India was quite successful in handling the pandemic until this second wave, which rose from a low case count to new peaks within a month. Cases lag infection events, and it takes time for the data to be reported, for people and governments to react to it, for changes to be made, and so on. It's easy in hindsight to say some action must have been taken by some date, but while it's happening live, it's hard to tell a new and different pattern apart from "normal" fluctuation. For example, when I was looking at the case graphs a couple weeks ago (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-tests-and-daily-new...), there was a temporary dip in case counts between the initial portion of the second wave and subsequent faster rise. That dip is no longer visible, and likely got filled in by delayed data, but my point is that it's hard to figure out what's an under-reaction or over-reaction to a live and chaotic situation. For leaders without the luxury of hindsight, it's challenging because they need to carefully balance health impacts with social and economic impacts.

> (from the Indian Express article) We need to accept that the politicians do not decide what we do in our everyday routine.

The federal government of India, for its part, was very much cognizant of the surge. Their press releases noted the surge in a few states as early as February 20th (https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1699596), which was a very fast reaction. The federal government provided updated guidance to the affected states the very next day (https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1699735), but did not force any decision on individual states, in keeping with the cooperative federalism that governs the health ministry's decisions. Regular guidance updates and interventions continued thereon.

Like your article suggests, my feeling is that this situation will end up being attributable to a mix of increased general mobility across society, combined with the unfortunate advent of more infectious variants, rather than any singular factor. Looking at the latest mobility graphs (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/changes-visitors-covid?co...), we can increasing mobility preceding the surge and then a big drop in mobility around March 27th, when the daily number of cases was 3x the low point but half the prior peaks. We can wish for earlier change in behaviors now, but the timeline of how society reacted is not entirely unreasonable - it's simply the reality of seeing data and reacting to it with some natural time delay. As for the risk of new variants, per a breaking Reuters article (https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-scienti...), some scientists identified that certain new variants were responsible for many cases and that they also seem to be able to escape antibodies:

> A version of that draft, seen by Reuters, set out the forum’s findings: the new Indian variant had two significant mutations to the portion of the virus that attaches to human cells, and it had been traced in 15% to 20% of samples from Maharashtra, India's worst-affected state.

> The draft statement said that the mutations, called E484Q and L452R, were of “high concern.” It said “there is data of E484Q mutant viruses escaping highly neutralising antibodies in cultures, and there is data that L452R mutation was responsible for both increased transmissibility and immune escape."

The findings were shared with the Health Ministry on March 10th, and publicly released on March 24th. This article notes that it is unclear if this report was ever sent to Modi. Interestingly enough, this Reuters article mentions many possible missteps or contributing factors, but also quotes a scientist who is careful not to place singular blame on anyone, just like the Indian Express article you linked:

> To be sure, some scientists say the surge was much larger than expected and the setback cannot be pinned on political leadership alone. "There is no point blaming the government," Saumitra Das, director of the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, which is part of INSACOG, told Reuters.