Commentary
- +1
Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, Andy Robaina, …
{
"authors": [
"Milan Vaishnav"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"India"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Civil Society"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
New Rules for Indian Politics
There are three clear lessons that can be drawn from India’s 2014 election.
Published on Jun 29, 2015
Source: IDFC
Milan Vaishnav spoke about the 2014 Indian elections at the IDFC Institute in New Delhi. The talk brings together a few of Dr. Vaishnav's current research projects to address whether the recent election was truly a "game changer." He began by laying out the facts of the election, including that it was the largest election in human history and that it is the first time a party other than the Indian National Congress has won such a resounding mandate in India. He noted, optimistically, that while the election was polarized along religious lines, Narendra Modi won in large part due to his successful record as Chief Minister of Gujarat, suggesting that the Indian electorate is rewarding competent governance in a way it has not in the past. In other areas, though, such as the presence of political dynasties in the legislature and the electoral success of criminals, this election was an example of continuity rather than change.Vaishnav pointed to three key takeaways from this election. First, the BJP has supplanted the Congress as the dominant pole around which Indian politics revolves. Second, though identity politics are still important, they are not sufficient to win; politicians must combine identity-based appeals with strong records on economic and governance issues if they are to succeed. Third, though voters may be shifting their preferences and regional parties are proliferating, the nature of the candidates themselves has not changed much.
About the Author
Milan Vaishnav
Director and Senior Fellow, South Asia Program
Milan Vaishnav is a senior fellow and director of the South Asia Program and the host of the Grand Tamasha podcast at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His primary research focus is the political economy of India, and he examines issues such as corruption and governance, state capacity, distributive politics, and electoral behavior. He also conducts research on the Indian diaspora.
- Indian Americans Still Lean Left. Just Not as Reliably.
- Indian Americans in a Time of Turbulence: 2026 Survey ResultsPaper
- +1
Milan Vaishnav, Sumitra Badrinathan, Devesh Kapur, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- India’s Foreign Policy in the Age of PopulismPaper
Domestic mobilization, personalized leadership, and nationalism have reshaped India’s global behavior.
Sandra Destradi
- The EU Needs a Third Way in IranCommentary
European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.
Richard Youngs
- Modernizing South Asia’s Borders Through Data-Driven ResearchArticle
Cargo time release studies offer a path to greater economic gains and higher trust between neighboring countries.
Nikita Singla
- India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?Commentary
On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.
Konark Bhandari
- The Kremlin Is Destroying Its Own System of Coerced VotingCommentary
The use of technology to mobilize Russians to vote—a system tied to the relative material well-being of the electorate, its high dependence on the state, and a far-reaching system of digital control—is breaking down.
Andrey Pertsev
