Superpower Syndrome: Sid Harth
cogitoergosum
http://bakulaji.typepad.com/blog/superpower-syndrome-sid-harth.html
Superpower Syndrome: Sid Harth
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian.marathi/browse_thread/thread/85f8a222fd275c15/e3c5461e2930a54e?lnk=gst&q=superpower+Syndrome#e3c5461e2930a54e
Superpower Syndrome: Sid Harth
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian.marathi/browse_thread/thread/8ed3e81dbcd9cc/c79bae039bd80161?lnk=gst&q=superpower+Syndrome#c79bae039bd80161
Superpower Syndrome: Sid Harth
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian.marathi/browse_thread/thread/b6aa5a8a1b675046/1af41bf7d298dd36?q=superpower+Syndrome&lnk=ol&
An ascent hampered by old ideas
TOI Crest, Apr 24, 2010, 01.11pm IST
Tags:India world order|India ascent
India should shed its inhibitions to secure an eminent place in the
new world order, says Dominique Moisi.
PARIS: Some countries are naturally at ease with the concept and the
reality of strategic power. Such was clearly the case of France under
Louis XIV, the Sun King in the seventeenth century, and such is the
case today of China, whose leadership is comfortable with the balance-
of-power games of classical Europe.
India is clearly in a different category. In economic terms, India’s
confidence has been boosted by the way the Western world now looks at
it with a mixture of respect and greed: “What kind of deals can I
strike with such an emerging market , whose population will soon be
the largest of any country in the world?”
Yet, in order to understand India’s political and diplomatic
relationship with the outside world, the most enlightening comparison
is with America in 1920. Like the United States after World War I,
India is realising that its status and role in the world have been
deeply transformed in the last two decades. And, like America then,
India is not naturally at ease with the notion of exercising global
power.
India’s history and culture — from emperor Asoka in the third century
BC to Gandhi — push it to emphasise ethics and to consider itself an
“exceptional” nation in its relationship with the world. Contrary to
China, India finds it difficult to adapt to its status as an emerging
“Great Power.” It would be a gross exaggeration, of course, to speak
of an Indian “inferiority complex.” And yet India constantly measures
itself against China, remains obsessed with Pakistan, and has recently
begun to look more critically at its relationship with the US.
It is natural for India to proclaim its “democratic” superiority to
China while recognising that on all strategic fronts it is not in the
same league. But is it even possible to draw a comparison between what
one Indian academic has called the “robotised Chinese man” and the
vast human diversity of India?
India seems to worry more than ever about China’s evolution . China’s
key role within the G-20 , together with the relative if not absolute
decline of the Western powers, seems to have reinforced the hard-
liners in Beijing and the nationalism of a China that seems less ready
than ever to accept any criticism of its human rights record.
Viewed from New Delhi, the vision of a reasonable, prudent, and
ultimately satisfied China — a vision “sold” to the world by the
Minister Mentor of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew — appears less than
obvious.
When it comes to Pakistan, too, India seems to lack confidence . On
all fronts — demographic, economic, military, and political — India is
far above Pakistan. But India does not seem to know how to deal with
its northwestern neighbour, and even less whom to deal with in its
government.
The largest democracy in the world cannot say openly that it almost
preferred the military dictatorship of General Pervez Musharraf to the
chaos of the current situation. In reality , what prevails in India is
a deep sense of frustration with Pakistan. India’s overtures to
Pakistan’s government have largely remained unanswered, and when
Indian officials express their unease, the US, if not the
international community , accuses them of behaving irresponsibly.
If India seems not to believe that America and its allies can really
“succeed” in Afghanistan, nor is it willing to resign itself to a
return of the Taliban to power, which could in turn lead to
Talibanisation of Pakistan. Yet India seems to behave in a very
“European” way in Afghanistan; it is ready to send money and experts,
but not troops.
India’s worries and frustrations in Afghanistan and Pakistan translate
into a mixture of disillusion and irritation with an America that,
seen from New Delhi, allows itself to be manipulated by Pakistani
officials. Indians cannot quite decide whether the Americans are
simply “naive” or duplicitous; either way, they are not reassured.
Whatever the case, the current warming of relations between India and
Russia, symbolised by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s recent visit,
does not translate into a grand reversal of alliances, as India’s
break with Russia in the 1990s did. India’s exchanges with Russia are
only one-fifth of what they are with China. What prevails nowadays in
New Delhi and Moscow is simple pragmatism.
While there is room for Europe in India’s view of the world, for India
(as for China) Europe is above all an economic rather than a political
reality. When it comes to politics , bilateral relations prevail, and
from that standpoint France and Germany seem more important than Great
Britain. The Raj era may be visible in the buildings of New Delhi and
in the uniforms of the Indian army, but Britain has lost any
competitive edge that it once had in India. The past has truly
passed.
India’s unease about strategic power, and its resemblance to a
gigantic European Union united only by the English language , reflects
its ongoing search for a new international identity. In this quest,
India is impaired by its lack of practice in the exercise of power on
a grand scale. India is not about to become a second China — it lacks
both the means and the ambition. That is a further reason for the West
to engage and invest in India.
The writer is a Visiting Professor at Harvard University
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/An-ascent-hampered-by-old-ideas-/articleshow/5852457.cms
India, China growth helping developing nations: World Bank
IANS, Apr 24, 2010, 09.21am IST
Tags:World Bank|Growth|India China|global economic crisis
WASHINGTON: But for the rapid progress made by India and China, the
pace of poverty reduction in developing countries would have been
still slower after the global economic crisis, according to World
Bank's lead economist.
"The crisis struck just when the developing countries were making
significant strides, especially in poverty. Poverty rates were falling
in all regions," Delfin Go, lead author of a new World Bank report,
told reporters on Friday.
"Even in Africa, the rate was falling about one percent a year from
the mid-nineties to about 2005. Although population was growing, the
number of poor was actually decreasing because of the rapid progress
in China and India," he said.
The Global Monitoring Report 2010: The MDGs After the Crisis,"
released on Friday ahead of the two-day Bank-Fund meetings over the
weekend, says as a result of the crisis, 53 million more people will
remain in extreme poverty by 2015 than otherwise would have.
In South Asia, there was a very rapid decline (in poverty) because of
India, Go said. "But outside of India, the rate of reduction of
poverty is less, so with the crisis, they will also be harder hit
than, let's say, India," he said noting "India was growing very fast
even in recent months and years."
"So the key driver for poverty reduction is always growth, and the way
to get a quick reaction or look at what is happening at poverty, then,
is to look at that big driver where economic growth is the hardest
hit," Go said.
"The fortunate thing about low-income countries is that although the
growth rates came down for many countries, as a group, it was not
negative even in 2009 at the height of the crisis."
Many of the hard-hit countries were more than high-income/middle-
income countries, where they depended very much on private capital
flows, he said.
Noting that China and India have provided some of the markets for
other low-income countries, Go stressed that "the recovery of growth
in developing countries will provide stimulus and a market for high-
income countries."
Noting there is a mutual gain in keeping low-income countries buoyant
and growing in the next several years, he said developing countries
need to regain the momentum in achieving the Millennium Development
Goals. But they will need help in terms of development assistance,
trade expansion and recovery, open access to markets, affordable
private capital, and continuing strong support from international
financial institutions like the World Bank and the IMF, Go said.
...and I am Sid Harth