India without Indira Gandhi?

[Vinization]

Suppose that Lal Bahadur Shastri, instead of dying in office after less than two years as prime minister of India, stays in power for a few more years (say, until 1968 or 1970) before he either dies or retires. Once that happens, he's succeeded not by Indira Gandhi, but by some other important figure in the Indian National Congress, like Jagjivan Ram, Morarji Desai or K. Kamaraj.

How different will India be without Indira's long and controversial (to put it mildly) tenure? What about the INC itself, since the Nehru-Gandhi family won't turn it into their private property? How will the lack of an Emergency period (assuming whoever is on Indira's place doesn't declare it ITTL) affect Indian politics? What about the economy and the Licence Raj?

 

[Brahman]

I heard he wanted to liberalize the economy of the country. So Earlier liberalization, well over 2 decades than OTL can mean India is Much richer and consecutively, China is never able to become Economic powerhouse

 

[Vinization]

I heard he wanted to liberalize the economy of the country. So Earlier liberalization, well over 2 decades than OTL can mean India is Much richer and consecutively, China is never able to become Economic powerhouse

Do you think the Emergency would still happen?

 

[Brahman]

Do you think the Emergency would still happen?

No, Shastri was not power hungry like Indira. Infact he was one of the most noblest of politician, He literally sent a resignation letter to Nehru, twice because during his terms as Railway Minister, he felt responsible for a few train crashes and wanted to be held accountable. If he lost like Indira did, he would gladly accept it and step down with dignity, not be a wannabe dictator like Indira

 

[SpacePotato117]

I read that Shastri was the man behind the Green and White Revolutions in India. He seems like one of the last national politicians who truly cared about farmers.
Maybe he would try to build up the rural economy across the nation? Potentially even carry out proper nationwide land reform? Primary education?

 

[marktaha]

If Indian businessmen had had the same freedom there as they have in Britain - superpower!

 

[ramones1986]

I wonder how a longer living Shastri would deal with the then nascent Indian public television Doordarshan.

 

[SpacePotato117]

I wonder how a longer living Shastri would deal with the then nascent Indian public television Doordarshan.

Probably keep it state-owned but give private channels the freedom to thrive as well.

 

[SpacePotato117]

Also, a fascinating thing that I read about in another discussion was that Indian liberalization itself might look different here.

In OTL, it seems like Indian liberalization was based on Chinese "Dengism." Basically, a fairly slow privatization process that allowed the economy to grow at a fairly steady pace. It was slower than Chinese liberalization, but it was modeled after it in the end.

However, liberalization under Shastri would start earlier than Chinese liberalization. In OTL, Shastri supported the failed 1966 liberalization (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalisation_in_India#1966_liberalisation_attempt)

In TTL, since India would start liberalizing even before China, I wonder what that reform would look like? What direction would it go in? Shastri was a very competent politician so I doubt he would do something stupid like the 1990s "shock therapy" in the former Soviet Union/Warsaw Pact.

Then there is also the matter of the Freight Equalization Policy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freight_equalisation_policy). This is believed to have ruined the industrialization of resource-rich states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, and Odisha. OTL this policy was removed in the early 1990s, presumably as part of the general liberalization of India. However, the damage was done, and those states were far behind and have only started really catching up now. As an example, Odisha produced around 2 million tons of steel per year in the 1990s. Now it produces over 20 million tons per year. What makes this worse is that some of these states are the most populated in all of India (especially UP and Bihar) and have great potential that was stomped on for decades.

Shastri would presumably remove this policy as part of his liberalization. The effects of removing the Freight Equalization Policy early will likely be nothing short of profound.

So again, I wonder what this reform would look like? Having India start its liberalization even before China really is a fascinating idea.

 

[Harshavardhana]

This is the kind of timeline people would be interested in reading if anyone wanted to write.

With no Indira Gandhi the entirety of the Gandhi-Nehru family and its control over the Congress is simply gone.

 

[Imp]

I've just read this article speaking of Shastri's tenure and it paints a decent picture of what his time as Prime Minister was like.

