tv Brookings Institution on Indian Election Results CSPAN May 24, 2019 9:32pm-11:08pm EDT
. >> good morning welcome to all of you. we are here to discuss the largest democratic exercise in the world with the results coming out yesterday 600 million indian voters went to the polls over the last suit few weeks they chose to return rain the prime minister for a second term in the prime minister as this comes as a surprise analysis to hear about that from 282 with the
required amount of the majority was 272. partners all have just over 350 of those 542 states that were contested so we are discussing the significance and the impact with the political landscape the economic policy as well as the approach to the world and joining me today is a panel of analyst watching these elections from different angles as a senior fellow from india pakistan counsel foreign relations. and senior fellow from economy development program and in the south asia program at the carnegie endowment. and getting started these are
domestic politics talking through these elections over the last few months so now over to you. >>. >> thank you very much. it is great to be here. one has to be humble at moments like this when we witness political earthquake in india less than 24 hours out to have all the data that you could fully understand what took plac place. so what i will show you are provisional numbers and thoughts and analysis from the data that we do have. starting with the fact is somebody mentioned with the wind in 2014 was big and 2019
was even bigger. in the back of the room you may not see much of a difference to see where they did well with the blue or gray are the other parties but i would mention three things that i thought were interesting. number one is the ability of the bjp to once again dominate. 75 percent of the part of a terry come from just eight states people said that was black swan a lightning strike but it has been replicated five years later there was some attrition but again going
up against that opposition which on paper anyway to give the bjp a tough fight did not materialize. the second interesting aspect are the significant gains they made in the eastern states this is what they had targeted for many years to anticipate that the numbers could go down in the western parts of india where the bjp could consolidate their position with that principle opposition. that is striking when it has always been this is a party of northerners who have always
struggled to break in the eastern court or were politics is much more dominated by those identities and the strong regional parties. also bjp did quite well in their foothold as advancing the state assembly election that they were thought to sweep once more in the national polls and bjp did win some seats so now that gives them another foothold in addition to extend the party further. look at the all india vote shar share, the most striking thing is the rise to
38 percent with 50 percent of the all india vote if you have been following is truly stunning but what jumps out at me is congress has leveled off so they seem to have a floor of 19 or 20 percent that is captive so look at that as a consolation prize one out of five indians but the last six election cycles the 50/50 split with national parties the other goes to regional parties. some of the biggest gains were regional parties work i look at the state level of over a
dozen states with more than 50 percent of the vote share. you can see many of the state states, almost across the board with one exception they did one better from 2014. so we had this debate whether or not this was an era of a new party system so have the three party systems the first from 1967 characterized by a congress dominance with the national power and. where congress remained dominant nationally but those to go at the state level and a quarter century which is known
as a third party system single gravitational force with the series of messy coalitions where bjp was not reliable but in 2014 we talked about the dawn of a fourth party system where it replaced congress as a dominant player so further it gives credence to the idea we are in a new era. if lightning struck in 2014 but bad it struck again with climate change. we need to look at the attributes. number one to become less competitive so to weigh those political parties so parties
that have one seat or 50 seats those that are represented in parliament it is a real departure from what they have seen to become less competitive even from what we saw in 2014 but the victory is even bigger. margin of victory is the distance in the vote share of the runner up and we see that increasingly with bigger margins than in the past. look where the winning party that has shot up over the last election cycle. you can win with 25 or
30 percent of the vote because it is fragmented we have seen a real consolidation so if we are in this era what drove voters the way that they did this time it's very easy to monday morning quarterback to say we need months if not years to go over the data to get a sufficient answer but let me show you some data points. the only social science research organization to do polling in india. 32 percent of voters but not have voted for the mda if not the prime minister candidate. that tells you how important leadership was. so this idea that prime
minister modi operates with clean intent with the national interest at heart something that many voters particularly in northern india has latched onto. there are some indicators where the unemployment issue with the slowdown in growth historically low prices and wage stagnation and what is interesting with the campaign jobs with that respondents the unemployment is the biggest problem and you can see here the month before the campaign started to when this was carried out so 21 percent from
the national survey and that declined by ten percentage points. if you look at economic issues that large 35 percent say the economy was the most important issue but that declined by 12 percentage points over the course of the election. so one way of thinking about it voters were looking for an excuse and a lot of people take issue with the word excuse. they said we don't need an excuse to vote for prime minister modi. even though there are economic woes they view him as the best person to address those woes.
