What a breath of fresh thinking----FED Chair Powell claims his policies need to be domestic oriented but this reveals the impact on many nations from the continued efforts at zero interest rates and massive liquidity infusions .Now the rising dollar is causing too much pain on many of the economically fragile around the globe.It is Tooze who is picking up the baton from Susan Strange and Robert Cox and showing the flaws in the micro thought processes of the modelers of economic outcomes
It makes no sense to compare per capita income between India and Bangladesh (or for that matter, for most countries) without adjusting for purchasing power. If we do that, the World Bank tells us that India stands at 6,300 and Bangladesh at 5,200 (USD but PPP adjusted current 2020 value).
Good analysis, but I notice the last paragraph says "In the global power game... India... serves to further enhance the pressure within South Asia, the opposite of what a hegemonic strategy would entail."
Perhaps India has no intention to adopt a hegemonic strategy, and is just being a realist, looking after their people given their challenges. Just like China's is not a hegemonic strategy either, contrary to Western demonisation - it is not in their cultural DNA - if you look at history, they were the #1 and #2 World powers for thousands of years except the past c250 (which, in all likelihood, is an aberration soon to be reversed), yet they did not colonise, attack and "contain" everybody everywhere, like the "rules based", "human rights upholding" West, did they?
"China is a key creditor of both Sri Lanka and Pakistan." There is no evidence provided for this claim, claim that is also contradicted by previous statements, that Sri Lanka borrowed from commercial banks and Pakistan from institutional borrowers like IMF, World Bank and governments.
There were a handful of studies showing that it is a falsehood perpetrated by the west about the "debt diplomacy" pursued by China. Beside being a lie, it reeks of projection. The quoted text seems a gentle nudge from the author on the reader's mind to continue to believe this nonsense.
I'll grant you that rebuttal for Sri Lanka, as current reporting shows China as their #4 creditor. However, IMF identified China as Pakistan's #1 creditor in April 2021, owning approximately 27% of its debt.
China heavily invested in infrastructure in Pakistan (it is still there so China can take possession). And the article mentions how China with Saudi Arabia continued to lend
There's not much good for China "buying" 100 year ports via debt in country after country, trying to repeat what happened in Sri Lanka. Giving billions to countries where you know the leaders will steal the money, not actually build sustainable new infrastructure that could pay for itself, and then the country would not be able to pay it back looks like it will yield the desired outcome for China.
I think it depends on what you think and understand to be the desired outcome for China's investment.
I accept it is too early to catagorically conclude China is doing it right to invest circa $1Trillion on such infrastructures, but: 1) the traditional IMF/Western aids/loans with strings had clearly not worked, and 2) US and EU are now saying they must catch BRI up with B3W, Global Gateway and whatnot.
Ok it is obvious the US and EU are saying/doing it for no better reason than to "compete with" and "contain" China/BRI, but hey, if it helps the poor, more power to them, I say, IF they do cough up real money, but somehow I doubt it.
Frankly it is monumental stupidty for the EU not to cheer China on, and co-invest serious money to help Africa, "Southn Asia" etc. After all, with geography, demographic and economic trends, guess where millions upon millions of migrants escaping hunger and wars will be heading if nothing is done?
China is not necessarily "buying" the rights to manage the logistics in a port (Dubai does that too, and China's example with the port of Pireus in Greece is apt) but mostly develops the ports, like it does in Gwadar in Pakistan, building things from the ground up.
I think India has enormous long term potential without all the baggage, problems and uncertainty that is starting to weigh down China e.g. India is largely "settled" politically as no matter how messy or short sighted it's democracy can be with policy shifts (along with the Pakistan issue), there's no uncertainty about its political system continuing for the long term or being dependent on the whims of one person in charge....
Thank you for zooming out our perspective, maybe $4/gal gas in the US isn’t as much of a crisis. I would be interested in a similar analysis applied to the United States’ response to global heating caused disasters: e.g. New Orleans, Houston, the Atlantic & Gulf coasts, Puerto Rico.
Interesting choice to use the term “polycrisis”. It’s not a word in common circulation as Google Trends can attest. This word was coined pre-Covid by an apocalyptic and very well funded ngo named Omega. Omega paid for the study that claimed that humans would no longer be able to reproduce by 2040 due to plastic contamination. That particular crisis didn’t seem to get the desired attention. Are you affiliated with Omega?
