Published May 09, 2026 | 3:29 PM ⚊ Updated May 09, 2026 | 3:29 PM
Vijay met Tamil Nadu Governor-in-charge Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar for a third time late on Friday evening.
Synopsis: Tamil Nadu politics is in flux after Vijay’s TVK victory. Speculation grows over DMK-AIADMK backchannel talks, Rajinikanth’s meeting with Stalin, and Governor Arlekar’s delay in inviting Vijay to form government. Left parties back TVK, while VCK hesitates. With alliances uncertain and BJP seen in the background, the state faces suspense over majority or President’s Rule.
Tamil Nadu politics is witnessing rapid-fire developments by the minute. On one hand, uncertainty continues over whether Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) leader Vijay will be able to form a government with a clear majority.
On the other, intense speculation surrounds the alleged backchannel talks between the DMK and AIADMK over a possible political understanding.
What began on 4 May, the day election results were announced, has now snowballed into a full-scale political drama. The game, initiated not directly by the top leaders but allegedly by their political heirs and close circles, continues to unfold without conclusion.
While the family circles around DMK president M.K. Stalin and AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami are said to be actively involved in political manoeuvring, the BJP, which has remained publicly silent, is also being viewed by several political observers as a force operating quietly in the background.
Vijay’s sweeping electoral victory on 4 May sent shockwaves through both Dravidian majors – DMK and AIADMK.
Soon after the results, members from the political circles close to Stalin and Edappadi Palaniswami reportedly held discussions over the possibility of a DMK-AIADMK arrangement. Following this, a powerful non-party individual closely associated with Stalin’s family is said to have convened a meeting with senior DMK ministers and explained the proposal.
During those discussions, fears were allegedly raised that if Vijay assumed power, it would become impossible for existing political-business networks to function for at least the next 10 years.
The group then reportedly approached Stalin with the proposal. Initially, Stalin is said to have dismissed the idea outright.
However, according to political sources, Stalin’s position is believed to have shifted on 6 May after actor Rajinikanth met him.
Though the meeting was publicly viewed as a gesture of support, some political insiders claim Rajinikanth had actually conveyed a message from “Delhi”, indicating that the Centre was aware of, and supportive of, ongoing discussions surrounding a possible DMK-AIADMK understanding.
Only after this meeting, sources claim, did Stalin begin engaging more seriously with the discussions.
This background, insiders say, also explains the resolution passed during the DMK MLAs’ meeting on 7 May, where legislators resolved to abide by whatever political decision Stalin ultimately takes.
Later that same day, discussions were held among senior DMK functionaries. During those talks, several former ministers are said to have supported the proposal.
However, DMK deputy general secretary and MP Kanimozhi Karunanidhi opposed the idea strongly. Sources close to her confirmed to us that she rejected the proposal outright, and some even claim she walked out of the meeting at one stage.
Amid these developments, criticism began mounting against Tamil Nadu Governor Rajendra Arlekar for allegedly delaying the invitation to Vijay, whose party emerged as the single-largest formation with public support, to form the government.
May 17 Movement coordinator Thirumurugan Gandhi was among the first to publicly state that the Governor was constitutionally obligated to invite Vijay to form the government.
Soon after, actor-politicians Kamal Haasan, Prakash Raj and leaders from several parties also raised their voices against the Governor.
The May 17 Movement, during a press conference, further alleged that BJP was behind the Governor’s actions. Similar suspicions were echoed by Left parties and several Opposition leaders.
According to left party sources, Stalin discussed the DMK-AIADMK proposal with alliance partners on the night of 7 May. CPIM General secretary M.A. Baby also confirmed this development during the press meet held in Madurai on 9 May.
When the proposal was reportedly discussed with CPI leader M. Veerapandian, he is said to have warned Stalin that such a move would become a “historic blunder”.
Similarly, CPM state secretary P. Shanmugam also reportedly rejected the proposal, stating that any such decision would first need to be discussed within the party.
Also Read: Is Tamil Nadu Governor Arlekar blocking Vijay’s swearing-in? What’s the hold up?
Against this backdrop, both the CPI and CPM held state committee meetings on 8 May and decided to extend unconditional support to Vijay and TVK.
During CPM’s state executive meeting, the alleged DMK proposal was reportedly discussed internally. While some senior leaders spoke about considering the AIADMK-led arrangement, a MP and executive committee member is said to have strongly opposed the idea.
According to sources, he argued that there was “no question” of supporting a DMK-AIADMK alliance and insisted that Vijay could instead be politically guided and influenced from within.
Even during the CPM state committee meeting held before the elections, he had strongly advocated for an alliance with TVK.
With the state executive reportedly divided, the matter was escalated to the state committee, which finally resolved to support TVK. CPI too arrived at a similar decision.
However, Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) leader Thol. Thirumavalavan, who had earlier said his party would decide based on the Left parties’ stand, has still not officially announced support.
On the night of 8 May, a senior VCK leader told us that the decision to support TVK had already been made and that preparations were underway to hand over the support letter.
But even by the afternoon of 9 May, the letter had still not been submitted.
Meanwhile, after a high-level VCK meeting on Friday evening, Thirumavalavan met Stalin. Sources claim that before meeting Stalin, he also met a powerful member of Stalin’s family circle.
During that meeting, the individual allegedly proposed making Thirumavalavan the CM in a DMK-AIADMK arrangement and requested that he persuade the Communist parties to join the effort.
Sources further claim that when Thirumavalavan later spoke to one of the Left party leaders, the latter questioned why VCK appeared to be reconsidering its earlier commitment to supporting Vijay.
Following this, Thirumavalavan is said to have informed the intermediary that he could not proceed with the proposal. Sources claim the discussions ended without a conclusion.
Only afterwards did Thirumavalavan reportedly meet Stalin and communicate his final position.
Political circles now speculate that the delay in issuing VCK’s support letter could be linked to negotiations over ministerial berths or even demands related to the Deputy CM’s post.
However, VCK MP Ravikumar denied these allegations, calling them an attempt to belittle the VCK.
Also Read: Congress dumps DMK for Vijay: What happens to INDIA bloc now in Tamil Nadu?
Amid the uncertainty, AMMK general secretary T.T.V. Dhinakaran met the Governor on Friday night and reportedly submitted a letter urging him to invite Edappadi Palaniswami to form the government. He also alleged that TVK was attempting horse-trading with MLAs.
At the same time, the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), which TVK had earlier claimed would support it, has now publicly denied extending such support.
Political observers warn that if Vijay had already submitted letters claiming support from IUML or AMMK without official authorisation, it could potentially trigger allegations of letter forgery and create serious legal complications.
With multiple parties still undecided and negotiations continuing behind closed doors, Tamil Nadu remains gripped by uncertainty.
The big question now is whether Vijay can prove his majority and form the government before 10 May, or whether the state could head towards President’s Rule.
