Category: Elections 2024

  • Finally, the Date Is Out for GE2025: Singaporeans Will Go to the Polls on May 3

    Finally, the Date Is Out for GE2025: Singaporeans Will Go to the Polls on May 3

    Rumors of an early election have swirled for months, but now it is official: Singapore’s General Election will take place six months ahead of schedule. On May 3, Singaporeans will head to the polls, marking a pivotal moment for Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, who will lead his first election as both Prime Minister and secretary-general of the long-ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).

    The announcement came on April 15, shortly after President Tharman Shanmugaratnam, acting on the Prime Minister’s counsel, dissolved Singapore’s 14th Parliament and issued the Writ of Election, setting the stage for a swift political season.

    Nomination Day will be April 23, giving candidates just nine days of campaigning before Cooling-off Day on May 2, a brief but intense window for any last-minute maneuvering.

    An Unusual Pressure on the PAP?

    The outcome of the upcoming election seems all but decided: the People’s Action Party (PAP), the dominant force in Singapore’s political landscape, is widely expected to secure another victory. Even the opposition is not naive enough to entertain any illusions of victory. For decades, Singapore’s elections have faced criticism for their structural favoring of the ruling PAP, which has been in power since the nation’s founding. However, this election feels interesting. Beneath the surface of what might seem like a familiar narrative, several key factors are making it an intriguing contest to watch.

    This election marks a pivotal moment for PAP’s new leadership under Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, the first leader outside the Lee family to assume the role. The votes cast will be crucial for Wong’s political future, as any decline in public support could prompt tough questions about his leadership and his reforms. As a result, this election serves as a critical test of Wong’s direction and his vision for Singapore. It’s clear that Wong and his team are working diligently to secure a decisive win.

    While the PAP continues to emphasize its central role in the nation’s prosperity, it also underscores the added significance of this election in ensuring Singapore’s long-term stability and success. In a social media post following the writ’s issuance, Prime Minister Wong noted that this election provides Singaporeans with the opportunity to choose leadership capable of guiding the country through an increasingly uncertain global landscape. He also acknowledged that the global conditions that have supported Singapore’s success in recent decades may no longer be reliable. With this in mind, he is sending a clear message to the public: it’s time to choose him and his party to navigate Singapore through these turbulent times.

    PAP to contest all the seats, opposition to focus on strongholds.

    Singapore’s 14th general election since independence will see the People’s Action Party (PAP) contest all 97 seats across 33 constituencies, including 18 group representation constituencies (GRCs) and 15 single-member constituencies. The ruling party is expected to face a challenge in every seat, fielding over 30 new candidates—the largest slate in recent years. The PAP is confronted by a growing opposition that has gained ground in recent elections, fueled by calls for greater political checks and a wider range of voices in Parliament. In 2020, despite securing 61.23% of the vote, the PAP lost some key seats to the Workers’ Party (WP), which allowed the WP to secure the position of Leader of the Opposition for Pritam Singh.

    The WP is targeting at least 30 seats, including Hougang, Aljunied, and Sengkang GRCs, while also contesting five additional constituencies, including the new Punggol GRC. The party’s election slogan, “Working for Singapore,” underscores its commitment to unity and its goal of achieving a “First World Parliament.”

    The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) plans to field candidates in at least five constituencies. Following the confirmation of the election timeline, party leader Leong Mun Wai announced that its candidate list will be revealed soon. The PSP’s A-team is expected to contest the newly reconfigured West Coast-Jurong West GRC, where, led by Tan Cheng Bock, the party nearly defeated the PAP in 2020, securing 48.32% of the vote.

    Meanwhile, smaller opposition parties have staked claims to contested constituencies, creating the potential for multi-cornered races unless they can reach a consensus soon, making the path smoother for the PAP.

    A lot of topics to discuss

    In recent years, key issues such as the cost of living, job security, and the affordability of public housing have dominated national conversations, and it will lead to campaigns too. Inflation reached a peak of 6.1 percent in 2022 but eased to 4.8 percent the following year, dropping further to 2.4 percent in 2024. But impacts are still there and concerns remain about whether external factors, like renewed U.S. tariffs, could lead to another round of global price hikes.

    Resident employment saw an increase in 2024, reversing the previous year’s decline. Yet, new university graduates faced more challenges in securing full-time employment, and retrenchments rose in the final quarter. In response to these job insecurities, significant investments have been made in the SkillsFuture movement to help workers adapt to evolving industry demands. Additionally, a new initiative has been launched to support individuals who have lost their jobs and are working to re-enter the workforce.

    After a pandemic-driven supply crunch, resale Housing Board flat prices soared, with more units crossing the million-dollar mark. However, efforts to increase supply and stabilize the market have led to early signs of moderation in both public and private housing prices in the first quarter of 2025.

    Political scandals affecting both major parties are also likely to have an impact on the election. These include two extramarital affairs, the arrest of former Cabinet Minister S. Iswaran following a Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau probe, and a trial involving Mr. Singh, who was charged with lying to a parliamentary committee. Iswaran pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 months in jail. Mr. Singh was found guilty after a 13-day trial and fined, though he is appealing his sentence, which does not affect his eligibility to run for election.

    It’s heating up!

    The election mood is palpable following the release of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee’s report. Political parties have begun introducing their potential candidates to the public, and the atmosphere is expected to heat up—alongside the tropical summer—in the days ahead.

