GLOBAL POWER SHIFT – WEST TO EAST?
The west-east transfer of power depends on acquiring technological knowhow to go with it
Sarajit Majumdar
Asia Sentinel, January 9, 2009
How far east of Washington, DC is east? The question arises from the report of the US-based National Intelligence Council 2025 Project, published in December, which foresees “the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East:”
The whole international system, the report says, “as constructed following WWII – will be revolutionized,” according to the council. “Not only will new players – Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRICs) – have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.”
Wealth as material objects means nothing unless a nation acquires the appropriate knowledge to use it. From the Neanderthal age to the Computer age, the story of civilization and prosperity is marked by the progress of technological knowledge. In this sense, the US symbolizes the west for its technological prowess. It is the only state that, according to Neil Postman, can be called a technopoly – totalitarian technocracy. Less so are France, Germany, Russia, et al. Following the NIC pointer far to the east, can India and China overcome the US technopoly?
Anyone from outside the US has reasons to be elated at the possible decline of the “Big Boys” supremacy, since the observation comes from a highly influential US agency – the NIC, and not from agencies of weaker economies. Taken seriously, the observations require careful consideration. Consider:
India and China have crossed the US$1 trillion-plus gross domestic product, the latter far exceeding the former. Indian GDP grew at 9.2 percent, close to double digits, during 2007 according to the IMF. China did even better at 11.4%. They lend money to the US government. Both achieved all this with export-led growth, not by catering to their own population. India achieved high growth by exporting service sector products like IT and IT enabled services. China exported small-scale and large-scale industrial products – steel, garments, toys, milk products, electronic products, etc. Exportable goods are highly susceptible to demand fluctuation abroad, as evident from the onset of the current worldwide recession. Export-dependent growth will remain wobbly. Stability of growth has to be found in the two countries’ own backyard.
The west-east transfer of power depends on acquiring technological knowhow to go with it
Sarajit Majumdar
Asia Sentinel, January 9, 2009
How far east of Washington, DC is east? The question arises from the report of the US-based National Intelligence Council 2025 Project, published in December, which foresees “the unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East:”
The whole international system, the report says, “as constructed following WWII – will be revolutionized,” according to the council. “Not only will new players – Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRICs) – have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.”
Wealth as material objects means nothing unless a nation acquires the appropriate knowledge to use it. From the Neanderthal age to the Computer age, the story of civilization and prosperity is marked by the progress of technological knowledge. In this sense, the US symbolizes the west for its technological prowess. It is the only state that, according to Neil Postman, can be called a technopoly – totalitarian technocracy. Less so are France, Germany, Russia, et al. Following the NIC pointer far to the east, can India and China overcome the US technopoly?
Anyone from outside the US has reasons to be elated at the possible decline of the “Big Boys” supremacy, since the observation comes from a highly influential US agency – the NIC, and not from agencies of weaker economies. Taken seriously, the observations require careful consideration. Consider:
India and China have crossed the US$1 trillion-plus gross domestic product, the latter far exceeding the former. Indian GDP grew at 9.2 percent, close to double digits, during 2007 according to the IMF. China did even better at 11.4%. They lend money to the US government. Both achieved all this with export-led growth, not by catering to their own population. India achieved high growth by exporting service sector products like IT and IT enabled services. China exported small-scale and large-scale industrial products – steel, garments, toys, milk products, electronic products, etc. Exportable goods are highly susceptible to demand fluctuation abroad, as evident from the onset of the current worldwide recession. Export-dependent growth will remain wobbly. Stability of growth has to be found in the two countries’ own backyard.
(...) [artículo aquí]
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment