India & The Underdog
We have seen two articles titled 'Developing world leader India has less time for the underdo'" and 'Now the axis of the virtuous', published in your esteemed daily of January 9 2004, which were sourced from Nampa-AFP.
Going by the content of the two articles, they appear to have been
written in the context of an international conference 'World Social
Forum' proposed to be held in Mumbai.
Whilst the clearly polemical and unbalanced tone of these two
articles would not cause a ripple in India, where people welcome
and revel in fierce debates, with all shades of rhetoric and
polemics, on all issues of interest, I am afraid that the articles
in question would not convey to your discerning readers the nature
of socio-economic progress taking place in India.
One need not dispute that poverty exists in India as indeed it
does in most parts of the world.
Given the nature of our polity, it is also perfectly
understandable that the merits and demerits of the economic reform
process in India in terms of its impact on poverty would evoke both
strong passions and reasoned analysis.
The fact remains that most people agree with the reform process
going on in India for more than a decade, as evident in the
policies of successive governments, which have correctly
interpreted their mandate from the electorate in favour of the
reform policies.
The policy of "strict protectionism" as the author of the
article puts it, helped a young country, scourged by two centuries
of colonialism, in developing a strong infrastructure which enables
our country today to participate in the globalisation process with
supreme self confidence and not to be intimidated by it; it
baffled, then, the adherents of the conventional economic theories,
mainly in the West, and even invited ridicule or, worse,
predictions of doom and destruction of the country.
Most significantly those decisions as indeed the decision today,
were taken by a leadership guided by India's own national
interest.
Considered from the poverty alleviation point of view, India has
moved from a country beset with frequent droughts on the eve of
independence, to becoming a net exporter of food grains unafraid of
a liberalised trade regime in agriculture, this has happened at a
time when India's population has increased more than three times to
over a billion since independence, due to a sharp reduction of
infant mortality and expanded life expectancy as a result of better
health care.
India's growth performance which was 3,5 - 4 per cent per annum
(uncharitably ridiculed as the "Hindu rate of growth") in the first
three decades rose to 6,5 per cent per annum on an average during
the 90s - the period of economic liberalisation - ending last year
at over 7,5 per cent,.
The rate of inflation and fiscal deficits have also declined
appreciably during the reform period.
Contrary to the assertion of the author of this article, Indian
subsidies in the agricultural sector have been far lower than those
in the developed western economies.
In broad terms, twice the size of India's population at the time
of independence is above the poverty level today - no mean
achievement for a vast, diverse and robust democracy in a stable
political and economical environment.
It is largely due to investment in our infrastructure,
especially the knowledge industry, that our national leadership
considers as realistic the goal of making India a developed country
by 2020.
Social welfare issues, as everywhere else in the world, would
continue to be debated in India with all the heat and the passion
they evoke and this debate would certainly influence the government
policy-making process.
But to suggest, as the title does, that India has "less time for
the underdog" is unfair to the readers who, undoubtedly want to be
informed about the true economic and social developments in
India.
- SN Srinivasan - First Secretary - Indian High Commission -
Windhoek
Whilst the clearly polemical and unbalanced tone of these two
articles would not cause a ripple in India, where people welcome
and revel in fierce debates, with all shades of rhetoric and
polemics, on all issues of interest, I am afraid that the articles
in question would not convey to your discerning readers the nature
of socio-economic progress taking place in India. One need not
dispute that poverty exists in India as indeed it does in most
parts of the world. Given the nature of our polity, it is also
perfectly understandable that the merits and demerits of the
economic reform process in India in terms of its impact on poverty
would evoke both strong passions and reasoned analysis. The fact
remains that most people agree with the reform process going on in
India for more than a decade, as evident in the policies of
successive governments, which have correctly interpreted their
mandate from the electorate in favour of the reform policies. The
policy of "strict protectionism" as the author of the article puts
it, helped a young country, scourged by two centuries of
colonialism, in developing a strong infrastructure which enables
our country today to participate in the globalisation process with
supreme self confidence and not to be intimidated by it; it
baffled, then, the adherents of the conventional economic theories,
mainly in the West, and even invited ridicule or, worse,
predictions of doom and destruction of the country. Most
significantly those decisions as indeed the decision today, were
taken by a leadership guided by India's own national interest.
Considered from the poverty alleviation point of view, India has
moved from a country beset with frequent droughts on the eve of
independence, to becoming a net exporter of food grains unafraid of
a liberalised trade regime in agriculture, this has happened at a
time when India's population has increased more than three times to
over a billion since independence, due to a sharp reduction of
infant mortality and expanded life expectancy as a result of better
health care. India's growth performance which was 3,5 - 4 per cent
per annum (uncharitably ridiculed as the "Hindu rate of growth") in
the first three decades rose to 6,5 per cent per annum on an
average during the 90s - the period of economic liberalisation -
ending last year at over 7,5 per cent,. The rate of inflation and
fiscal deficits have also declined appreciably during the reform
period. Contrary to the assertion of the author of this article,
Indian subsidies in the agricultural sector have been far lower
than those in the developed western economies. In broad terms,
twice the size of India's population at the time of independence is
above the poverty level today - no mean achievement for a vast,
diverse and robust democracy in a stable political and economical
environment. It is largely due to investment in our infrastructure,
especially the knowledge industry, that our national leadership
considers as realistic the goal of making India a developed country
by 2020. Social welfare issues, as everywhere else in the world,
would continue to be debated in India with all the heat and the
passion they evoke and this debate would certainly influence the
government policy-making process. But to suggest, as the title
does, that India has "less time for the underdog" is unfair to the
readers who, undoubtedly want to be informed about the true
economic and social developments in India.- SN Srinivasan - First
Secretary - Indian High Commission - Windhoek