Ganguly, Sumit, and William Thompson. "Ascending India: Its State Capacity Problems and Prospects". In Ascending India and its State Capacity: Extraction, Violence, and Legitimacy, by Sumit Ganguly and William Thompson, 271-286. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017.

Ganguly, Sumit, and William Thompson. "Ascending India: Its State Capacity Problems and Prospects". In Ascending India and its State Capacity: Extraction, Violence, and Legitimacy, by Sumit Ganguly and William Thompson, 271-286. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017.

• The founders of the Indian nation, especially Jawaharlal Nehru, sought to create a strong centralized government to promote economic development; eradicate harmful social practices, like untouchability; and reduce the opportunities for secession from India (272).
• The extensive power of the Indian central government has initially used only sparingly, the most prominent case of abuse was the dismissal of the Communist government in Kerala in 1957 and that was seen as exceptional. Abuse of these abuses, particularly president's rule, became common in Congress during the government of Indira Gandhi (272).
• Abuse of central government authority really ended with the assassination of Indira Gandhi in 1984, due partially to the popular opposition to the central government in the wake of the mass repression under Indira Gandhi. Liberalization on the Indian economy also reduced the power of the central government in the economy, while the decline of Congress made all parties dependent all regional political parties for support in coalitions, making the dismissal of state governments politically costly (272-273).
• The authors hypothesize that India will achieve great power status based on its large economy, which they expect to continue growing, and its military, which could give it great power status if it is enlarged. They note, however, that if economic growth slows, India is unlikely to become a great power (275-276).
• Indian state capacity is weak in many important areas. It does not collect much of its revenue in income taxes, which make up a proportion of its revenues on par with Brazil and far behind Russia or China. Its monopoly on the use of force is weak by almost any standard. The legitimacy of the Indian government, however, is strong and far greater than the governments of Pakistan and Bangladesh (276-277).
• More worrisome, India actually seems to be losing state capacity in some areas, like fiscal control, and is not making gains in others, like persistent non-state violence. Most of its armed conflicts, like the Naxalite movement and insurgencies in Kashmir, have lasted for decades and are unlikely to be resolved (278).
• Indian economic growth in the 21st Century has been impressive, but the authors question whether it is sustainable. India lacks the infrastructure necessary to undergird sustained economic growth, which is abysmal, and the Indian government has traditionally done a bad job at investing in infrastructure, with project taking extraordinarily long periods of time and being prone to corruption (278).
• India has managed to reduce the number of those in extreme poverty through economic growth, but thus far has not addressed the enormous inequalities in its society. Growth has disproportionately benefitted the wealthy, increasing the quality of life for many poor Indians, but not creating a national middle class (279).
• Democracy in India, against all odds, is well developed and robust. There is freedom of speech, a strong and independent judiciary, elections are heavily contested by opposing political parties, and the military does not become politically involved. This democratic system tends to exacerbate the worst trends in Indian politics, resulting in persecution of religious minorities, harsh treatment of separatist movements, and frequent human rights abuses (279-280).
• Indian foreign policy was oriented towards an alliance with the Soviet Union following the Indian defeat in the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The retreat and later collapse of the USSR in the late 1980s left India without a foreign policy strategy, leaving it to respond to problems on an ad hoc basis, mainly countering threats within South Asia or trying to erode Pakistani or Chinese influence abroad (280).
• India seeks a bigger role in the world, through measures like a permanent seat on the UNSC, but has not been able to articular a clear foreign policy on this level. It has consistently invested in the military, but has not created a strategy that would justify its expanding capabilities (281).
• The biggest problems that India will face in the future are global warming and shortages of essential goods for its growing population. India is expected to have between 1.7 billion and 2 billion people by 2050, straining the already stretched water, electricity, and food supplies available to India. If India is to avoid disaster due to goods shortages, mass migration, and natural disasters, it needs to improve the capacities of the central government (281-282).
• "Its population may become the world’s largest, its economy is becoming one of the world’s largest, and its military power will probably move along at least a similar upward trajectory. Yet just about everything concerning India is characterized by developmental handicaps of one sort or another. Too many people are poor, infrastructure is woefully lacking, and demands on the state for action to remedy these problems are multiplying" (282).