So as others have stated, Shastri had a large hand in the food revolutions that took place in India beginning in the 60s. A lot happened in his brief time as PM. It was under him that the focus of government shifted from industry to agriculture. One thing to note is he faced a lot of internal challenges from within the party as he tried to govern, and in many ways it was the Indo-Pakistani War of '65 that really cemented his position as leader; as colleagues and opponents finally saw him as a decisive leader. On the economic front,
"He had signalled a desire to move away from controls to…incentives, with an enlarged role for private capital and business; he had shown an openness to foreign capital in key sectors of the economy; he had brought the Planning Commission down from the dizzy heights it had occupied…; and by his personal touch he had indicated that there could be a partnership between business and government. Last, but not least, he had grappled with the complex question of devaluation…accepting the likely economic changes that would ensue (Kudaisya, 2002, 219)". This is from the article I linked; the article the quote itself is from is behind a paywall to which I don't have access, but seems like it would give great detail as to his economic plans.
On the international front, it was under him that India really stopped seeing Britain, and to a lesser extent America, as an ally (due to their positions in the '65 war). He had decent relations with Nasser and Tito but lukewarm relations at best with Sukarno in the NAM club (Sukarno had even sent naval vessels toward Indian waters in support of Pakistan before Shastri, the canny politician, sent the current Chief Minister of Odissa's father, who had been an airforce pilot and had saved Sakarno's life against Dutch colonial forces, to negotiate; the ships turned back) while what he viewed as snubbing from the Johnson Administration lead to him meeting with various Soviet leaders and it can be argued it was under his PMship that India began the slide away from American friendship and began to venture toward the Soviet orbit.

Thus the question now arises on what would have happened had Shastri continued his tenure as PM. It's safe to assume he would finally have a chance to visit the US in '66, probably roughly the same time when Gandhi did so. How talks between the two leaders would have gone is something we cannot be sure of, but I think it would be safe to presume respect between the leaders even if they disagreed on policy. Shastri would have probably secured grain in the same manner as Indira did, but I reckon would have managed to keep American interference low when compared to Indira's government over the same period. Another matter which may have led to a better meeting between Shastri and Johnson would have been Shastri's openness to foreign investment into some sectors in India, who would have likely leveraged this to gain American expertise in agricultural matters as well as new crop strains. Along with this, Shastri was open to moving away from the economic system India had in play. Now the liberalisation attempt of '66 wasn't due to Shastri but actually because India needed to import grain and so the IMF forced Indira to liberalise. This is why when the Green Revolution started showing positive impact in '68, Indira waited a year before allowing for de-liberalisation to take place by '69, as she wasn't convinced by the merits of liberalisation. Shastri on the other hand would have probably been able to leverage the promise of access of new markets for American companies to get the Americans to lean on the IMF and allow for India to liberalise slower than OTL, which would mean that the liberalisation would not be turned back unlike OTL. So the outcome here is slower paced Indian liberalisation compared to '91, as Shastri was still a socialist, but more measured and thought out.

The Soviet Union did not apparently begrudge India's friendship with the US, as long as India remained non-aligned. Shastri would have likely been able to use this to maintain decent relations with the Soviets while keeping pressure on the Chinese flank, giving India some breathing room. Being a big believer in self-sufficiency when it came to arms, I could see him pursuing technology transfer deals with the Soviet Union as to allow India to build up a functional domestic arms industry. This would likely be on the basis of foreign currency, as a growing India would obtain greater dollar reserves and be able to use this to trade with the Soviet Union. To ensure the Americans did not freak out, this would likely be coupled with allowing for American investments into some Indian sectors. I could definitely see him use the Soviets as a bid to obtain equipment from the US too, but the question that arises is with Nixon and how he views Shastri. Nixon famously disliked Indira, but again Shastri is of a different mold, and Nixon may perhaps be able to empathise with a man who also came from nothing to become something (compared to Indira who had somewhat of a more affluent childhood). It is difficult to say how the two men would have gotten along, but safe to presume it would have been better than OTL. How much better is up in the air.

Indo-British relations at this point would likely be no better than OTL, might even be worse. If India leans more toward America at the cost of Britain, safe bet to assume it won't sit well with Whitehall.

Industry and agriculture wise, safe to assume the Green Revolution starts either in '67 or '66 here with Shastri's drive for food self-sufficiency. With his drive for a strong defence industry, a minor butterfly may be Kurt Tank is convinced to stay on in HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited). This might very well evolve into a major butterfly if India's economic growth allows it to develop more indigenous fighters and eventually civilian transportation aircraft, while the Soviets keep providing technical knowhow as India buys it using American dollars. A desire for a stronger defence industry might ironically do more for Indian industrialisation, as this would require a constant supply of steel - which would likely allow for indigenous companies like Mahindra to benefit from the expanding steel production and produce tractors in greater numbers (a sector probably remaining free from international competition) as well as allow companies such as Ford to set up factories to produce cars for the Indian market (probably a sector where foreign companies would be allowed to enter the market, although we might see a Maruti Ford brand here instead of Maruti Suzuki).

