India's "National Herald" article on December 10, original title: Why are we still so poor?What went wrong with the economic model in South Asia?Last week, I wrote an article about South Asia's still being poor compared to the rest of Asia. The task now is to figure out what we did wrong and what undeniably different we are from them.
South Asia has tried to manage the economy through ** programs, "licensing systems" and "liberalization", with some success, and has created some leading industries. It cannot be said that we do not have or are not trying to have hard power. We have also developed nuclear **, invested a lot of money in the military. Pakistan spends 17 per cent of its total expenditure on the military, while India and Bangladesh spend 9 per cent each. We've been part of the Western Alliance, we've been non-aligned, and we've tried to move somewhere in between. But the end result is the numbers we see today. The world's GDP per capita is 1At around $20,000, China is slightly above the world average, while Bangladesh, India and Pakistan are only 1.5 of the world average.
In 1960, we also had a huge gap with the global GDP per capita, which was $459 globally and $82 for India. Note that this is per capita income, and South Asia accounts for a full 23% of the world's 7.7 billion people. This means that for 60 years we have been dragging down the world economy and productivity, and to about the same extent. Something must have gone wrong with us, what is it?
According to the World Bank, Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan account for only 5 percent of South Asia's total regionally, while Southeast Asia has five times the number. Why is that?
The problem is man-made. Tight borders mean it's about 20 percent cheaper for an Indian company to do with Brazil than with its South Asian neighbors, the World Bank said, because "there is a widespread trust deficit across the region." The World Bank also noted that South Asia is "one of the least integrated regions in the world" in terms of people-to-people exchanges, and that only by putting aside traditional concerns and taking joint action can we develop cross-border solutions to common problems, improve infrastructure and connectivity, and advance policies.
Why let outsiders tell us something so obvious?The World Bank also added that regional cooperation has the potential to bring significant benefits to all countries in South Asia, as the current intraregional** is only 1 3 of its potential, with an estimated annual shortfall of $44 billion.
This problem can only be solved if we are less hostile and more open to each other than we have in the past. In The Ten Rules of a Successful Nation, Ruchiel Sharma says, "South Asia is still fenced high. Isolation, lawlessness and the lingering pain of regional wars make it difficult for India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka to open their borders."
Is it possible for those of us who are quarrelsome neighbors to open up to each other?If so, in what realistic way can this be achieved in the face of difficulties and deep-seated historical resistance?And what impact will this have on our society?As we approach the second quarter of the twenty-first century, let us strive to change that, no matter how insignificant. (Written by Akar Patel, translated by Chen Xin).