Taj Mahal
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Taj_Mahal_in_March_2004.jpg
In this chapter Fareed mostly focuses on India, and its rise to power and stability. In the early 1980s, India was a mess. There were many political protests, and the economy was not doing too well. The growth was slow and most of the Indian graduates left India for better opportunities.
The past decade, however, could not have been more different. India transformed itself into a very peaceful and prosperous nation. Relations with Pakistan are better and they managed to maintain a high rate of economic growth. The world is now courting India as never before. Foreign delegations are flocking to India to form deeper relations with the nation.
With this growth comes many questions and concern from other nations. Will India become the next China? Will they look at the United States as an ally?
The short answer to that is that no one knows yet. Indians are now mostly focused on advertising their country to foreign investors. They portray themselves a very friendly nation, not only to the west, but to everyone else also. Over the past fifteen years, India has been the second-fastest growing country in the world, behind only China.
Indian apartment buildings
http://ecofriend.org/images/growing_buildings_in_munbai_.jpg
The key concept Fareed wants the readers to understand is that in spite of such fast growth, India still remains a very poor nation. The per capita GDP is still below $1000. The size of the economy is large and is growing very fast, however the large growing population of over a billion people is dragging the per capita figure down.
A very crowded Indian passenger train
http://moronland.net/media/pictures/pic01950.jpg
The past decade, however, could not have been more different. India transformed itself into a very peaceful and prosperous nation. Relations with Pakistan are better and they managed to maintain a high rate of economic growth. The world is now courting India as never before. Foreign delegations are flocking to India to form deeper relations with the nation.
With this growth comes many questions and concern from other nations. Will India become the next China? Will they look at the United States as an ally?
The short answer to that is that no one knows yet. Indians are now mostly focused on advertising their country to foreign investors. They portray themselves a very friendly nation, not only to the west, but to everyone else also. Over the past fifteen years, India has been the second-fastest growing country in the world, behind only China.
Indian apartment buildings
http://ecofriend.org/images/growing_buildings_in_munbai_.jpg
The key concept Fareed wants the readers to understand is that in spite of such fast growth, India still remains a very poor nation. The per capita GDP is still below $1000. The size of the economy is large and is growing very fast, however the large growing population of over a billion people is dragging the per capita figure down.
A very crowded Indian passenger train
http://moronland.net/media/pictures/pic01950.jpg
India has a very large youth population and the experts are making the assumption that the youth can speed up India's growth. Unlike China, who was very successful with the "child-policy", India faces a youth bulge because the past family planning policies had mostly failed. Fareed concludes his argument by going back to India's growth. The poverty rate is half of what it was two decades ago, which is very impressive. The private sector is thriving and they are posting double-digit gains. India has more billionaires than any Asian country, mostly self-made, and according to the author: " if demography is destiny, India's future is secure."
Downtown Mumbai from Nariman Point
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Mumbai_Downtown.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Mumbai_Downtown.jpg
India owes much of its political system to what the British left behind. Unlike the other Asian countries, the British stayed in India for centuries and built lasting institutions and agencies there. India has a very modern administrative structure. India did not need to invent a central bank or independent courts because they already had them. However, the main inference is that even though India has succeeded in some dimensions, it has failed on many others. During the 1950s, India tried to modernize by mixing economic models between capitalism and communism. The results were disastrous and kept India back for many decades.
Fareed put emphasis on India's poor score on the United Nations Human Development Index, which ranks countries not just by wealth, but also health.
The implications of India's neglect are quite sever, especially in the long run. India ranks behind Syria, Sri Lanka, and even Vietnam. Female literacy rate is at a shockingly low 48 percent. Despite much rhetoric about helping the less fortunate, the government has done very little for them.
Fareed put emphasis on India's poor score on the United Nations Human Development Index, which ranks countries not just by wealth, but also health.
The implications of India's neglect are quite sever, especially in the long run. India ranks behind Syria, Sri Lanka, and even Vietnam. Female literacy rate is at a shockingly low 48 percent. Despite much rhetoric about helping the less fortunate, the government has done very little for them.
Indian's protesting for their civil rights
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20090717/capt.photo_1247843427308-1-0.jpg
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20090717/capt.photo_1247843427308-1-0.jpg
Can these problems be blamed on democracy? Not quite. Bad policies produce failure, no matter what kind of government is in power. Still, certain aspects of democracy can prove problematic, especially in a country with rampant poverty and illiteracy. Many of the politicians are corrupt and the minorities control most of the country's wealth and they like to keep it that way. At this rate the implications of this distribution of control over power can be catastrophic for the rest of the nation.
