12 years of Modi: Transformation or missed opportunity?

By Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan* 

On May 26, Prime Minister Narendra Modi completed 12 years in office, marking one of the most consequential and debated political tenures in contemporary India. While supporters celebrated the occasion as a milestone in India’s rise under strong leadership, critics described the period as one marked by economic disruptions, rising inequality, institutional weakening, and an increasingly perception-driven style of governance.
Modi’s rise to power in 2014 was built around ambitious promises — “Achhe Din,” two crore jobs annually, corruption-free governance, recovery of black money, minimum government and maximum governance, and a development-oriented “New India.” Twelve years later, opinion remains sharply divided over whether these promises were fulfilled or whether the Modi era has relied more on political messaging and image management than substantive structural transformation.
Supporters of the government point to large-scale infrastructure expansion, welfare schemes, digital governance initiatives, and India’s growing international profile as evidence of transformative leadership. Critics, however, argue that the period has also witnessed persistent unemployment, widening economic disparities, democratic concerns, and increasing social polarization.
Employment generation remains one of the most contested aspects of the Modi years. The BJP’s 2014 promise of creating two crore jobs annually continues to be cited by critics, who argue that India has struggled to generate sufficient quality employment, particularly for young people. Concerns over unemployment have repeatedly surfaced in public discourse through student protests, exam paper leak controversies, and growing dissatisfaction among graduates and first-time job seekers.
Reports and surveys have highlighted anxieties among India’s youth regarding jobs, inflation, and economic security. Critics argue that despite periods of strong GDP growth, employment generation has not kept pace with the aspirations of a rapidly expanding young population. Manufacturing growth has remained uneven, while the informal sector — which employs a significant share of India’s workforce — suffered disruptions following demonetisation and the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST).
Demonetisation, announced on November 8, 2016, remains one of the defining and most controversial policy decisions of the Modi government. The overnight withdrawal of ₹500 and ₹1,000 currency notes was presented as a move against black money, counterfeit currency, and terror financing. Supporters defended the move as an effort to formalise the economy and accelerate digital transactions. Critics, however, argued that the exercise imposed severe hardship on ordinary citizens and failed to achieve several of its stated objectives.
Economists and opposition leaders pointed out that most of the invalidated currency eventually returned to the banking system, raising questions about the effectiveness of the exercise in uncovering undeclared wealth. The sudden cash shortage affected small businesses, daily wage workers, farmers, and the informal economy, which depended heavily on cash transactions. Long queues outside banks and ATMs became symbolic of the disruption caused during the period.
GST, introduced as “One Nation, One Tax,” was another major economic reform associated with the Modi government. While tax unification was broadly welcomed in principle, the implementation process drew criticism from small traders and micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs). Businesses complained about complex compliance procedures, multiple tax slabs, digital filing burdens, and frequent regulatory changes. Critics argued that the combined impact of demonetisation and GST placed enormous pressure on smaller enterprises and the informal sector.
Another recurring criticism of the Modi era concerns rising inequality and the perception of increasing corporate concentration. Opposition parties and independent analysts have accused the government of favouring large corporate groups through privatisation policies, tax reductions, and regulatory decisions that allegedly strengthened the dominance of a few major conglomerates. Critics argue that while large corporations expanded rapidly, many small businesses and MSMEs struggled with financial pressures, stagnant demand, and rising operational costs.
Inflation and the rising cost of living have also emerged as key concerns in recent years. The Modi government initially benefited from relatively low global crude oil prices, which helped contain inflation during its early tenure. However, rising fuel prices, food inflation, and broader cost-of-living pressures have increasingly affected middle- and lower-income households. Critics argue that inflationary pressures, coupled with uneven wage growth, have deepened economic insecurities among ordinary citizens.
The Modi years have also witnessed growing debates over democracy, institutional autonomy, and civil liberties. International media organisations, civil society groups, and opposition leaders have raised concerns over alleged pressure on journalists, the use of investigative agencies against opposition figures, shrinking parliamentary debate, arrests under stringent laws, and restrictions on dissent. Critics argue that political power has become increasingly centralised around the Prime Minister’s Office, weakening institutional independence and democratic checks and balances.
Supporters of the government reject these allegations, arguing that stronger governance and decisive leadership were necessary to improve efficiency, strengthen national security, and combat corruption. They maintain that many criticisms stem from political opposition rather than objective institutional decline.
Political communication under Modi has also transformed India’s electoral landscape. The BJP’s extensive use of social media, centralised messaging, large-scale branding campaigns, and personality-driven politics has reshaped how political narratives are constructed and disseminated. Critics argue that governance under Modi has often emphasised image-building and event-based politics, while supporters view the communication strategy as a modern and effective form of public engagement.
Religious polarization and identity politics remain among the most contentious issues associated with the Modi era. Critics accuse sections of the BJP ecosystem of relying on Hindu nationalist narratives, religious mobilisation, and polarising rhetoric to consolidate electoral support. They argue that communal tensions and hate speech incidents have increased during this period. Supporters counter that the government has promoted cultural confidence and addressed long-standing historical and political imbalances.
At the same time, the Modi government’s welfare initiatives have received widespread recognition, including from many independent observers. Schemes such as Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana, free ration distribution programmes, Jan Dhan bank accounts, and direct benefit transfers have expanded the state’s welfare reach significantly. Supporters regard these programmes as transformative interventions that improved financial inclusion and social security for millions of citizens.
Critics, however, argue that welfare expansion alone cannot substitute for deeper structural reforms in employment generation, healthcare, agriculture, and education. According to them, while welfare measures have provided immediate relief, they have not adequately addressed long-term economic vulnerabilities or inequality.
Despite sustained criticism, the BJP under Modi has remained electorally dominant for much of the past decade. Surveys conducted during his tenure often reflected high approval ratings and significant personal popularity. Supporters continue to portray Modi as a decisive and nationally influential leader in contrast to what they describe as a fragmented opposition.
However, opposition parties have increasingly raised concerns over the functioning of democratic institutions and the fairness of the electoral process. Allegations regarding the misuse of central agencies such as the Election Commission of India, Enforcement Directorate, and Central Bureau of Investigation have become a recurring feature of political debate. Opposition leaders have alleged selective targeting of political rivals, while the BJP has dismissed such accusations as politically motivated.
Recent controversies surrounding electoral processes, including debates over voter list revisions and allegations of “vote chori” raised by Rahul Gandhi, have further intensified discussions about institutional independence and democratic accountability. BJP leaders have consistently rejected these claims and defended the integrity of India’s electoral system.
Twelve years after Modi first assumed office, his political legacy remains deeply contested. Supporters see the period as one of national confidence, welfare expansion, infrastructure growth, and enhanced global standing. Critics view it as an era marked by economic distress, rising inequality, institutional erosion, and increasing polarization.
The Modi years have undoubtedly reshaped Indian politics, governance, and public discourse in profound ways. Whether history ultimately remembers this period as an era of national transformation or as a phase of democratic and institutional decline remains a question that will continue to shape India’s political debate for years to come.

---

*Freelance content writer and editor based in Nagpur; associated with TruthScape, a group focused on countering disinformation on social media