    The PAP has started rolling out its candidates constituency by constituency and will continue in the coming days. The WP and PSP are expected to follow soon. Still, Nomination Day could bring last-minute surprises as parties finalize their slates.

    This year will also mark the return of physical rallies—banned during the 2020 election due to the COVID-19 pandemic—with full-fledged campaigning set to begin after nominations close on April 23.

    The arena is ready.

  • Tajikistan’s Election Charade Cements One-Party Rule

    Tajikistan’s Election Charade Cements One-Party Rule

    Tajikistan, a republic in Central Asia, offers yet another case study in the art of electoral theater—an exercise in ritual rather than representation. Like many of its neighbors, it conducts elections not as a contest of ideas but as a carefully managed reaffirmation of the ruling party’s dominance.

    On March 2, the country staged yet another parliamentary vote, ostensibly to select representatives for the lower house. The result, of course, was never in question. International media paid little attention, having long dismissed Tajikistan’s elections as political formalities. And sure enough, as the Central Commission for Elections and Referendums dutifully announced its preliminary figures, the expected supermajority materialized, less a revelation than a reminder of how power is preserved in the region.

    The 2025 Elections

    Tajikistan is holding two elections within a single month, one for each house of parliament. On March 2, 2025, voters elected members of the Assembly of Representatives, the lower house responsible for direct representation. Later, on March 28, 2025, the National Assembly, the upper house, will be selected.

    The Assembly of Representatives, or Majlisi Namoyandagon, consists of 63 deputies serving five-year terms. Under Tajikistan’s electoral system, 41 members are elected through single-member districts, while the remaining 22 are chosen from party lists.

    As expected, the ruling People’s Democratic Party of Tajikistan, which has long dominated the country’s political landscape, secured an overwhelming victory. It won 49 of the 63 seats, including 37 of the 41 constituency-based seats. Through the party-list system, it received 2.43 million votes—51.9 percent of the total—claiming 12 of the 22 seats allocated by proportional representation.

    The Agrarian Party of Tajikistan followed with 986,000 votes (21 percent), securing five seats through the party list system and a total of seven seats, including two won in single-member districts. The Party of Economic Reforms obtained three party-list seats with 595,000 votes (12.7 percent) and gained two additional constituency seats. The Democratic Party and the Socialist Party each received around 250,000 votes (5 percent), earning three seats apiece.

    Meanwhile, the Communist Party of Tajikistan, with just 89,000 votes (1.9 percent), failed to secure representation, as it fell short of the 5 percent threshold required for party-list allocation.

    A Sham election?

    A total of 3,500 polling stations were established across Tajikistan, with an additional 36 set up at the country’s diplomatic missions in 28 nations to accommodate citizens abroad. According to the Central Commission for Elections and Referendums (CCER), 4.7 million people—85.3 percent of the 5.5 million eligible voters—participated in the elections. This strikingly high turnout figure appears dubious, given the widespread political apathy in Tajikistan, the lack of significant electoral campaigning, and the timing of the vote during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which likely reduced voter turnout.

    The government declared the elections valid and successful. CCER Chairman Bakhtiyor Khudoyorzoda claimed they were conducted in a transparent and open manner, with free and alternative choices, and that most voters participated with a strong sense of civic responsibility. However, independent verification of the March 2 election results remains nearly impossible.

    Tajikistan remains one of the world’s most repressive and undemocratic states, having been under the control of the same leadership since 1992. Every presidential and parliamentary election has faced strong criticism over a lack of transparency and fairness. Election observation missions in the country have long followed a predictable pattern—reports note compliance with technical procedures while simultaneously highlighting the absence of genuine competition, ultimately offering recommendations for reform that the government has consistently ignored.

    This time, in addition to barring international election observers, the government denied accreditation to major foreign media outlets, including the BBC, further reinforcing doubts about the election’s legitimacy.

    The Mighty PDPT

    The People’s Democratic Party of Tajikistan (PDPT) has been the country’s dominant and ruling party since 2000. Originally founded in 1994 by Abdulmajid Dostiev as the People’s Party of Tajikistan, it has been led by President Emomali Rahmon since April 1998. Rahmon has consistently secured more than 75 percent of the vote in presidential elections, while the PDPT has maintained a supermajority in parliament since 2005.

    The PDPT maintains close ties with foreign political parties, particularly Russia’s ruling party, United Russia. It follows a similar ideology of ultranationalism, statism, and authoritarianism, reinforcing Moscow’s influence in the region and preserving the so-called “Russosphere.“

    What the Opposition Says

    The five parties that contested the elections alongside the People’s Democratic Party of Tajikistan served more as symbolic opposition than actual challengers. The true opposition to Dushanbe was excluded from the race, and its leaders—now largely in exile—have dismissed the March 2 elections as a sham.

    Sharofiddin Gadoev, chairman of the Amsterdam-based Movement for Reform and Development, challenged the official turnout figures, alleging that only 300,000 people actually voted. The leader of Group 24, an opposition movement outlawed in Tajikistan, also denounced the elections.

    Further tightening the regime’s grip is the long-expected transfer of power from 72-year-old President Emomali Rahmon to his son, Rustam, the mayor of Dushanbe and speaker of parliament. As in many former Soviet republics, the authoritarian playbook endures—only the façade has changed.

