Era Of Indira Gandhi

The Tashkent Conference resulted in a tragic outcome. Shastri, who had a history of heart problems, died of a heart attack on January 10 in Tashkent, after only nineteen months as Prime Minister. Shastri's death brought the issue of succession to the fore once more. This was India's second succession in two years, and it went off without a hitch, demonstrating the country's political system's resilience. 

 

•    Morarji Desai was back on the battlefield. Desai's dislike among Kamaraj and the Syndicate had not abated, and they searched for a candidate who could defeat him while remaining in their shadow. 

•    Indira Gandhi was chosen because she was Nehru's daughter, had an all-India appeal and a progressive image, and was unattached to any state, region, caste, or religion. Indira Gandhi, they reasoned, would be more malleable and pliable because she was inexperienced and a young woman with no deep roots in the party. 

 

•    Kamaraj was the one who orchestrated her election. When 12 of the 14 chief ministers threw their support behind her, hoping to gain more power to run their states and also to capitalize on her mass appeal and the Nehru name to attract voters in the upcoming elections, the race was effectively decided.

 

•    This time, there was no consensus process because Desai insisted on a competition. Because of his seniority and position in the party, he was confident of winning, especially since his opponent was "this mere chokri (a young brat of a girl)," as he put it. 

 

•    Indira Gandhi defeated Desai by 355 votes to 169 in a secret ballot in the Congress parliamentary party on January 19, 1966. Her being a woman had not been a handicap, as thousands of women had gone to jail in the fight for freedom, and several of them had held high positions in Congress, including the presidency. They had also held high positions after independence, including governors and cabinet ministers at the Centre and in the states, including the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, India's largest state. 

 

A.    Instability: Indira Gandhi's government was confronted with a number of serious issues that had been brewing for some time but required immediate attention and solutions. Punjab was on fire, and the Naga and Mizo peoples were revolting. Accepting the demand for Punjabi Suba and being firm with the Naga and Mizo rebels, showing willingness to negotiate with them and accepting the Naga rebels' demand for autonomy, she dealt effectively with these issues.

 

B.    The economic situation: The economy was in a state of decline and was rapidly deteriorating. Exports and industrial production were both on the decline. 

 

•    In 1966, the rains failed for the second year in a row, and the drought was even worse than in 1965, resulting in skyrocketing inflation and severe food shortages. 

 

•    Famine gripped large swaths of the country, particularly Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh. The 1962 and 1965 wars, as well as the Pakistan-China axis, resulted in a significant increase in military spending and a shift of resources away from planning and economic development. 

 

•    Budget deficits were increasing, putting the Fourth Five Year Plan in jeopardy. The situation demanded tough decisions and strict enforcement, but the government vacillated, was slow to make decisions, and, even worse, was late and ineffective in putting them into action. 

 

•    It was unable to reduce its own bloated administrative spending, which was required by the financial situation.

 

C.    Food grain problem: The problems of food grain procurement and distribution, as well as the prevention of famine deaths, were treated as if they were a war. 

 

•    There were few famine deaths compared to the millions who died during the colonial period from droughts and famines of comparable or even lesser intensity. This was a significant victory for Indian democracy. 

 

•    The government's one decisive step to deal with the deteriorating economic situation and boost food imports backfired, becoming the most divisive of Mrs. Gandhi's early decisions. 

 

•    As previously stated, Indian exports were not growing, and those that did exist were heavily subsidised by the government. The advisers to Indira Gandhi claimed that this was due to the rupee's gross overvaluation. There would be a greater inflow of much-needed foreign capital if it were devalued. India's food security was heavily reliant on wheat imports from the United States under the PL-480 aid programme. 

 

•    There was also a pressing need for World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) economic assistance, which had been halted during the Indo-Pak war, to be resumed. The US, the World Bank, and the IMF, on the other hand, insisted on the rupee's depreciation. As a result, on June 6, barely four months after Mrs. Gandhi took power, the Indian government devalued the rupee by 35.5 percent. 

 

•    Across the country, there were angry outbursts against the decision. Left groups and parties, the majority of intellectuals, and Kamaraj, who also resented the fact that he was not consulted before the decision, were among the most vocal critics. Within the Congress party, some critics believed that such a divisive and unpopular decision should not have been made during an election year. 

 

•    There was also widespread dissatisfaction with the government's response to foreign pressure. Ironically, the devaluation failed to achieve its stated goals of increasing exports and attracting foreign capital. There was also no discernible increase in the flow of food and other forms of foreign aid. Mrs. Gandhi would later admit, in 1980, that the devaluation "was the wrong thing to do and it harmed us greatly." 

 

D.    Major foreign policy initiatives:

•    She tried to build bridges with the United States at first, especially during her visit to Washington in March 1966, when she was in desperate need of American wheat, financial aid, and capital investment. 

 

•    Under PL-480, President Lyndon B. Johnson promised to send 3.5 million tonnes of food grains to India as well as 900 million dollars in aid. Actual dispatches to India, on the other hand, were irregular and arrived in small instalments. 

 

•    Indira Gandhi was humiliated by the US's "ship-to-mouth" approach, and she refused to submit to such blatant and open pressure. She also made the decision to get out of this precarious situation as soon as possible. In fact, India was never to approach the US on such unfavorable terms again.

 

•    Indira Gandhi's dissatisfaction with the United States manifested itself in foreign policy. She began to separate herself from that country. She remained silent on Vietnam during her March-April 1966 visit to Washington. 

 

•    She then issued a statement in July 1966 condemning US bombing of North Vietnam and its capital, Hanoi. She signed a joint statement with the Soviet Union in late July in Moscow, demanding an immediate and unconditional end to US bombing in Vietnam and labelling US action in Vietnam as "imperialist aggression."

 

•    Mrs. Gandhi had agreed in Washington to the US proposal for a 300 million dollar Indo-American Educational Foundation to be funded by PL-480 rupee funds. She eventually dropped the plan, partly because it had been roundly criticized by a large number of Indian intellectuals and leftists, both inside and outside Congress, as an American attempt to penetrate and control India's higher education and research. 

 

•    Mrs. Gandhi formed close ties with Egypt's Nasser and Yugoslavia's Tito, and began to emphasize the need for non-aligned countries to work together politically and economically to counter the threat of neocolonialism emanating from the United States and Western Europe. 

 

•    Mrs. Gandhi assured the Soviet leaders of India's continued friendship, despite the Soviet efforts to build bridges with Pakistan and occupy a position of equidistant distance from both India and Pakistan. 

 

•    She also expressed a desire to open a dialogue with China, but Sino-Indian relations were still frozen at the time. In general, after the Washington fiasco, she pursued a foreign policy of staunch independence.

 

•    In 1966, spiraling prices, food scarcity, growing unemployment, and, in general, deteriorating economic conditions sparked widespread popular unrest, mass economic discontent, and political agitation. 

 

•    The rising and often unfulfilled aspirations of various sections of society, particularly the lower middle classes, added to the unrest. Many of them were satisfied, but many more were not. Furthermore, the capitalist development pattern was widening the economic gap between different social classes, strata, and groups. 

 

•    At around the same time as Mrs. Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister, a wave of popular agitations began, including demonstrations, student strikes and riots, and agitations by government employees. These agitations frequently devolved into violence. Bandhs, which meant the closure of a town, city, or entire state, were a new feature. As enraged crowds clashed with lathi-wielding cops, law and order frequently broke down. 

 

•    The army had to be called in on occasion. The administration was further tarnished by lathicharges and police firings. Teachers and other middle-class professionals, such as doctors and engineers, have now joined the ranks of strikers and agitators, demanding higher pay and dearness allowances to compensate for the sharp price increase. The public's trust in the administration and the ruling political leadership was eroding. 

