The largest election in the world in India covering an electorate of 968 million people from April 19 to Saturday has been completed. The results were unexpected, with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) majority diminished.
The BJP had 303 seats previously and had won handsomely in 2014 and 2019 under the leadership of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This year, it belied expectations and pollsters’ predictions. Its 240 seats were below the majority mark of 272, although it remains by far the single largest party and with its National Democratic Alliance it won 295 seats, giving it a safe majority.
The opposition Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance could only cobble together 235 seats.
The BJPs losses came in the bigger states. While it enhanced its performance in eastern and southern India, in the five states with the largest representations in parliament — Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal and Tamil Nadu — it made no new gains or lost seats, which pushed it down to its lowest level since 2014.
Yet Modi returns to lead a government for the third time, equaling the record of India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Modi’s government has promised continuity and emphasis on its detailed manifesto, including rapid economic growth, employment generation and welfare.
Foreign policy was not a major polling agenda, but national security is. The BJP is committed to a robust development of India’s physical and economic security. Its work in the area will be watched carefully.
As India grows to be the third-largest world economy, it needs a large dose of technology and employment generation to augment its successes in digital technology and IT services. India seeks trade, technology and tourism engagement with countries and tasks its diplomats to enhance exports, seek modern technologies and enlarge tourism inflows.
Countries where this could happen will be brought into renewed focus. Renewable energy, semiconductors, critical minerals and manufacturing foreign direct investment will be top objectives.
The relationship with the US will remain a prime focus strategically in the Indo-Pacific region and for technology and economic aspects. A further expansion of engagement with the EU, perhaps leading to the conclusion of a long pending India-EU free-trade agreement will be pursued. A greater strategic coherence with Europe and expansion of technology relations through the Trade and Technology Council transatlantic forum are important issues.
India will continue its engagement with the G7. It will remain engaged with BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The Indo-Pacific region will remain a major area of focus for New Delhi as it implements its Act East Policy and Indo-Pacific Oceans’ Initiative. The relationships with Japan and others in the Indo-Pacific region are strategically important for expanded economic engagement.
The biggest challenges will be dealing with Pakistan and China, both of which have clear hostility toward the rise of India. Pakistan’s new civilian government makes positive noises about engaging India. This will depend on how Pakistan controls cross-border terrorism. The higher participation of the electorate in Jammu & Kashmir was encouraging.
China remains the biggest challenge. China expects India to engage without resolving their border issues. China unilaterally alters interactions on the border and creates new fault lines that are challenged by India. So far, India has maintained that without tranquility on the border, the relationship cannot progress.
The new government will enhance its defense arrangements on the border with China to prevent a recurrence of situations like 2020. While upgrading its guard, a confident government might seek to engage China in bilateral talks that would include the border.
Chinese assessments see the results of the elections as weakening India, but they strengthen Indian democracy. China is unused to this.
If the long-term diplomatic estrangement continues, India’s resolve to de-risk its engagements with China would result in closer partnerships in the Indo-Pacific, particularly Japan, the US and Australia. A closer engagement with Taiwan and ASEAN, as well as challenging Chinese hegemonic designs in the Indian Ocean is probable.
The quick congratulatory message from President William Lai (賴清德) and the prompt response by Modi after India’s election results were announced shows that India-Taiwan ties are poised to grow.
Gurjit Singh is a former Indian ambassador to Germany, Indonesia and ASEAN, Ethiopia and the African Union.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS