Leading Indian strategist:India not in the same league as US and China!

[antartica]

Nothing is too late for india in this regard .

I personally feel that indian defence industry cannot grow until and unless private sector come into the scene .
One the private sector is in , I am sure the rate of growth in defence industry would be tremendous .

 

[faithfulguy]

Acquiring tech from abroad isn't going to hamper her own technological growth. Big hurdles in India's (tech) growth is its work culture, attitude of people, and some govt policies, not the lack of brain. India began developing arms years later than China. Private industries have just recently began to realize the importance of research as foreign companies coming. Things have changed in past decade, and changed in a big way. Growth will be much more rapid than before.
Though China inputs much more money than India, we fulfill this deficit by foreign collaboration. Collaborations don't mean that we cant do that. But they greatly reduce the time and money required to do that, by eliminating the need of re-inventing the wheel. They compensate for lack of resources. I do agree, there is no replacement for money, and what money can achieve. So China will be far ahead for long time.

India doesn't aim for superiority, cause it cant. Not now, not for few decades. It's a bitter truth for us.

At least you know common sense, unlike Rahul.

There is one thing in the title that is not point out. China is actually not in the same league as the US. So the author was too generalizing when it lump both China and the US into the same league. US is the super power and we live in Pax Americana right now. China is an up and coming secondary power. This just point out the hard truth about India in the near future. That India will not catch up to China in the near future and is at least a few steps below the US.

 

[saurabh]

At least you know common sense, unlike Rahul.

There is one thing in the title that is not point out. China is actually not in the same league as the US. So the author was too generalizing when it lump both China and the US into the same league. US is the super power and we live in Pax Americana right now. China is an up and coming secondary power. This just point out the hard truth about India in the near future. That India will not catch up to China in the near future and is at least a few steps below the US.

Nothing can be said for sure about the future. Doesn't it seems surprising that the second biggest economy, a technological powerhouse, global leader in robotics was not, is not, and neither in near future considered a superpower. While china, still a developing nation, is considered above European Union when talking about future?
I think author placed China alongside US cause it has a certain global influence that only US has. Nobody will take individual European countries that seriously as they take China (talking about future).

When we place Japan second in economy, it is in terms of dollars. But we dont take into account its spending capacity and what it can achieve in spending that amount. Everything is costly in Japan compared to China, so may be it has more money, it still would achieve less with it than what China can.

If you imagine the future, it would appear bipolar unlike now. US will maintain its position, but what other pole comes to mind?

 

[faithfulguy]

Nothing can be said for sure about the future. Doesn't it seems surprising that the second biggest economy, a technological powerhouse, global leader in robotics was not, is not, and neither in near future considered a superpower. While china, still a developing nation, is considered above European Union when talking about future?
I think author placed China alongside US cause it has a certain global influence that only US has. Nobody will take individual European countries that seriously as they take China (talking about future).

When we place Japan second in economy, it is in terms of dollars. But we dont take into account its spending capacity and what it can achieve in spending that amount. Everything is costly in Japan compared to China, so may be it has more money, it still would achieve less with it than what China can.

If you imagine the future, it would appear bipolar unlike now. US will maintain its position, but what other pole comes to mind?

As you say, no one knows what the future hold. I can only talk about now. Right now, US is the only global superpower with no 2nd place.

As for other countries, they are all growing. China is definitely the media idol in the west as the next country capable of challenging the US. To me, its too early to tell. Japan was touted as the next superpower back in the 1980s. A historian even regard Japan as the next superpower. Look at where Japan is now. So to predict how a country can challenge the US, if its possible, is way into the future (beyond 20 years). So a lot of things can happen when we look that far ahead. But the western media like to crown China as the next superpower already.

From what I understand, this has cause an issue in India as a lot of Indian regard itself as the next superpower capable of take on the US and that China would disintegrate because it lack democracy.

 

[saurabh]

As you say, no one knows what the future hold. I can only talk about now. Right now, US is the only global superpower with no 2nd place.

As for other countries, they are all growing. China is definitely the media idol in the west as the next country capable of challenging the US. To me, its too early to tell. Japan was touted as the next superpower back in the 1980s. A historian even regard Japan as the next superpower. Look at where Japan is now. So to predict how a country can challenge the US, if its possible, is way into the future (beyond 20 years). So a lot of things can happen when we look that far ahead. But the western media like to crown China as the next superpower already.

From what I understand, this has cause an issue in India as a lot of Indian regard itself as the next superpower capable of take on the US and that China would disintegrate because it lack democracy.

China disintegrate!! Not going to happen. Most of the Indians don't regard India to be next superpower. Infact, half the population doesn't even understand the meaning of superpower.
China is still developing, and already has a huge economy. for decades, it will just grow. It has more resources, population,
and potential for growth than Japan ever had. Has a govt with very, very strong will to grow. I agree US is sole power today. But China is catching up fast. Its not just economy and tech that matters, but image and influence matter more.

About India, it too has the potential to grow. Though the democracy is the biggest hurdle is short term, we will be better off autocracy in long term.

 

[faithfulguy]

About India, it too has the potential to grow. Though the democracy is the biggest hurdle is short term, we will be better off autocracy in long term.

At least you have a clear view of democracy for a backward country. Being from Taiwan, I realize that Taiwan grow the fastest under autocracy. But now, democracy is helping Taiwan grow at a slower pace. I think democracy works only when the majority of people worry more than putting food in their stomach. As this would be the concern for most Indians, India is not ready for democracy yet.

 

[saurabh]

At least you have a clear view of democracy for a backward country. Being from Taiwan, I realize that Taiwan grow the fastest under autocracy. But now, democracy is helping Taiwan grow at a slower pace. I think democracy works only when the majority of people worry more than putting food in their stomach. As this would be the concern for most Indians, India is not ready for democracy yet.

For short term autocracy is good. That too, its when you can digest violation of human rights, loosing your freedom (atleast in some manner). Democracy serves well when the people are well educated about their rights. But its best for long term, cause one day everyone will know his rights, and would be able to differentiate good from bad. India was under autocratic rule when it got independence. Lot of leaders were there, everyone with different ideology. Split bw communism and capitalism. Lot of religions, cultures. Many many differences bw different parts. An autocracy wasn't even possible.
Democracy may seem to be slow, but it will bear sweeter fruits than autocracy in long term. You have to remember, democracy evolved out of autocracy. Because autocracy was just not good enough!

 

[faithfulguy]

For short term autocracy is good. That too, its when you can digest violation of human rights, loosing your freedom (atleast in some manner). Democracy serves well when the people are well educated about their rights. But its best for long term, cause one day everyone will know his rights, and would be able to differentiate good from bad. India was under autocratic rule when it got independence. Lot of leaders were there, everyone with different ideology. Split bw communism and capitalism. Lot of religions, cultures. Many many differences bw different parts. An autocracy wasn't even possible.
Democracy may seem to be slow, but it will bear sweeter fruits than autocracy in long term. You have to remember, democracy evolved out of autocracy. Because autocracy was just not good enough!

I believe a benevolent dictatorship would be good for India now. It need true leadership that is impossible to realize in a democracy. Look at Putin in Russia. He is bringing Russia back into glory and Russians are happy because of him.

 

[ssheppard]

I believe a benevolent dictatorship would be good for India now. It need true leadership that is impossible to realize in a democracy. Look at Putin in Russia. He is bringing Russia back into glory and Russians are happy because of him.

I wonder how Chinese and Pakistani members want India to be ruled by dictators.....

If Chinese have been ripped off their choice of deciding who should lead them.... why do they want every country to have the same kind of leadership....

Indians don't want dictatorship in their country...and thats their right to choose....like Chinese choose to live under Communists...and Pakistanis for some reason love army rule.

Indians are pretty comfortable with the kind of growth the country is having....

 

[saurabh]

I believe a benevolent dictatorship would be good for India now. It need true leadership that is impossible to realize in a democracy. Look at Putin in Russia. He is bringing Russia back into glory and Russians are happy because of him.

