Tag: Elections 2024-25

  • Singaporean Politics in 2024: Preparing for the Big Election

    Singaporean Politics in 2024: Preparing for the Big Election

    In 2024, Singaporean politics was shaped by a series of pivotal moments. A once-in-a-generation shift in leadership brought a new prime minister, while the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) underwent substantial reforms under fresh leadership. As next year’s general election approached, political campaigns began to take shape. The country also faced the verdicts of high-profile scandals, which tarnished its reputation. Amidst all this, prominent foreign leaders, including India’s formidable Prime Minister Narendra Modi, visited, adding Singapore to global geopolitical discussions.

    In May, Lawrence Wong was sworn in as Singapore’s prime minister, marking only the third leadership transition since the country gained independence in 1965. A former government economist, Wong succeeded Lee Hsien Loong, who stepped down after two decades in office. Lee’s resignation was historic, as it was the first time since independence that no member of the Lee family held the office or was in line to do so. Lee continues to serve in Wong’s cabinet as senior minister.

    On May 13, Wong unveiled his first Cabinet, with key portfolios largely unchanged, except for the appointment of Minister for Trade and Industry Gan Kim Yong as deputy prime minister. Together with Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, DPM Gan is expected to provide stability during the initial transition and mentor younger office-holders, according to Wong.

    A more substantial Cabinet reshuffle is anticipated after the general election, as PM Wong has indicated plans to rotate younger 4G ministers into new portfolios to broaden their experience, assuming the PAP is re-elected. While the two deputy prime ministers are seasoned leaders, it remains unclear who PM Wong views as his key 4G lieutenants. However, recent internal PAP appointments offer some insight: Education Minister Chan Chun Sing and National Development Minister Desmond Lee retained their positions as assistant secretaries-general.

    In his first National Day Rally address, Wong announced a reset of policies, including the introduction of an unemployment payment scheme and an extension of state-sponsored parental leave by 10 weeks. Political observers previously suggested that the unemployment payout signaled a shift toward welfarism. 

    Lawrence Wong is actively campaigning for next year’s general election, scheduled for November. He has taken several steps to boost the popularity of his party, the People’s Action Party (PAP), which has been in power since Singapore’s founding, while also enhancing his own image by leveraging modern tools and methods. Although the ruling party faces challenges from the opposition, it understands the risks and is positioning itself for a refresh ahead of its 70th anniversary. On December 4, Lawrence Wong was elected secretary-general of the PAP by the party’s top leadership. Additionally, Mr. Chan was promoted from vice-chairman to chairman of the headquarters executive committee, a position formerly held by Prime Minister Wong.

    In 2024, high-profile criminal cases involving former transport minister S. Iswaran and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh captivated the attention of Singaporeans. Iswaran, 62, pleaded guilty to five charges on what was supposed to be the first day of his trial, avoiding what many had expected to be a prolonged legal battle over corruption charges. In October, the court sentenced him to 12 months in jail for four counts of accepting valuable items as a public servant and one count of obstructing justice. Following this, Prime Minister Wong reaffirmed the government’s zero-tolerance policy toward corruption. He emphasized that, despite the personal difficulty in acting against a colleague and friend, it was the government’s responsibility to maintain Singapore’s clean and corruption-free system.

    Just weeks later, Singh, 48, faced two charges of perjury related to his testimony before a parliamentary committee. Over 13 court days spanning five weeks, the trial examined Singh’s statements in December 2021 to the Committee of Privileges, which had been convened to investigate a lie told by former WP MP Raeesah Khan. The trial saw testimony from Khan, former WP members, and former WP secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, with tense exchanges between the prosecution and defense. The case has drawn attention to the opposition, particularly the inner workings of the Workers’ Party, as Singh is the Republic’s first Leader of the Opposition.

