Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will India make the breakthrough?
BBC | Friday, February 2, 2007

Posted on 02/02/2007 6:19:00 PM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu

Businessman trying out a Porsche

Affluence is more apparent these days

BBC World Service will be dedicating a week of special programmes from 3-11 February looking at how India is changing.

The BBC's George Arney has been reporting on India for many years and, for just as long, the country's promise has been waiting to be fulfilled.

How do you summarise a country which is home to one in six members of the human race, which contains a third of the world's poorest people and yet has an increasingly consumer-oriented middle-class twice the size of the population of Germany?

And which - according to predictions by the CIA and investment bankers Goldman Sachs - could, along with China, come to dominate the global economy in the next few decades?

India has always been hard to get a handle on. In the 28 years that I've been visiting, thinking and writing about this vast and varied subcontinent, I've clung on to an unnerving, and yet somehow also reassuring, truism: for any generalisation that can be made about India, the opposite is equally true.

So is it or is it not true that, 60 years after partition and independence, India is finally about to take its place on the world stage as a major player?

Slumbering elephant

Dusting off my first ever Indian guide book (a 1978 Fodor Guide) - I can see that that the predictions of a resurgent India have been around a long time.

"India has rocketed", the foreword says, "from a backwater colony into the forefront of the world's leading nations."

Bullock and cart
Much of the country's infrastructure is dilapidated

But predictions that the slumbering Indian elephant would wake up never seemed to come true.

As the "tiger" economies of South-east Asia roared away in the 1970s and 1980s, India's biggest achievements remained its ability to feed its own people, and its adherence - against the odds - to democracy.

The question now, as one long-time observer puts it, is whether India will emerge as a major power, or whether it will remain "forever arriving".

Despite endemic problems of poverty and disease, major changes have already occurred.

Unshackled by the economic liberalisation of the early 1990s, India is already poised to overtake Japan as the world's third largest economy.

It is also strutting its stuff on the world stage. Its nuclear status has now been formally acknowledged by the US. And, when the UN is finally reformed, it's likely to land a permanent seat on the Security Council.

India Shining

All this adds up, to use the slick advertising slogan coined a couple of years ago by the then governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to a new India: India Shining.

Le Meridien hotel
Five star hotels cannot keep up with overseas demand

But hang on. Wasn't that slogan exposed as an empty boast, when - despite presiding over a period of unprecedented economic growth - the BJP was decisively rejected by India's have-nots at the last general elections?

Amidst all the buzz about the vibrant, new India getting ready for take-off, is the old India still capable of dragging it back, aborting the countdown?

Consider a few statistics: 300 million Indians live on less than US$1 a day, compared to only 85 million in China, which has a bigger population.

Forty-five per cent of Indian children under the age of five are malnourished. Less than a third of India's homes have a toilet. Less than half of its 500,000 villages are connected to the electricity grid.

Globalisation challenge

Despite the explosion of consumerism and capitalism in India's booming cities, more than half of all Indians still live in rural areas.

Farmers are committing suicide because they can't compete in a globalised market. "India doesn't live in its villages," says author and activist Arundhati Roy. "It dies."

Crowded boat

In the rush for riches, can India's social fabric stand the strains?

Having shed its old commitment to state-directed socialism, critics argue that the Indian state is failing to provide the most basic necessities to its poorest citizens: health care, education, drinking water.

As the gap between rich and poor widens, Naxalite militants have spread their doctrine of Maoist revolution, now making their presence felt in more than a quarter of the country.

Maoism, according to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, is the single biggest internal security challenge ever faced by India.

And, even though the Maoists are unlikely ever to bring the government to its knees - as they did in neighbouring Nepal - the brutal low-intensity conflict they've spawned is helping to keep India's poorest regions poor - and sharpening the inequity which some see as the biggest danger facing India over the next few decades.

So where is India headed? Some changes are visible to any casual visitor. The rampant consumerism in India's cities was unimaginable when I first visited in 1978.

But how far are India's traditional values breaking down under the onslaught of consumerism and individualism?

Are caste and hierarchy being eroded - and if so, are the downtrodden benefiting?

Is the explosion of television creating a new, more homogenised Indian culture?

Globalisation has brought tremendous changes and, for some, tremendous rewards. But are there more losers than winners, and, if so, what will the consequences be? In the rush for riches, can India's social fabric stand the strains? Or will growing inequities pull it apart at the seams?





TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: asia; future; globalisation; globalization; india; multipolar; power; rival; sasia; superpower; threat; unipolar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last
To: canon5d
"China invaded Vietnam, Vietnam tried to invade China into the Yunnan province but was UNSUCCESSFUL. In other words, China was able to go into Vietnamese territory and not the other way around. In this way, China wins. "

Thats the communist version of the story. Here is the real story. China tried to enter Vietnam, got their bloodied arse handed to them by the Vietnamese and went back home. End of story. If you want to believe something else go ahead but this really isn't the site for commie propaganda.