so there is a tweet yesterday to say typically we say what are the issues with unemployment inflation and then mapping onto those preferences than the opposite happened they really wanted prime minister modi and found empirical ways to support the case. this issue will be unresolved and to say with some confidence it likely provided the bjp with a bump. and with those subsequent response. to value the economy like national security and
leadership like a decisive leader like prime minister modi. to be suggested the mda was tipped the rough majority it could be what happened what magnified the lead. so i will just end here so i don't take too much time with those other big winners. the first i would point to is the why and if our congress party that isn't has also swept those assembly elections this is interesting because the sun of the former chief minister was booted out of the congressional party he thought he was the rightful inheritor to the legacy due to the fact he was indicted on federal one - - several corruption charges
it turns out that may have been a mistake voters overlooked all of that and have given a resounding mandate. so those who may be the darling of the donors and they were hurt very badly in the elections. also the dmk the party that did very well in those that were in the wilderness both parties which is the incumbent at the state level experienced leadership transition to come out of that flight one reason the seats went up is because they have given them 23 seats. so if there is a man in indian
politics with nine lives here is a man who began his career exclusively at the bjp who left the mda then rejoined now with 16 seats and now is a pivotal player in north india. who are the big losers other than the congress there is a series of political parties that rose on the backs of that empowerment in the wake of the commission with the public sector physicians and the two big regional parties and a lot of them did quite poorly.
so those that did manage to win double digits so in that way it is an improvement but those that help to prevent did not succeed without objective so if there was party that they could go into a third national political alternative they were humbled with just one state on - - with just one seat but the seven seats where the ruling party of the states for the second election in a row goes to the bjp. and to see a precipitous decline of the parties in india at this point have nary a foothold they have been
badly hurt those who supported the left to move to bjp to combat that energy. so i will end here if i might with some questions of a political analyst and many of us very few predicted a victory of this magnitude so what about something of this size? but there are a couple of questions so what role do different conceptions play? to talk about the idea to be
discredited and are we in a new place nationalism is essentially the dominant ideology. and there is a different idea and those who disagree directly with the fact that a large swath of the country which previously did not identify with that ideology can be converted and the second is that the issues that are shaping partisan attachments or is it the other way around? those that filter everything through the affinity of bjp or with prime minister modi? how big are the campaign affects we are not very good
press and with the leadership that we don't normally happen in with that narrative in the economy. so the key issues of voters in the landscape and with this need to create jobs over the next three years and that hasn't achieved the full potential so what do you think so what do you think is this mandate so what do you expect like a jackal to help over the
next few months or years? . >> i did not see this coming in with these english companies and those to be comfortable like that. though superlatives and then to focus on something with the nitty-gritty issues and what needs to be done still and most importantly and with this mandate and what they have done in recent years and then it matches and that the picture painted by the statistics and then to be warranted and then and growth
overall has been pretty good with economic activity and at the same time it hasn't been done in with those consequences and with the looks of the deficit. and those have continued to what is remarkable with a very good growth performance with the chains around their neck. and then to see a significant change coming over the next few years. . >> and it is a mandate so what is the message voters were sending in with those economic challenges that prime minister modi may not have achieved a
lot and that was that an approach and not just nationalism but what fed into it. so what is equally important not just the messages being sent but by prime minister modi and his party with the social and nationalistic agenda to manage to push for the economic agenda. so if you look at what could be done over the next few years or what has been accomplished over the last few years, it is a mixed picture in india it is a challenge and what has been done over the last few years with that insolvency or bankruptcy and
with that dynamic approach and that goods and services with the implementation and that would be a good thing for india public support scheme with those cash benefits in all those areas a lot more needs to be done but the economist those put out that list and then to change over time and with those labor laws to have a chokehold on the manufacturing sector in those enterprises constrains the
industrial problems even though they haven't played a very big role those consequences especially in the major metropolitan areas and not functioning very well right now and then to say to recognize and with that desperate need for infrastructure and energy needs to be dealt with but here again some progress that needs to be made and what this agenda really needs. and that is not destructive but the employment outcomes and the middle class and to
think about how prime minister modi went with a mandate which was considering something very tempting which was very dramatic mandate it's not just that but what india had many times over the last five years is a very nice growth opportunity. and of that crisis it has been painful but sometimes it has to be done. and not only that domestic growth and those external circumstances and also are very favorable.
