Modi’s 4078 days of “Stability” V/S Indira’s 4077 days of “Stagnancy”

“A week is a long time in politics” is one of the famous quote of British Prime Minister Harold Wilson. If a week is a long time, then 583 weeks must be like an eternity. That is the distance in time Prime Minister Narendra Modi has travelled ever since he assumed the office of Prime Minister in 2014.

In terms of number days, Modi completed 4078 days recently, thus surpassing Indira Gandhi’s tenure of 4077 days. In that way, Modi is the second person after Nehru to be the longest serving Prime Minister, a remarkable feat for somebody who is not from Congress and who is not from the country’s Gandhi – Nehru first family. All other Prime Ministers have spent a few years and some even a few months in the august office of Prime Minister.

There can be a mention of hundreds of schemes and hundreds of policies that are pro-people and pro-poor that has transformed the day-to-day lives of the common man during tenure of Modi’s 4078 days.

What is the significance of Modi completing 4078 days as Prime Minister? In what way Modi’s tenure is qualitatively different from that of Indira Gandhi who had served for 4077 days at Prime Minister?

Striking feature of Modi’s tenure is Rock-Solid Political Stability that he has been able to provide during the last 11 years. There has been hardly any streak of dissension or internecine quarrel in the government. Not a single minister has spoken against the other or against the Prime Minister. This has been possible because of Modi’s personal conduct and behavior – he has never spoken against any of his minister in public. “*In fact, Modi has become an ideal worthy of emulation”*

But more importantly, Modi’s 11-year tenure has triggered rapid economic progress, infrastructural transformation and cultural renaissance. Political stability is quintessential for economic progress. But the political stability that does not lead to rapid economic development, that does not spur employment growth, that does not empower the youth to become entrepreneurs speaks of “Stagnancy” that “Stink.” That is what Indira’s tenure brought – Political stagnancy that stinked.

Let’s compare the economic growth of Indira’s tenure and Modi’s regime because statistics speak loud and clear without any bias.

In the year 1966 (the year in which Indira era commenced), the economic growth was 0.1 per cent, 4 per cent in 1967, 4 per cent in 1968, 4 per cent in 1969, 3.3 per cent in 1970, 3.3 per cent in 1971, 3.3 per cent in 1972, 3.3 per cent in 1973, 3.3 per cent in 1974, 9 per cent in 1975 (commencement of emergency), 9 per cent in 1976, five per cent in 1977, 6.7 per cent in 1980, 6 per cent in 1981, 3.5 per cent in 1982, 4.7 per cent in 1983 and 3.8 per cent in 1984.

Now let’s study the economic growth during Modi’s period from 2014 to 2025.

The growth between 2014 to 15 was 7.4 to 7.5 per cent, 2015 to 2016 the growth was 8 per cent, 2016 to 2017 the growth was 8.3 per cent, 2018 to 2019 the growth was 6.5 per cent, in 2019- 20 it was 4.2 per cent, between 2020 to 2021 it was 5.8 per cent (Pandemic), between 2021 to 22 it was 9.7 per cent (Post Covid Recovery), 2022 – to 23 it was 7.6 per cent, 2023 to 24 is 9.2 per cent and the projected growth for the year 2024 -25 is 6.5 per cent.

In fact, the economic growth peaked in Financial Year 2021 – 22 to 9.7 per cent after the Covid contraction.

It is suffice to say that Modi’s tenure 4078 days “political stability” triggered massive rapid economic growth and cultural renaissance whereas Indira’s 4077 days of “political stagnancy” was marked by economic stink and cultural decay.

Apart from robust economic progress, Modi’s tenure also saw India asserting itself as a nation against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism – be it surgical strike, avenging Uri attack, Balakot (Pulwama) and the recent Operation Sindoor (Pahalgam). The world saw India’s qualitative transformation in technological warfare prowess.

India has been witnessing massive cultural renaissance with Modi himself leading from the front in celebrating Bharat’s cultural diversity by inaugurating the statues of spiritual icons in various parts of the country. In terms of infrastructure, the country has made rapid progress – be it national highways, be it ports, be it airports and institutions.

Modi’s deft handling of foreign policy matters has made all Indians across the globe look and walk tall; every Indian is being looked at with awe and respect around the world. World leaders rush to meet Modi at international events.

On the other hand, the most ignominious feature of Indira’s 4077 days of stagnancy is the declaration of the draconian emergency between 1975 and 1977 during which fundamental rights were trampled, press was muzzled, parliament was tamed and thousands of opposition leaders were jailed.

Yet another dubious distinction that Indira enjoys is the creation of Khalistan problem that resulted in the killing of thousands of people in the sensitive-border state of Punjab. She created Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale only to cut-down Akalis but later he became a proverbial Frankenstein who fanned terrorism all across Punjab. Ultimately, the fire she had triggered burnt herself in the form of her assassination in October 1984. Punjab bled like anything for more than six to eight years. The fire of Khalistan threatened the Unity and Integrity of the country.

On the other hand, Modi did not do anything that endangered country’s security, unity and integrity. He has always said, “I will not do anything that will make my motherland hang her head in shame”

Thus it is Modi’s 4078 days of “Political Stability” that resulted in robust economic progress, cultural renaissance and rapid infrastructural transformation whereas Indira’s 4077 days of “Political Stagnancy” was marked by a stink that pervaded the entire country, economic and cultural decay.

Hemanta Sharma S A is a Bengaluru-based mainstream English Journalist for the last 36 years.

He has served in several newspapers and has travelled acrosd the country.

Hemanta Sharma visited Moscow to cover the International Conference on Nuclear Energy in November 2016.