Miscellaneous News

NiuBiDaRen

Brigadier
Registered Member
Can India Become Stronger Than China? Yes, It Can

The country with the biggest gap between its potential and its performance is India. All India has to do is to learn from its Southeast Asian and Chinese neighbors and open itself up to economic competition. Introduction Can India become stronger than China? What do I mean by becoming stronger? Simple: have a bigger economy. The goal of this lecture is to explain why I believe India can have a bigger economy (indeed the biggest economy in the world) and how India can set about achieving it. I will divide my lecture into three parts. In part I, I will explain why I am confident that India can have the largest economy in the world. In part II, I will explain the principles India can take to become number one. In part III, I will also suggest some concrete steps India can take to develop an economy bigger than China’s. Part I: Why I am Confident There are two reasons why I am confident. The first reason is historical evidence. As British historian Angus Maddison has documented, from year 1 to 1820, the two largest economies of the world were always China and India. What happened after 1820? The British arrived. As Shashi Tharoor, a distinguished citizen of Kerala, has documented, when the British arrived, India’s share of Global GNP (nominal) was 23%. When they left in 1947, the share fell to around 3%. Today, India’s share remains at about 3%. India’s share of the global population is 18%. Hence, its share of global GNP should also be 18%, if you assume that the average Indian is as intelligent and capable as the average human being. This is the second reason why I am confident. The average Indian is clearly as intelligent and as capable as other human beings. I hope that this is an uncontroversial statement. But I would also like to make a controversial statement: the average Indian can outperform the average citizen of other communities. You can see why such a statement is inherently controversial. Hence, let me back it up with some evidence. The most competitive human laboratory in the world is the USA. In an article I wrote for McKinsey, I said, “It’s so easy to grasp the gap between India’s potential and its performance because you can see the potential of what an ethnic Indian can do in the most competitive human laboratory in the world, which is the United States of America. And when the Indians arrived in America, they thought they might be number five or number six in terms of per capita income. They ended up being number one.” Today, the average per capita income of the Indian residing in the US is US$ 55,298. If Indians in India can achieve the same per capita income, the total GNP of India would be around US$ 71 trillion, making it the largest economy in the world, larger than the US at US$ 21 trillion or China, at US$ 15 trillion. If this figure is unimaginable, let’s imagine that the average Indian in India is half as smart as the average Indian in the US. Then India would still have a GNP of US$ 35 trillion, still larger than that of the US at US$ 21 trillion and China at US$ 15 trillion. Why do I highlight all these figures? I do so because I only want to emphasize one big point at the beginning of my lecture: the country with the biggest gap between its economic potential and its economic performance in India. India’s GNP today is US$ 2.6 trillion. It should be at least 10 or 20 times larger. Let me deal with one objection immediately. The argument can be made that the super-smart Indians ended up in the US. Hence, they ended up with super-high per capita incomes. Even if I acknowledge this as true, how about comparing the per capita income of Indians in India with Indians in other countries? I don’t have the data for all overseas Indian communities. However, I have traveled all around the world and met Indians from all corners of the world. Without fail, in almost every country I have visited, the overseas Indian communities have done well and are thriving. So, why are they thriving? The answer could be complex but let me mention one key factor: Indians are naturally competitive economic animals and thrive in economic competition. In this regard, they are very similar to the Chinese. This brings me to the second important point I want to emphasize in my lecture: the economic fortunes of the Chinese turned after the key reformist leader of China, Deng Xiaoping, asked a very simple question: why were the Chinese people successful in every economy except in China itself? The answer was a simple and obvious one: the Chinese were allowed to compete economically in every country in the world except China. Hence, Deng Xiaoping did the obvious thing: he opened up the Chinese economy and allowed all Chinese, 1.4 billion of them, to compete. So what were the results? Deng Xiaoping started to open up the Chinese economy in 1980. 1980 is a significant year. In 1980, the size of the Chinese economy (US$ 191 billion) and the Indian economy (US$ 186 billion) were about the same. Today, the size of the Chinese economy is US$ 15 trillion, over five times the size of the Indian economy at US$ 2.6 trillion. Part I: Why I am Confident 103 So how did India go from having an economy the same size as China’s to having an economy one-fifth that of China? The answer is amazingly simple. China opened its economy to global economic competition and allowed 1.4 billion Chinese to compete. Since the Chinese thrive in economic competitions, the Chinese economy thrived and surged ahead. By contrast, the 1.3 billion Indians have been deprived of economic competition. Since they have been deprived of economic competition, they cannot thrive. Hence, India’s economy has fallen behind. Let me add another important point here. India’s economy has also fallen behind other regions and countries. I come from Southeast Asia. Of the ten ASEAN states, nine have an Indic cultural base. Hence in some ways, we are cultural satellites of India. The total population of ASEAN is 650 million, half that of India’s. But the combined GNP of ASEAN in 2020 was about $3 trillion, slightly larger than that of India ($2.8 trillion). Another statistic is more shocking. In 1971, when India helped Bangladesh to become an independent country, many commentators said that Bangladesh was a hopeless country that would become an economic basket-case, according to Henry Kissinger. Indeed, when I was Ambassador to the UN from 1984 to 1989 and from 1998 to 2004, Bangladesh was a member of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). India was never a member of LDCs. Yet, by 2020, the per capita income of Bangladesh (US$ 1968) became larger than that of India (US$ 1900). So why have the ASEAN countries and Bangladesh outperformed India in the economic realm? The simple answer is that ASEAN and Bangladesh plunged into global economic competition. India didn’t. All this brings me to part II of my lecture: what principles should India follow to become the largest economy in the world? My broad answer, of course, is that India needs to unleash the vibrant animal spirits of the 1.3 billion Indian people by exposing them to global economic competition. However, this broad answer has to be implemented with some concrete steps. I will try to spell out some of them. Part II: Key Principles to Follow Before spelling out the principles that India can take to become more competitive, let me confirm at the outset that it will not be easy. There will be many political, economic, bureaucratic, psychological, vested interests, and so on, obstacles to overcome. Indeed, China didn’t have an easy time either. I was present at the World Economic Forum, Davos meeting in 2017 when President Xi Jinping admitted that the process of opening up the Chinese economy was a difficult one. This is what he said: “There was a time when China also had doubts about economic globalization and was not sure whether it should join the World Trade Organization. But we came to the conclusion that integration into the global economy is a historical trend. To grow its economy, China must have the courage to swim in the vast ocean of the global market.