 

•    Opposition political parties, particularly the CPM, Socialists, and Jan Sangh, took advantage of the public mood to embarrass the government on a regular basis by organising bandhs and other agitations. Some of them believed that a breakdown in the administrative system would allow them to gain power through elections or non-parliamentary, extra-constitutional means. As a result, they frequently disregarded democratic boundaries and constitutional rights.

 

•    The year 1966 also marked the start of the parliament's decline as an institution. In the parliament, there were constant disruptions and indiscipline, with some opposition members showing complete disregard for parliamentary decorum and niceties. Many times, the young prime minister was not accorded the respect due to her position. She was frequently subjected to teasing and harassment, as well as vicious and vulgar personal attacks, as well as male chauvinist and sexist references and unfounded allegiances. Dr. Rammanohar Lohia, in particular, did not miss an opportunity to mock her, referring to her as a "goongi gudiya" (dumb doll). 

 

•    Indira Gandhi had to deal with a difficult situation within the party as well. For one thing, public support for Congress has dwindled. Since Nehru's time, the party had been declining, becoming dysfunctional, and losing political clout. At every level, it became increasingly riven by groupism and factional rivalries, resulting in the formation of dissident groups in almost every state. 

 

•    Mrs. Gandhi's own position in the party had remained precarious and precarious. She had been unable to form her own cabinet after becoming Prime Minister, and had to leave all important portfolios—Home, Defence, Finance, External Affairs, and Food—unaffected. 

 

•    The Syndicate and Kamaraj, the party president, tried repeatedly to reassert the party organization's position in relation to the prime minister, and to limit her freedom of action in formulating and implementing policies. 

 

•    They also didn't give her much say in the internal affairs of the party or in the selection of candidates for the parliamentary elections. Because 1967 was an election year, Indira Gandhi had to put up with it all. 

 

•    She also had two major flaws as a political leader at the time: she was ineffective as a leader—her opponents were often successful in isolating her within the parliamentary party, and even within the cabinet—and she lacked "ideological moorings."

 

•    A major political-military crisis erupted in East Pakistan almost immediately after the general elections of 1971. (now Bangladesh). India was inevitably drawn into the conflict, resulting in a bloody war between the two countries.

 

•    During the Third Plan, i.e. the 1960s, India adopted a new agricultural strategy. In 1959, the government decided to change the strategy used in the agricultural sector of the country, as suggested by a team of experts from the Ford Foundation in their report "India's Food Crisis and Steps to Address It." As a result, modern technology and agricultural practises gradually replaced India's traditional agricultural practises.

 

•    In 1965, the first High Yielding Variety (HYV) seeds were introduced into Indian agriculture, kicking off the Green Revolution. To boost the crop, this was combined with better and more efficient irrigation and the proper application of fertilisers. The Green Revolution's ultimate goal was to make India self-sufficient in food grains.

 

•    India had to rebuild its economy after 1947. Agriculture supported more than three-quarters of the population. However, India's agriculture had a number of issues.

 

•    To begin with, grain productivity was extremely low. And, due to a lack of irrigation and other infrastructure, India was still reliant on the monsoon. There was also no modern technology present. And India had previously experienced severe famines as a result of the British Raj's focus on cash crops rather than food crops. 

 

•    The goal was to never have to rely on another country for food. So, in 1965, the government launched the Green Revolution with the help of Indian geneticist M.S. Swaminathan, known as the "Father of the Green Revolution." The movement was a huge success and lasted from 1967 to 1978.

 

•    For the first time in Indian agriculture, HYV seeds were introduced. These seeds performed better with wheat crops and were more effective in areas with adequate irrigation. As a result, the first phase of the Green Revolution concentrated on states with better infrastructure, such as Punjab and Tamil Nadu. 

 

•    HYV seeds were distributed to several other states during the second phase. Other crops were also included in the plan, in addition to wheat. 

 

•    Proper irrigation is one of the most important requirements for HYV seeds. Crops grown from HYV seeds require varying amounts of water during their development. As a result, the farms cannot rely on monsoons. Inland irrigation systems around farms in India were vastly improved as a result of the Green Revolution. 