whether if it is a political cost. and those have been implicating that defect. to that system it works well some people with any reforms. and those how they will feel the initial impact. so that that is the open question but second to have the right people around him to do this. this is not so much what the bjp asked for but prime minister modi but there is only one of him. so to know if he puts the right people in place with a very difficult task to think
about what is an equally challenging. but the number of capable technocrats that was quite limited if they did not last so the big question right now is prime minister modi will have that tremendous mandate and what needs to be done. and then with that configuration and circumstances. and with those are limited and with that stability in the foreseeable future.
and then i hope that prime minister modi will push forward but we have to wait and see. . >> and with that external engagements and with the results each is busy but what does this mean? . >> but not in the least because with the attacks in india and in pakistan that national security rhetoric with the election itself and
then to play a role so what will be seen next so what about those things that lie ahead? . >> i want to echo the co- panelist with the fact that we don't have a good sense of what this is a mandate for. to have such a large component and to see that in a few decades and what those voters are voting for four that they would stand up to pakistan to briefly refresh what happened
to know there is a terrorist attack and those that are claimed by a terrorist group all the suicide attackers in the indian government decided to respond with airplanes across the border to launch the airstrikes into pakistan location of where this terrorist group had visibility there are a lot of commercial one - - questions that emerge in and the next day they mounted retaliatory strikes in india resulting in indian airline air force pilot down and in custody for three days.
. >> those that emerged for which we are not 100 percent clear and in the election that the recruiters in india saw and that they have a leader in the government to stand up in a strong way to pakistan and over the course of decades and with the tensions to have some sort of dialogue under way with a terrible terrorist attack that takes place in india. and with this dynamic and tired to feel like the effort and friendship reaching out
that hand prime minister modi reached out the hand of friendship to see this doesn't meet with that equal hand of the terrorist groups for pakistan. people are frustrated with that. and to carry out a level of escalation and i think that will show how much of a role in voters minds i look forward to what political scientist or journalist will elicit from this. and to question the mandate this relates to expectations in the united states and other countries outside of india so right now from other people
that prime minister modi is a reformer and this is a mandate for reform for those steps from economic reform. just not sure that's exactly what they thought they were voting for and also when i say reformer use a reform are those in india say reformer not talking about the same thing. prime minister modi implemented early in his first term reforms the policy level reform to decline later in the term that one of the things he is very good at is a development project which people think of as reform. so they campaign keeping a country clean, building
toilets to make sure all indian villages have access to a toilet. compete on - - completing electrification program. a program assures they had cooking gas cylinders. housing program for lower incomes. the largest health insurance plan. you can creates a long list of important programs but i'm not sure they are exactly reform. this exact same policy program the national manufacturing policy i know the india program that manufacturing sector contributes remotely meets that target because that percentage of gdp they haven't
budged in the last five years but interest for some companies around the world setting up manufacturing has produced that level of investment and those important challenges to boost manufacturing as a way to further develop the economy to boost the level of prosperity and some of the other things are labor and land reform. that is crucial with creating the economic context to get to a place where it's a much more powerful manufacturing power. also the external scenario with china moving out actually creates a real opportunity for india if the context within india can meet the challenge.
