HTLS 2023: Simultaneous polls, chip race dominate Day 2 conversations – Hindustan Times Feedzy

Milan Vaishnav suggests this approach raises several questions and scenarios. What happens if there’s a dissolution of a government or a coalition collapses?

“So, there would be two phases of elections. So if we were just to assume this would kick off with the ’24 general elections for argument’s sake, you would have a phase one election where you would have the Lok Sabha elections and elections in 14 states which are slightly before or slightly after the general elections, and those would be held say in May and June of next year, then about two and a half years later, you would pull all of the other remaining states.”

He says the second phase, involving the remaining states, would take place approximately two and a half years later, around November 26.

Referring to the report by the Niti Aayog, Milan Vaishnav explained the proposed concept, which builds on the Parliamentary standing committee report. It’s not ‘one nation, one poll,’ but rather ‘one nation, two poll.’

Vaishnav highlights how India saw unstable opposition governments where defections and counter-defections caused the dissolution of many assemblies, further disrupting the simultaneous election cycle.

“Indira Gandhi called early elections which kind of firmly delinked state and national polls so it started out simultaneously, but there is nothing hardwired in the system to suggest it should stay that way.”

Vaishnav points out that India essentially had simultaneous elections from 1952 to 1967. The cycle was first disrupted in Kerala in 1959 when President’s rule was imposed to dissolve a Communist Party government. The break in the cycle continued in 1967 when the Congress party lost critical states.

Responding to the question of whether reverting to the old system of holding elections together is a valid argument, Vaishnav provides historical context.

While simultaneous elections may be technically feasible from an election commission perspective, the complexities, logistics, and the need for a fair and level playing field make it a challenging proposition, according to the former CEC.

The former CEC argues that ensuring that the election process is glitch-free, including the performance of VVPATs and EVMs, is a paramount concern. He notes that any errors or malfunctions can result in significant public and media scrutiny.

When it comes to simultaneous elections, Chawla notes that the challenge is not just logistical but also political. Ensuring a level playing field for all parties, particularly opposition parties, is critical.

He stresses that the Election Commission must be seen as a fair umpire, ensuring fairness even for individual candidates without strong party backing.

Chawla: India is a vast country, and even for a general election alone, as many as 2,000 senior officers, including joint secretaries and above, are required as observers. This already results in significant government personnel being devoted to elections.

He says political parties have traditionally sought central police forces rather than relying on state police, which further strains resources.

When discussing the possibility of holding simultaneous elections, Chawla emphasized that it may not necessarily be cheaper. He pointed out several challenges that arise when conducting elections together.

Vaishnav: The estimates suggest that, on average, a general election costs around ₹4,000 crore, while a state election in a medium to large state would be around ₹300 crore. These numbers may have slightly increased due to factors like inflation and population growth.

When you put this in perspective, it’s not an exorbitant amount. For example, the Member of Parliament Local Area Development (MPLAD) scheme, which allocates ₹5 crore per MP per year, adds up to ₹14,000 crore over five years.

Vaishnav: When considering the massive expenditure associated with holding multiple elections in India, it’s crucial to break down the costs into two categories: government expenditure for election conduct and implementation and the money spent by parties, candidates, and their supporters.

Chawla’s take on simultaneous elections is that it’s not just about having a district magistrate and the administrative hierarchy in place. It also involves a substantial amount of rigorous training.

“Costs can be met, but the election pyramid would have almost to double, if not almost triple, to be able to do these elections simultaneously. So not impossible but not easy,” he says.

“It’s complicated. It really is a very complex issue,” Chawla emphasizes. He further discusses the current debate and the formation of an extraordinary committee under a former president.

Chawla: From an election perspective, it would be possible to conduct simultaneous elections, but it would require significant adjustments. These would include increasing the necessary hardware, doubling the number of constituencies, and addressing logistical challenges, such as district magistrates, returning officers, EVMs, VVPATs, and more.

Speaking on the issue of simultaneous elections, Chawla traces back to the beginnings of the debate. He mentions that in 2015, a parliamentary committee was established under MP Sudarshan Nachiappan, which called the Election Commission in for evidence. During this interaction, the commission indicated that it was not impossible to hold simultaneous elections, laying the foundation for the ongoing discussion.

