The West’s turn away from letting the state play an important role in shaping the structure of its economy and society will have important consequences for the entire world. Some of these will be negative, some positive. They will be positive, at least for those countries whose leaders are able to look into the future, not only to meet the challenges it will bring but also make use of the opportunities that may be on offer.
Some of the public policy choices should be made in the context of the three large countries of mainland Asia — China, India and Pakistan. They will have to be tailored to meet their own needs and circumstances. China will need to work out how it will continue to make the transition to an open market while continuing to limit the openness of the political system. It will also have to determine the role it will have to play in shaping the global economy, now that it has become the worlds’ second largest economy and may, by 2015, overtake the United States.
India, after a remarkable two-decade long record of uninterrupted high rate of economic growth is losing some of the momentum it had picked up in this period. Large segments of its population remain unaffected by the economy’s rapid growth. In the middle of 2011, the country was convulsed by the popular reaction to several incidents of large-scale corruption on the part of senior elected officials and by the officers of the military. Being a vibrant democracy it will have to find a way out of the resentment that has built up within a short period of time.
Pakistan, the third country in this group has the weakest economy, a highly troubled society and an unsettled political system. Some have said — including Hillary Clinton, the United States Secretary of State — that the country is faced with an existential threat. The World Bank’s 2011 World Development Report includes the country among what it regards as fragile states. It is in the strategic interest of its two very large neighbours — China and India — to ensure that the country does not stumble so badly that it succumbs to the eventual control by the extremist forces that are operating in the country. A fracturing — even a greatly unstable — Pakistan will not be good for its neighbourhood, certainly not for China and India.
Some of the responses by the mainland Asia to the developing situation in the West will, and should, take the form of bilateral relationships — Pakistan working with China, China working with India and India working with Pakistan. Some of this is happening. Snubbed by the United States, Pakistan has turned to China for economic assistance, military support and simply for some encouragement in what Islamabad considers to be a very ‘unfriendly world’. The two countries have developed what both call an “all weather friendship”. While Beijing is reluctant to get very involved in Pakistan’s growing rift with the United States, it is prepared to give signals to the world that it supports Islamabad in many different ways.
While both Beijing and New Delhi continue to watch each other with some suspicion; while India remains disturbed that China continues to hold some of the territories it considers its own and has not withdrawn its claim to the Indian state of Arunchal Pradesh; and while Beijing is unhappy that New Delhi has given refuge to Dalai Lama from where he continues to operate, the two countries have learnt to work with one another. This is particularly the case in bilateral trade which has grown rapidly and now amounts to over $40 billion.
Notwithstanding these bilateral responses by the three countries to the enormous changes in the global economy, there is also some space for the three countries to work together. Not only do they account for 40 per cent of the world’s population, they also cover a good part of the world’s total area. This trilateral relationship will have to develop institutional underpinnings in addition to the improvements in the trade and communication links that already exist.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 29th, 2011.
COMMENTS (15)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
FROM AF-Pak to India-China-Pak ???
Big Leap for Pak-- Dreaming ? India -China -Bangladesh will be more appropriate
i am a big supporter of greater economic integration among pakistan, india, china, and bangladesh.
however this article show lack of information on at least on two points...
india is gaining momentum under guidance of a group of noted economists working in PMEAC ( prime minister economic advisory council ) and not at all loosing it. india -china trade in 2010 was 61.2 billion dollar.the need of second generation reform in india is true and economist PM Manmohan singh knows the right time and has already created an outline of it but it is being blown out of proportion by US to create fear in world community of investors, so to pressurize indian establishment to do it soon. american companies are desperate for opening of indian economy, particularly of retail sector, insurance sector.
Sir with all due respect are you admitting that Pakistan’s two protracted proxy wars with its neighbour’s (Proxy war in Indian Kashmir and supporting of Taliban in Afghanistan) and funding other terror attacks in US and UK etc has drained your coffers? It appears that now you would like to make fool of China and India by pitting them against each other for gaining influence over Pakistan. Your country fooled US of ten billion dollars and delivered nothing. Since you have perfected this game now and would like to try it on China and India.
Pakistan already has an agreement with other South Asian countries through SARC but Pakistan has no intention of respecting this institution as in the past all the good proposals on Economy were objected by the spoil child Pakistan due to its obsession with Kashmir. Dil behlane keliye ghalib bahana accha hain:))...
Large country of mainland Asia:Pakistan?
This is a brilliant attempt at keeping ourselves relevant courtsey actions by India, China (and USA)! We have an impeccable record of exporting terror into one, prostrating ourselves in an 'all purpose' manner with the second and spreading hate despite emormous aid from the third. We are not responsible for snubbing the USA and the other equally great choices we have made. So now India (and China) should ensure that we not stumble (and crash)! If they don't then we are not to be blamed for the state we are in!
Visceral anti-India reaction of Pakistan will put paid to all such hope!! India and China trade is on target to reach $100 billlion by 2015. ( the author's figure of current $40bn is from 3-4 years ago!).
A better arrangement would be for China and India to tie up with other countries in the region who are progressive and focused on trade - Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. India is already well on it's way to chieving this vision - through it's 'Look East' policy. There is nothing to India's West - just grief and mayhem.
beggars not chossers.
Why are you leaving out Bangladesh which has a population more than Pakistan and whose leaders have shown greater vision than those of Pakistan
Fantastic piece Mr. Burki. There are few intellectualy vivacious, nuanced and realistic op-eds in this newspaper, and fewer still responses (read Nadir el-Edroos).
This is very good and well said.
India's economy will slow down unless they implement 'second-generation' reforms -- to include liberalizing the import regime and the external sector. The impetus from the early wave of reforms has petered out.
Some feel that China is headed for a hard-landing caused by over-investment.
I support your vision of a strong tripartite arrangement. If Pakistan has eventually decided to give India MFN status, that is a good positive step. We also need to stop our suicidal arms race with them. A credible minimum deterrence does not mean that we keep on adding to our stockpile of nuclear weapons.
I expected more from such an eminence. How is stating that India China and Pakistan should get along helpful? (well, maybe in Pakistan, such sentiments are still considered revolutionary!)Several of the facts are also incorrect. For example, the trade between China and India is near $60 billion, not $40 billion. The simple, core problem is that Pakistan is living a fool's dream of painting China as its savior and still maintaining a hostile posture toward India. If Pakistan can find a way to simply accept India, it will be overcome by the goodwill that will flow in from India like a tsunami. If Pakistani citizens get rid of its paid hate-India crowd, nothing can stop it from becoming a stable, prosperous country. Alas, the chances of that happening anytime soon are near zero. Too bad for Pakistan.
Looking at it dispassionately, a Balkanization of Pakistan into separate nations for Sindhis, punjabis, etc is a better option for all concerned than a united but disfunctional state. Here is why.
The world need not have to worry about a powerful nuclear state that could turn rogue and disrupt the world's delicate power balance. Nuclear weapons in the hands of Islamic terrorists is a distinct and scary possibility. A bunch of smaller states will turn the attention away from military dominance to economic dominance. That is what has happened in Europe over the past century, the French and British dont fight in the battlefield any more. They just fight for business.
Deemphasizing the religious basis of the current Pakistani state and reemphasizing the regional identities (Sindhi, punjabi, etc) would be a better approach to defining national identity and will reduce tensions and bring peace and prosperity to the region. There is no longer a reason for jihad with India, because the national identity is now local and not arabicised Islam. Trade between east and west Punjab will flourish.
My two cents...
Snubbed by the US? I thought we had snubbed the US?