    Singapore continues to maintain a conflicting stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict by not recognizing Palestine as a state while advocating for its cause and supporting a two-state solution. In 2024, it repeatedly called for an immediate ceasefire and the safe, unconditional release of all remaining hostages. In August, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan emphasized that Singapore must be prepared to call out violations of international law, breaches of the UN Charter, or actions that threaten fundamental principles. However, in June, three women faced public order charges for allegedly organizing a pro-Palestine procession near the Istana and soliciting online attendance. Despite numerous calls from leaders for recognition, Singapore has not officially recognized Palestine.

    Neither the PAP nor opposition parties are actively engaging with the ground, but potential candidates have already been spotted in several constituencies. Some level of horse-trading between opposition parties appears to have begun to avoid three-cornered contests, which have historically been seen as detrimental by splitting the opposition vote. Red Dot United (RDU) chief Ravi Philemon said that his party began walkabouts in Nee Soon GRC in August, after learning that the Progress Singapore Party was no longer active there. RDU is part of a four-party coalition with the National Solidarity Party, Singapore People’s Party, and the Singapore United Party. In 2020, most opposition parties had to broker bilateral pacts after a proposed coalition of seven opposition parties failed to materialize.

    The 2025 general election will be crucial for Singapore as it will test the latest generation of PAP leadership and highlight the growing strength of the opposition, shaping the future of Singapore’s politics. The shift toward a welfare state is expected in the coming years, with the opposition playing an important role in this evolving landscape. At the same time, the new U.S. administration under Trump may demand more pro-U.S. policies from the Singapore government, potentially destabilizing the country’s geopolitical balance.

  • 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.

  • EVM Rigging or Directionlessness: What’s Troubling the Indian National Congress?

    EVM Rigging or Directionlessness: What’s Troubling the Indian National Congress?

    Six months ago, the Indian National Congress, often called Congress—the grand old party of Indian politics—found itself celebrating a rare achievement in the past decade. It wasn’t a return to power in New Delhi, but the party’s first success in ten years at securing the minimum number of seats needed to claim the position of Leader of the Opposition. This modest victory, celebrated as a triumph, underscored the dramatic decline of a party that once ruled India with commanding majorities.

    Since Narendra Modi and his BJP took power in 2014, the Congress party, often called the Gandhi dynasty party, has steadily declined. The party’s flaws became glaringly evident after it lost power, yet its leaders ignored them. Instead of introspecting, they focused on accusing the BJP of malpractice, alleging Election Commission bias, and claiming voting machine tampering. By failing to address internal shortcomings, they repeatedly lost elections at both national and local levels.

    The Indian National Congress, along with its regional allies, benefited from the anti-incumbency wave against the ruling party, which had been in power for the past decade, during the last parliamentary elections in June. They secured 99 out of 543 seats, earning the position of Leader of the Opposition and a cabinet rank However, shortly after, crucial state assembly elections—including those in Jammu and Kashmir and Maharashtra—took place. The results deeply disappointed Congress, revealing challenges that went beyond the BJP and Modi.

    In the state elections held after the parliamentary elections, surveys predicted a favorable outcome for Congress, but the party failed to translate this into seats. In Jammu and Kashmir, where the BJP lacks significant influence, Congress underperformed, losing six seats compared to the previous election, while its alliance partner made a remarkable jump from 15 to 47 seats. In Haryana, despite strong performance in the parliamentary elections and favorable survey predictions, Congress squandered the opportunity and lost to the BJP.

    In Jharkhand, the alliance partner JMM gained seats and formed the government, but Congress failed to improve its tally. In Maharashtra, India’s wealthiest state, where Congress led in the last parliamentary election, the BJP dominated the assembly elections. Even Congress’s alliance partners could not save the party there. After these defeats, Congress leaders intensified their accusations against the BJP, alleging election malpractice, including tampering with electronic voting machines, in an attempt to explain their losses in the state elections.

    The Election Commission, BJP, and even Congress’s alliance parties disagree with the claims. The Supreme Court of India has also confirmed that the process is safe, to the best of its knowledge. Interestingly, only the Indian National Congress suffered in the recent state elections, while all other major state parties, including those that opposed the BJP, benefitted. This situation is forcing Congress to reflect on itself and wake up to reality.

