Thursday, July 14, 2011

21st Century: Future World Power(s)


I am not an astrologer. However, in this article I shall try to sketch what kind of world we will have by the end of this century based on my studies, observations and personal experiences. We all know the developed economies (mainly western countries) are having a very humble growth-rates (or stagnant growth in many cases), whereas the developing countries are having more or less better growth rates. The rise of the rest of the world (excluding western) is led by China, India, Brazil & Russia (i.e., BRIC nations). The richest country the USA, having GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of almost $15 Trillion, growing at about 2-3% a year is likely to be overtaken by China, (having GDP of about $5 Trillion) which is growing at almost 10% a year. Needless to say that everything comes down to the economy of a country, while assessing its power and global influence (if you have money, then only you can have a strong military, scientific advancement, industrialization & productivity, globally competitive human resource and so on). With this background information, let’s explore various view points:
Conservative American View: If America fails to sustain its SUPER POWER status, we are heading towards a catastrophe. If America is weakened, the world will be a barbaric place to live in, mainly because, the Americans will not be able to provide security to various nations, and will not be able to supply aid to poor nations. For example what about American presence in South East Asia to safe guard Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, and Philippines etc? What about Middle-East? Who is going to handle constant frictions between the Sunnis (everywhere except Iran) & Shies (mainly Iran), and above all, between Arabs & Israelis? Who will support the poor war torn nations of Africa and Asia? In general, the whole world order will be threatened, if America loses its power. There is no other country to fit into its shoe. The Chinese never speak up and have no legitimacy on moral issues, and fundamentally there is nothing like human rights in a communist state. America’s fall will be a moral collapse of the world.
Conservative Chinese View (also called pragmatic view in China): For the past 2-3 hundred years, the world has been governed on the conditions suitable to the west. However, now the west should be prepared to obey, rather than dictating its terms. The western ideas of democracy, capitalist-society and universal human rights have absolutely nothing to do with China. Rights and laws are subjective, depending on the social structure of a country, which can vary country to country. Every country/society should find its own solutions. Chinese government is to secure interests of the people of China, and all other governments should do the same for their people. The west has no right to tell others what they should do; let others figure out what is to be done. Even when there is genocide in some distant country, China should not intervene. Let those people find their solutions; and let time take its own course as it has taken to bring us all to this date. China will continue to remain a communist country and Chinese government will continue to secure interests of the people of China only. The west should adjust to this; else China will fight its terms out when needed.
The liberal thinkers around the world (including in US, & China): We are going to have a world that is multi polar. There will be no one super power country, but we shall have many countries with influential power. America will lose “Super Power” status, but it will not be its fall, rather it will be the rise of the rest (as Fareed Zakaria argues all the time). It will be something like the Britain, who lost its Super Power status by ’40s, but it has remained an influential global player even today.
Moreover, America still has great fuel to remain globally competent for a longer duration:
· Infrastructure and institutions for future technologies & industries like no other country has (i.e., Biotechnology, nanotechnology etc)
· World class universities & research labs (needless to mention, 37 of top 50 universities of the world are American)
· Attracts highly skilled immigrants (unlike any other developed country, America is growing younger as the population is on rise)
· It houses most of the global companies, most of the fortune 500s, and keeps generating newer multinationals
· And of course, from hip-hop to Harvard, from Hollywood to Gates foundation, its soft power is probably influencing the whole world like no other nation is in position of doing so.
My take: Thus, one great thing would be that the world would be truly democratic in nature. It is very ironic that the country which believes in democracy (USA) is trying to avoid sharing of power, while the country which believes in having only one party (China) is advocating for a multi-polar world, where power is shared between many. Nonetheless, we will not just have two great powers, but many indeed. Though India’s GDP is currently at 10th position (about $1.5 Trillion), it is expected to grow faster than China, mainly because of its economic design and its demography. Let me explain this:
· China is attracting huge foreign direct investments (FDIs). In one month it attracts FDIs that India attracts in one year. Now, this is great for faster growth, but it is risky and you are dependent on foreigners to pump in money. At some point if FDIs are low or if people book profit and walk out of your country, it may surely hurt your growth rate.
· China’s one child per family program is great for population control, but it will make it grow old, whereas India will be one of the youngest countries of the world (challenge for India to take advantage of this unintended opportunity). This year UN has come out with a report that pointed out that China is going to have a demographic collapse over the next 25 years. It is going to lose 400 million people.
Of course, this is not a race. There is no gold medal for a country with the highest GDP or growth rates. After all, the quality of life of the individuals of a country matters, and both the countries will be able to do it best by cooperation with each other and the rest of the world. I was very glad when India simply declined the Bush administration’s tacit offer of obtaining help from America in return of taking stands against China (in short, Americans wanted India as a counter power to China). India does not have to choose between US or China; rather it should have deep warm ties with not only US & China, but with every other nation of the planet. Wellbeing of its people should be the only goal for India.
Moreover, both India & China will be closely followed by Brazil, Russia, South Africa, and Mexico and so on. The economic rise of the world would mean that the global poverty would fall below 15% by 2015 (it was 40% in 1981).
All nations will be required to act responsibly. Things that could hurt all sorts of projections are wars, social (and political) instability, scarcity of resources and environmental disasters. These constraints can be overcome only through cooperation and mutual respect. Hopefully, there will be no one country with all mussel power that threatens others.
What kind of India I wish: I think India should never become a hard Super-Power that suffocates the rest of the world, expands its boundaries and dictates its terms in arrogant manner. However, India must generate global citizens, who lead the world through education, mutual respect and sustainable development. India has a great potential of becoming a role model for the developing world, and it must realize its Soft-Super Power.

