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 – WindhoekWhilst 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
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!