    Congress no longer has a clear political direction. Once the flag bearer of socialism in India, with cadres who upheld socialism and secularism, it has now lost its way. Its current politics revolves around worshipping the Gandhi family and courting Muslim votes. Congress has seen three generations of the Gandhi family hold the position of prime minister and head of government. But people have now decided that enough is enough. Making Rahul Gandhi the prime minister is not their responsibility, especially since he hasn’t proven himself capable, even in his own assembly seats. Narendra Modi has consistently upheld his image as a man of the common people and demonstrated his capability at various levels of administration, excelling as the chief minister of Gujarat. In contrast, Rahul Gandhi is unwilling to build his credentials from the ground up; instead, he directly targets the prime ministership, just like his predecessors. Modi has skillfully used this contrast to frame the election as a choice between the common man and the royal family.

    Congress lacks leadership at different levels. The party no longer has quality leaders because it has punished and sidelined anyone who posed a threat to the Nehru-Gandhi family’s dominance, shrinking into a group of worshippers of the Gandhi family who have no connection with the people. Meanwhile, the BJP is cultivating and grooming second and third-tier leaders.

    Congress’s poor election management remains a significant problem. In a diverse country like India, with various vote banks and a caste-driven system, effective election management is essential. The BJP excels in this aspect, designing strong campaigns and implementing strategies to secure victories. For instance, the BJP has managed to win in Muslim-majority seats, even though Muslims are not traditionally part of its vote bank. By using strategies to divide the Muslim community and consolidating the Hindu vote bank, the BJP has achieved success.

    In contrast, Congress believes that Muslims will consistently support them out of fear of the BJP and Narendra Modi. However, other parties are now vying for Muslim votes, causing a split in support. Meanwhile, Congress’s heavy focus on Muslim-centric policies has alienated Hindu voters, further eroding its support.

    It is clear that Congress is losing its base. Once firmly rooted in Indian soil, the party has seen its foundation overtaken by the Bharatiya Janata Party and local parties. Ten years out of power have made this shift easier. Today, elections have become a contest between the BJP and local parties, while Congress’s significance continues to diminish.

    In a democracy, a party must offer meaningful politics to the people, rather than simply blaming the ruling party or promising freebies. While this approach has worked in some areas, Congress cannot compete with the BJP in the long term without redefining its politics. Furthermore, whether Congress wins or loses, the absence of another truly national party that spans from north to south and east to west threatens Indian democracy. A parliament dominated by a single party could soon become a reality, and that would be the biggest disaster for the democracy of the Republic of India.

  • 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.

  • How Would Trump’s Second Term Affect Asia?

    How Would Trump’s Second Term Affect Asia?

    Donald Trump has been confirmed as the next U.S. president, defeating incumbent Vice President Kamala Harris. As the 47th president, he will take office next year, though his return to the post after a defeat is already resonating worldwide. The U.S. president’s role extends beyond national borders, shaping global direction and policy. Asia, the world’s focal point this century, is preparing for Trump’s return, and he is likely to focus more on the region in his second term compared to his predecessors, who primarily concentrated on Europe and Latin America.

    In his last term, which ended four years ago, Trump clearly demonstrated his approach as a businessman-turned-politician. While the Biden administration has since reshaped the global landscape, Trump is expected to resume his previous style, promoting closer ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, taming Russia and Iran, shifting U.S. alliances from Pakistan toward India, challenging China, and reinforcing U.S. relations with East Asia.

    The war-ridden Middle East anticipates Trump’s immediate attention. Many Arab Americans expressed anger over the Democratic Party’s failure to address regional issues, which contributed to their loss. Trump is expected to be more reactive in the region than Biden. He has been a staunch supporter of Israel and has built strong ties with Israel and its Prime Minister Netanyahu, while Democrats, especially Kamala Harris, have advocated for a two-state solution and support for Palestine. Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. embassy there, and encouraged allies to follow suit. During his previous tenure, he also proposed a peace plan that, while heavily favoring Israel, was still somewhat workable.

