The electoral shock in Kannur, long considered the organisational fortress of the CPI(M) in Kerala, is turning into a larger test for former Chief Minister and Opposition Leader Pinarayi Vijayan as the party prepares for a crucial three-day expanded state committee meeting in Kozhikode.
The September 13-15 meeting is expected to examine the reasons behind the LDF's defeat and chart the CPI(M)'s political and organisational course ahead. But even before the review begins, a fundamental difference appears to have emerged over how the setback should be read: whether the party needs to correct itself or whether voters who moved away from the LDF will eventually return.
That debate is particularly intense in Kannur.
The defeats in Payyannur and Taliparamba have forced the CPI(M) into an unusually deep review in a district synonymous with the party's organisational strength. The party organised political explanation meetings at four locations across the two constituencies, with Pinarayi Vijayan himself taking the lead in reaching out to the cadre.
His message, however, has been uncompromising.
At Taliparamba, Vijayan said those who deserted the LDF after being influenced by what he described as a flood of false propaganda were beginning to understand the reality.
"Those who abandoned us have now understood several things," Vijayan said, expressing confidence that they would return and strengthen the LDF.
He also launched a direct attack on Taliparamba MLA TK Govindan, who had left the CPI(M) after opposing the candidature of PK Shyamala and contested as an independent with UDF support.
Vijayan described Govindan's decision as the "height of opportunism" and accused him of betraying the party after having worked within its leadership.
According to Vijayan, opportunists and "class traitors" who attempted such rebellions had historically failed to go far. He called upon the CPI(M) organisation to remain united and asserted that those who had left would eventually realise their mistake and return.
The remarks have sharpened the political battle over who should take responsibility for the LDF's losses.
Govindan hit back, accusing the CPI(M) of refusing to acknowledge its own mistakes.
Responding at an RMP public meeting in Mavoor in Kozhikode, Govindan said those claiming that they had committed no mistake and did not need lessons from anyone were speaking the "language of arrogance". He argued that the selfish interests of leaders were weakening the party and mocked the CPI(M)'s organisational growth.
The confrontation has now moved into a bitter personal and organisational battle.
CPI(M) Kannur district secretary KK Ragesh has also targeted Govindan, calling the Taliparamba MLA the constituency's "Brutus" and a "class traitor". Ragesh alleged that Govindan would have contested irrespective of whether the CPI(M) changed its candidate and accused him of reaching a secret understanding with the party's opponents ahead of the election.
The political bitterness has taken an even more serious turn. Govindan has complained to Mayyil Police after receiving an anonymous phone call threatening his life while he was attending a public programme. The caller allegedly warned him that his "journey will not last long" and referred to people in jail carrying out the threat.
All this comes at an uncomfortable moment for the CPI(M).
The party's central and state leaderships are preparing for an extensive review of the election defeat, with the Kozhikode expanded state committee expected to become a crucial forum for deciding how far the correction process should go.
The weight of the central leadership's presence is significant. General Secretary MA Baby and Polit Bureau members BV Raghavulu, K Balakrishnan, U Vasuki and Vijoo Krishnan are expected to attend the meeting. Along with Kerala's Polit Bureau members A Vijayaraghavan, Pinarayi Vijayan and MV Govindan, eight PB members will be present to discuss the road map of the party which has eroded its electoral presence considerably, not just in Kerala but in the country.
Therefore, meeting is expected to discuss a roadmap prepared by the state committee on political and organisational changes required after the defeat.
The central leadership's assessment has already increased the pressure on the Kerala leadership by maintaining that the state leadership cannot distance itself from responsibility for the electoral setback.
That makes Pinarayi Vijayan's political messaging in Kannur particularly significant.
Instead of retreating under criticism, the former Chief Minister appears to be taking an increasingly assertive position: defending the party's political line, confronting rebels directly and arguing that a section of voters who deserted the LDF will eventually reconsider their decision. His stance even stood against the findings of the central committee member report published a few weeks ago.
His criticism is not restricted to those who left the party.
Vijayan has also attacked the state government's decisions, including the PM SHRI agreement with the Centre. He said the previous LDF government had entered into the agreement to secure Samagra Shiksha funds but had already decided that PM SHRI would not be implemented, eventually withdrawing from the agreement.
For the CPI(M), therefore, Kannur has become more than an electoral problem.
The setbacks in Payyannur and Taliparamba have opened questions about candidate selection, dissent, the party's relationship with its traditional support base and the ability of its leadership to recognise discontent within its strongest organisational territory.
For Pinarayi Vijayan, the stakes are even higher.
Kannur is the political ground from which he rose to become the CPI(M)'s most dominant leader in Kerala. A rebellion and electoral erosion in the party's own fortress inevitably puts his assessment of the defeat and his leadership of the recovery under sharper scrutiny.
The Kozhikode meeting will now have to confront the contradiction at the heart of the CPI(M)'s post-election debate: Did Kerala's voters misunderstand the LDF, or did the LDF fail to understand its voters?
How the party answers that question could determine not only the scale of its promised course correction, but also the political space Vijayan occupies in the CPI(M)'s next phase.
