D. K. SHIVAKUMAR’S POLITICAL ACROBATICS: AMBITION, DENIAL, AND A REALITY CHECK

 For months now, Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D. K. Shivakumar has been performing a political balancing act. His actions suggest a clear ambition to become chief minister, but his words repeatedly deny it. Whenever this gap becomes obvious, he turns on the media, accusing it of creating stories. This pattern has become too familiar to be dismissed as coincidence.

Nothing illustrates this better than his frequent temple visits. Faith is personal and deserves respect. But when a senior minister publicly says his praying is with a purpose (read for the chief minister’s post), devotion turns into display. These visits, repeated week after week, have drawn  criticism. Many now feel that a senior administrator is spending more time signalling ambition than focusing on governance.

The irony is that Shivakumar already has almost everything a politician could want. He controls key portfolios, enjoys wide authority, and plays a decisive role in the government. He is also one of the richest politicians in the country, despite years of scrutiny by central agencies, a long jail term, and serious allegations involving disproportionate assets and money laundering. There has been no public expression of regret—only the impression that power has provided insulation.

This is possible largely because the government is led by Siddaramaiah. The chief minister has chosen not to confront his deputy, seemingly to maintain party peace. By ignoring the excesses, Siddaramaiah appears to be avoiding internal conflict. But this silence has a price. It weakens the government’s moral standing and creates the sense that administration is being pushed aside to manage rival ambitions.

What seems to have truly unsettled Shivakumar are the recent signals from Delhi. He failed to get a meeting with Rahul Gandhi. More importantly, he was left out of the Congress Working Committee meeting, while Siddaramaiah alone was invited. In Congress politics, such signals matter. Access to the high command means relevance. Denial of access sends a clear message.

After this, Shivakumar’s repeated claims that he is not seeking the chief minister’s post sound less convincing. They appear less like choice and more like compulsion. The public can see the gap between what is said and what is done.

Ambition itself is not the problem. Politics runs on ambition. The problem is pretending it does not exist. Voters today are alert. They may tolerate power games, but they are unlikely to believe denials that are contradicted by daily conduct.