    Trump’s pro-Israel approach led many to fear it would deteriorate relations with Muslim states. However, while openly supporting Israel, he also established a strong relationship with Saudi Arabia and the Crown Prince, despite heavy criticism from human rights watchdogs and significant opposition both within the U.S. and abroad. His efforts resulted in closer ties between several Muslim nations and Israel, with Saudi Arabia nearly formalizing relations. Some Republicans even nominated Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for these actions, and many believe Saudi Arabia would have formalized relations with Israel had Trump won a second term four years before instead of Biden.

    During Biden’s term, Saudi Arabia became increasingly distant and pursued other alliances, including with Russia. Many believe Trump can fix this and could persuade Netanyahu to negotiate a ceasefire. However, regarding Iran, Trump is expected to maintain a hardline stance against the regime, and a closer U.S.-Israel alignment could further pressure Iran, potentially fueling internal unrest. Conflicts in Syria and Iraq will likely persist, with additional U.S. support expected for the Kurds. Turkey, under Erdogan’s vision of Ottoman revival, may continue a balanced approach rather than adopting a more assertive role.

    Central Asia and Russia are also likely to remain in Trump’s focus. Given his alleged close ties with Putin, many believe he may work to resolve the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. As a seasoned negotiator, Trump might aim to broker an agreement between both sides. During his campaign, Trump acknowledged American frustration over spending on Ukraine, suggesting a resolution may be near. In exchange for potential cooperation with Russia, Trump might reduce U.S. involvement in Russia’s sphere of influence in Central Asia, an area where Biden sought to weaken Moscow’s control.

    In South Asia, Trump’s interest in the Indian market was evident during his previous term. He cultivated a strong relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and both view each other as close allies. However, as nationalists, they often balance competing interests. Nonetheless, the mutual reliance between the U.S. and India—both in terms of American production needs and the Indian market, and vice versa—suggests that major deals may soon follow. Despite her Indian heritage, Kamala Harris is often seen by Indian media as opposing Modi due to her stance on certain policies. It was also clear that Indian media endorsed Trump during the campaigns. This alignment creates room for more significant developments between the U.S. and India, while Islamic nations in the region, like Pakistan and Bangladesh, may face challenges due to Trump’s pro-India and pro-Hindu stance.

    In East Asia, Trump’s relationship with China is likely to worsen as he opposes any economic growth in China that might threaten U.S. market dominance. Trump initiated the ongoing trade wars, and further actions against Chinese products are expected. His push to revitalize American manufacturing will likely intensify pressure on China. By framing China as an adversary, Trump’s strategy may drive more countries away from China’s business, which could significantly impact China and escalate tensions between the U.S. and China. This economic friction may heighten tensions in the South China Sea, especially if China loses market influence.

    Trump’s search for alternatives to China could benefit Southeast Asian countries, particularly Vietnam, Indonesia, and possibly Malaysia. Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan will likely draw closer to the U.S., as Trump seeks to strengthen alliances to counter China. His previous engagement with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un also showcased his diplomatic flexibility.

    Asia is sure to see more eventful days during Trump’s second term. Israel and Russia, both seeking an end to ongoing conflicts, appear uncertain about how to resolve them and may be hoping for an intervention. Donald Trump is likely to step in, aiming to position himself as a hero. Optimists believe a resolution could happen within months, as he has discussed these issues multiple times and has strong relationships with key parties, along with a desire to save American money.

    However, while Trump may strengthen some alliances, many believe his approach could strain relationships with other regional actors, such as Iran, China and  nuclear-armed Pakistan. As tensions between the U.S. and China continue, there is a risk of increased instability in the eastern region. Yet, with Trump’s focus on economic growth and business, it’s expected that global attention will shift back to economic matters, setting aside other issues currently in the spotlight.

  • 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.

  • Can Modi and BJP Conquer Jammu and Kashmir?

    Can Modi and BJP Conquer Jammu and Kashmir?

