The Economist
November 23, 2013
The region is able and readier to boot out government.
South Asians, nearly a quarter of the world’s population, are no pushovers. Some 1.6 billion people—the entire region—now live within civilian-led democracies, however imperfect. South Asian voters are ever readier to eject out-of-favour rulers. In the year to May 2014, governments in six out of seven South Asian countries are likely to change.
In May voters ejected Pakistan’s ruling Pakistan Peoples Party, the first time an elected government finished a full term and passed power to another. Bhutan’s incumbent was kicked out after the tiny kingdom’s second-ever general election, in July. Bangladeshis are poised to send the current ruling party packing, at polls expected on January 9th; this week in Bangladesh an interim government was created to oversee voting. And in India opinion polls point the ruling Congress party to the exit too, in a general election likely in May.
Two other South Asian countries held national elections this week. The Maldives is a long way from being a mature democracy. Until 2008, it had for decades been run by a dictator, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, still influential. Biased courts and an establishment set on shaping election results underscores how its institutions are not properly independent yet.
But at least a run-off on November 16th produced an elected president, after various failed attempts. Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party of Maldives scraped in with just over 51% support. The news was met stonily by many in Male, the capital. The concern is partly to do with Mr Yameen’s reputation. Mr Gayoom is his half-brother and is sure to be a looming presence. Both men have grown rich on oil deals and other opaque business with the Maldives’ neighbours.
Yet democrats have some things to cheer. Though he easily won the election’s first round in September, Mohamed Nasheed conceded defeat in the run-off, with 48% of the votes. He says he will work from the opposition; only 46 years old, he expects to contest many more polls. Voting was not crudely rigged, as many thought it would be. Rather, it was repeated delays in holding the run-off that gave Mr Yameen time to get the backing of a third candidate. The electoral commission (unlike the courts) proved itself independent, which matters for parliamentary elections due in the spring.
Another South Asian country stumbling towards full democracy has more to celebrate. Nepal endured ten years of civil war against Maoist revolutionaries, until 2006. Then, in 2008, the Himalayan country abolished its monarchy, having already scrapped Hinduism as the national religion. Progress stalled. A Constituent Assembly, elected in 2008, repeatedly missed deadlines for writing a constitution. Elections to refresh that assembly and allow for a new government were twice put off.
But, on November 19th, polls at last went ahead (see picture). Voters were not cowed by threats of violence. In the days before polling a hardline faction of the Maoists enforced strikes and curfews and was probably behind bomb attacks. A lorry driver died from a petrol bombing, while a child was injured after opening an abandoned bag of explosives. The hardliners had hoped to disrupt the election and discredit a bigger, moderate Maoist wing that now prefers ballots to bullets.
They failed. Instead, voters roared their approval of democracy. Turnout was a record 70%. Results may prove messy, with the moderate Maoists underperforming and the remaining seats spread among parties representing castes, Marxism in different flavours, royalism, lowlanders’ interests and more. Nepal’s electoral system has both party lists and constituency MPs; a clear outcome is unlikely.
The mess will bring other delays, notably over who forms the next government—the establishment Nepali Congress may stake first claim—as well as writing the constitution. There, much disagreement remains, including over how much federalism the country should adopt, and whether the provinces should be defined by ethnicity. Meanwhile, some Maoists want presidential democracy, while some on the right want a ceremonial king. The constitution could take many more years to write.
Democratic progress that is both awkward and partial applies to much of South Asia. Only Sri Lanka is unlikely to get a change in government soon, though some think the president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, will call a snap election late next year. He has just hosted an unusually controversial Commonwealth summit . Poisoned by the memory of its recent history of a civil war at whose denouement tens of thousands of civilians died, Sri Lanka, even though it is at peace, risks a drift towards authoritarianism, with Mr Rajapaksa digging into office. If so, he will be South Asia’s odd man out.
