Everyone may not agree, but after eleven years, the Narendra Modi government is facing a strong challenge for the first time.
Published Aug 19, 2025 | 9:00 AM ⚊ Updated Aug 19, 2025 | 9:00 AM
Prime Minister Narendra Modi
Synopsis: People admired Narendra Modi more than the constitutional institutions, believing he was redirecting the Indian state on the right path, protecting people from internal and external enemies, elevating them to first-class by reducing minorities to second-class, and providing confidence and pride to the Indian soul that had lost its vigour and self-confidence. Is it still the same now? What are these jolts in the otherwise smooth sky journey?
What is a crisis? What developments lead to the disruption of the status quo? Even all-powerful emperors and dictators who wield unchallenged power become weak at some stage – why?
When Dharma (the moral and ethical order of society that keeps the equilibrium) cannot even walk on one foot (of the mythical cow that is the embodiment of Dharma), why does the world order collapse?
Looking at the dominance exercised by Narendra Modi and his party until the day before yesterday, no end seemed in sight. There are no rivals who can compete from outside; unless someone from inside destabilises it, there is no challenge to this rule – such analyses kept coming. Repairs through elections also fell short by a mile in the 2024 general elections.
The government is not just walking with crutches but is running by making external supporters obedient. What has sustained this authoritarianism that disregards the Constitution and constitutional institutions?
Public approval to some extent, and the impact of propaganda narratives that could turn Indian society’s thought process and belief system upside down, have provided stability to the power structure to some degree.
People admired Narendra Modi more than the constitutional institutions, believing he was redirecting the Indian state on the right path, protecting people from internal and external enemies, elevating them to first-class by reducing minorities to second-class, and providing confidence and pride to the Indian soul that had lost its vigour and self-confidence.
When he is doing good for us, when he is arousing our sentiments, what if he follows constitutional values or not, what if he amends them – such a careless attitude has overtaken the majority of Indian society.
Is it still the same now? What are these jolts in the otherwise smooth sky journey?
Everyone may not agree, but after eleven years, the Narendra Modi government is facing a strong challenge for the first time.
What is it? There are no general elections now, right? Whether Bihar or Tamil Nadu is won or lost, what additional benefits or insurmountable dangers could there be? Such doubts may arise.
But what we are talking about now is a moral crisis, a legitimacy crisis. For the first time, it is about the strong distrust that has taken root in people’s minds.
Those who do not accept moral foundations will question what a moral crisis is. Even when walking on one foot, there is some balance. When that one foot also buckles, the system shakes. We are now in a situation where all the elements providing legitimacy to the Narendra Modi-led central government under his party are becoming obsolete.
Immediately after coming to power in 2014, the BJP started cleansing the media. It launched a massive project to use social media for multiple purposes. On the other hand, it made changes in the administrative machinery. It already had unchallenged strength in the legislatures.
There was some issue with the judiciary, but it took care to avoid troubles in key matters. Some judges were provided post-retirement rehabilitations. Some were ensured not to get key cases. While handling individuals cleverly in four ways, overall efforts were made to reduce the judiciary’s powers.
The passionate support the government has among the people also acts as a barrier to various institutions functioning impartially. A kind of fear-induced pressure also works on judges. Another constitutional institution, the Election Commission, underwent a constitutional amendment to replace the Chief Justice with a Cabinet Minister in the selection of commissioners.
As a result, with the Prime Minister, one of his Cabinet colleagues, and the opposition leader as members of the three-member selection committee, there is scope for unilateral decisions. Even while that legal amendment is under judicial review, appointing current commissioners this year using a new method became controversial.
By removing the Chief Justice from the selection committee, the Election Commission lost half its credibility, and the way new appointments were made has further discredited it.
One of the factors that gave popularity to the Narendra Modi government is extreme nationalism. After the Pehalgam incident, the country united behind Modi and expected a stronger action than the Balakot strikes on Pakistan.
The post-Pehalgam narratives also influenced that expectation. Nationalist admirers of Modi thought Operation Sindoor would provide such satisfaction. The abrupt end of that military action, and the US President’s repeated announcements implying his pressure was behind the decision, questioned the Modi government’s credibility.
No matter how much the government said it halted the operation because Pakistan came to the negotiating table, contrary statements came from the US and Pakistan as well.