A stickler in relations will of course be India testing its first nuke, but this may happen after Shastri's time and so not be up to him as much. It's impact may not matter as much either, as America would likely cut-off Indian uranium supplies for a bit before some backdoor diplomacy would open it up again as India may have likely allowed for American energy companies with nuclear reactor construction knowhow to partner up with the Indian govt to build large scale and numbers of commercial reactors, which would pressure the American government not to embargo India too long, cause money. This would also mean India will see a growth in energy production which was not present in OTL.

I'll just close off with this article, which puts the sad loss of Shastri best:
"His sudden and untimely death was a manifold tragedy for India. A longer innings would, arguably, have consolidated the nation’s institutions, probably made government more competent and, perhaps, rendered more permanent inner-party democracy in the Congress".

 

[CommieScum]

How would Shastri deal with Bangladesh? Would Khalistan still happen? And what about congress veterans like Kamaraj?

 

[Rajveer Naha]

If Shastri managed to get the economy liberalized it would be just that and there would be no privatization. The leading argument would be to save capital for pressing infrastructure projects. that would eroded the socialist base of the Congress but it wouldn't have mattered in the 1967 elections as he was a Prime minister who had won a war.

If the economic reforms were successful it would lead to a far stronger private and free market sector in India and if there are further reforms India would be in a good position to attract western investments and compete head on with China, if it still has Dengist economic reforms. A growing English speaking population along with well developed mercantile laws would make the country quite attractive to investors.​

I read that Shastri was the man behind the Green and White Revolutions in India. He seems like one of the last national politicians who truly cared about farmers.
Maybe he would try to build up the rural economy across the nation? Potentially even carry out proper nationwide land reform? Primary education?

He inherited the reins of the administration at a time when the food shortage reached critical limits. He had to even ask the people to not eat a day each week to reduce the shortage. He followed that strictly along with his family. He asked people to take up kitchen gardening and even plowed the gardens of the Prime Minister's residence.

"He had signalled a desire to move away from controls to…incentives, with an enlarged role for private capital and business; he had shown an openness to foreign capital in key sectors of the economy; he had brought the Planning Commission down from the dizzy heights it had occupied…; and by his personal touch he had indicated that there could be a partnership between business and government. Last, but not least, he had grappled with the complex question of devaluation…accepting the likely economic changes that would ensue (Kudaisya, 2002, 219)"

Well given the disaster that was the Third five year plan it was a natural reaction. Long term planning was abandoned for three years called the plan holidays. If the Planning Commission evolved into something like the Niti Aayog it would be more useful. Given the need of focus on agriculture foreign investments would be welcome and also inject some competitiveness into the economy.

Then there is also the matter of the Freight Equalization Policy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freight_equalisation_policy). This is believed to have ruined the industrialization of resource-rich states like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, and Odisha. OTL this policy was removed in the early 1990s, presumably as part of the general liberalization of India. However, the damage was done, and those states were far behind and have only started really catching up now. As an example, Odisha produced around 2 million tons of steel per year in the 1990s. Now it produces over 20 million tons per year. What makes this worse is that some of these states are the most populated in all of India (especially UP and Bihar) and have great potential that was stomped on for decades.

This is a very pertinent point that many of us miss. It led to an unnatural resource curse in the east. The effects would like mean that the term of BIMARU( Acronym of the economically poor states of BIhar, Madhya pradesh, Andhra pradesh, Rajasthan and also nominally included Odisha the name also a play on the Hindi word for sick "bimar") dosent come and a more natural industrialization takes place.

On the international front, it was under him that India really stopped seeing Britain, and to a lesser extent America, as an ally (due to their positions in the '65 war). He had decent relations with Nasser and Tito but lukewarm relations at best with Sukarno in the NAM club (Sukarno had even sent naval vessels toward Indian waters in support of Pakistan before Shastri, the canny politician, sent the current Chief Minister of Odissa's father, who had been an airforce pilot and had saved Sakarno's life against Dutch colonial forces, to negotiate; the ships turned back) while what he viewed as snubbing from the Johnson Administration lead to him meeting with various Soviet leaders and it can be argued it was under his PMship that India began the slide away from American friendship and began to venture toward the Soviet orbit.