I welcome your comments....

Hans Rosling: Asia's rise -- how and when (c) TED conferences
Some great web links on this topic:
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/05/why-the-21st-century-will-not-belong-to-china/ (Fareed article on 'why 21st century will not belong to China')
http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/266 (Freedman on World is flat at MIT)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXdwsYtlzX4 (CCTV video 'China & India friends or foes)
Book: Zakaria, F. (2009). The post American world. W. W. Nortan & Company, USA.

13 comments:

  1. Hey Kathan,

    For once I agree and like the entire article. Good analysis.

    Ritika

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hehe.. That's interesting, Ritika. Thanks very much for kind words.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good article. India has to play a very critical global role in next few years for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  4. a really thoughtful article. I specially like idea on multi polar world and soft super power. I also believe India has lot of challenges to face on infrastructure, political , Law and order and religious matters. I also like idea of indian as global citizen.
    Good article Kathan.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good article, and I encourage you to continue to think how India and China find ways to build mutual trust and respect, and to work together to better our world.

    India and China share similar development patterns given where they are economically. They are two of the largest nations in terms of population, so their challenges and priorities are naturally aligned. For example, on the global stage the two countries should make "per capita" an important criteria in consumption, CO2 emissions, etc.. The developed countries will prefer to downplay that factor.

    It is natural that India, China, and every other country look after their interests, but India and China need to be mindful of not becoming somebody else's pawn.

    China and India are still relatively poor, and it is easy for external political actors to fuel ethnic divide.

    China and India should champion their principles of peaceful co-existence and non-interference together.

    Given the proximity and the population, there is no excuse why China-India trade cannot grow leaps and bounds.

    Work on these items and the two countries will gradually build mutual trust.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That is a refreshingly accurate view of Chinese thought, although I wouldn't really label it conservative per se. In China, not many people will stand clearly in either liberal or conservative camps, pragmatism is the better word here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks everyone, your words are very encouraging.

    @Anonymous (july 15th)- You would like exploring my earlier article on India as moral leader-

    http://globiansperspective.blogspot.com/2011/03/can-india-having-citizens-like-me-be.html

    @DeWang- I highly appreciate you for such detailed suggestions. I shall definitely explore India-China relationship in detail and come up with an article, exploring areas of progress and strengthening relationship. I realize we have great commonalities than differences. We must capitulate on cooperation for our mutual welfare.

    @ Xian- In article, I meant "Conservative" as voice of establishment (not really seeing things from a neutral perspective). But, thanks for the suggestion, I shall put that in bracket for my Chinese friends.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Occidental OrientalJuly 25, 2011 at 9:00 PM

    "China and India should champion their principles of peaceful co-existence and non-interference together."

    China does not have a "non-interference" policy. It has an expansionist policy as evidenced by their take over of Tibet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @Occidental Oriental- I think DeWang (Chinese reader) should be able to defend his comment that you are referring to.
    Meanwhile, I'd like to point out that I have simply reflected the current debates going on in America and China, while depicting conservative views of those countries. Currently, it is a fact that the Chinese claim that they have "non-interference policy". Of course, you may disagree based on their dispute with Tibet. And honestly, I too feel that just because they considered Tibet to be part of ancient China, it does not justify such occupation. However, as times change, countries change their policies. The past actions may not necessarily predict future policies. Otherwise, western countries would have been a great curse to the rest of the world based on their colonialism & imperialism policies. Just as they have learnt to forego such policies, we hope, China must have learnt as well.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Occidental OrientalJuly 26, 2011 at 9:12 AM

    If China learned then why are there so many Tibetan refugees seeking shelter in India?

    ReplyDelete
  11. @OO- That's what I said. Based on Tibet experience China must have learnt to respect borders.

    ReplyDelete
  12. However to experience these studies effectively you must reliable write my paper services for students be great in science subjects and have energy for examinations and examination.

    ReplyDelete