  • Narendra Modi Finally Got India’s Capital Territory

    Narendra Modi Finally Got India’s Capital Territory

    Delhi, the national capital territory of India, serves as the country’s administrative center, housing Parliament, ministries, the Supreme Court, and other key government institutions and tribunals. Unlike Indian states, it functions as a special administrative zone with limited governing authority, akin to Washington, D.C., in the United States. Despite its small size, Delhi wields significant political influence. Often called “Mini Hindustan” due to the diverse migration from across India, it remains a crucial battleground for political parties, with gaining power in Delhi considered a point of pride.

    For Narendra Modi and the BJP, securing power in Delhi has been a long-standing goal. Though the party briefly controlled the capital in the 1990s, it struggled to regain influence after Modi became prime minister in 2014. Despite its widespread electoral success across India, the BJP consistently lost Delhi’s assembly elections to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), led by Arvind Kejriwal. Originating from an anti-corruption movement, AAP positioned itself as a grassroots alternative to traditional politics, operating more as an activist-driven group than a conventional party. While some experts saw AAP’s rise as a potential third force in Indian politics, the party lost its important ground in this latest election.

    After years of setbacks, the BJP’s hard work finally paid off in the latest Delhi Assembly elections, which concluded on February 5th. This victory—Modi’s fourth attempt at capturing the capital—marks a significant political shift. For the first time in over a quarter-century, Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has taken control of Delhi’s government. In the 2025 assembly elections, the BJP won 47 of the 70 seats, ousting the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which had governed the capital since 2015. AAP secured just 22 seats. In a stunning upset, its leader and founder, Arvind Kejriwal, along with his deputy, Manish Sisodia, lost their seats despite the party’s strong appeal through welfare programs and its anti-corruption agenda. The Indian National Congress, which failed to win a single seat for the third consecutive election, faces serious questions about its future. Once a dominant force in the region, Congress ruled Delhi for nearly 15 years before Kejriwal’s rise. The Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), another former powerhouse, also suffered a crushing defeat.

    Waving party flags and holding up posters of Narendra Modi, BJP supporters chanted slogans and danced outside the party headquarters in the capital as the vote results started to come in, with most exit polls predicting a decisive win for the party. Addressing the crowd, Modi criticized the Aam Aadmi Party and Arvind Kejriwal for their actions, but reserved his sharpest words for the Indian National Congress, delivering a scathing critique of the opposition. Amit Shah, India’s influential home minister and senior BJP leader, emphasized that the victory represented the people’s rejection of deceit. He noted that the public could no longer be misled by falsehoods. Shah also stressed that under Modi’s leadership, the BJP would transform New Delhi into the world’s leading capital by fulfilling all its promises. He hailed the victory as a testament to the people’s faith in Prime Minister Modi’s vision for progress.

    The election result was a major boost for the BJP, especially after the party failed to secure a majority in last year’s national elections and had to rely on coalition partners to form the government. The BJP regained momentum by winning key state elections in Haryana and Maharashtra. In the lead-up to the election, Modi’s government implemented tax cuts for the salaried middle class, a vital voting bloc. Throughout the campaign, both Modi and Kejriwal promised reforms, such as overhauling government schools, providing free healthcare and electricity, and offering a monthly stipend of over 2,000 rupees ($25) to impoverished women—proposals that have become standard in Indian elections.

    The Delhi election signals important political shifts in India. Narendra Modi and the BJP are reaching new heights, extending their influence into states and territories once beyond their grasp. Modi is also attracting support from Muslim and Sikh communities, groups that were traditionally outside his base. Meanwhile, the opposition bloc, known as I.N.D.I.A., which includes the Indian National Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), is unraveling. Both parties failed to coordinate and strike agreements ahead of the Delhi election, leading to disappointing outcomes. AAP may distance itself from the alliance, as many parties within the bloc face similar struggles due to a lack of cohesion. Modi’s success is well-deserved, and the BJP is clearly flourishing. However, the opposition must reassess its strategy if it hopes to challenge Modi’s expanding dominance.

  • How the BJP’s ‘One Nation, One Election’ Is Redefining Indian Democracy

    How the BJP’s ‘One Nation, One Election’ Is Redefining Indian Democracy

    From the United States to Japan, democracies everywhere contend with a common predicament: the staggering financial burden of elections. Governments allocate vast budgets to organize them, while political parties and candidates pour in even greater sums to secure victory. This flood of money—both aboveboard and concealed—not only fuels corruption but often forges troubling alliances between business tycoons and politicians, bound by the relentless demand for funds. Fair elections remain the cornerstone of democracy, but their escalating costs can feel like a silent affliction, gradually undermining the very principles they are designed to protect.

    In India, the world’s largest democracy, elections scale up into grand spectacles of participation and spending. With over a billion people involved, the process transcends politics, transforming into a sprawling festival of flags, rallies, sweets, and freebies. Spanning months, election seasons unfold in staggered phases, covering parliamentary, state, and local polls across 28 states and multiple union territories. The financial strain on the nation is immense, fueled not only by government and political party expenditures but also by the pervasive corruption and money laundering that frequently accompany the process.

    The relentless cycle of political campaigns, rife with financial and ethical challenges, undeniably hampers India’s economic momentum. Yet democracy, by its very nature, cannot exist without elections. To address this dilemma, the Indian government has put forth the contentious “One Nation, One Election” proposal—a bold attempt to streamline the electoral process and curb costs and corruption. But the question persists: will this sweeping reform resolve India’s electoral quandary, or will it usher in a host of new complications?