    Jammu and Kashmir, India’s northernmost and predominantly Muslim territory, has long posed a challenge for the Indian government due to increased terrorist attacks and Islamist extremism. International media, which have consistently supported secession efforts in Kashmir, often celebrate each clash between extremists and the Indian military, thereby garnering overseas backing for these movements. However, for the Indian government and its people, Kashmir is an emotional issue, deeply rooted in history, and they are unwilling to give it up. While previous union governments in New Delhi granted Kashmir certain privileges and special status, partly in response to international pressure, the current Hindu nationalist government under Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has taken a different approach. They revoked Kashmir’s special constitutional status and made it a union territory to promote assimilation, sparking significant displeasure at the international level, particularly from Muslim-majority countries.

    It has long been the BJP’s goal to form a government single-handedly in the state, though the Muslim majority largely opposes them. Ten years ago, the BJP formed a coalition government with the PDP, a local party, but the alliance quickly collapsed due to internal disunity. The union government subsequently made Jammu and Kashmir a union territory with direct administration. Nevertheless, the BJP understands that securing a majority government in the state is crucial for making key decisions and avoiding court interventions. Having achieved seemingly impossible victories in other Indian states through well-engineered election strategies, the BJP is now fighting hard in the ongoing assembly elections.

    The BJP is confident this time, with several positive factors working in its favor, starting with the fact that the party is stronger now. In addition to securing the Hindu vote, it has made inroads among minority groups such as Sikhs, Buddhists, and even some Muslim factions. The party’s electoral performance has also improved significantly. In the last assembly election, the BJP’s best performance saw them winning 25 out of 87 seats. This time, with constituencies redrawn and the total number of seats increased to 90, the party needs 45 seats to secure a majority.

    The increase in seat numbers is expected to boost the BJP’s chances, as more seats have been added in the Hindu-majority Jammu region. Six additional seats were allocated to Jammu, while only one was added to the Kashmir region, bringing the total number of seats in Jammu to 37. If the BJP can secure over 30 seats in Jammu, they would only need 15 or fewer from Kashmir. For the BJP, it is relatively easy to garner support from independent candidates and smaller parties, and they also anticipate nominations from the Lieutenant Governor. The BJP has also found an opportunity in the division among the opposition. Although the Indian National Congress (INC) has joined forces with the National Conference (NC), Kashmir’s largest party, they have been unable to bring the influential JKPDP into the alliance, which is expected to split the vote.

    Another positive factor is the increasing tendency of people in Kashmir to move away from traditional political parties like the NC, JKPDP, and INC, and support independent candidates, as seen in recent elections. Improved security is also expected to benefit the BJP, as more people in the Kashmir Valley may feel safe enough to vote for the party, which they previously avoided due to fear and threats. Additionally, the BJP is optimistic about the impact of development projects and significant infrastructure investments across various sectors in the state.

    The BJP faces considerable challenges as well. First, the Islamist population in Jammu and Kashmir is determined to defeat BJP candidates by supporting any viable alternative. Defeating the BJP is their main objective. As a result, the BJP faces threats even in the Hindu-majority Jammu region. With major national parties, including the Indian National Congress (INC), BSP, and AAP, contesting in Jammu, they could potentially garner Hindu votes in conjunction with support from the Islamist vote, allowing them to win over the BJP. Any losses for the BJP in Jammu region could undermine its dream of securing a majority, especially if the INC attempts to unite all parties except the BJP to form a government.

    There are also internal issues. Local protests against candidates chosen by the central BJP leadership could lead to votes shifting toward the opposition. Additionally, the INC-NC alliance poses a significant threat to the BJP in the Kashmir region. If terrorist attacks increase near the polling dates, it could further damage the BJP’s chances.

    It’s clear that, without significant support from the Muslim population, the BJP is unlikely to secure a majority in Jammu and Kashmir. While the party has emphasized infrastructure development, security improvements, and welfare programs in the region, the core issue remains religion, as the Kashmir issue is deeply rooted in religious divisions. The BJP is countering this by consolidating non-Muslim votes and attempting to attract liberal and nationalist Muslim voters. If the BJP succeeds with this tactic, it could finally achieve a majority in Jammu and Kashmir. Otherwise, the result will likely follow the usual pattern of favoring coalition governments.

  • How Will the U.S. Election Impact the Israel-Gaza Conflict, and Vice Versa?

    How Will the U.S. Election Impact the Israel-Gaza Conflict, and Vice Versa?

    Israel’s war on Gaza shows no signs of ending soon, and countries around the world seem unwilling to intervene. The only country outside of Israel with the capacity to meaningfully intervene is the United States. Despite being the world’s most powerful country, capable of diplomatic and military operations anywhere, the U.S. appears constrained in acting against Israel’s will, a nation it holds dear. With a sizable Jewish and Muslim population – both of whom are divided over the Israel-Gaza conflict – the U.S. presidential election is also expected to be influenced by the situation. In response to growing negative sentiment and campus protests in solidarity with Palestine, the U.S., along with its Arab allies, has attempted to broker a ceasefire and develop a solution, but these efforts have not succeeded. With Biden stepping away from the presidential race, the U.S. now awaits the upcoming contest between hard-right Republican Trump and left-leaning Democrat Kamala Harris to see how future intervention in the Israel-Gaza conflict will unfold.

    While both candidates follow core U.S. policies in the Middle East, their approaches to resolving the conflict differ. Kamala Harris has not outlined detailed plans but remains firmly committed to Israel, continuing the U.S.’s long standing support for the nation. She reaffirmed her backing of Israel, emphasizing the need to secure the release of hostages, while advocating for a two-state solution to provide both Palestinian sovereignty and security, which conventionally the US does not endorse. 

    Harris advocates for a ceasefire, conditioned on Hamas releasing the hostages taken during the October 7 attack and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. She was among the first Western leaders to call for a ceasefire in early March and has been more outspoken than President Biden regarding the humanitarian crisis caused by Israel’s military actions in Gaza. However, she has yet to make progress in advancing negotiations on this issue. Despite her reported disagreements with Prime Minister Netanyahu over his handling of the war, she has not proposed any actions that would directly affect his government. Notably, she skipped Netanyahu’s speech to Congress in July but met with him privately during his visit to Washington. Harris’s positions can appear inconsistent or impractical, raising questions about the feasibility of her approach.

    Donald Trump, the former president, has clearly stated his position on the Israel-Gaza conflict and claims to have a resolution plan. He has pledged to resolve the issue quickly if re-elected. However, he has not provided specifics on how he would negotiate with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas to achieve a ceasefire and secure the release of Israeli hostages held in Gaza.

    Trump has consistently supported Israel’s war on Gaza, urging the country to conclude the conflict swiftly due to diminishing international support. Although he was initially critical of Netanyahu and Israeli intelligence for being unprepared for the Oct. 7 attack, he quickly retracted those comments and reaffirmed his strong alliance with Netanyahu, with whom he had a close relationship during his presidency. During his time in office, Trump released a peace proposal he called a blueprint for a two-state solution. However, this plan did not propose a fully autonomous Palestinian state and was perceived as heavily favoring Israel. Trump’s administration strongly backed Netanyahu’s government and endorsed hard-liner Israeli policies previously rejected by the U.S. His presidency also saw a significant warming of relations between Israel and several Arab countries, highlighting his skills as a negotiator and businessman.

    Criticism of the current U.S. government’s actions is likely to target Kamala Harris, as American activists have reported on the ongoing casualties from the war. Traditionally, Muslim and Arab voters lean toward the Democratic Party, but dissatisfaction with the current administration’s handling of the situation and its stance on Israel has caused frustration. Additionally, many liberals and anti-war advocates within the Democratic base are unhappy with the government’s response. While Trump is unlikely to gain favor from these groups due to his pro-Israel stance, many believe he might be able to end the conflict with his negotiation and problem-solving skills, which previously helped improve relations between Arabs and Israelis during his tenure. A ceasefire before the election seems unlikely, as the outgoing president, who is not running for re-election, would not gain any political advantage from such a deal.