Two Own-Goals, When None Needed!

It is bewildering—and deeply frustrating—to watch the government repeatedly find itself on the back foot against ragtag, opportunistic protests operating under the banner of "Gen Z." Very few on the ground actually resemble students preparing for competitive exams like NEET or JEE. Yet, here we are.

The origin of the so-called "Cockroach" movement itself borders on the absurd. The name originated when the Chief Justice of India, referring to individuals infiltrating professions with dubious credentials, made a remark that was quickly spun out of context. It wasn't coined by the government or any cabinet minister. Enter Abhijeet Dipke—sitting comfortably in the US with a long history of AAP activism—who seized on the phrase, launched a viral digital campaign under the "Cockroach" banner, and somehow marshaled the visibility and funding to mobilize street protests alongside veteran activist figures.

However, my greatest frustration and disappointment is not these jobless protesters, who may or may not be funded by foreign powers (who may or may not want to create student-led trouble similar to Bangladesh and Nepal!), but the Modi government, and especially, Modi ji.

A Crisis of Credibility, Not Administration

In my previous post, I highlighted the missteps surrounding the initial NEET paper leak. This was never just a routine administrative failure; it was a crisis of trust. Prime Minister Modi built a deep, personal connection with India’s youth through initiatives like Mann Ki Baat, his Exam Warriors book, and continuous messaging around Yuva Shakti. When so much institutional credibility is anchored to his personal leadership, silence during a major student crisis creates a damaging void.

The defense that leaks have occurred historically, or that swift arrests were made and exams rescheduled, misses the point. Over two months, as public anxiety mounted, the Prime Minister had ample opportunity to address the nation directly, reassure students, and take decisive political action. Accepting accountability early—perhaps by replacing the Education Minister sooner and speaking directly to the youth—would have contained the crisis. Instead, hesitant crisis management allowed fringe agitators to claim victory. By allowing a bunch of suspect, foreign-funded anarchists to strong-arm the government, the Modi government created another unnecessary dent in its credibility. Talk about two own goals when none were needed!

Breaking the Cycle of Agitation

This pattern is becoming all too familiar. From the CAA/NRC demonstrations to the farm law agitation, and now the CJP movement, we repeatedly see legitimate public policy debates hijacked by disruptive political forces. While the government has successfully removed systemic friction within state institutions over the past decade, it continuously struggles to manage public narratives when street protests erupt.

A firm mandate from the electorate is meant to ensure decisive governance, not perpetual capitulation to the loudest agitators. Until the administration learns to preempt these narrative traps and address public anxieties before they are weaponized, constructive policy reform will remain hostage to street politics.

Tactical Masterstroke or Repeated Capitulation?

Already, spin doctors are attempting to reframe this frustrating capitulation as a "masterstroke." The narrative being pushed is that the government surrendered to clear the decks for the upcoming Parliament session and prevent the opposition from washing out key legislative business.

But that excuse rings hollow. The expectations from PM Modi and his government remain extraordinarily high—which is precisely why the vast majority of voters have continued to repose their faith in him over the last 12 years.

Twelve years into power, when will this government learn to effectively counter these agitators? The UPA era stalled development precisely because professional protesters were allowed to dictate government policy. People gave PM Modi a massive mandate to end this culture of political sabotage. While his administration successfully removed these elements from official institutions, it must now dismantle their ability to repeatedly hijack the public narrative on the streets. Only then can genuine democratic debate thrive—focusing on issues that actually affect daily lives, like E20 fuel mandates and heavy petrol taxation, rather than manufactured political outrage.