a couple other things about the mandate, when we talk about reforms in the united states i'm just not sure the us has the same thing what india are talking about. they talk about as component projects with quality of life but not the same thing making the market much more open to the world for a couple of other things to analyze, we have spoken about the idea that prime minister modi is a strong leader. that is an important component. that he is incorruptible and hard-working as the mandate. we haven't spoken what we can attribute to the hindu pride
with a shade of nationalism at the far end get something that looks like sectarianism and this is the discussion with the problem of terrorism emanating from pakistan with these domestic questions as well. those campaign comments from the chief minister referring to the congressional party from that coded language that sometimes you can see campaign comments why should indian reforms evidenced by the fact they didn't choose to go to pakistan? so you can see the shading of the question that was much
stronger in 2014 that's what people will have to reckon with going down the line so to what extent was the best option? i don't know the answer i hope political scientist can discuss that because it's quite important so what does this mean? 's so i throw that out as a series of questions. >> i hope you are taking notes with your political analysis to decide what nationalism means but there was indian nationalism with a large and
respected ruler with those incidents that you mention but you talk about india and the big leagues so to come back as you said to put it out there and with the congressional party and what is historic is by 2024, then a decade they are out of power is a longest time they have ever spent out of power. so what lessons do they need to learn?
. >> i will preface my comments by saying it is not a party given to self reflection and introspection. many of the existential questions we are debating today are frankly the same questions we were asking 2014. they are relating to a deficit of leadership and ideology. and what it is that addition? so why i am skeptical i put the graph up there so there is still a base across the country around 19 or 20 percent operations but beyond that there are enough states in india that are
two-party states with bjp these are states that where congress did well in the recent assembly election. so to the extent there is a repository for those congress is the only one that can exploit that vulnerability so to see them emerge in those two-party states so that in some ways takes the edge off the existential crisis so they can revert back to that. now coming to those larger issues i will state the obvious that if you subtract family from the party then you have no party anymore but then
to take them with somebody else that would fragment into regional franchises. and that's how they got their start. so this leadership deficit is great for easy transition planning it's not so great with a gene pool with a roadblock. so most people will say it is more persistent and more diligent that is substantial and the big mistakes of the
congress to train all of their guns on prime minister modi with the watchmen is a thief that has blown up in their face so the premise of that requires people to actually believe it is possible that he himself is on the take that's why they never really went anywhere. so we don't anticipate leadership changes the best thing congress could do is to adopt a more collegiate style approach with a empower political leaders one of the real strengths is that it facilitated the rise of state leaders but now the bjp has
said that is one way congress could go but they have a chance to do that to a power new group but chose not to do that. so they don't have great hopes but in terms of vision to be in a dangerous position because what prime minister modi has done so well is to saturate the space on the right and on the left so the notion of the public provision of where congress begins. but they cannot criticize and it is unlikely for congress to
adopt those reforms so they are stuck. so for it to be completely discredited and it is terminus with the audience that india is a complicated place in the most diverse country in the planet so to be in the unparalleled diversity away into the constitution to say you will not enact that but there is a policy to maintain the equal distance from religion so to use that religious education to subsidize social practices associated with religion.
one of the things you point out what the parties think it is for and when the bjp led coalition one of the lessons they took on the liberalization of reforms met with that inclusive growth to take everybody along. and with those promises with the state expenditure with that infrastructure spending so where will all the money for this come from? and on a related point with these hundred year plans. but to make sure it's
inclusive. >> to have a group of economist with that strategy so somebody is willing to take it on but what prime minister modi more broadly to take up both types of the aisle to resonate on one hand and then going back to the election strategy that did not work well because as we mentioned that even with the ease missteps the notion that it
was finally leader on the national stage was part of the endemic problem with those elections and what they anticipated to be pushed back. and so to make people's life better and in addition to improve the function of the economy the actual delivery has been substantial in many ways but the sense is nobody could take on these problems and it is a very powerful message and into the second
term. and what he plans to do it will be challenging. one of the key problems is you have a good pool of domestic savings but not a financial systems to channel those into the most productive users. so talk about the labor laws and infrastructure and i am even partial but unless india gets it right it's difficult to generate good growth because without those resources with that dynamism in the economy. but with banking reform because the difficult banking sector requires politically connected enterprises and then
