India and Indonesia vote
India and Indonesia went to the polls, along with half the world - what does it tell us about global politics?
It’s been a bumper year for fans of democracy. Half of the world has voted or will vote in elections this year, with polls in 64 countries.
In some of those countries, voters probably didn’t feel they had much sway, the likes of Belarus, Pakistan and Russia.
But where there are free and fair elections, we can learn a lot about the state of the world and the global trends that will drive our politics in the years to come.
I’ve already written about the UK’s result. In this post, I’ll write about India and Indonesia - and at some point in the future, I’ll cover South Africa, France and the USA.
I’ve put India and Indonesia together deliberately. Both countries have a popular incumbent who has improved living standards for many. Both countries’ populations appear to be motivated primarily by economic growth. But, in both countries, liberal voters were faced with a candidate who has a checkered history of religious and political persecution.
India: Modi takes a dent
The Indian election is an extraordinary undertaking. This is the world’s largest democracy, with almost a billion eligible voters. The country is also geographically massive, and election agents go the extra mile to reach voters. One group of election agents trekked up 7 miles of mountains and crossed a river to set up a polling station in a remote village.
Modi’s BJP party took another victory - its third election victory since 2014 - but this time severely dented, and losing their majority. The BJP is a Hindu nationalist party with ardent supporters. Their ideology, known as Hindutva, is that Hinduism is intrinsically linked with India. It makes sense, as almost 80% of Indians are Hindu - but the country’s constitution is clear that India is a secular state, and Muslims make up a fairly sizeable minority.
The BJP have implemented divisive policies, and the party tends to stoke national tensions between Hindus and Muslims. In his last Parliament, Modi oversaw a controversial citizenship law that bars Muslims from a fast track to Indian nationality; and the construction of a temple on the site of a mosque that was torn down by nationalist mobs in 1992. Many BJP states have also introduced tightened laws on interfaith marriages.
These are culturally complex issues, steeped in history, but there is no denying that the BJP is a divisive, nationalist party. Their success since 2014 tracks with a rising tide of nationalism around the world, from Trump to Brexit, which is driven by the promise of sunlit uplands of economic prosperity.
But there’s signs of that tide ebbing in India. Modi was expected to take an outright majority - he was so confident that his election slogan was “Ab ki baar, 400 paar” - “This time, we’ll surpass 400 [seats]”. His party won just 240, a fall of 63, and his coalition alliance did not pass 300.
Analysts had forecast that his popularity was waning in southern states, but the election result showed he took a huge hit in rural areas: where people are facing rising unemployment and not feeling any better off despite the country’s economic growth. Like many populist leaders (Trump, Johnson), Modi is much more popular than his party - and this will likely be his last term as Prime Minister. That makes the next election one to watch and a potential moment of change.
The BJP has done a lot of good for India. India is the world’s fastest growing economy and is forecast to become the world’s third biggest economy by 2027. It’s hard to criticise any government with a record like that, and Modi remains enormously popular. The question for India, and countries around the world, is whether that growth could be possible (or even exceeded) in a more tolerant, secularist country.
Indonesia: The cuddly Authoritarian
I definitely wouldn’t have thought to write about the Indonesian election, had it not been the fact that we went there on holiday earlier this year. But it deserves to be talked about: it’s the fourth largest country by population and the world’s third largest democracy. It has the largest Muslim population in the world and the biggest economy in Southeast Asia. It’s non-prominence on the global stage has led to it being called the biggest invisible thing on the planet.
Like India, they have this extraordinary commitment to the democratic process. In 2019, 894 election workers died, overworked and exhausted from overnight counts and sometimes days spent trekking to remote polling stations.
Their commitment makes sense. Indonesia is a new joiner to the world of free and fair elections. From the mid 1960s to the 1998, the country was under a brutal regime led by a dictator, Suharto.
Rather than a pencil in their polling booth, Indonesians get a nail which they use to punch a hole beside their candidate of choice. After they vote, their finger is stamped with a semi-permanent ink, to prevent them coming back and voting again.
The incumbent, Joko Widodo, did not appear on the ballot paper because he’s reached his term limit. But he was hugely popular. During his presidency, Joko (or Jokowi, as he’s known) brought a raft of impressive reforms: universal healthcare, a massive infrastructure push with 16 new airports and 1000 miles of roads; and 43% cumulative economic growth.
Unsurprisingly, then, all three candidates gave ‘relatively thin policy platforms’ with ‘more of the same’ being the best they could offer. It bucks the trend of much of the world, where voters have been voting for change.
Joko lent his implicit backing to his defence minister, Prabowo Subianto, who went on to win the election.
Prabowo is the son-in-law of the dictator Suharto and served as a general in his military, where he committed serious human rights abuses including kidnapping student activists. It’s a period that young Indonesians are not taught about in school. Prabowo actually ran against Joko in 2014, and in that election pledged to take Indonesia “in a more authoritarian direction”.
But in this election, Prabowo managed to rebrand himself as a cuddly old grandpa: he dances at his campaign rallies and posts Instagram pictures of his cat.
The continuity campaign, combined with the backing of the country’s youth and Joko, did the trick. Prabowo won with more than double the votes of his closest opponent. The population were enamoured: but some commentators in Indonesia believe he is a threat to democracy.
In countries as large as India and Indonesia, it is almost impossible to pinpoint what came behind an election result - there are single states larger than the whole UK. Motivations vary.
The lesson I think you can draw from these elections, though, is that populations will tolerate a lot in pursuit of economic growth: and more specifically, economic growth that makes them feel better off. Religious and democratic ideology is less important than the simple question of who will I feel better off under.
Modi took a beating because unemployment rose in rural areas, and Prabowo has won on his promise to continue the improvement in standards and economic growth that Joko began. Voters can look beyond both men’s problematic pasts.
When you speak to Americans, you hear the same thing about Trump: they know he’s this awful misogynist, a criminal, an all-out terrible man to have representing America on the national stage: but when he was in charge, Americans felt richer - they were richer.
With very few exceptions, voters are led by their wallet.