawar is that his influence today should be measured by the number of MLAs he has. It is not. Their real currency is relevance. Every few years, Maharashtra witnesses this same cycle. One meeting, one rumor and one denial led to fresh calculations about what Sharad Pawar might do next.

This is not accidental. This is the essence of the Pawar principle of keeping communication open and keeping your options alive, to ensure that even when your numbers dwindle, your political value does not diminish.

This is why the story is no longer about who met Devendra Fadnavis late on Tuesday evening. The bigger story is that eight MPs from a party that many believed had become politically weak are once again at the center of the arithmetic of some of the most consequential legislative ambitions of the Modi government.

That, more than any meeting, is a reminder that in Indian politics, Sharad Pawar’s greatest strength has never been certainty. There is a possibility of this.

read more