be willing to undertake that because that is a significant political cost. but on the financing side looks like it's coming under control but if you put together the overall consolidated difference they don't look quite as good but of that trajectory so there is a sense there is a real commitment to economic reforms. but prime minister modi has the notion the poor have access to facilities that women in particular will be empowered to layout a broad
vision. and he argued just to get things done without laying out a big vision and not what he said but clear delivery of those things that needs to be done. so with the broader vision and to just be the best of available options. to recharge and reinvigorate a clear sense. >> you mentioned women, one of my favorite campaigns has been confiscated by the election
commission. but seriously what was striking for me to be in the record-breaking turnout up from the last time which was record-breaking in 2014. record-breaking in 2014. . . . . >> similar things and how to kind of actually respond to them. just following up on getting back to this conversation about the economy. if you are a foreign investor, what would you be seeing, looking for, signals that would
make you feel bothered over the next few months and what would worry you the next few months, similarly if you are trade negotiator what would you, maybe not negotiator because it's always tough but what would you be looking for for india to do on the trade front? >> from the investor perspective, keeping in mind that i am not an investor, another it is important that this issue of ease of doing business. and that is where you've seen great progress in india during the modi first government. they focus on the idea of creating a context where people would feel their investments are welcome. these the world bank ease of doing business index is a kind of star, a metric for what india needed to improve. and they have moved up on that list quite substantially. so that they're not crack in the top 50 yet which is the original goal. but they have moved up from being you know, in the lower
third of the ease of doing business index.but it does mean everything is easy. you can continue to hear stories from people about difficulties investing or large investments that find, all of a sudden someone has a new regulatory review. like on the issue of e-commerce. or people who are now quite important -- the data heavy space. india has become the world largest open internet economy if you think about just in terms of sheer number of users, platforms involved because china is closed. so you start to hear a lot of questions from people that what happened will be data -- data nationalism is something that you are hearing a lot about. from an investors perspective i think it depends on what space
you are in but also what the kind of future questions about sector regulation look like and i think that, and he is not necessarily the easiest place in every sector to do business and as i mentioned earlier, i think we have seen during the first government, he is pro-business. he is willing to be seen, encouraging and courting business to come to india. he is pro-indian business! it doesn't mean he's necessarily pro open markets, pro-business all over the world. i think that is an important distinction. on the trade negotiator side, i really worry that the trade frictions between india and united states which i could go on at length and it would bore all of you because some of the issues are extremely -- but aware that the frictions began to affect some of the other areas are very positive and deepening cooperation between the united states. so let me just say that the defense and strategic areas of cooperation has continued to advance quite substantially. we have seen under the modi
government and receive continue with the trump administration, a deepening on interoperability, continued exercise, the resurrection of the quadrilateral dialogue which i want to differentiate is a foreign ministries led consultation. it takes place between india, japan,and australia. everyone should read the writing on that. this has all been very positive i think. the trade side is really hitting rocky shoals. it has been for some time. part of this has been because of the way the trump administration approaches trade. the trump administration is extremely focused and reciprocity. when i was in the obama administration we to speak about our trade relationship with india is relatively balanced. the trump administration sees india as among the large economies of which we have the largest trade deficits. so that is one of the agenda items when trade negotiators
need to talk about ways and it will take steps to reduce the trade deficit. indeed it has come down by that seven percent between 2017 and 2018. as on a $22 billion deficit. there are a lot of other items on the list. for example, and some of it, items on the list, every long laundry list that were referred to. some of the items now are getting piled on with new items that the trump administration is creating. so in 2017 the trump administration decided to do a review of the national security implications of steel and aluminum. imports to the united states. it turns out we have steel imports from india and when they determined that there is a national security impact of steel and aluminum imports and assisted decided to apply tariffs. one of our present tarsal steel imports, 10 percent aluminum imports. it turns out we applied this to
india still imports so is now an issue. they have developed a list of reciprocal tariffs on u.s. products which they would apply again pacifically. they held that in advance while trade negotiations have been ongoing between india and can i say spec could not help her fear that at some point the indian government decide to say well, sorry folks, it is time we are going to apply these tariffs now on a number of u.s. goods that won would likely be almonds. it is an important one. so you have all of these high profile story on trade wars is the story of u.s. china but i do worry that we could find ourselves in a kind of series of escalating trade steps and reciprocal steps that start to make this trading relationship much more difficult than it already is and it is an easy at the best of times. >> and -- the moderator could read this. actually to hear your thoughts on what implications the