Slum dwellers in front of their shacks near the Victoria Memorial in Calcutta, India
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2179/1645013394_99a92a7771.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2179/1645013394_99a92a7771.jpg
The author's point of view is that democracy is India's destiny. Fareed, being an Indian himself, believes that a country so vast and complex can not be governed any other way and the politicians have to use democracy in their advantage. The government has recently started investing in rural India's education and health. Village councils have to give a third of the seats to women, which has led to one million elected women in village councils. This gives them a platform and opportunity from which to demand better health, educations, and equal rights.
Business Today awards for the most powerful women in Indian
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060224/biz2.jpg
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060224/biz2.jpg
Fareed ends this argument by emphasizing that government does matter. Even India's great success, its efficient private companies, could not thrive without a well regulated financial system that has transparency and enforcement. India's central paradox today, according to Fareed, is that its society is open, eager and ready to take on the world, where its state is hesitant, cautious, and suspicious of the change that is happening.
After gaining independence, Indians were eager to play a role on the world stage. They inherited this from the British. The British controlled the Middle East during WWI from India, and Indian soldiers fought and carried out Britain's wars. They learned from that tradition and were quite comfortable with it. India's first prime minister, Nehru, had been educated like an English Gentleman at Cambridge and Harrow and his grasp on history was extraordinary. Nehru became a towering figure in Indian politics, and because of his extensive knowledge, even during his own term in the office, he was his own foreign minister. He was an idealist , " An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," and his mentor Ghandi used to say, " and soon the world will be blind and toothless." Ghandi was revered in India like a god, and his nonviolent style, brought down the British empire.
Nehru was determined to bring new courses in international affairs and lived up to his ideals. He did not want military personnel to serve in the ministry and if they did, they wanted them to dress like civilians. He placed hope over calculation in some cases, and his foreign policy was full of rhetoric about peace and goodwill. This policy backfired when China invaded India in 1962, settling the of border dispute in their favor. This shattered his idealistic view of the world and he realized he is getting out of touch with reality, and he was not the same after that.
After gaining independence, Indians were eager to play a role on the world stage. They inherited this from the British. The British controlled the Middle East during WWI from India, and Indian soldiers fought and carried out Britain's wars. They learned from that tradition and were quite comfortable with it. India's first prime minister, Nehru, had been educated like an English Gentleman at Cambridge and Harrow and his grasp on history was extraordinary. Nehru became a towering figure in Indian politics, and because of his extensive knowledge, even during his own term in the office, he was his own foreign minister. He was an idealist , " An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," and his mentor Ghandi used to say, " and soon the world will be blind and toothless." Ghandi was revered in India like a god, and his nonviolent style, brought down the British empire.
Nehru was determined to bring new courses in international affairs and lived up to his ideals. He did not want military personnel to serve in the ministry and if they did, they wanted them to dress like civilians. He placed hope over calculation in some cases, and his foreign policy was full of rhetoric about peace and goodwill. This policy backfired when China invaded India in 1962, settling the of border dispute in their favor. This shattered his idealistic view of the world and he realized he is getting out of touch with reality, and he was not the same after that.
Standing (L to R) Jawaharlal Nehru, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, Krishna Hutheesing, Indira GandhiRanjit Pandit; Seated: Swaroop Rani, Motilal Nehru and Kamala Nehru (circa 1927). and
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Nehru_family.jpg
India by some measure is the most pro-American country in the world. One reason could be that for decades, the Indian government had tried to blame India's misery on the CIA and the Americans. They also tried to spread anti-Americanism in India, which today has backfired for the most part.
The Indian American community has been bridging the two cultures. Americans and Indians understand each other. The Americans may be puzzled by how the Chinese government conducts its business, or the Iranian Guardian Council, but has understood India. Their relationship is not only between the governments like many countries, but there is also a bond between the societies.
The Indian government is also changing its policies. They are moving from Nehru's self-righteous and Ghandi's hostile approach, to one that benefits the Indian people. Manmahon Singh's policy is that peace and stability can develop a market as well as its society.
Also similar to the Chinese, Indian Hindu's do not believe in a god. The have many gods and each branch of it has its own gods and goddesses. Because there are no core set of beliefs or doctrines you can do what you like and follow whichever one of the teachings that you desire.
This ease has allowed them to flourish and be an easy going nation. Even though India has a very large Muslim population, the Indian identity has always stopped them from joining the fundamental terrorist groups, and no Indian has ever been affiliated with Al-Qaida or other such groups.
