The arm-twisting acts of the Trinamool Congress and the DMK are the symptom of a larger malaise.

"Mamata is a dangerous, populist demagogue: economically illiterate but politically astute - deadly combo...Mamata is behaving like a mad despot. Political leadership is in deficit with such irrational behaviour that can only harm the poor," tweeted Kiran Mazumdar Shaw, chairman of Biocon Limited, responding to the fracas over Dinesh Trivedi’s railway budget.

Nothing very original, except that they come from a business leader who is normally more circumspect. By now the whole of intelligent India is in serious doubt over the Trinamool chief’s ability to mix smart politics with good economics and run a state efficiently. There are questions whether she is just unpredictable or irrational. Given her way, there would be no fare hike, no increase in tariffs of any kind, no upward revision of the prices of petrol, diesel and kerosene and no land acquisition for industries. Her guiding philosophy: let the country and West Bengal suffer, the vote bank must be happy.

What makes Mamata dangerous is her importance in the coalition government at the Centre. She can embarrass it no end and even bring it down if she tries a bit harder. She can torpedo any big ticket economic reform idea or legislation to fight corruption. Her big advantage: she commands 19 MPs, who play a crucial role in the survival of the UPA.

Her brand of politics, in many ways, reflects the danger to democracy from powerful regional satraps. The DMK and the AIADMK have been arm-twisting the Centre to back the UN resolution on war crimes and human rights violations and vote against the Sri Lankan government. Their immediate concern is an assembly in Tamil Nadu. They want to whip up the Tamil sentiment to garner votes. The importance of Sri Lanka in the geopolitics of South-East Asia and the strategic value of India’s friendship with the country is lost on them. The country can wait.

The Samajwadi Party or the Bahujan Samaj Party, which have enough MPs to prop the government, are in a position to force the UPA to change policies according to their whims and political necessities. They could reject any anti-terror legislation on flimsy arguments like violation of federal principles. In fact, any regional party with some numbers to impact the fate of the government can now have a say on foreign or domestic policies. The UPA is at the receiving end now, the NDA could be next if it comes to power.

The trend is dangerous. It could lead to local political concerns riding roughshod over issues of national import and the country’s future being decided in state capitals. Those celebrating the slow death of national parties such as the Congress and the BJP and the emergence of strong regional parties probably have lost sight of the negative impact of the development.

When the makers of the Indian Constitution provided it a strong unitary bias, the reason was simple: the country is much more than a combination of states. It provides coherence to the idea of India. Being a nation, it cannot just stay confined to managing external affairs and internal security. Without a strong Centre, the states would pull in different directions and inflict trouble upon themselves and the nation itself.

However, it is difficult to ignore to fact that the rise of strong regional parties has a lot do with poor, even malicious, political leadership at the Centre. The trend towards regionalisation of national politics is a culmination of brazenly partisan attitude of parties controlling power in New Delhi. They—the Congress, which has been the longest in power, is the biggest culprit here—have been ignoring regional aspirations, particularly in the area of economy, for long. What they are getting now is a backlash.

But the outcome has worrisome implications which are inescapable now. National parties have shrunk in influence and in the era of coalition politics the Centre is destined to remain weak, at the mercy of regional players. Since the regional players are not expected to keep the national interest in mind—particularly when it involves their own political interest—the country must develop new rules of engagement between the Centre and the states.

Admitted, the root of the problem is the fractious nature of our politics. The regional parties are the logical culmination of our political-electoral process. They might not act against the Centre as deliberate defiance all the time. But the real worry is they have political compulsions at home which they cannot ignore.

The tantrums of Mamata are the symptom of a bigger malaise, as are the antics of DMK chief Karunanidhi and J Jayalalithaa. The country must brace itself for bigger trouble if it does not find a quick remedy to it.