    An India Today report predicts that the cost of the 2024 elections could soar to a staggering 1.35 trillion rupees. While official figures remain unverified, experts believe the final cost will likely surpass this estimate. The Centre for Media Studies, a Delhi-based non-profit, revealed that India spent over 600 billion rupees on the 2019 general elections, making it the world’s most expensive at the time. Added to this are the billions spent on various state elections. Confronted with these enormous costs, the government has proposed a solution aimed at reducing financial strain: the merger of national and state elections, to be held once every five years. This forms the backbone of the “One Nation, One Election” initiative. The Indian government is considering the synchronization of all elections, whether within a single month or a set time frame, to ease the financial burden of repeated electoral cycles.

    Beyond financial savings, the government argues that the proposal would bring other benefits: by avoiding the disruptions caused by ongoing election seasons, governance could become more efficient, and politicians could focus on national issues rather than just campaigning. Additionally, the government believes it would also boost voter participation and encourage greater political engagement.

    For years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been a staunch advocate for the concept of “One Nation, One Election.” The party has long supported a vision of a strong central government over a decentralized federal system. But this idea has sparked fierce opposition, particularly from India’s regional parties and the Congress Party, the country’s historic political powerhouse.

    The Congress Party now opposes the “One Nation, One Election” proposal, despite having conducted unified elections from 1951 to 1967. In stark contrast to Modi’s vision of a centralized system, Congress seems fragmented and hesitant to endorse the initiative. Party leaders fear the proposal could bolster Modi’s position, using his national popularity to secure synchronized state and parliamentary elections, potentially weakening Congress’s foothold in state politics. Many regional parties share this concern, believing the plan would further undermine India’s federal structure. They worry that national issues would dominate in a unified election cycle, sidelining state-specific concerns and diminishing the influence of regional governments in the national conversation.

    With a five-year parliamentary term and the possibility of no elections in between, critics argue that such a system would free the ruling party from the democratic “Test” of frequent elections. This, they warn, could empower the government to push through unpopular policies—like fuel price hikes—without fear of electoral consequence.

    Though the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) still enjoys a commanding position, even with a two-thirds majority necessary to amend the constitution, its path to implementing “One Nation, One Election” faces obstacles. On Tuesday, India’s law minister, Arjun Ram Meghwal, introduced a bill in Parliament to establish the system, only for it to fail in a vote. In a notable twist, even BJP members—including a prominent union minister—abstained from voting. However, the government remains undeterred, planning to move the issue to a parliamentary committee for further deliberation. The committee will review a report from former President Ram Nath Kovind, who chaired a nine-member panel recommending simultaneous elections. Kovind described the proposal as a “Game Changer,” citing economists who believe the change could bolster India’s GDP by up to 1.5%.

    India, the world’s largest democracy, is perpetually in election season. With 28 states, eight union territories, and nearly a billion eligible voters, elections are an ever-present feature of the nation’s political landscape. Unifying all elections into one season may reduce the spectacle and vibrancy of the process, but it could ultimately strengthen India’s democracy by streamlining elections and curbing excessive spending. However, this shift risks eroding the federal nature of India’s constitution, potentially creating tension at the local level. The impact of the “One Nation, One Election” proposal could fundamentally alter Indian democracy, diminishing the role of federalism and state-level politics, leaving national parties and their agendas with dominant influence.

  • Hindutva Strengthens Its Hold in India’s Wealthiest State

    Hindutva Strengthens Its Hold in India’s Wealthiest State

    Maharashtra, the largest economy in India, the second most populous state, and the third largest by area, has chosen the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its Hindutva alliance to form the government for another five years through a landslide victory in the legislative assembly election. The state is home to India’s business capital, Mumbai, and serves as a major hub for business in the country. It is also the largest contributor to India’s economy, accounting for 14% of the national nominal GDP. Maharashtra’s significance in India’s economy and politics cannot be overstated, as political parties rely heavily on funding from the state. This victory marks a significant boost for Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the BJP, following setbacks in the previous parliamentary and Jammu and Kashmir elections, and strengthens the party’s financial position as well.

    The Maharashtra Assembly election for the 15th Legislative Assembly took place on November 20, 2024, with voters selecting all 288 members. Voter turnout reached 66.05%, the highest since 1995. The election featured a contest between two major alliances, reminiscent of the previous Indian parliamentary election.The first alliance, the Hindutva Alliance named Mahayuti, includes the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Shiv Sena (SS), the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), and several regional parties. This alliance, led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde of Shiv Sena, currently governs Maharashtra, with the BJP being the largest party within the coalition. The second alliance, the Secular Alliance named Maha Vikas Aghadi, consists of the Indian National Congress (INC), Shiv Sena Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray (SS-UBT), the Nationalist Congress Party Sharadchandra Pawar(NCP-SP), the Samajwadi Party, communist parties, and other regional parties. While both alliances represent a broad spectrum of political ideologies—Hindutva and secularism—members have come together primarily to form a government. During the campaigns and even after voting concluded, both alliances made extensive preparations, with Maharashtra’s political landscape known for practices such as horse trading and corruption.

    The results, announced on November 23, were absolutely stunning, with a massive win for the ruling Mahayuti alliance under the leadership of the BJP. To secure a majority in the 288-seat assembly, a party or alliance needs 145 seats. Mahayuti bagged 235 seats, with the BJP alone securing 132 seats. This marks the party’s biggest success in the state’s history and one of the greatest wins for any party in recent Maharashtra history. The victory rate is remarkable, as the BJP contested only 145 seats, according to the alliance’s agreement. With this strong mandate, the BJP can form a government independently, without relying on other major parties in the alliance. They only need the support of 13 more members to ensure stability, and they are adept at securing such deals. Shiv Sena secured 57 seats, and the NCP got 41. It seems likely that there will be negotiations between the parties, as seen in previous governments. Most probably, BJP will take the Chief Minister’s post, with Devendra Fadnavis expected to be the next Chief Minister of Maharashtra. 

    The collapse of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance is surprising, given its strong performance in the six months leading up to the parliamentary elections. However, the alliance secured only 50 seats out of 288, falling far short of expectations. It cannot even claim the position of opposition leader, as no single party or alliance has the required number of seats to do so. The Indian National Congress (INC) won only 16 seats out of the 102 it contested, marking one of its poorest performances in Maharashtra, a state it once dominated. Shiv Sena (UBT) emerged as the largest party in the alliance with 20 seats, despite contesting 92. The strength of the NCP-SP fell to just 10 seats, even though they contested 86. The election results have cast doubt on the future of the MVA alliance, as its member parties—driven by differing interests—had united primarily to gain power in Maharashtra. Questions now surround the relevance of Shiv Sena (UBT) and the NCP-SP, as well as the political futures of their leaders, Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

    The Maharashtra election results will significantly impact national politics. They signal strong support for Modi and his Hindutva agenda, as Maharashtra’s BJP leaders and the likely Chief Minister are staunch advocates of both. This victory will also bolster Modi’s position in Parliament’s upper house, where members are proportionally elected from state assemblies. For the Indian National Congress, the results underscore their ongoing failure to connect with the electorate. Their lack of political direction has once again led to a disappointing collapse.

  • Sri Lanka: The New Communist Hotspot in Asia

    Sri Lanka: The New Communist Hotspot in Asia

    Sri Lanka, once on the brink of collapse, now finds hope in communism. Frustrated with conventional political parties, dynastic politics, and rampant corruption, the people have rallied behind the country’s communist party, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), and its alliance under the banner of the National People’s Power (NPP). Last month, voters elected Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the party leader and former revolutionary, as president. The snap parliamentary elections he called led to a resounding victory for the party, which secured nearly two-thirds of the seats in Parliament.

    This remarkable victory for the JVP marks a significant shift in Sri Lanka’s political landscape, driven by widespread dissatisfaction with previous governments. Sri Lanka’s newly elected communist government now inspires communist parties across the region, who view it as a model for achieving their own political ambitions.

    However, this transformation has alarmed democracy advocates. In a small, politically volatile nation, many fear that Sri Lanka could transition into a one-party communist state, similar to China or Vietnam. The rise of a communist government in South Asia also promises to reshape regional politics, potentially altering the balance of power.

    The election for the 17th Parliament of Sri Lanka, held on November 14, 2024, mirrored the presidential election from two months earlier, but with an even more decisive victory for President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his communist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) party, now led by Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya. The National People’s Power (NPP) emerged as the largest group in Parliament, securing 61.65% of the popular vote and winning a supermajority with 159 seats out of the total 225. The Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) became the main opposition, capturing only 17.66% of the vote and a reduced total of 40 seats.

    Additionally, the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi won 8 seats, the New Democratic Front secured 5 seats, and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, the winner of the previous election, fell to just 3 seats—a sharp decline from the 145 seats they had secured in the last election. This outcome reflected public dissatisfaction with the ousted leader Mahinda Rajapaksa and his political dynasty. The NPP’s 159 seats marked a historic achievement, surpassing all other Sri Lankan political parties and securing the second-highest proportion of seats in the nation’s history. The NPP won every district except Batticaloa. This was also the first election since 1977 in which a single party achieved a supermajority, and the first time a non-Tamil political party won the former separatist Jaffna District. The results delivered a clear verdict on how the 2022 Sri Lankan political crisis reshaped the country’s political landscape, as ultra-nationalism gave way to communism, marking a dramatic shift from global trends, or something akin to British politics.

    Sri Lanka’s victory marks the second instance of a fully communist government in South Asia without any coalition with centrist parties, following Nepal. This achievement, in a region once dominated by nationalism, is a significant milestone for communism as a global movement seeking to expand its influence. South Asia, one of the most populous regions in the world, has not embraced communism despite being fertile ground for it. Many hope that the communist victory in Sri Lanka will inspire communist factions in other South Asian countries.

    In India, once a communist hotspot, the movement now has very low or negligible representation in parliament, holding only a small state. Beyond that, communists have no significant role in Indian politics. Nepal, despite having a communist president and prime minister in the past, now experiences large splits within coalitions with centrist parties, holding little power compared to before. While many expected communism to fade from the region, Sri Lanka offers new hope. The country is already deeply tied to China through massive economic debt, making it easier for China to operate and spread communism from this Indian Ocean island, a gateway to the Indian subcontinent.

    Reports indicate that Indian communists are already celebrating this victory as they struggle for survival, particularly in Kerala, the only Indian state still governed by communists. The triumph of communism over nationalism is something they have long desired. In Nepal, the communist party is gaining ground as people grow frustrated with frequent changes in government. In other religiously dominated countries in the region, like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the Maldives, communist influence remains weak. However, in Bangladesh, there have been reports of communist-linked parties hoping for a communist government. As communism is a pan-nationalist ideology, Sri Lanka’s victory could inspire and support other communist movements across the region.

    While many believe a communist Sri Lanka could emerge through the systematic occupation that communism deploys, others question how long the island can remain united, given its ethnic and cultural divisions and the fact that the population is only united by their hatred of the previous government. The United States will likely oppose the growth of communism, particularly with the Trump administration in charge. The country is highly volatile, and easily influenceable by the U.S., as its people are both educated and, at the same time, hopeless. India, too, would not want a communist government that could align closely with China. They will probably attempt some form of cultural uprising. But for now, it is clear: Sri Lanka is red, and communism has once again opened a door to the Indian subcontinent.

  • Georgia Stays Committed to Russia

    Georgia Stays Committed to Russia

    Georgia, facing serious geopolitical tensions between Russia and the West, has chosen to support the ruling party, Georgian Dream, and its soft Euroscepticism in the parliamentary election held on October 26. This election and the subsequent incidents have attracted significant global media attention due to ongoing regional power struggles and large-scale participation in anti-government protests. The landslide victory of Georgian Dream is undeniably remarkable. The ruling Georgian Dream party, which has been in power since 2012, secured more than 50% of the vote and won 89 of the 150 parliamentary seats.

    However, the opposition, along with Europe and the U.S., has rejected the results, calling the election illegitimate and fraudulent, and accusing the ruling party of malpractice. While these election results reflect a clear direction, pro-European sentiment dominates the capital, whereas residents in villages and smaller cities continue to support the conservative, Orthodox-aligned Georgian Dream party and maintain pro-Russian sentiments.

    While the opposition takes a tougher stance after the disappointing election—such as boycotting the new parliament and receiving support from Western media—the published results feature a significant win for the Georgian Dream party under the leadership of newly appointed Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze. The party, which mimics Russian politics and caters to Orthodox interests, presents challenges for the country’s strategic direction as it drives its campaign. They have promised to fully pass the Protection of Family Values and Minors bill, which they previously initiated in the Georgian Parliament. The bill, intended to ban LGBT propaganda, has been justified by the ruling party as necessary to prevent the spread of pseudo-liberal ideology from outside Georgia.

    Georgian Dream accuses the opposition of being puppets of the West. They frame the opposition within a narrative of war versus peace, traditional values versus moral degradation, and subservience to external powers versus an independent and sovereign state. The Georgian Dream party pledged to ban the former ruling United National Movement party upon winning office, accusing it of various crimes against the Georgian people during its rule, including pushing Georgia into war with Russia in 2008 and attempting to embroil Georgia in a second front of the Russo-Ukrainian War. A narrative Europe doesn’t like and Russia loves. 

    While the opposition accuses the election and its results of being unfair, there were a lot of setbacks on their side as well. First of all, they were largely split and could not initiate a common drive, and they were poorly connected to rural areas. The opposition coalition, such as Unity – National Movement (U-NM), comprising the United National Movement, Strategy Agmashenebeli, and European Georgia, and the Coalition for Change (CC), which includes Ahali, Girchi – More Freedom, Droa, the Republican Party, For Georgia (FG), and Strong Georgia (SG)—all advocating for pro-Europeanism—could not agree on a common minimum program before the election. The split vote and changing coalition instabilities rewarded victory for the ruling Georgian Dream alliance.

    In the capital, Georgian Dream received 42% of the vote, while the four major opposition coalitions combined received 46%, plus an additional 5.3% from the libertarian Girchi party. This split indicates that the opposition, despite having a clear upper hand, failed to capitalize on their support. According to the current results, the Coalition for Change (CC) came in second, increasing their 2020 election tally from 2 to 19 seats. Unity – National Movement suffered a significant loss, dropping almost 23 seats to reach a total of 16. The Strong Georgia alliance came fourth with 14 seats, while Gakharia For Georgia secured fifth place, winning 12 seats in their first election. All other parties and alliances that had representation in the previous parliament, such as the Georgian Labour Party, lost their representation entirely.

    The future of Georgia looks troubled, particularly after the parliamentary election. The country is deeply divided between conservatives with Orthodox foundations and strong connections to Russia, and Europhiles who are deeply irritated by the ruling party’s Rusophilia. The country will witness more protests against the government, at least in Tbilisi. The choice of the Georgian Dream party will align the country with Russia’s orbit and free it from further trouble with the Kremlin. Georgia appears to benefit from the Russia-Ukraine war, as capital and manpower flow from Russia. It seems that the government and businesses in the country are choosing to capitalize on this opportunity, and the divided opposition is certainly helping the government achieve this.

  • Japan Enters a Phase of Political Uncertainty

    Japan Enters a Phase of Political Uncertainty

    While Japan struggles economically and demographically, its politicians steer the country into another round of instability. Last month, a new prime minister, Shigeru Ishiba, took office but quickly decided to hold an election to solidify his position and introduce a fresh government distinct from that of his predecessor, Fumio Kishida, who stepped down amid low approval ratings and scandals. However, Ishiba’s strategy backfired as voters dealt a significant blow to both his party and its coalition partner, resulting in their lowest combined seat count since 2009. Intriguingly, for the first time since 1955, no single party surpassed the 200-seat mark in the 465-member parliament. Now, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) must secure new allies from opposition groups as they prepare to face a formidable opposition bloc in parliament, complicating the path forward for the conservative yet nominally liberal Liberal Democratic Party.

    On October 27, Japan held its 50th general election for the House of Representatives following Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s decision to dissolve the lower house. Voters cast their ballots for 465 assembly seats, including both single-member constituencies and proportional representation seats. In the previous assembly, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) maintained a clear majority with 259 out of 465 seats. However, Ishiba’s gamble on early elections ended in disappointment. The LDP, recognized as Japan’s ‘grand old party’ and a proponent of nationalism and conservatism, suffered a major setback, losing 68 seats and falling to 191—45 seats short of a majority.

    The LDP’s ally and the fourth-largest party, the Buddhist-nationalist Komeito, also saw its seat count drop from 32 to 24. Meanwhile, the main opposition party, the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDP), led by Yoshihiko Noda, rose significantly from 96 to 149 seats. This substantial gain reflects the prevailing anti-LDP sentiment and other factors, yet the CDP could not surpass the LDP’s total seat count. The right-wing populist and economically liberal Nippon Ishin no Kai secured 38 seats, becoming the third-largest party. Another notable outcome emerged as the conservative Democratic Party for the People (DPP) climbed to fourth place by winning 28 seats, an increase of 17 from the previous election, displacing Komeito.

    The LDP and Komeito alliance needs 18 seats to form the government. Eleven political parties won seats in the parliament, along with 12 independent candidates. Even if all the independents supported the government, the LDP coalition would still fall short by 6 seats. Therefore, they need the support of political parties. Analysts expect that the LDP will talk with other conservative parties in the parliament to form a multi-party government aligned with common minimum programs. Both the DPP and Ishin have ruled out joining an LDP-Komeito government for now because they understand the public’s discontent with the current administration. However, many believe they will eventually agree to a coalition. The chances for the CDP, the main opposition party, to form a government are slim, as they cannot create a coalition with other parties that hold very different views, many of which are conservative. The number of communist and liberal parties is also very low. 

    Major newspapers in Japan, including Sankei Shimbun, Yomiuri Shimbun, and Asahi Shimbun, all ran editorials in their morning editions calling for Ishiba to step down as prime minister, emphasizing the need to understand the people’s mandate. Nevertheless, he insists that he will continue. So it is clear that Shigeru Ishiba and the LDP will form a government with compromises.

    Many political and economic analysts believe that the downfall of Japan results from its politics as well. Each term filled itself with incidents. Besides Shinzo Abe, Japan has not had any strong government or leadership recently. After Abe, the country witnessed more turmoil in Japanese politics, and now Ishiba’s gamble creates even more chances for political upheaval. However, he is experienced, and optimists expect that increasing tensions with North Korea and China will lead to cooperation among politicians.

    The upcoming Ishiba government will face numerous internal problems too, from the need for corruption-free governance to deep demographic challenges, presenting a host of issues for the administration. It will be interesting to see how he leads the country through these issues with the coalition government.

  • Kashmir Opts Out of Bharatiya Janata Party

    Kashmir Opts Out of Bharatiya Janata Party

    India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has once again failed in its mission to conquer Jammu and Kashmir, a Muslim-majority state, as the people opted for an alliance between the region’s largest party, the National Conference, and India’s opposition party, the Indian National Congress, to form a government. Jammu and Kashmir, which elected its assembly after 10 years, will witness Omar Abdullah, the leader of the National Conference and a prominent figure from the Abdullah dynasty, returning to power. This marks a significant political win for the opposition INDIA alliance, strengthening its broader political strategy to weaken the BJP’s dominance in Indian politics.

    The INDIA coalition, comprising the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC), Indian National Congress (INC), and Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)), secured a majority in the election, winning 49 of the 90 seats. While the BJP, which contested alone, improved its seat tally and vote percentage, it failed to reach the crucial majority and ended up with 29 seats. The Jammu and Kashmir People’s Democratic Party (PDP), another major regional party, faced significant humiliation, winning only 3 seats.

    Elections were held in Jammu and Kashmir from 18 September to 1 October 2024, in three phases, to elect 90 members of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly. The results were announced a week later, on 8 October 2024, with almost 63% voter turnout. This election holds significant importance as it is the first assembly election in over a decade and the first since the territory’s special status was revoked and its statehood withdrawn. Additionally, Jammu and Kashmir elections always attract international interest due to the region’s Muslim majority, which has historically leaned toward secessionism, often with support from Pakistan and China. The elections have been marred by terrorist attacks in the past, and this assembly election was similarly held under the threat of terrorism and insurgency.

    The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has redefined Kashmir’s political landscape, did everything in its power to secure a majority in the state assembly, considering it a crucial objective. They poured significant resources into the region and carried out extensive infrastructure developments. No other state has received the level of attention from the BJP’s central government that Jammu and Kashmir has. The party also delimited constituencies in a way that was seen as favorable to them and introduced provisions such as granting nomination powers to the Lieutenant Governor. The BJP’s election strategy was clear: to maximize the number of seats from the Jammu division, which has a Hindu majority, while splitting the votes in the Kashmir division, which might favor the National Conference (NC)–Indian National Congress (INC) alliance, by supporting multiple independent candidates. However, this strategy failed. Although the BJP increased its vote percentage and number of seats in the Jammu division, it could not reach its target as other players, such as the National Conference, Aam Aadmi Party, and independents, gained ground. Meanwhile, the JKNC-INC alliance successfully prevented vote splitting.

    At the same time, It’s a strong comeback for the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) and its leader Omar Abdullah, who is set to assume the Chief Minister’s post for the second time. He has been out of power for nearly a decade and was even humiliated by his loss in the parliamentary election conducted almost six months ago, where he was defeated by an independent candidate in a crushing manner. However, this time, the people of the Kashmir Valley rallied behind him, and he won from both seats he contested.