elections might have for india 's relationship not just with the u.s. but as a regional -- d.c. modi growing confidently on the international stage and try to broker relationships with countries from the region? or do you see them constraining him into more nationalistic mode? >> i'm going to go back to kind of a gandhi comparison. straightly different reasons. when she won in the early kind of 70s were also after she defeated, that is you know she defeated -- during what was then called the east pakistan crisis. nothing of it as a war in 1971. even her opposition leaders, the urban legend is that then a member of parliament -- the future prime minister called her -- talking to a warrior
queen so to speak. but it had an impression of the neighborhood as well. which is that it gave her a certain, the fact that she had that kind of -- she wanted to see the elections but i can't help but think that for leaders, not just in the neighborhood watching this election, the scale of the mandate but also xi jinping in china and donald trump who incidentally before he was president, was in india in 2014 just after elections and called for -- and so it can't help but make an impression on the leaders. and i think what we'll see now over the next few months, or weeks is, and the next few years, is whether it actually translates to kind of relationships. it's interesting, and sri lanka for example, the bodies are out of power hadn't been kind of very indian friendly so to speak. we have seen major leaders come out and praise the president
for trying to make their way back into office. but i think for xi jinping for example, on the china front, he had an opportunity in 2014 to kind of really, prime minister admires what china has achieved economically. then in the first humans of the modi missionary sought china india activity. but then it kind of dissipated. after the september visit of xi jinping was supposed to be this kind of major move but got overshadowed by the incident. then a few years, the question i have on the china front is, do we see china say listen, we have to focus on the u.s. china competition. we want to take india it is not out of the game but you know maybe build up the uncertainty they have about the u.s. and decrease the perception of us. for a little while. you actually really move to accommodate some of the
sensitivities substantially? i personally think we see little more rhetoric. it is substantially tougher than to do that because it would mean them giving up for example, certain things with their pakistan relationship, making some tough decisions on the economic side. will they do it? i don't know. if our thinking strategically as we are led to believe by people like secretary kissinger, that they do, then i would. i do think it would change and they can say we you know you want to transform this economy and focus on that but i can't say more on the u.s. side than alyssa has. i do think there are some kinda big decisions that will need to be made including on the defense side, this particular the defense procurement. their have been deals waiting to be signed and talks have been postponed. but i think that the skill of the victory make an impression on president trump and it is interesting to me that kind of thinking about the quad but also the big elections you've had in the indo pacific.
they have all returned incumbents.one of the things is that we will bring a sentimental stability but what will it mean for the larger issues? with that and apologies to the moderator taking over for a little bit. we are going to turn over to audience questions. we've a good amount of time for that. we'll take them in clusters. i appeal to you, please keep them short. identify yourself, please keep them short so we can get to as many questions as possible. we will take these two and the third when they are first. thanks, laura. and if there's a particular person you want to direct your question two, let us know that as well. >> hi. my name is -- i just came to india following elections. i would like to say a couple of things about what was talked
about. briefly -- remember the bill that did not pass because of -- that we had also heard about -- i think it actually sort of changed more people trying to be the -- outward facing person. the social aspect as you briefly mentioned. i think my perspective would be that the options part. larger that people want continued he and people believe that given this that sampling will actually come out of it. >> your question please? chris my question is largely, what is this, as he said the mandate, will your perception be about how the mandate is going to be interpreted? will it be more like what was talked about or making india
and the most -- boosting the indian economy. >> hello, thank you. i am -- my question, you talk about this puzzle and the partition affiliation shapes issues that you choose. if you are to -- in that case, -- >> i work in u.s. policy studies. my question primarily -- i enjoy every tefillin is about india's youth and the way they voted. 84 million new voters voted and
both 2014 and email@example.com disproportionately voted for the prime minister modi. why do you think that is? what are the driving factors, is -- what impact on policy and politics moving forward. >> hi, chris mcrae. i was at the summit and 17. the point i would like to make is that very near the top of -- two of britain's most knowledgeable people about india. actually lot of attempts inside china to look at positive relationships when that is possible but also to blend back with sort of digital infrastructure as well as rural infrastructure. he dared to look at the get all of those things.which are probably now all up for grabs
depending on who approaches modi with what. i think there's so much going forward i like to hear more about that rather than the historical policy reform issues. >> will start answering those. take anyone or if they were directed to you, please. >> yet, let me try to take this question. i mean, i think we are trying to piece together the puzzle but -- you know, i think as i mentioned earlier, there are certain characteristics about narendra modi that really seem to resonate with the broad voters. this idea that he is somebody who is a decisive leader who understands that in a fragmented country like india, yet essential is a certain amount of political authority
and take tough decisions. again, these are perceptions to we can debate how they translate into reality. the second is, i think this idea that he is somebody who operates with clean intent to put the natural -- international interest above all else. limited back to the example. one thing that you constantly heard despite people who may have been adversely affected is well, okay it didn't pan out puglisi tried something. right? i think the third aspect is a certain kind of muscularity. we have discovered the different nationalisms we see. look at india's image in the
world. that's one thing we have not seen. look at how people now respect us and treat us.if i had to boil all of these things down, you know, one of the things were never good to quantify because it's kind of squishy concept is this idea of status. and recognition. if you look for some of the social service delivery schemes, is quite interesting. >> let's see to give people toilets, get rid of open defecation. hoppe was a yes we received the toilet but is not tied to any water source. rural electrification. the village has been given that connection but the house also hasn't gotten one. cooking gas, yes they are looking yes connection but we cannot reporting the replacement cylinder. they fill the state that is always been so distant and so amorphous and so uncaring that it's actually recognize them, right? and so i think that's the kind of psychological -- kind of shock that i think is something that again, it is hard to talk about tangibly but i think it is very much present.
in terms of the question -- youth voters, we don't know yet because we haven't gotten the data. my suspicion would be historically, two things have been true but the youth photo printer one is that they have not come out to vote in as large numbers of people above them. we are talking about people between the ages of 18 and 25. largely first-time voters, seconds of the haven't shown a very distinct partisan preference in the way they voted. in 2014 both of those presumptions were overturned. in other words, the voting turnout rate of young voters was larger than the india average and then one decisively for -- if you are to vote for the bjp it does well in all age cohort but then it gets smaller the older folks are. right? and so, we don't know yet what the data shows. i would suspect that we would
see a continuing and sharpening the trend on 2014 again in 2019. >> do you want to address any of those? [inaudible] >> one broader point b& of the questions that came up. it is difficult at this stage to see political -- as was pointed out, when modi is convinced something is really important it will happen. in a big way maybe not implemented but it will happen so the question now is whether he'll have the people around him that will convince him that many of the things on our laundry list are the really important things. the party would essentially constrict him arguing this is a mentor for the social and nationalistic agenda. other than the agenda. there is much to worry about.
>> i just want to say, i think that's related to the point about why are we talking about this other than the fact that there is a discussion about the results. the questions of what ended with china economically, whether the infrastructure can, the infrastructure promises can be fulfilled etc., is related to the political aspect, to what the mandate is, to what the political capitol is used for and the fact that prime minister modi has it, the question is will he use it? people were disappointed in 2014 that he did make more of the political capitol he had then. the man that he had then. but i think this question will come up again. i think it's related to the point about image. because i don't think, if we don't see the kind of promises being kind of implemented or delivered on both countries foreign and domestic i do think you'll start to see the solution again because we going to cycles of euphoria and disillusionment about india. what we need is really kind of a steady state. i think it will depend very
much and he does at home will kind of drive its importance abroad in his ability to do things abroad as well. >> the question hadn't really answered on the mandate question. the difficulty here that for those who are hoping for more sweeping liberal economic reforms, there are a number of veto points and veto players within the system that one has to consider. the first is the bjp own base where they try to marry social conservatives with economic conservatives. which leads them with a very big tent party. so these have often talked about as cow on one dimension and then you see people in all four quadrants per semester potential. the -- is the upper house where again, the bjp lacks maturity and will suggest a majority is
unlikely until the very end of the second term. i think that is something that continues but the third one i think, and this is just to build on the point. i think the biggest downside risk with respect to the economic agenda is that there is really nobody of cabinet stature, cabinet rank who represents or who has a very distinct compass around the issue of economic reform. this is something that we have seen all previous governments. whether it was the congress government, whether it was the person before him or the others, they didn't always win on every policy battle that they waged. but they provided this kind of stature and core of conviction. that is something that we don't see. one of the questions is that what we see this is the second time. i think what gives people pause is that this is not a prime minister that is known to look
favorably upon the creation of alternative power centers. other than his own within the government. and so i would remain somewhat skeptical that we would likely see this. >> will take the next round of questions. we have got, let's do it this way, two more rounds will keep it short. will do this side and then turned back to the other side. >> thank you for talking to us. there is a certain view of the indians, indian voters that they vote for really either for political basically considering what a candidate, a local candidate to do for their constituency. yet, it was mentioned nearly one third of voters might not have voted for nda if this is not a candidate being put forth. when you say there's a certain change in which voters are voting for their candidates?