Actually, India has a higher per capita GDP then Bangladesh. The IMF which earlier claimed that Bangladesh had surpassed India later came up with another report saying that India will remain ahead for the foreseeable future. India's per capita GDP stands at ~$2500
What a breath of fresh thinking----FED Chair Powell claims his policies need to be domestic oriented but this reveals the impact on many nations from the continued efforts at zero interest rates and massive liquidity infusions .Now the rising dollar is causing too much pain on many of the economically fragile around the globe.It is Tooze who is picking up the baton from Susan Strange and Robert Cox and showing the flaws in the micro thought processes of the modelers of economic outcomes
It makes no sense to compare per capita income between India and Bangladesh (or for that matter, for most countries) without adjusting for purchasing power. If we do that, the World Bank tells us that India stands at 6,300 and Bangladesh at 5,200 (USD but PPP adjusted current 2020 value).
Good analysis, but I notice the last paragraph says "In the global power game... India... serves to further enhance the pressure within South Asia, the opposite of what a hegemonic strategy would entail."
Perhaps India has no intention to adopt a hegemonic strategy, and is just being a realist, looking after their people given their challenges. Just like China's is not a hegemonic strategy either, contrary to Western demonisation - it is not in their cultural DNA - if you look at history, they were the #1 and #2 World powers for thousands of years except the past c250 (which, in all likelihood, is an aberration soon to be reversed), yet they did not colonise, attack and "contain" everybody everywhere, like the "rules based", "human rights upholding" West, did they?
"China is a key creditor of both Sri Lanka and Pakistan." There is no evidence provided for this claim, claim that is also contradicted by previous statements, that Sri Lanka borrowed from commercial banks and Pakistan from institutional borrowers like IMF, World Bank and governments.
There were a handful of studies showing that it is a falsehood perpetrated by the west about the "debt diplomacy" pursued by China. Beside being a lie, it reeks of projection. The quoted text seems a gentle nudge from the author on the reader's mind to continue to believe this nonsense.
I'll grant you that rebuttal for Sri Lanka, as current reporting shows China as their #4 creditor. However, IMF identified China as Pakistan's #1 creditor in April 2021, owning approximately 27% of its debt.
China heavily invested in infrastructure in Pakistan (it is still there so China can take possession). And the article mentions how China with Saudi Arabia continued to lend
There's not much good for China "buying" 100 year ports via debt in country after country, trying to repeat what happened in Sri Lanka. Giving billions to countries where you know the leaders will steal the money, not actually build sustainable new infrastructure that could pay for itself, and then the country would not be able to pay it back looks like it will yield the desired outcome for China.
I think it depends on what you think and understand to be the desired outcome for China's investment.
I accept it is too early to catagorically conclude China is doing it right to invest circa $1Trillion on such infrastructures, but: 1) the traditional IMF/Western aids/loans with strings had clearly not worked, and 2) US and EU are now saying they must catch BRI up with B3W, Global Gateway and whatnot.
Ok it is obvious the US and EU are saying/doing it for no better reason than to "compete with" and "contain" China/BRI, but hey, if it helps the poor, more power to them, I say, IF they do cough up real money, but somehow I doubt it.
Frankly it is monumental stupidty for the EU not to cheer China on, and co-invest serious money to help Africa, "Southn Asia" etc. After all, with geography, demographic and economic trends, guess where millions upon millions of migrants escaping hunger and wars will be heading if nothing is done?
China is not necessarily "buying" the rights to manage the logistics in a port (Dubai does that too, and China's example with the port of Pireus in Greece is apt) but mostly develops the ports, like it does in Gwadar in Pakistan, building things from the ground up.
Imran Khan was deposed by the PAK military, at the behest of the USA (Khan had the temerity to visit V. Putin in Moscow following its invasion of UKR)
This is a good overview of the region and I included it in my weekly emerging market links post: https://emergingmarketskeptic.substack.com/p/emerging-markets-week-september-26-2022
I think India has enormous long term potential without all the baggage, problems and uncertainty that is starting to weigh down China e.g. India is largely "settled" politically as no matter how messy or short sighted it's democracy can be with policy shifts (along with the Pakistan issue), there's no uncertainty about its political system continuing for the long term or being dependent on the whims of one person in charge....
Thank you for zooming out our perspective, maybe $4/gal gas in the US isn’t as much of a crisis. I would be interested in a similar analysis applied to the United States’ response to global heating caused disasters: e.g. New Orleans, Houston, the Atlantic & Gulf coasts, Puerto Rico.
Interesting choice to use the term “polycrisis”. It’s not a word in common circulation as Google Trends can attest. This word was coined pre-Covid by an apocalyptic and very well funded ngo named Omega. Omega paid for the study that claimed that humans would no longer be able to reproduce by 2040 due to plastic contamination. That particular crisis didn’t seem to get the desired attention. Are you affiliated with Omega?
Actually, India has a higher per capita GDP then Bangladesh. The IMF which earlier claimed that Bangladesh had surpassed India later came up with another report saying that India will remain ahead for the foreseeable future. India's per capita GDP stands at ~$2500