In short, it will not take rocket science to make India’s economy the largest in the world and larger than even that of China and the US. It will only take simple common sense. There’s no need to invent anything new. All India has to do is copy and learn from Southeast Asian countries that have had close relations with India for two thousand years. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called on India to “Look East”. Prime Minister Narendra Modi called on India to “Act East”. My message to you is a much simpler one: please come to Southeast Asia and learn from the East.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

NiuBiDaRen

Brigadier
Registered Member
Can we not spam every silly brainfart every Jai Hind pollutes the internet with?
Kishore Mahbubani is one of the leading intellectuals and not quite Jai Hind, although he obviously has a strong tendency to be sentimental about India. He wrote the books Has China Won and Can Asians Think? and Has the West Lost It? And he was the former President of the United Nations Security Council and close friend of Kissinger and Lee Kuan Yew.

I apologise for spamming though. It gives me a lot of laughs everytime I do it during this time. I shall stop.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Kishore Mahbubani is one of the leading intellectuals and not quite Jai Hind, although he obviously has a strong tendency to be sentimental about India. He wrote the books Has China Won and Can Asians Think? and Has the West Lost It? And he was the former President of the United Nations Security Council and close friend of Kissinger and Lee Kuan Yew.

I apologise for spamming though. It gives me a lot of laughs everytime I do it during this time. I shall stop.

I read it and my conclusion is that his logics are simply wrong and too simplistic and I have to say idiotic, I wouldn't waste my time reading his book after reading the above post by @Crang
 

emblem21

Major
Registered Member
Kishore Mahbubani is one of the leading intellectuals and not quite Jai Hind, although he obviously has a strong tendency to be sentimental about India. He wrote the books Has China Won and Can Asians Think? and Has the West Lost It? And he was the former President of the United Nations Security Council and close friend of Kissinger and Lee Kuan Yew.

I apologise for spamming though. It gives me a lot of laughs everytime I do it during this time. I shall stop.
I can under his support for India but imagining India as a super power is just plain silly, not only does such an under taking require that the nation be well educated and are willing to carry out the necessary policies that will lead the nation to that particular destiny, but the nation should also have a good understanding in regards to drinking cow piss being a bloody health hazard and also, self reflection is something a nation requires to learn from mistakes and improve, not going Ja Hind at every single situation when China kicks their ass black and blue.
 

NiuBiDaRen

Brigadier
Registered Member
I read it and my conclusion is that his logics are simply wrong and too simplistic and I have to say idiotic, I wouldn't waste my time reading his book after reading the above post by @Crang
If you ignore the chapters where he waxes lyrical about historical India (Akand Bharat), his writings about a hypocritical West and how they don't understand China is pretty good. I mean he's Indian, so you gotta let him ramble a bit about the previously mighty India.
 

ht1688

New Member
Registered Member
Mahbubani is one of the few defenders of China in the English speaking circle. I have followed him for years. Even when basically everyone turned hawkish beginning the Trump years, he tirelessly defended China. I thought he is much more convincing than most Chinese scholars trying to debate Westerners.

He doesn't talk about India that much, and when he does, he seems to try to appease the Indian crowd. He's also gone on Indian TV a few times to defend China, even after Ladakh. He tells the Indian audience it is in India's best interest to work with China. I believe he is of Pakistani ancestry (?).

His take on Ukraine has been disappointing. His first instinct was that this war benefits the US but hurts China the most. I think this is a bad take but might be understandable given he gets his news from Singapore and the West. Recently, I've noticed that he's changed his tune a little, probably after Western media started admitting Ukraine was losing.
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Tricked. We should immediately resume financing coal projects abroad. The West isn't serious about Climate Change
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
So they stressed the role of increased deliveries of liquefied natural gas, adding they “acknowledge that investment in this sector is necessary in response to the current crisis.”
That’s a reversal of an agreement affirmed as recently as May to stop funding fossil fuel projects overseas.
At the same time, leaders committed to stick with the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
lol
 
Top