or would this be part of the third sort of change, i'm so the fourth change you mentioned in indian politics. >> thank you. >> hi, isabel with inside u.s. trade. i'm hoping you can elaborate on how this election will impact bilateral trade tensions and whether previous tensions will spill over and potentially escalate. what will be different and what needs to change? >> thank you, this is jake from the indo american foundation. my question is primarily for alyssa. how much analysis is going thus far and how much will go to decoding the vast muslim vote because they have the largest shea population outside of iran and they have more so leaned toward the beach. if you can extrapolate on that. i think the media and perceptions that they just simply vote in a block and i
think that is incorrect. >> thank you. -- my questions about domestic constituency on foreign policy. historically, we have seen issues on -- they have had an impact, right? do you think this election will change things? and do you think things might change in terms of how india engages economically. foreign policy with other countries. >> let's start with millan, alyssa and then -- quickly take the question about islam. what we know from the past is that islam, and surprisingly the bjp derives very small percentage of his overall moisture from those that are in
the community also between 2009 and 2014, the percentage of data from see fts again that voted further doubled. it doubled from 3 and a half to 4 percent. to about eight arena have percent pretty you can still say it's pretty small. but it was an increase. this whole idea of muslim block voting is a myth. and is been empirically disproved time and time again. if you just take the state, for instance, we've often talk about how voters might coalesce to keep the bjp out so they would vote strategically. but that has not happened. the hindu vote, part of the reason is that it's actually very hard to achieve that kind of coordination. and so you will see votes going, small maria votes going to bjp but in between that,
you'll see a fraction. because it will, a fragmentation so it really depends and one reason why the many people worried on the opposition side of the congress not being part of this opposition alliance would hurt their chances because it would create a three corner contacts between the bjp, -- and congress. certainly endorse the idea that there is not block voting. and probably never has been. when it comes to the muslim community. and i'm happy to come i will send you papers to that effect. the question on voter behavior. it is a really good, it's a really good question. i don't have an answer but i think certainly, in this election we can say with some degree of confidence that voting really was about the person at the top of the ticket as it were as opposed to
individual candidates. and this is something that was encouraged by the prime minister himself. he was very clear in 2019 saying, a vote for the bjp is a vote for me. right? and that is the most important thing. it is not the person on the ballot. he was quite explicit about this and is actually something he said, i remember being there in 2012. just lost reluctance of the person on the ballot is irrelevant. it's really about who you get to lead the government. and so i think that certainly is, is a feature. in any way what we know historically is that candidate level factors tend to matter somewhat less than national elections because the mp is so distant from the average voter. candidates tend to matter more is at stake election. the issue of patronage, i think we are in this messy area where katz certainly matters and parochialism certainly matters. but i think it is simply not
enough to rely on that. if that were true, they would have done quite well. because you just take the vote banks and say okay we appeal to these muslims and it adds up to 45 percent and we know that doesn't translate. >> we have a couple of questions. one on bilateral trade, tensions, what can be done. then, is this election going to visit, create particular types of foreign policies or relationships? >> limited the bilateral trade question. first, the top part of the question was, what does the election change? and i think that my view is that this election doesn't change the bilateral trade dynamic. i think we're likely to see more of what we have been seeing in the last year and 1/2. that is one of the reasons why i am concerned about this potential problem of a very important component of the overall bilateral relationship.
will mention it now but a couple months ago the trump administration issued the intent to remove india from the gsp program that allows india to export items into the united states for go they need to take one additional step for that to become the final status where the notification of 60 days but they actually that requires another step of another issuance of that has not happened yet. we may likely see that happening that is a process initiated by the trump administration but that prime minister modi would react to that.