Moreover, Donald Trump has been giving several signals of supporting Pakistan. In the recent Parliament sessions, the government clearly appeared defensive on this issue. Analysts say the Prime Minister’s US visit this month is to appease Trump, and it is unclear what results it will yield.
In addition to the Pakistan dispute, Trump’s handling of tariffs with India and the Modi government’s failure to respond adequately have damaged the BJP’s prestige in its key strengths of nationalism and patriotism.
The 15 August Red Fort speech was a key opportunity for Modi. He should have condemned America’s unfair pressure in the economic sector and its friendship with Pakistan in a clear, firm tone.
But instead, the Prime Minister only made vows targeting Pakistan. Instead of saying he would protect the country’s farmers from America’s tariff attacks, he said he would protect the Indus waters due to Indian farmers.
As Rahul Gandhi said in the Lok Sabha, the Centre has fallen into weakness, unable to confront China’s incursion or America’s pressure. Being in a position to only warn Pakistan indicates the BJP government’s vulnerability on the nationalist front.
The ‘atom bomb’ set off by Rahul Gandhi on the 7th of this month has put the Modi government in a lot of trouble. The criticisms made with examples against the Election Commission regarding vote theft are unanswerable. The Election Commission could only give very weak responses. The BJP descending into the field to defend the Election Commission made it a co-accused.
Rahul Gandhi’s allegation that the Election Commission and BJP are jointly committing this vote theft gained strength. Instead of answering the details revealed by Rahul, making counter-allegations and circulating technically altered documents made the BJP even thinner.
Rahul Gandhi researched one constituency in Bengaluru as a sample, but the context of his revelation of irregularities is the Special Intensive Revision of Voter Lists (SIR) programme being conducted by the Election Commission in Bihar. In the backdrop of the vote theft he exposed, Rahul Gandhi is starting the Vote Adhikar Yatra in Bihar from this Sunday.
The Supreme Court issuing orders for transparency in the SIR also happened in this atmosphere. The Bihar experiment may not yield the results the central government hoped for now.
The Prime Minister did not mention this incident in his Red Fort speech. But he grandly spoke about identifying and taking action against infiltrators and illegal migrants (‘ghuspetiye’) across the country.
He warned in a not-so-dignified manner that these outsiders coming from borders are snatching jobs and businesses from Indians and even abducting women. There is a chance for the BJP to counter Rahul’s yatra by propagating the removal of these infiltrators as justification for the SIR programme.
But due to Rahul Gandhi’s revelation, distrust has formed among the people about voter lists, the election process, and the entire election machinery. Can the goal of cleansing infiltrators counter that distrust? Will people believe the reasons BJP and Modi are giving for voter deletions?
Rahul’s revelation not only exposed the Election Commission but also mainstream media once again. How media priorities are, how they turn substance into fluff, was revealed by the coverage given to Rahul’s lengthy press meet. Even ordinary people without much political knowledge understood who is colluding with whom to make a public-important issue unimportant.
We have been thinking about the decline of media, called the fourth pillar in democracy, for a long time, but in this phase, it has come forward as an undeniable fact.
The judiciary has left some hope by announcing a somewhat positive decision on the SIR, but recent developments have created severe doubts about all other institutions. If this doubtful situation cannot be corrected to some extent, the government will lack acceptability.
Without it, to continue in power, it will have to follow more extreme authoritarian policies, resorting to higher levels of force and repressive measures. Or, it will have to face institutional turmoil.
The Prime Minister praising RSS from the Red Fort for the first time is noteworthy. As a Sangh pracharak, Modi doing that on the occasion of the organisation’s centenary can be understood.
Is that all, or is there also a request to the Sangh to pull him ashore from this crisis embedded in that praise? Reports came that on the occasion of his 75th birthday, the Sangh is seeking a change in government leadership. On the other hand, unity, initiative, and activity in the opposition have increased.
The Red Fort speech indicates that the government has no new political weapons, and there is a lack of creativity in the party and government.
‘Dharma’ has many meanings, but in modern democracy, the acceptability in people’s minds for the stability of governments is such a dharma.
That legitimacy, that dharma, is lacking, and a situation has come where even one foot does not support the system. How far can a chariot with broken axles run?
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
