Narendra Modi has beaten the three year itch to become the new 'sardar' of Indian politics

Prime Minister Narendra Modi might be the first Prime Minister after Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi to avoid anti-incumbency in the first term. Nehru did it thrice and Indira twice. UPA too did it but then Manmohan Singh wasn’t the face of Congress in 2004. Modi’s 3 years should be evaluated in context of the work but for me, Modi’s achievement lies in the disorganised state of the opposition and his ability to drive the political narrative of the country. It is this achievement which marks three years of Modi in power. Unlike the past, it is the ruling party which has wrested the narrative and the opposition is hunting for both an issue and a leader. He is the new Sardar of Indian politics combining Nehru's acumen in foreign policy with Patel's tough position in internal politics. 

Most governments with stable majority or in alliance are afraid of the three-year mark. In general, it marks manifestation of anti -incumbency, piling up of charges of corruption or fatigue against the ruling regime. Surprisingly, the three years of Modi government has become more a statement on the condition of the opposition and less about what PM has done or what will he achieve in next two years.The opposition is virtually absent from the popular discourse. In post 1960 India, the opposition would always dominate the discourse even if results went against them in the elections.
 
After 1971, it took India 3 years to decide that the country has had enough of Indira and an agitation which started from Gujarat rocked the nation which subsequently led to the imposition of Emergency. This happened after Indira defeated Pakistan, nationalised banks, abolished privy purses and detonated a nuclear device in Pokhran. Indira Gandhi was thrown out lock stock and barrel by an angry electorate. But it also took Indira less than one-year to organise the party and start anti Janata party campaign. She came back to power with a thumping majority in 1980 but again by 1982, Congress was burdened with unrest and insurgency. The opposition was  slowly gaining ground but her assassination changed the course of the polity. Congress came to power with brute majority as nation mourned Indira’s loss. Even Rajiv Gandhi’s script went haywire by 1986. The opposition breathed fire and his government despite overwhelming numbers became lame duck.

VP Singh lost the government because of internal contradiction but even PV Narasimha Rao could not escape the wrath of Indian electorate. Despite the reforms, he lost the plot after 1992 and the opposition under Vajpayee dominated the political discourse. The United Front government came as a desperate attempt to keep Vajpayee out of power. It did for two years but ultimately couldn’t stop him. BJP came to power both in 1998 and 1999. The slogan was abki bari Atal Bihari. But when Vajpayee got the chance for full term, even he could not escape political churn of India and Sonia’s emergence as a key opposition figure. Godhra dislocated his plot and he lost the elections. Only, Congress bucked the trend because it projected Manmohan as the Prime Minister. Despite an aggressive BJP, Manmohan came across as an uncompromising figure in front of an old and tired LK Advani. But then, BJP still retained three-digit presence in Lok Sabha.
 
The pattern was repeated in 2011 by which UPA 2 went off the rails. Now the question is as to what has happened that opposition looks disorganised and completely unprepared to control the largely Modi-specific narrative. To my understanding, it is absence of any one leader who can match up to Narendra Modi's stature. It is this dwarfing of the opposition which defines three years of Narendra Modi. He understood the three-year curve and never allowed the opposition to run away with it. BJP faltered in Delhi and Bihar, but wrested key states like Assam, Uttar Pradesh and Manipur from opposition. This phenomenon explains as to why despite a humungous failure of the Modi government, Kashmir crisis has not been able to gain traction in political narrative.

With BJP dominating the political scenario, India is back to the politics of 1960s and 1970s where it was one party against the rest. So, three years of Modi has recreated the political landscape of 1970 where BJP is reprising the role of  Congress from that era. The difference is more stark as regional parties have refused to accord primacy to the Congress because of its depleted strength.After three years Modi sits pretty despite his failures because the opposition doesn’t exist at the national level. Now, Congress needs to decide whether it wants to change the leader or do ideological course correction for recovery. BJP did it in 2012 and came back to power with the bang.
 
It is this development which defines three years of Modi. He has become the first Prime Minister after Nehru and Indira to buck the trend of anti-incumbency in first term. Manmohan Singh was not the PM face in 2004 elections. Sonia led the front. She appointed him as the Prime Minister. He was not voted as the Prime Minister in 2004. He was the face in 2009 but lost 2014 because Congress failed to project anyone as the Prime Ministerial candidate.  Today opposition stands at cross roads instead of the ruling party. It needs a leader and a strong ideology to defeat BJP. What needs to be seen is whether the eventual challenger emerges from Congress or any regional party.