The question of whether India will become the next China has sparked widespread discussion.
China's answer is that the next China will still be China, as the Chinese model cannot be replicated or replaced.
Recently, two Indian economists have also expressed their views on this matter, suggesting that India will not become the next China.
While their viewpoints may seem peculiar, they might offer deeper insights into the global economic situation, worthy of China's consideration.
India's general elections are set to conclude on June 1st, with current Prime Minister Modi likely to begin his next term.
During his previous term, Modi prioritized economic development and maintained an independent stance, unwilling to align fully with either the U.S. or China, such as by rejecting complete alignment with the U.S.'s Indo-Pacific strategy.
Meanwhile, India has also sought to learn from China's successful economic development experiences, achieving some degree of success.
However, for the upcoming term, what economic policies will Modi implement?
Will India continue to succeed? Or, more bluntly, can they compete with China?
In search of answers, the U.S. magazine "Barron's" recently interviewed Indian economists Raghuram G. Rajan and Roheet Lamba.
Rajan is a former Governor of the Reserve Bank of India and former Chief Economist of the International Monetary Fund; Lamba served as an economist in the office of the Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India. They have a deep understanding of India's economic model.
The interview covered various aspects of the Indian economic model and future development, with one question drawing particular attention:
Some believe that India could become the next China in terms of transformative growth. Is this a reasonable role for India?
Rajan's response was unequivocal: absolutely not.
He pointed out that China's manufacturing sector has already established significant global influence, and the world cannot accommodate another manufacturing giant comparable in scale to China. Therefore, India cannot follow this path.
Furthermore, the global manufacturing industry faces increasingly severe challenges of trade protectionism, and in some areas, direct competition with developed countries such as the U.S. and Europe.
Today, what India needs to consider is how to chart its own development path.
Rajan believes that in addition to developing manufacturing, India must also consider other avenues of growth, such as through the provision of services like telemedicine and consultancy.
The viewpoints of these two Indian economists are quite persuasive, helping China to view the challenges facing the global manufacturing industry from another perspective and to reflect on its own development path, considering how to proceed more smoothly.
As a latecomer, India has a clear understanding of the competitive landscape of the current world and the challenges China faces.
The world cannot accommodate another manufacturing giant of China's scale, a viewpoint that makes sense.
The U.S. and Western countries will not tolerate threats to their dominant positions from China and India, a clear realization.
Although China's current development is relatively fast, is it too eager to challenge the leading positions of the United States and Western countries?
In fact, the United States recognized China's potential threat as early as 10 years ago and initiated comprehensive suppression.
This shows that China has to accelerate its development pace to avoid becoming their sacrificial lamb.
Comments