Dhinakaran’s return to NDA signals thaw in his ties with Palaniswami

Signalling a thaw in his equations with the founder of the Amma Makkal Munnetra Kazhagam (AMMK) T.T.V. Dhinakaran, the AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami on Wednesday (January 21, 2026) welcomed the former’s decision to join the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). 

In a social media post, Mr. Palaniswami said Mr. Dhinakaran’s move was aimed at bringing to an end the “brutal reign” of the “evil force DMK” and re-establishing the “golden rule” of Jayalalithaa. “Keeping people’s welfare alone in mind, let us all work together to protect the people and retrieve Tamil Nadu from the grip of the DMK’s family rule,” he wrote. In return, the AMMK founder thanked Mr. Palaniswami for his favourable response. 

The day’s development marks the closure of nearly nine-year-long stormy ties that the two leaders had.  Even though Mr. Palaniswami and Mr. Dhinakaran were on the same side at the time of the party’s split in February 2017 when O. Panneerselvam revolted against the leadership of former interim general secretary V.K. Sasikala, the two fell apart within months. 

Even before Mr. Dhinakaran was arrested in April 2017 in a case of alleged attempt to bribe officials of the Election Commission for allotment of a symbol to the AIADMK (Amma) led by him, a group of functionaries had heated exchanges with him at his residence. At that time, Mr. Dhinakaran was the deputy general secretary of the faction. He was to contest in the by-election to the R.K. Nagar assembly constituency as the candidate of the faction, but the Election Commission had cancelled the poll at the last minute. 

Mr. Dhinakaran’s release on bail a couple of months later brought a crisis for the government led by Mr. Palaniswami, as 30-odd legislators of the AIADMK called on him.  In the meantime, the groups of Mr. Panneerselvam and Mr. Palaniswami came together, and 19 MLAs had come out openly against Mr. Palaniswami’s leadership, eventually leading to the disqualification of 18 of them in September. Three months later, Mr. Dhinakaran emerged victorious in R.K. Nagar as an independent candidate and in March 2018, set up his own party, AMMK.

In the 2019 Lok Sabha and 2021 Assembly elections, his party faced the electorate virtually independently and the result was disastrous. However, in 2021, the party contributed to the defeat of the AIADMK and its allies in 20 Assembly constituencies.

After Mr. Panneerselvam was expelled from the AIADMK in July 2022, he and Mr. Dhinakaran came together. Both were part of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led NDA during the 2024 Lok Sabha polls and they were unsuccessful in their electoral bids from Ramanathapuram and Theni in the south. After the AIADMK and the BJP revived ties in April 2025, the AMMK quit the NDA in September, citing the “persistent neglect” of the party by the BJP national leadership. 

Asked whether the patch-up would click among workers of the AIADMK and the AMMK, given the fractured relationship all these years, former AIADMK Minister S. Semmalai replied in the affirmative as there was a “positive shift” in Mr. Dhinakaran’s position. Quoting the AMMK leader that the decision has been made keeping aside “the fight between parceners”, the former Minister, one of the veterans of the Dravidian major, pointed out that “all along, the AMMK leader had considered us adversaries. Today, he calls us parceners.”

Two office bearers of the AMMK said the development was in tune with expectations of the people and all the forces that were once part of the AIADMK should come together. Besides, as their party has been set up to perpetuate the memory of M.G. Ramachandran and Jayalalithaa, it is “natural” for it to join hands with the AIADMK, they said. 

The talk in political circles was that the prospects of the AIADMK-led NDA will be adversely affected in about 50 Assembly constituencies in the Cauvery delta and southern districts without Mr. Dhinakaran, Mr. Panneerselvam and Ms. Sasikala. While the AMMK founder’s return to the NDA addresses this perception to some extent, it remains to be seen whether the other two will be accommodated as Mr. Palaniswami has repeatedly voiced his opinion against his former colleagues.