Which country in South Asia will be first to become developed?

[HariVamsha]

Why is there no none of the above option ?? Because no other South Asian country will be a developed country. Bangladesh doesn't have the resource nor the manufacturing capability .
India will have pockets which will be highly developed rest backward . India has inequality problem and a huge population . India already has 3rd largest amount of billionaires. Though Indian economy will easily be the 3rd largest in the world from 2025 onwards.

Hypothetically if you had to choose and earlier id that resembled your post, which would you have chose ?

 

[Hellraiser007]

With out a doubt India!

 

[N.Siddiqui]

Check for Pakistan GDP growth rate in 60's, in 1964 it was 9.38%, in the year 1969 it was 9.79% GDP growth rate....Alas

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Almost all mighty empires and dominant states were actually very diverse, but managed to unite themselves; usually through force.

The British Isles for example, at one time had hundreds of different ethnic groups, tribes and languages similar to Pakistan.

You do know my introduction to history as a child was "British History"? It began with Stonehenge, Roman, Alfred the great, Harold 1066 etc etc. So I do know. For 1,000 years the British Isles were pulverised, mulched, minced, compounded by military force until finally they made the homogenized "Briton".

Now they make movies like Braveheart etc. And only after they had become sufficiently homogenized did they go on to become a world power.

 

[kvpak]

If "Indian occupied contries" were to become independent countries, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra, Telengana and Kerala would become developed nation in a decade after independence.

"India would have registered higher growth rates if it had comprised only what are now its southern and western parts...The rest of the country held the South and West back...", so said P. Chidamparam, former Minister of Finance of India (2004-2008) to the American Ambassador Timothy Roemer in August 2009. Chidamparam concluded that India could achieve 11-12 per cent growth if it were the South and West only, noting that the rest of the country held it back.” (The Hindu newspaper; March 23, 2011).

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Check for Pakistan GDP growth rate in 60's, in 1964 it was 9.38%, in the year 1969 it was 9.79% GDP growth rate....Alas

1960s was only a false flight that was carried on the wind generated by Ayub Khan with his crisp cloths, even more crisper British Army accent and manners. He somehow fooled the Americans into thinking Pakistan was like Turkey, Greece, Cyprus. Help it along and it would turn into a Euro style country. Soon the Amerucans figured out and after the 1965 war it was all over. Few years down and American dollars started to run out. End of good times. The goldrush was over.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

1960s was only a false flight that was carried on the wind generated by Ayub Khan. He somehow fooled the Americans into thinking Pakistan was like Turkey, Greece, Cyprus. Help it along and it would turn into a Euro style country. Soo the Amerucans figured out and after the 1965 war it was all over.

Musharraf, the erstwhile general was able to fool the Americans one again later on, in 2004 Pakistan had hit a GDP growth of 8.96% and FDI per year was in excess of 7-8 billion USD for many years. Telecom, media had a mushroom growth those days.

And this time around change China for USA...

 

[egodoc222]

If "Indian occupied contries" were to become independent countries, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra, Telengana and Kerala would become developed nation in a decade after independence.

"India would have registered higher growth rates if it had comprised only what are now its southern and western parts...The rest of the country held the South and West back...", so said P. Chidamparam, former Minister of Finance of India (2004-2008) to the American Ambassador Timothy Roemer in August 2009. Chidamparam concluded that India could achieve 11-12 per cent growth if it were the South and West only, noting that the rest of the country held it back.” (The Hindu newspaper; March 23, 2011).

Don't include andhra and telangana...in your bull crap!!

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Musharraf, the erstwhile general was able to fool the Americans one again later on, in 2004 Pakistan had hit a GDP growth of 8.96% and FDI per year was in excess of 7-8 billion USD for many years. Telecom, media had a mushroom growth those days.

No. You can only fool a country like US once. During Mush days USA obliged because their tail was jammed in the Afghan aspect. That ran it's course few years ago.

 

[rishav]

bangladesh . small focused country , no real border tensions , chittagong port . bangladesh set hai

 

[Homo Sapiens]

First we are talking about Bangladesh and secondly your assuming Malthus Theory as absolute. As regards Japan I don't agree but leave that for another day. But some of the most walthiest places are also the most dense in people. It all depends on how those people work. If they all get up in the morning, all paddle in same direction without any friction it will be engine of prosperity like Singapore, HK, Shanghai. If they get up in the morning and fight, argue, kick, scheme, shoot, blow, steal from their fellow citizen then you will have Somalia.

You have a point.But I think, even if Bangladesh become the most prosperous region of South Asia, it will not be in the league of developed countries like USA.I think all south Asian countries will attain upper middle income status before stagnation.And the gap with most developed countries in the world will be a factor of 2 to 3.Like if a developed country had per capita income of 50k dollar than south Asian country will have 20k.Not very developed but not poor either.

There is a possibility that Bangladesh will become one of the wealthiest part of south Asia like in the past.Before the British took over and broke the economic backbone, Bengal was the most prosperous part of south Asia.It had the abundant agricultural bounty and thriving trade and commerce. If Bangladesh (and west Bengal)regain that position, it will be through trade and commerce.Bangladesh's location is good for trade and commerce.Another good location for flourishing trade is from Mumbai to Gwadar including Karachi.These two end of the sub-continent will pull ahead then the rest.But the gap will not be huge among south Asian regions.A few thousand dollar here and there.

 

[egodoc222]

My vote is for Sri Lanka!

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Back in 1960s after they met officials from Pakistan who mostly were the crop from the British era the American's were genuinely fooled or lulled themselves into thinking Pakistan as a Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, South Korea, Taiwan that with some help would become a solid part of the Western bulwark.

They got it right for Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, South Korea, Taiwan but Pakistan? Well you know the answer. All the other five today are solid members of NATO or other Western architecture.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

No. You can only fool a country like US once. During Mush days USA obliged because their tail was jammed in the Afghan aspect. That ran it's course few years ago.

As I've said China is the new USA, and this time the relationship will be more strategic than transactional and long lasting too.

CPEC is to Pakistan now what was Mangla, Tarbela and some other help Pakistan got from USA, just got bigger this time, so Pakistan is playing it smartly...yes need a sea change in top leadership.

 

[Indian wonk]

Hypothetically if you had to choose and earlier id that resembled your post, which would you have chose ?

Hypothetically I would choose India.
But for that we have to generate 250 million jobs , Increase Agriculture growth to 5 % yoy and increase manufacturing sector to 28 % of GDP and all these will have to be done through sustainable growth .