The former Chief Election Commissioner of India, Navin Chawla, and Milan Vaishnav, the director at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, shared their insights.

Miller: The capabilities that semiconductors have made possible in terms of AI are tremendous. However, we are still in the early stages of applying AI to various sectors of the economy.

Sukumar: What could possibly drive the future?

Miller: The major challenge the tech industry will face over the next decade is applying artificial intelligence to the broader economy. Companies like OpenAI and Google are already exploring AI’s potential, but we are in the early stages of this process.

According to Miller, managing this uncertainty presents a particularly formidable challenge. Companies encounter significant obstacles when attempting to secure comprehensive insurance against risks associated with China-Taiwan, but it’s a necessary step due to the potentially enormous costs involved. In the event of a Chinese blockade of Taiwan or disruption of semiconductor shipments, preliminary estimates indicate that the global economy could suffer trillions of dollars in damage within just a few quarters.

Miller: Taiwan’s geopolitical situation is highly complex and challenging. The difficulty lies in predicting the political landscape and Chinese policies regarding Taiwan. As a result, companies and countries are reevaluating their supply chain dependencies on both China and Taiwan.

Miller observes that in the political discourse of the United States, Europe, and Japan, political leaders often express the desire to bring manufacturing back to their own countries and reverse the trend of offshoring. However, he believes that when you closely examine the actions of government officials, their primary focus is not so much on completely reversing offshoring in manufacturing, but rather on addressing specific risks.

“In reality, the chip industry is that there will not be any country that can produce cutting-edge chips independently for decades. So the question is how much risk and what type of risks are you willing to bear.”

Miller: A significant part of this progress has been made in ways that aren’t economically viable. The Chinese government has been infusing substantial sums into the industry. This approach aligns with the interests of Chinese leaders who prioritize security considerations. However, it may not be in the long-term interest of Chinese citizens as it drives up costs without yielding many viable businesses.

Measured by the metrics that Chinese leaders are looking at, which is the share of chips that China produces domestically, they are making progress. It’s still the case that China relies heavily on importing high-end chips from Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and the US. However, compared to a decade ago, China imports less as a share of its overall chip consumption.

Miller emphasizes that besides design, there exists the potential to investigate other facets of the supply chain, such as manufacturing or assembly. The critical issue to consider is whether India can assume a more substantial role in those sectors as well.

On the flip side, it’s crucial to bear in mind that competition prevails throughout the entire supply chain. India is not the only player, as numerous economies across the globe are also making efforts to strengthen their semiconductor industries.

Sukumar: Do you think India has a chance of succeeding in its effort to become part of the semiconductor ecosystem?

Miller: Well, I think India certainly has a very good chance of becoming part of the semiconductor ecosystem. In fact, in some ways, it already is. There’s a very large number of semiconductor design experts in India right now. This is a promising foundation. The question is, can that design ecosystem be further developed? Can more design-focused firms be established in India?

Miller: However, the design expertise is something that India has a lot of opportunity to leverage. Design expertise can be applied in many different ways and within various niches. So that’s the challenge for really every country – to find the part of the supply chain where their comparative advantage lies.

Miller: So for countries and companies, the challenge is to find the niche where they have a comparative advantage and where they can compete at the cutting edge. For countries like India, trying to build up its semiconductor ecosystem, taking on major players head-on is a significant challenge. These established players have substantial resources on their side.

Miller: I think every country today is looking at where they can fit in the chip ecosystem because there’s no single country in the world that is anywhere close to having a self-sufficient supply chain domestically.

Miller: Whether it’s the shape of the world economy – for example, China spends as much money each year importing chips as it spends importing oil. You can’t understand the global trading system without semiconductors.

If it’s the rise of big tech companies and AI, which has been enabled by ever more advanced semiconductors. All of the key trends that are shaping and transforming the world today have semiconductors at their core.

Sukumar: What made you write this book? What sparked that idea?

Miller: Over the past number of years, I have come to realize the extent to which my life and all our lives are structured around thousands of tiny silicon chips buried deep in the electronic devices that we rely on.

We came to realize that these chips are not only important because they make our devices possible but also because all of the key trends that define our world are shaped by these semiconductors.

We are about to start an insightful interview with Chris Miller, the author of ‘Chip War.’ The interview promises to shed light on the pivotal role of semiconductors in shaping our world. Let’s dive in!