India’s democratic credentials do not impress Francis Fukuyama, who two decades ago prophesied the “end of history,” as being a catalyst for the country’s economic growth. Fukuyama finds excessive “patronage politics and fractiousness” in India — flaws that stand in stark contrast to China’s speedier, though not necessarily cleaner, political system.
The reality is, however, somewhat different. China’s local governments have been accumulating mountains of debt to fund their construction binges, raising serious concerns about potential defaults.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) himself recognizes the urgent need to address the country’s inequitable growth, calling for means to be found to “share prosperity evenly,” and thus to reduce the widening gaps between “rich and poor, cities and countryside.”
Illustration: Constance Chou
Economist Nouriel Roubini has predicted that China’s economy will most likely slow sometime between 2013 and 2015, the point at which its fixed-asset investments of nearly 50 percent of GDP will demand social and monetary returns.
Until now, Roubini says, China’s export-led growth has depended on “making things that the rest of the world wants, at a price that no other country can match,” a consequence of cheap labor and economies of scale.
This cost advantage is diminishing fast.
India is facing severe difficulties as well, but of a different nature. For example, outward investment by Indian companies is expanding fast. Some believe that this is a natural development for a rising power, but critics view outward investment as a reflection of the scarcity of opportunities at home.
Rising interest rates, high inflation and severe policy gridlock amid a spate of government corruption scandals have impeded both foreign and domestic investment in India, thus slowing economic growth to a level that is below its potential. An unpredictable regulatory environment, inadequate infrastructure and a sluggish, monsoon-dependent agricultural sector are adding to the economy’s problems.
Clearly, economic turbulence is roiling both of Asia’s major economies, the giants of the so-called BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).
Consider inflation. On July 6, the People’s Bank of China raised its benchmark interest rate for the fifth time since October last year. This has generated apprehension about property markets and fear that local governments could default on part of their staggering debt of US$1.65 trillion.
In India, the government’s failure to contain rising prices, pursue structural economic reforms vigorously, attract foreign direct investment, advance infrastructure development, manage expenditure and avoid liquidity crunches underscores the many challenges it faces. Moreover, a continued standoff between the government and the opposition has weakened political effectiveness, further undermining India’s growth prospects.
Indeed, India’s core challenge remains political. With food prices rising sharply, the poor are being hit the hardest, fueling greater poverty, inequality and resentment. However, the same is true in China: Anti-inflation protests are now roiling both countries, owing mainly to rising energy, food and raw-material prices, with food accounting for one-third of household spending in China and about 45 percent in India.
The fear now in both countries is that inflation shocks could turn into a self-reinforcing price spiral. As the IMF cautions, “core inflation — excluding commodities — has risen from 2 percent to 3.75 percent, suggesting that inflation is broadening.”
One reason that Indian prices are rising is that infrastructure growth remains sluggish. Progress on roads, railways and power projects — all of which could prevent food from perishing prematurely and energy and commodities from being unnecessarily wasted — is essential to stabilizing prices.
China, meanwhile, finds itself at a critical juncture. Its leadership will change next year — at a time when income inequality is on the march and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) lacks any consensus on how to stop it. Given that less than 9 percent of CCP members are actually “workers” nowadays, the regime’s leaders must be even more uncomfortable with growing inequality. However, in the absence of serious political reform, income inequality will widen as crony capitalism sinks its roots more deeply.
India and China both need a renewed commitment to structural reform to sustain their economic growth. Cheap labor and monetary management will not do the trick on their own. The credibility that both governments gained after their countries avoided the worst of the global financial crisis of 2008 is beginning to wear thin. For, as inflationary fears in the BRICS giants grow, second thoughts about the shift in the world economy’s center of gravity are beginning to gain currency.
What both countries need are short-term corrections and long-term structural changes. China needs to prepare itself for an economy whose performance is not dependent on exports and low domestic wages. India must find other drivers of economic modernization than new information technologies (as welcome as these are). Workers in both countries are now demanding better living standards — a demand that even China’s tightly controlled political system cannot ignore.
India, for its part, needs to open up its economy further in order to take advantage of its continuing rapid population growth and the ongoing changes in the structure of the global economy. It must recommit itself to feeding its population — and thus to attaining its stated objective of a “Second Green Revolution” in agriculture.
China and India have used very different political models to achieve their ambitious GDP growth targets. Nonetheless, as their economies mature, both will need to embrace structural change — and to address the challenges of overdue political reforms.
Jaswant Singh has served as finance, foreign and defense minister of India.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Taiwan faces complex challenges like other Asia-Pacific nations, including demographic decline, income inequality and climate change. In fact, its challenges might be even more pressing. The nation struggles with rising income inequality, declining birthrates and soaring housing costs while simultaneously navigating intensifying global competition among major powers. To remain competitive in the global talent market, Taiwan has been working to create a more welcoming environment and legal framework for foreign professionals. One of the most significant steps in this direction was the enactment of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals (外國專業人才延攬及僱用法) in 2018. Subsequent amendments in
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
US President Donald Trump on Saturday signed orders to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China effective from today. Trump decided to slap 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada as well as 10 percent on those coming from China, but would only impose a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy products, including oil and electricity. Canada and Mexico on Sunday quickly responded with retaliatory tariffs against the US, while countermeasures from China are expected soon. Nevertheless, Trump announced yesterday to delay tariffs on Mexico and Canada for a month and said he would hold further talks with
Taiwan’s undersea cables connecting it to the world were allegedly severed several times by a Chinese ship registered under a flag of convenience. As the vessel sailed, it used several different automatic identification systems (AIS) to create fake routes. That type of “shadow fleet” and “gray zone” tactics could create a security crisis in Taiwan and warrants response measures. The concept of a shadow fleet originates from the research of Elisabeth Braw, senior fellow at the Washington-based Atlantic Council. The phenomenon was initiated by authoritarian countries such as Iran, North Korea and Russia, which have been hit by international economic