Indra’s Drishtikona (Viewpoint)

India and China: Some Advices Worth Serious Considerations

Posted : November 22, 2005 at 10:17 pm [IST]

Minister Mentor of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew as Prime Minister of Singapore brought Singapore on global economic map with his policies. He delivered the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial lecture in New Delhi on Monday. His views are worth serious considerations.

Whether Asia will take its place in the world as [Jawaharlal] Nehru wanted depends on how both India and China work together as they rise and actively set out to avoid ending up in opposing camps. It was “vital” that India and China understand where they stand vis-à-vis each other.

They [the two countries] must not be paranoid and suspicious of each other in a game of one-upmanship. Instead they can cooperate and compete economically, and each improves its performance by using the other’s progress as benchmarks for what they should do better.

The rise of India and China was changing the global balance. “Together, they account for 40 per cent of the world’s working age population and 19 per cent of the global economy in PPP (purchasing power parity) terms.”

“On present trends, in 20 years, their collective share of the global economy will match their percentage of the global population, which is roughly where they were in the 18th Century, before European colonialism engulfed them.”

China’s illiteracy rate was below 10 per cent, India’s was about 40 per cent. Three years ago, China had a capital outlay of $ 260 billions on electricity, construction, transportation, telecommunications and real estate (20 per cent of GDP), while India spent just $ 31 billions (8 per cent of GDP)
.
East Asia was “coalescing”, brought together by market forces. “India, China and Japan are readjusting their relationships with each other and with the U.S. [United States]. This will not be an easy process because all countries want to preserve their independence and space to grow.”

“If there are no mishaps by 2050, the U.S., China, India and Japan will be economic heavyweights, as will Russia if it converts its revenue from oil and gas into long term value in infrastructure and non-oil industries.”

The U.S. was courting a “nuclear India.” India could no longer be dismissed as a “wounded civilisation” - as termed by a westernised Non-Resident Indian, V.S. Naipaul.
However, the nation cannot grow into a major economy on the strength of services alone. “Since the industrial revolution, no country has become a major economy without becoming an industrial power.”

India’s bureaucrats instead of remaining regulators and must turn into facilitators. Democracy should not be made an alibi for inertia.

I wish Indian bureaucrats could move on their own to get the perception of their performance changed in the minds of people both in the country and many abroad. I wonder also why India can’t emulate some critical achievements of China. Is it so difficult? Or do we get some peace in living and maintaining status quo, instead of striving hard and get into top league?

- Indra

Category: Government Policy/Administration |