 

•    The plan focused primarily on food grains such as wheat and rice. Cotton, jute, oilseeds, and other cash and commercial crops were not included in the plan. 

 

•    Increased fertiliser availability and application to boost farm productivity. 

 

•    Use of pesticides and weedicides to minimise crop loss and damage 

 

•    Finally, technology and machinery such as tractors, harvesters, and drills are introduced. This greatly aided the promotion of commercial farming in the country.

 

•    Market Surplus-By and large, the Green Revolution was a success. But now there was a new dimension to it. The government had to make certain that the benefits of increased productivity were distributed to the general public. The benefit of higher productivity would be lost if the farmers kept the grains for themselves. Thankfully, this did not occur. 

 

•    Farmers began selling their produce in markets due to the high yield and productivity of their farms. Market surplus refers to the portion of the produce that they sell. As a result, the increased output brought about by the Green Revolution began to benefit the economy. 

 

•    The cost of grains and other food products has decreased. The average person could easily afford to purchase them. In the event of future food shortages, the government was even able to stockpile grains and establish a food bank.

 

1.    Increased Agricultural Production: India's food grain output increased dramatically. It was a significant increase. Wheat Grain was the biggest winner from the scheme. Wheat production increased from only 11 million tonnes in 1960 to 55 million tonnes in 1990. 

 

2.    Higher per-acre yield: The Green Revolution not only increased total agricultural output, but it also increased per-hectare yield. By 1990, per hectare yield of wheat had risen from 850 kg/hectare to an incredible 2281 kg/hectare. 

 

3.    Less Import Dependence: India was finally on its way to self-sufficiency after the green revolution. There was now enough production to meet the needs of the population as well as to build a reserve in case of an emergency. We didn't have to import grains or rely on the food supply of other countries. India was able to begin exporting agricultural products after all. 

 

4.    Employment: It was feared that commercial farming would put a large number of people out of work. On the other hand, rural employment has increased. This is due to the fact that the supporting industries provided job opportunities. Irrigation, transportation, food processing, and marketing all added to the workforce's number of jobs. 

 

5.    A Win-Win Situation for Farmers: The Green Revolution was a huge win-win situation for farmers. Their earnings increased significantly. They weren't just surviving; they were thriving. It allowed them to transition from subsistence farming to commercial farming.

 

6.    India has gone from a food grain deficit to a surplus thanks to the Green Revolution. No other activity has had such a profound impact on people's socioeconomic development as the Green Revolution. 

 

•    However, over time, agricultural intensification has resulted in a general degradation of the fragile agro-ecosystem. Farmers' socio-economic conditions are being impacted by high production costs and declining economic returns from agricultural practices.

 

•    Over-adoption of agricultural technologies by farmers to make the Green Revolution successful include loss of soil fertility, erosion, soil toxicity, diminishing water resources, pollution of underground water, salinity of underground water, increased incidence of human and livestock diseases, and global warming. 

 

•    Chemicals are used indiscriminately and disproportionately, polluting the soil, air, and water, as well as animal feed and fodder. This could be one of the major causes of increased livestock productivity and reproductive health issues. 

 

•    Various scientific studies and surveys on fertilizer and pesticide residues conducted over the last 45 years indicate that residues of fertilizers and pesticides such as nitrates, organochlorines, organophosphates, synthetic pyrethroids, and carbamates are present in milk, dairy products, water, fodder, livestock feeds, and other food products at levels higher than the permissible limit. 

 

•    Because urea, a nitrogen-rich fertilizer, is used far more than the recommended 4-to-1 potassium-to-nitrogen ratio, it contributes to global warming. The extent of systematic damage to the soil, groundwater, and ecosystem caused by the Green Revolution needs to be quantified, as it may have irreversible consequences for those who once benefited if timely, adequate, and long-term measures to mitigate the Green Revolution's harm are not taken.