Indian Flag
http://www.earthtimes.org/newsimage/nuclear_case_15017.jpg
The Indian American community has been bridging the two cultures. Americans and Indians understand each other. The Americans may be puzzled by how the Chinese government conducts its business, or the Iranian Guardian Council, but has understood India. Their relationship is not only between the governments like many countries, but there is also a bond between the societies.
The Indian government is also changing its policies. They are moving from Nehru's self-righteous and Ghandi's hostile approach, to one that benefits the Indian people. Manmahon Singh's policy is that peace and stability can develop a market as well as its society.
Also similar to the Chinese, Indian Hindu's do not believe in a god. The have many gods and each branch of it has its own gods and goddesses. Because there are no core set of beliefs or doctrines you can do what you like and follow whichever one of the teachings that you desire.
This ease has allowed them to flourish and be an easy going nation. Even though India has a very large Muslim population, the Indian identity has always stopped them from joining the fundamental terrorist groups, and no Indian has ever been affiliated with Al-Qaida or other such groups.
Indian Flag
http://www.earthtimes.org/newsimage/nuclear_case_15017.jpg
India is the only country that has nuclear arsenal and is not a member of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Fareed has also talked about this issue on his CNN program, GPS. The United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been trying hard to get India to join the treaty. It may be a difficult task considering the United States still have over two thousand nuclear warhead of his own, argues Fareed. Sanctions have proved fruitless in almost every case. India, even though it was a much poorer country back then, their growth went on for three decades and finally developed an active nuclear weapons program under U.S. sanctions. Iran also has been developing peaceful nuclear program and the U.S. sanctions seem to have hardly done anything to stop it. I believe as long as there are greedy businessmen and arms dealers, such sanctions are completely useless because the regimes can continue to purchase the needed parts and technology only at a higher cost.
Fareed argues that India's nuclear plans, however, are for national pride. Many Indians resent the fact that India will always have second class status compared to Russia, China, and other major countries. None of those countries are supervised by IAEA as much as Indian facilities are. India's argument is that they are surrounded by Pakistan and China, whom have nuclear weapons and have been in wars with India before. Neither have accepted a mandatory cap on their productions, and India sees that as only a one sided freeze on India's developments.
Fareed argues that India's nuclear plans, however, are for national pride. Many Indians resent the fact that India will always have second class status compared to Russia, China, and other major countries. None of those countries are supervised by IAEA as much as Indian facilities are. India's argument is that they are surrounded by Pakistan and China, whom have nuclear weapons and have been in wars with India before. Neither have accepted a mandatory cap on their productions, and India sees that as only a one sided freeze on India's developments.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/analysis/toons/2000/03/23/lang/lang.jpg
India is a growing country. Povery rates are down, and they have sustained an eight percent growth for the past three years. India's diversity is four thousand years old and deeply rooted in their culture, language, and traditions. It's a country so vast and diverse that when the British were leaving, in 1947, the new government had to negotiate individual agreements with almost 500 rulers. The Hindu-Muslim divide may be important in one state, but not the other. This diversity and division has many advantages for India. It adds to India's variety and prevents the country from giving in to a dictator. Because of this diversity, usually only coalition governments success and even Ghandi with his popularity could not form an authoritarian and centralized government.
This is similar to the U.S. in the late 1800s, when they were trying to get rid of the British in America. They slowly fought them off, then civil wars, and slowly led to centralizing the government, large domestic changes, and deep international crises, which transferred America from a weak state in the late 19 century, to America as a super power now.
Fareed ends his argument by mentioning "This tension between society and the state persists in American to this day. In fact, it's worth keeping in mind as we turn to the single most important player in the twenty-first century and ask how America itself will react to the post-American world."
This is similar to the U.S. in the late 1800s, when they were trying to get rid of the British in America. They slowly fought them off, then civil wars, and slowly led to centralizing the government, large domestic changes, and deep international crises, which transferred America from a weak state in the late 19 century, to America as a super power now.
Fareed ends his argument by mentioning "This tension between society and the state persists in American to this day. In fact, it's worth keeping in mind as we turn to the single most important player in the twenty-first century and ask how America itself will react to the post-American world."
The USS Constitution defeats the HMS Guerriere, a significant event during the war.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/USS_Constitution_vs_Guerriere.jpg
Sakawarton (Smoke Johnson), John Tutela, and Young Warner, 3 Six Nations veterans of the War of 1812.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Six_Nations_survivors_of_War_of_1812.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/USS_Constitution_vs_Guerriere.jpg
Sakawarton (Smoke Johnson), John Tutela, and Young Warner, 3 Six Nations veterans of the War of 1812.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Six_Nations_survivors_of_War_of_1812.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment