He had fiercely campaigned in leading his side in the electoral battle in 2014. He was emphatic in asserting not to expect free lunch in his regime. His main opponent the Congress president Sonia Gandhi had the charity offer of two programmes that would have cost the national exchequer total of Rs.2.95 lakh crore in a year. She had promised of expanded rural employment guarantee scheme and food security scheme to supply cheap food to half the Indian population.

On one hand was the allurement of huge charity and other hand was the offer to retain dignity. The outcome of the election was decisive rejection of the charity offered by Sonia Gandhi as her party ended up with mere 44 seats, not even ten per cent seats in the House with 543 seats. Narendra Modi had also promised to accelerate the economic growth rate to convert India into an economic power. But in eighteen months, soon after his failure to win power in Bihar in December 2015 he gave up his fight. In the remaining period of three and half years he rarely spoke of the economic growth and its rate. On the contrary he went in for the harsh measure of demonetization of higher value currency notes worth Rs. 18 lakh crore. Though he listed three objectives that motivated his measure, on the face of it all three were facile issues. The real intent remained buried in the behind the door conflicts within.

BY the end of fourth year of his first term, it was apparent that Indian economy was on the downward slide with no perceptible effort to control the slide. He had nothing on credit side in his performance ledger when the next elections came. The inability to win new states or even to retain seven of eight seats in the Lok Sabha in bye-polls in four BJP ruled states in 2018 led many to conclude his return was uncertain as he had nothing to impress the electorate except his personality standing alone. Yet he surprised all equally his mentors well as his harsh critics by winning twenty two seats more than the previous tally.

He proved the pull of his name. Many believed he might now pursue his agenda of the economic growth but instead of corrective measure to put the economy on rails, he undertook to implement the issues that were the core for the Sangh Parivar, in the first year. Hopes were revived again when he rejected the proposal to convert the Muslims into being sub citizens, as resident humans but without citizenship rights. His surrender as the drastic change in his priorities indicated was apparent. It also indicated that he was not the master with loyalty of majority within the parliamentary party but a puppet as the loyalty of the majority in the parliamentary party was controlled by another entity. Though the BJP is not an open house like the Congress was till the end of the Narsimha Rao regime, the internal politics remains same as it was earlier the personality oriented based on personal likes and dislikes. Only difference is winners do not publicly gloat and losers silently walk away. The personality and personal wars are fought silently and within the closed rooms.

Perhaps his publicly rejecting the proposal for fresh registration of Indian citizens did cause the anger within to make the Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat to denounce the NaMo government at the public rally at Ranchi in second week of March 2020 as NaMo government not the ideal government of the Sangh concept. In other words, he said that the NaMo government did not have sanction of the Sangh Parivar. Exactly two weeks later the Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought the entire country under the blanket lockdown on pretext of fighting the corona pandemic. He did not care for consequent impact to the already doddering Indian economy. He had not consulted his party or cabinet colleagues or chief ministers or even his party chief ministers.

It is not easy to believe that the serious consequence of the lockdown of all economic activities on 60 per cent Indian population surviving on daily earnings remained outside his thinking. He did not mention to it in his announcement of the lockdown edict for he was already suspected of shifting the vote bank from the middle classes to the deprived classes. He left the announcement to his finance minister as to what the government proposed to meet the hunger needs of families left without their daily earnings.

The question is why did he suddenly came on June 30 on the public platform to assure the deprived classes and Dalit masses that they would continue to benefit of charity as free supply of food to them will continue for four more months. It denoted a drastic change in his attitude of not tearing publicly the dignity of human beings. He had won his political battle precisely because he had refused to pull away the scanty garb of dignity from bodies and beings even poor mass.

The sharp variance in his approach to deal the Chinese attitude of confrontation and that of the party men is apparent in the projection as if India is at war with China. It may have induced him to win over the hungry millions vastly affected by the lockdown. NaMo is playing much bigger political game is obvious. But the question is whether he was initiating a political battle or merely building his moats to make crossing difficult to his detractors. This entire thesis may appear to be over-reading simple facts. But no human action is without a definite purpose.