Some analysts see the results as signs of weakness in the Congress's leadership and its recently -- reluctantly -- adopted strategy of alliance-building. They were certainly a big blow to Maharashtra's Chief Minister Sushilkumar Shinde, who had vacated the Solapur seat after three terms.

There is some merit in this analysis. But the setback to the secular parties shouldn't be exaggerated. In fact, the elections results strengthen the case for a broad-based anti-BJP front.

To start with, the margin of the Congress's defeat in Solapur (1.22 lakh votes) is admittedly daunting. This is only partly explained by "anti-incumbency" related to the poor performance of Maharashtra's Congress-Nationalist Congress Party coalition. At least three other factors are relevant: choice of candidate, non-cooperation by the NCP, and caste and community equations.

Mr Anandrao Devkate was originally the Congress's third choice. But Mr Shinde's wife and Mr Vilasrao Deshmukh turned down the ticket. Mr Devkate faced energetic opposition from the BJP's Maratha sugar-baron Pratapsinh Mohite-Patil, brother of senior NCP minister Vijaysinh Mohite-Patil. The NCP didn't campaign for Mr Devkate.

Besides, Solapur's Marathas (22 percent of the electorate) and Lingayats (40 percent) backed Mr Mohite-Patil for caste reasons. Muslims (15 percent) didn't support the Congress because they were antagonised by the partisan use of POTA.

However, it would be wrong to conclude that the Congress-NCP alliance has no future and the NCP can somehow align itself easily with the BJP/Shiv Sena.

There's organic solidarity and complementarity between the BJP and Sena. They are both Hindu-communal and Right-wing by ideology, political programme and instinct.

The NCP may have its flaws, but it is not communal. Rather, it's a centrist party with a multi-caste, multi-religious base. It cannot join a coalition with the BJP/Sena without splitting. The Solapur result should jolt the Congress into managing its alliances better.

In Kerala, the Congress lost "super-safe" Ernakulam to the Left Democratic Front -- for the first time since 1967. Before the results, there were fears that the BJP-backed former CPM Finance Minister A Viswanatha Menon would gain handsomely from the fight between the LDF and the Congress-led United Democratic Front.

In the event, the BJP's vote declined from 78,000 to 51,000. The LDF won by 22,000 votes. In 1999, the Congress had won with a 1.11 lakh margin. This represents a huge transfer of votes to the LDF.

It's tempting, but wrong, to blame the result mainly on Congress factionalism. The decisive factor was Mr Antony's policies and his crushing of the non-gazetted employees' strike.

He unleashed wanton repression upon Muthanga's Adivasis. In Marad, near Kozhikode, there were repeated Hindu-Muslim clashes which forced 4,000 Muslims to flee. The government was extremely apathetic to their plight. Mr Antony's government is extremely unpopular.

His main internal rival, the Karunakaran group, has sensed the changed public mood and joined the CPM in attacking his "Hindu-communal" bias. This allegation is not far-fetched.

Recently, Mr Antony has shifted towards soft-Hinduva and criticised the "pampering" of the minorities and the "undeserved benefits" given to them.

The Karunakaran camp may have factional calculations in attacking Mr Antony. But that alone cannot explain why state Congress president K. Muraleedharan said (October 2) that "it's better for Congressmen to join hands with Marxists rather than with the saffron brigade".

Mr Muraleedharan's proposal for a Congress-Communist alliance must be treated sympathetically. It's an appeal for a Grand Alliance against the BJP -- a "historic compromise" between two traditional enemies in Kerala and West Bengal.

A universal Centre-Left alliance against Hindutva would repeat the one-seat-one-candidate principle which defeated the Emergency-period Congress in 1977. Such a strategy needs some moral and political clarity. It must recognise Hindutva's uniquely undesirable character and menace to democracy:

* The BJP (with the Shiv Sena) is India's only significant political force which opposes the pluralist-secular foundations of this society and politics. It seeks to subvert the Constitution. This Hindutva agenda is reflected both in its long-term ideological commitments and its vicious attacks on Muslims and Christians.

* The BJP and Sena are extreme Right-wing parties, bonded to anti-parliamentary organisations, and incapable of internal reform. They are controlled by unelected cabals like the RSS which aren't answerable either to the electorate or the administration.

* The BJP has pursued malign policies -- in economics, foreign affairs, security and social matters. These have weakened democratic structures and India's economic base and imposed hardships upon the people, e.g., through the virtual dismantlement of Public Distribution of food.

* The BJP practises confrontationist and intimidatory politics, undermining democratic institutions, such as parliamentary committees, the Finance Commission, National Human Rights Commission, Election Commission, and sometimes, the Supreme Court. The latest example is its threat to privatise IndianOil Corporation -- as a revenge for the Court's stay on the sell-off of HPCL and BPCL.

* The BJP is converting India into an authoritarian "National Security" state by exaggerating and communalising "security threats" and imposing draconian laws. It has doubled India's military expenditure over six years and made the public more insecure.

It's trying to turn India into a vassal state of the United States, while mindlessly pursuing hostility towards Pakistan.

Voting the BJP out of the power is the topmost priority -- and a precondition for India's re-secularisation. It's only with a principled, united Opposition, with the Centre-Left as its fulcrum, that the scourge of communalism, militarism and hypernationalism can be eradicated.

Only thus can the Indian people's energies be channelled into productive, democratic avenues. Or else, India will become the world's social and intellectual backwater marked by economic servitude. That is not what Indians deserve in the Twentyfirst Century.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.