    The resurgence of Kashmiri sentiment and the downfall of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which was the main challenger to the JKNC and its alliance with the Indian National Congress (INC), significantly contributed to the JKNC’s election victory. Despite the INC’s relatively poor performance—contesting 38 seats and winning only 6, a drop from 12 in the previous election—the dramatic collapse of the PDP, which won only 3 seats, down from 28 in the last election when it was the largest party, played a pivotal role.

    Other national parties, like the Communist Party of India (Marxist), retained their only seat with Yusuf Tarigami’s victory, while the Aam Aadmi Party made its debut in Jammu and Kashmir by securing its first seat. Most local parties, except for the JKNC, faced a complete collapse in this election.

    The victory of the JKNC, without any possibility of political maneuvering, is an undeniable setback for the BJP’s hard work. It is expected that the Jammu and Kashmir state government will increasingly clash with the central government, as JKNC and its leader, Omar Abdullah, hold policies and demands that are in stark contradiction to those of the BJP. The JKNC has always emphasized Kashmiri pride in contrast to the BJP’s pan-Indian vision. The JKNC demands the restoration of statehood, the reinstatement of the special constitutional status, and an end to BJP rule in the region, particularly through the Lieutenant Governor’s authority—none of which are likely to be accepted by the BJP.

    As a result, political confrontations between these governments are expected in the coming days, although Omar Abdullah has referred to Prime Minister Modi as a gentleman and has expressed hope for a good relationship with the Union government.

  • Sri Lankan President to Hold Election for Communist Parliament

    Sri Lankan President to Hold Election for Communist Parliament

    As anticipated, Sri Lanka’s newly elected president, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, took decisive action on Tuesday, dissolving parliament and announcing a date for a general election. According to a government gazette notification, parliamentary elections are set for November 14, with the newly elected assembly convening on November 21. This move is not merely procedural; it is a fulfillment of a promise Dissanayake made during his campaign-to forge a new government.

    He is increasingly confident that the country’s prevailing disillusionment with traditional politics, coupled with the harsh realities of everyday life, may well fuel a rise in communist sentiment among the populace. By expediting the general election, he aims to broaden a voter base that garnered a mere 3% in the previous parliament election, which translated to only three seats out of 225 in parliament. For Dissanayake, the path forward hinges on establishing a legislative body that aligns with his leftist ideology, ensuring not just smooth governance but also a robust platform for policy-making in a time of profound change.

    Following Dissanayake’s swearing-in ceremony, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena resigned, paving the way for Dissanayake to appoint a new prime minister and cabinet. The dissolution of parliament occurred just hours after Dissanayake swore in Harini Amarasuriya as the new interim prime minister, marking the first time in 24 years that a woman had led a Sri Lankan government. At 54, Amarasuriya, a university lecturer and activist, shares a similar background with Dissanayake and is also a member of his Marxist-leaning coalition party. With the communist party now at the helm, they find themselves in need of a functioning parliament.

    We cannot analyze the upcoming parliamentary election based on the results of the 2020 election, which followed the parliament under Mahinda Rajapaksa. The economic crisis and the mass protests in 2022, which ultimately forced Rajapaksa to flee the country, have fundamentally altered the political landscape of Sri Lanka. In the 2020 election, Rajapaksa’s Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) achieved a resounding victory, winning 145 out of 225 seats amid allegations of malpractices. The opposition, contesting through various alliances, had little impact; Sajith Premadasa, the runner-up in the presidential race, led the Samagi Jana Balawegaya alliance and secured 55 seats. The Tamil National Alliance, representing the ethnic Tamil minority, emerged as another significant player with 10 seats, while Dissanayake’s National People’s Power coalition placed fourth. However, the political landscape in Sri Lanka has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past four years.

    It is more insightful to analyze the recent presidential election, in which the SLPP-despite winning a majority in the last parliamentary elections-nominated a candidate from the Rajapaksa family. Nirmal Rajapaksa managed to garner only 4% of the votes and was ousted in the first round, suggesting the party has lost public support. In contrast, Ranil Wickremesinghe, the former president, contested the election under the banner of the United National Party (UNP)-the country’s long standing political party-receiving 17% of the votes. If the UNP can convert this into parliamentary representation, it could signal a revival for a party that performed poorly in the last parliamentary elections.

    The presidential election indicates that the main contest in the upcoming parliamentary elections will likely be between Dissanayake’s National People’s Power and Premadasa’s Samagi Jana Balawegaya. Both candidates emerged as significant contenders, securing around 40% of the votes in the final round. Dissanayake and his coalition, riding a wave of popularity, may carry this momentum into the upcoming election, while Premadasa, with his established political base and broad support, remains a formidable opponent.

    Sri Lanka’s administrative system, a semi-presidential republic, stands apart from those of its neighboring countries, such as India and the United Kingdom. Instead, it draws parallels to the political structures of France and Portugal, where a president coexists with a prime minister and a cabinet, both of whom are accountable to the legislature. As the country approaches a pivotal parliamentary election, the stakes are particularly high.

    Should Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s National People’s Power (NPP) alliance secure a majority, it could usher in a transformative era, shifting the nation from its entrenched Sinhalese nationalist identity toward a left-leaning governance. However, if the NPP fails to achieve this goal, the potential for unrest looms large.

    The electorate in Sri Lanka is notably responsive to prevailing trends, and currently, the NPP appears to hold the advantage. This sentiment may signal a significant ideological shift for the island nation, suggesting that Sri Lanka’s political trajectory is poised to lean further to the left.