Realist John
Mearsheimer argues that the two defining characteristics of a countries power
are its military power and latent power. This realist framework contends that
military power is paramount, and that latent power, a “state’s ability to
translate assets of population and wealth into military power”, is as important
(Mearsheimer). Under this realist argument, India is not currently equipped to
become a world super power. Their military severely suffers from a lack of
modernization, corporate and government debt are very high, there is double-digit
inflation, and poverty still runs rampant throughout the country. However, I do
believe that India will eventually pass China on the list of world super
powers. They will find an efficient way to harness their soon-to-be largest
population in a working machine that will thrive both militarily and
economically.
Today, India is one of the largest
importers of military equipment in the world, due to the absence of a strong
weapons manufacturing industry. Without this industry, India cannot equip its military
with technologically modernized weapons itself. Inefficiency is another large
issue. The majority of India’s military resources and manpower are stationed on
crucial border points with China and Pakistan. Though understandable, this
military strategy has “limited
India’s power projection beyond its borders”(Mearsheimer). India is
capable of having a strong and powerful military program if it can re-design its military strategy and create a more
self-sustaining modernized weapons program.
Another major
factor holding India back is its lack of latent power. Today, India holds the
second largest population in the world, but as of 2010, almost 25% of the
Indian population was under the international poverty line of $1.25 per day.
The country is also dealing with a huge budget deficit and an inflation rate of
6.46%. Right now, India’s economy cannot support or utilize such a large
population. As of 2013, 65 million Indians lived in slums, which are
characterized as “dwellings unfit for human habitation”. At this time, India
does not have the means to translate its wealth (total GDP) and size
(population) into military power. While they hold a competent, young
population, the country’s infrastructure is not built to sustain such a large, growing
population.
In the
future, I predict that India will overtake China as the world’s second largest power.
India has the tools to more than enable itself to become a dominant world
power. Unlike China, which will soon begin suffering from an aging population, India
will thrive from the large growth in their labor force. With a solid democratic
structure, too, I believe they can utilize their growing workforce and
transform into an economic and military super power. In thirty years time I believe we could potentially be looking at India as a rival to the United States, because they possess the ingredients to becoming a world super power.
Sources:
Sources:
Trevor, I liked the way you explained both India's potential, with their growing population and economy, and their issues, with their per capita poverty and lack of military infrastructure. India is projected to become the most populous country on Earth soon, but I wonder if that will lead to prosperity and power as you predict, or if that will make things even more challenging for them, with greater poverty, scarce resources, etc.
ReplyDeleteI agree that India's large population will prove to be a great asset as the state continues to develop. I too would very intrigues to see how the government of India would choose to attack the rampant poverty and other social issues that plague it and stand in the way of the states development.
ReplyDeleteI can't say that I know too much about india's current development status/situation, but i agree with Lowell here in questioning whether India's population growth is an advantage to the country. Such a population growth would definitely be an opportunity to yield a legitimate military with the right direction, but on the other hand its difficult to argue that this wouldn't just make their poverty problem occur on a larger scale. Agreed, it will be interesting to see where they a decade or two down the road
ReplyDelete