I don't get what is meant in the second half of this paragraph, including the relevance of Biju Patnaik's daring exfiltration of Hatta. The US played a desperate game of trying to balance India and Pakistan which India did not appreciate given that India clearly wanted to be seen as a bigger fish. What meeting with various Soviet leaders are you referring to? After the postponement of visit there wasn't any significant meeting of agreement that signaled a shift of Alignment. After the 1962 war with China India abandoned non alignment in all but name and took a significant pro-west turn with strong relations with the Johnson administration. The visit was likely postponed because India was bother people with a peace plan for Vietnam. which culminated with the Radhakrishnan Plan. Well Sukarno is not going to be there for very long.​

The Soviet Union did not apparently begrudge India's friendship with the US, as long as India remained non-aligned. Shastri would have likely been able to use this to maintain decent relations with the Soviets while keeping pressure on the Chinese flank, giving India some breathing room. Being a big believer in self-sufficiency when it came to arms, I could see him pursuing technology transfer deals with the Soviet Union as to allow India to build up a functional domestic arms industry. This would likely be on the basis of foreign currency, as a growing India would obtain greater dollar reserves and be able to use this to trade with the Soviet Union. To ensure the Americans did not freak out, this would likely be coupled with allowing for American investments into some Indian sectors. I could definitely see him use the Soviets as a bid to obtain equipment from the US too, but the question that arises is with Nixon and how he views Shastri. Nixon famously disliked Indira, but again Shastri is of a different mold, and Nixon may perhaps be able to empathise with a man who also came from nothing to become something (compared to Indira who had somewhat of a more affluent childhood). It is difficult to say how the two men would have gotten along, but safe to presume it would have been better than OTL. How much better is up in the air.

Indo-British relations at this point would likely be no better than OTL, might even be worse. If India leans more toward America at the cost of Britain, safe bet to assume it won't sit well with Whitehall.

Well India received technology transfer deals with the Soviet Union for the MiG-21s and Petya class frigates but Indian Navy kept on fitting Soviet weaponry on Western inspired hull and acquired very few directly soviet ships. The US imposed a 10 year arms embargo on India and Pakistan after the 1965 war but India relying on Soviet Union, UK and France escaped its effects but Pakistan was badly hurt as it lost its largest supplier of arms. Core engine technology wasn't given until the mid-70s so I wouldn't bet on it. The best way of developing a robust domestic arms industry is to allow some foreign cooperation and private investment and follow the Navy model of supplying expertise, consultancy and sacrificing some capabilities till those are developed. Thus the Navy today has the greatest percentage of domestic equipment so that is a sector of improvement

In two years butterflies would be hitting across the world and several close states might swing and Johnson win the election. Nixon for some reason was dead set to harm India's interests. Indira Gandhi after trying to work with them gave up trying in 1969 and in 1971 signed the friendship treaty with Soviet Union as a warning to prevent US from interfering in the Bangladesh war.​

Once that happens, he's succeeded not by Indira Gandhi, but by some other important figure in the Indian National Congress, like Jagjivan Ram, Morarji Desai or K. Kamaraj.

Desai may win out as after the war it seemed that Indira Gandhi was going to be removed from politics and sent as ambassador to UK to her sons.
It might finally be the break for Desai to be the Prime Minister. But if his term goes like the Janata Party term then it may hamper the growth of the country.
Kamaraj wasn't exactly interested in direct power. He gave up the Chief Ministership to work for the party. But an interesting successor would be YB Chavan who was responsible for the modernization of Indian military after the 1962 defeat and also credited for winning in 1965 and restoring the national pride.

Industry and agriculture wise, safe to assume the Green Revolution starts either in '67 or '66 here with Shastri's drive for food self-sufficiency. With his drive for a strong defence industry, a minor butterfly may be Kurt Tank is convinced to stay on in HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited). This might very well evolve into a major butterfly if India's economic growth allows it to develop more indigenous fighters and eventually civilian transportation aircraft, while the Soviets keep providing technical knowhow as India buys it using American dollars. A desire for a stronger defence industry might ironically do more for Indian industrialisation, as this would require a constant supply of steel - which would likely allow for indigenous companies like Mahindra to benefit from the expanding steel production and produce tractors in greater numbers (a sector probably remaining free from international competition) as well as allow companies such as Ford to set up factories to produce cars for the Indian market (probably a sector where foreign companies would be allowed to enter the market, although we might see a Maruti Ford brand here instead of Maruti Suzuki).

