It is unquestionably a matter of credit for the Aam Aadmi Party that it has achieved recognition as an entity with a national presence within a little more than a decade of coming into existence. That its rise has taken place during a period when the Bharatiya Janata Party was aggressively expanding its footprint across the country makes the achievement even more commendable. At the same time, it is a commentary on the state of other and older political outfits such as the Communist Party of India, which have withered away in the face of challenges posed nationally by the BJP, and to a lesser extent, the AAP. As the only party besides the BJP and the Congress to rule over two states and as one that has gathered some momentum in other states as well, the AAP is entitled to believe its fortunes are on the ascendant.

Recognition as a national party entitles the AAP to several benefits, not the least of which is a reserved symbol, additional airtime during poll campaigns, enlistment of a higher number of star campaigners, and allocation of land from the government to build its headquarters. This though is the icing that can best be enjoyed when the cake itself is edible. At this point of time, and notwithstanding the recognition by the Election Commission, the AAP has many hurdles to cross before it becomes a credible national alternative. It is identified far too strongly with one leader, Arvind Kejriwal, and must have a more robust presence in states where it wishes to make a mark by enlisting local leaders of substance. Mr Kejriwal is already handicapped by the incarceration of two of his senior colleagues in Delhi. There are also suggestions that governance in Punjab is run on Delhi’s instructions, which is a far cry from the decentralization of power that ought to be the objective of a party that wishes to be seen as different.

While some of the initiatives taken by the party in Delhi, where it has been in power for several years, have borne fruit, there are many other areas where considerable work needs to be done. Success in the capital’s municipal election ought to have eased the way for taking up civic initiatives, but tussles with the Union government and the city’s Lieutenant-Governor have set up roadblocks for the AAP. While there may thus be valid reasons for AAP’s lack of success in some areas, these are not likely to detain the voter indefinitely, a fact that its leadership must appreciate, especially because its political opponents are pointedly targeting each of the party’s strengths, especially its claim to provide honest governance.

In short, the recognition as a national party must be a time for introspection, not just celebration. Such introspection must cover the role AAP sees for itself. If it is to be a part of the national opposition to the ruling party, it must realise the risk of being tainted by the bedfellows it chooses. If it sees itself as an alternative to all existing national political parties, it must realise it needs far more traction than it presently has.