How would anyone decide the dictatorship is benevolent. Dictatorship will be worthy only if takes decisions which are good for people and country, instead of ones which look good to people, which is done in democracy. Also, it needs to have a leadership unchallenged, through force or through popularity. Both aren't there.
Putin is doing good in Russia, and is doing that within democracy. This can be realized in India too. Top Indian leaders are capable enough, and are working. But as I said earlier, from north to south and east to west, the needs, ideologies, cultures, everything is diffferent. In east, we have communism, west, capitalism!! Huge differences. Autocracy isn't feasible.
Still, people are getting smarter about there true needs, and this is what that makes democracy stronger and better. You can search, the growth of infrastructure in India in past two decades.

 

[saurabh]

I wonder how Chinese and Pakistani members want India to be ruled by dictators.....

If Chinese have been ripped off their choice of deciding who should lead them.... why do they want every country to have the same kind of leadership....

Indians don't want dictatorship in their country...and thats their right to choose....like Chinese choose to live under Communists...and Pakistanis for some reason love army rule.

Indians are pretty comfortable with the kind of growth the country is having....

People don't want dictatorship, but it is imposed on them. This is what dictatorship means. Some Chinese do protest, but whole world knows what happens to them. We should get out of this mentality, that every Chinese or Pakistani thinks ill of us. Most of them, just like us, think about their own need first. Off course, they want their country to be ahead, but than this is a feeling everyone in the world shares.

 

[Honor]

How would anyone decide the dictatorship is benevolent. Dictatorship will be worthy only if takes decisions which are good for people and country, instead of ones which look good to people, which is done in democracy. Also, it needs to have a leadership unchallenged, through force or through popularity. Both aren't there.
Putin is doing good in Russia, and is doing that within democracy. This can be realized in India too. Top Indian leaders are capable enough, and are working. But as I said earlier, from north to south and east to west, the needs, ideologies, cultures, everything is diffferent. In east, we have communism, west, capitalism!! Huge differences. Autocracy isn't feasible.
Still, people are getting smarter about there true needs, and this is what that makes democracy stronger and better. You can search, the growth of infrastructure in India in past two decades.

Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore is a form of benevolent leadership. Singapore citizens realized that he can bring properous to the country. Within 45years, Singapore is now the top 5 richest country in the world in term of GDP per person. For information, Singapore is still one party state.

Like US, you need to have a stable economy and highly educated people first before talking about democracy.

 

[gogbot]

I believe a benevolent dictatorship would be good for India now. It need true leadership that is impossible to realize in a democracy. Look at Putin in Russia. He is bringing Russia back into glory and Russians are happy because of him.

India has at its heart represented Secular free democracy. through India's 5000 year history, Those values have surfaced more than once.

Ashoka wrote what is now the earliest version of the UN bill of rights. He even wrote the Worlds first Animal rights based on Buddhism teaching that all life is sacred. more than thousand years ago

Akbar Challenged the Right of any religion to claim absolute truth over the other.

Ghandi showed us at our Heart, regardless of caste, race religion or ideology. We are all human

I will be dammed before i have India loose the values, That people have striven so hard to preserve.
Democratic secular republic is as much a gift of history to us. as it is a burden.
It should be cherished.
Once we loose it we may never get it back.

 

[saurabh]

Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore is a form of benevolent leadership. Singapore citizens realized that he can bring properous to the country. Within 45years, Singapore is now the top 5 richest country in the world in term of GDP per person. For information, Singapore is still one party state.

Like US, you need to have a stable economy and highly educated people first before talking about democracy.

Lee Kuan Yew turned out to be benevolent. But if he had not? People don't get choice in autocracy, but they do in democracy. If they think that a person is good for them, they can keep him in power. If he doesn't turns out to be good, he can be thrown out. This is what democracy is all about

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

Lee Kuan Yew turned out to be benevolent. But if he had not? People don't get choice in autocracy, but they do in democracy. If they think that a person is good for them, they can keep him in power. If he doesn't turns out to be good, he can be thrown out. This is what democracy is all about

This is all meaningless when nearly all of the 'elected' officials are hardened criminals, many with close ties to mafias/dons. When the Babus don't care for the people, only to line up their own pockets then it is the people that suffers. Get rid of the systematic caste discrimination AND the corrupt goons first.