Kurt Tank was in many ways a hinderance rather than an asset by this point. After the Orpheus engine for the HF-24 Marut was no longer available. He shot down the deal for MiG 19 engines which would have at least given Mach 1.4 capabilities as it did not enable the reaching of the Mach 2 boundary. He refused considering the Scnema Atar and Super Atar engines which would have required a redesign but would have solved many issues with the tailplane. But the butterflies are significant enough to allow India to build a powerful Civil aviation industry rivalling Brazil or Canada or in case of military China and France.

We won't get Maruti without Sanjay Gandhi. the concept maybe there but it won't be called Maruti. And Ford surely wouldn't be a partner. American cars of the time were terrible and unaffordable and expensive to run. Other possible partners are Fiat(well Premier has the partnership, but they would have been a great candidate as they were very open to partnerships to sell their products across the globe). A Japanese or European Maker is what it is going to be. An interesting butterfly would be if Aravind cars manage to survive(the first India designed India built cars, plenty of history and details can be found in the link.)​

A stickler in relations will of course be India testing its first nuke, but this may happen after Shastri's time and so not be up to him as much. It's impact may not matter as much either, as America would likely cut-off Indian uranium supplies for a bit before some backdoor diplomacy would open it up again as India may have likely allowed for American energy companies with nuclear reactor construction knowhow to partner up with the Indian govt to build large scale and numbers of commercial reactors, which would pressure the American government not to embargo India too long, cause money. This would also mean India will see a growth in energy production which was not present in OTL.

A nuclear test would delay the Tarapur Atomic Power Station so it should wait until the station is operational the next shipment can be figured out over the next few years. And India can later join the Non-Proliferation treaty as a weapon state with the PRC as it joined later when ROC was replaced.

Another minor point that I would like to add is that there would be profound changes to the Constitutional Law landscape of India due to the absence of Indira Gandhi(Keshvananda Bharati(basic structure doctrine gone), MC Mehta, Maneka Gandhi, etc all gone). We would likely still get IC Golaknath but chances are that it later reverts to a form of Sajjan Singh or evolves into a progressive version of the MC Mehta. Notably Article 31 providing for Right to Property remains in the Fundamental Rights Chapter of the Constitution. Even in the field of Criminal Law landmark judgements like Nandini Satpathi never come we probably see an alternate evolution of people's rights. Without the Emergency and cases like ADM Jabalpur we don't see the era of judicial activism where the Courts suddenly became the champion of people's rights to repair its image in light of the ADM Jabalpur case. So all in all a very different India with lots of creative license for the authors.​

 

[SpacePotato117]

Also, could there be a chance that Dr. Homi Baba could live in TTL? He was the leading face of India's nuclear program.
Most interestingly, he seemed to have a plan for utilizing thorium power rather than conventional uranium. India has been following this plan, but it hasn't fully accomplished it yet.

Could the butterflies allow him to live? What would happen if he lived? Would India have functioning thorium reactors by today?

 

[Imp]

snip

Yea I agree, severely doubt he'd allow for privatisation to occur at least that early on. And yea I think he's definitely not going to lose seats in the '67 election in the way Indira did.

And I agree, it would be favourable for investors. But India would still have to ensure the ease of doing business would be favourable, thus continuous effort on cutting red tape and bureaucracy and the like. That would also have the added benefit of Indian businesses also being able to grow. Air India likely won't be nationalised, which would be a massive boon for the airline and allow it to have a reputation like perhaps Singapore Airlines by the present day.

Ah yea, the fasting/one meal on Mondays. He really did lead from the front on that. Plus his dedicated efforts at keeping prices reasonable and cut profiteering.

You know from what I have read, definitely see him resolving the planning commission into something akin to Niti Aayog. If he was that keen to move from control to incentives, a move like this would have been right up his alley. Again, he'd likely face internal pushback but his track record showed he would have been able to handle this.

The Freight Equalization Policy was something even I missed, good catch on that @SpacePotato117. But yea, certainly would have allowed for this states to develop at a much more natural pace. If these states grow at the rate the South Indian states did, then already we would see an Indian economy significantly larger than OTL based on that alone.

Referring to Biju Patnaik's rescue was me highlighting Shastri being canny; he could use the assets he had in front of him to gain a desirable outcome. This bodes well for hypothetical future meetings with other world leaders. I don't think I was speaking of a shift post the postponement of the meet with Johnson, more that he had met "Kosygin, Brezhnev and Mikoyan for lengthy, frank and cordial talks" in the spring-summer of '65. And no doubt India's position on Vietnam likely played a role in the meeting being postponed.

Ah but it was only for the MiG-21s. Who knows what more Shastri could have managed to obtain had he stayed in power longer. I do agree that obtaining core engine tech would likely still remain a few years down the line, maybe a year or two earlier than OTL at best. I agree on the domestic arms industry, but this might be challenging to pursue for the airforce, considering keeping parity with Pakistan in the air was important, so taking the hit on capabilities to develop indigenous versions may be a bit of a tough sell. I could however see Shastri push forward for that anyway tho.

I think if Shastri surviving butterflies away RFK's assassination, then India has a good shot at maintaining decent relations with America as it would have a leader who viewed India at least somewhat favourably. His aide got married wearing a Nehru jacket in '67, so there is that lol. Another Democratic term would thus help India maintain friendly relations with America while Pakistan likely suffers still. Nixon and RFK were very different men.

It's known Nixon didn't like a lot of people. Nixon also ironically tended to like men he viewed as "manly" and "charismatic", which is what Texas Two Step is based upon, where he nominates John Connally to be his VP for those exact reasons. He also liked Yahya Khan, the leader of Pakistan which likely coloured his view of India - it was apparently Yahya who facilitated the whole "Nixon goes to China" trip. Yahya was also Nixon's drinking buddy so I am sure that helped! I got this from an economist article,
"Nixon, a man of few friends, was notably fond of Pakistan's military ruler, Yahya Khan, a gruff, dim-witted, whiskey-drinking general. Nixon compared the Pakistanis favorably to Abraham Lincoln. By contrast he despised India's wheedling civilian politicians, reserving a particular dislike for Gandhi, whom in private he frequently called a 'bitch' and 'witch'".
Kissinger also helped shape Nixon's views on the matter,
"Ultimately, Mr. Kissinger did much to set America's course. He argued that America should pay no heed to domestic horrors in Pakistan, saying "you can't go to war over refugees", and warned that India was a greater threat to international order. Indian "bastards", he agreed with Nixon, needed a "mass famine" to cut them down to size."
So yea, not quite sure what Shastri's going to be able to build with Nixon if he somehow still comes into power, but the butterflies'll probably mean RFK survives and thus becomes President.

Shuffling off Tank to the civilian sector may allow India to still keep him and make use of his expertise once he is no longer able to railroad such decisions. An Indian Embraer or Bombardier would certainly be quite the positive butterfly. Who knows, maybe some face time with Shastri may even convince him to change his mind.

Ah good point on Ford actually, keep forgetting it was the oil shocks which made American cars at least able to compete with other worldwide manufacturers. And Fiat makes a lot of sense actually, who can forget all those Fiat taxis that used to grace city streets. I'd think it would likely be Japan, given how it was the Japanese and Koreans who were the first to invest into the Indian market in the 80s, but I am not sure if they were as able to invest in India in the late 60's/early 70s compared to a decade later. I have also never heard of Aravind cars. It would be quite the story for them to survive and become a big name to rival Mahindra and Tata.

Makes sense on the dating of the nuclear test. And I think India joining the treaty as a weapons state makes the most sense, not quite sure why this has not happened in OTL but I can guess.

Interesting note on the judiciary. Part of me is worried that without the emergency, the judiciary and other institutions may not be strengthened. The judiciary did end up moving to defend its turf because of the Emergency while people also took to the streets to protest and thus highlighted their desire to protect the democratic institutions of India. Although perhaps this may be balanced out by all the negatives not occurring and as you said more creative licenses for authors.

Could the butterflies allow him to live? What would happen if he lived? Would India have functioning thorium reactors by today?

Well there is the theory that the CIA had him killed, so if that was the case then I think he would still end up dead. But then again, the same theory implies the CIA killed off Shastri for the same reason (to prevent India from obtaining nukes). Therefore if Shastri doesn't die then perhaps Bhabha survives too.

As for what happens if he survives, I want to say yes to thorium but it's quite a complicated journey to get to Thorium reactors and I am not sure even with Homi Bhabha surviving India would manage this. But I do think the Indian programme would be better run and actually manage to achieve some of its nuclear energy goals compared to the weak showing it has had in OTL.

 

[Vinization]

Could the Swantantra Party reconcile with the INC if the Licence Raj is dismantled? Assuming they don't, who would have a better chance of leading the opposition down the line, them or the folks who eventually formed the BJP?