"If you define victory as China having to force Vietnam out of Cambodia, then you're right, they lost."

Vietnam beat the crap out of the China backed Khmer Rouge. Another of your commie lie.

"Remember 1962? China beats India without an airforce and with much less technological weapons than what India possess at that time because Indians underestimated China and didn't think it could operate in high altitudes. In the long run China did lose in terms of international image but military wise, they did achieve their objectives. "

If you define victory as having been able to enter someone's territory then even Nazis, Pakees, Iraq under Saddam, would be winners in your book.

BTW in 1962 India didn't possess any military equipment, let alone being better than China. India's economy was in a mess still recovering from partition exodus and 200 years of colonial rule. Another of your commie lie busted!

So you re the new Chicom in the forum?
21 posted on 02/05/2007 1:09:19 PM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MunnaP
China always backed the losing side.......

They backed Pakistan in Indo-Pak conflict. Backed Milosevic in Bonsian war.... got their embassy bombed. Got busted out of Vietnam in matter of weeks. Got raped by Japan in WWII. Supported Pol Pot in Cambodia and got beaten again by Vietnam. And Korean war to my knowledge was anything but a stalemate.
22 posted on 02/05/2007 1:30:46 PM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Gengis Khan

Well said.


23 posted on 02/05/2007 4:43:21 PM PST by MimirsWell (Musharraf - In the line of (back)fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Gengis Khan

Maybe if you would actually read my post, you would act a little more like grown men instead of slapping labels on people.

In 1962, India is far more wealthier than China, and possesses better military equipment than China. You can blame the british for a lot of things, but even today, where did the aircraft carrier that India has (which China doesn't) come from?

As far as the Vietnam war goes - something you just don't understand given that India was one of the biggest supporters of the Soviet Union. Vietnam was backed by the Soviets for its invasion into Cambodia - part of the reason is to check if the Soviets would come to Vietnam's defense, it did not. Even the Vietnamese accused China of betraying the world communist revolution by "becoming a puppet of the imperialist United States".


24 posted on 02/05/2007 4:46:30 PM PST by canon5d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
Is the explosion of television creating a new, more homogenised Indian culture?

Does the explosion of the internet create a more fractured American culture?

25 posted on 02/05/2007 4:55:59 PM PST by Sawdring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: canon5d
"In 1962, India is far more wealthier than China, and possesses better military equipment than China."

Far more wealthier then China???!!! Cool off on your jets dude. You are going overboard with the hyperbole. In the 50's when India was dealing with 20-30 million refugees, China was planning invasion of Tibet. And Nehru got taken for a ride with all the Chinese sweet talk about Asian solidarity and Hindi-Chini bhai bhai crap.

Indian was never wealthier or militarily better equipped then China. Not in 1962 and not even now.

"You can blame the british for a lot of things, but even today, where did the aircraft carrier that India has (which China doesn't) come from? "

We bought it..... with cash. They didn't do charity. We are buying one even from Russia. And also making two more of our own.

Now why China doesn't have one? Becoz it cant use one. Aircraft carrier isnt an easy thing to use. It takes years to build the expertise.

And try not to evade the question. You are a chicom right?
26 posted on 02/05/2007 8:45:26 PM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Gengis Khan

GK,spoken like a true blue Bong!!!!!!


27 posted on 02/06/2007 3:23:44 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Gengis Khan

And who gave you that expertise? It's the british.

You guys had an airforce in 1962, etc. Far better military equipment too.

You do realize that about 20 million Chinese died during Mao's Great Leap Forward, right? (in other words, the country was in shambles) - that's in the late 50's. And you do realize that by that time, the Soviets were totally against China and China got zero support from them after 1950's.


28 posted on 02/06/2007 8:45:12 AM PST by canon5d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: canon5d
"And who gave you that expertise? It's the british."

And who paid for it? Indians of course ;)

By the way the Chinese got a lot more from the Russians and Americans (starting from Nixon to Clinton. Who gave you the Kiev class carrier that you couldn't use? The Russians of course!!! ) You need to stop cribbing.

"You do realize that about 20 million Chinese died during Mao's Great Leap Forward, right?"

Do YOU realize what that "Great Leap Forward" was all about? It was about China exporting more food and buying weaponry with that money. Read that again......"BUYING WEAPONRY".
Thats how Mao starved his people for his territorial ambitions.
29 posted on 02/06/2007 7:01:29 PM PST by Gengis Khan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gengis Khan

"Do YOU realize what that "Great Leap Forward" was all about? It was about China exporting more food and buying weaponry with that money. Read that again......"BUYING WEAPONRY".
Thats how Mao starved his people for his territorial ambitions."

This is about as gross distortion of history as you can get. Show me the link, the proof for this.

What happened was inflated values of grain production and a FAMINE has occured. Search for Great Leap Forward on the web and see it for yourself. Besides, in late 1950's, Russians were no longer helping China - it was India who cozy up to them.


30 posted on 02/07/2007 8:57:35 AM PST by canon5d
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-30 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson