How Modi can strengthen India against China, Pakistan

[$@rJen]

we will control , when you will Control your RAW

what did RAW do to you?? Raw doesn't control Indian foreign policy,military or the civilian govrn.

and hell no, you can't control if anything Pakistan military only getting more control in every aspect of Pakistan civ government and its policies which doesn't want peace with India

now can we stick to the topic

 

[HariPrasad]

How Modi can strengthen India against China, Pakistan






Tuesday, December 30, 2014

By : First Post




The biggest and the most immediate fallout from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to the United States should be this: India allows 100 per cent FDI in defence. This is the crying need of the Indian armed forces, neglected for decades, if the national security issues have to be redressed hundred per cent.

• The biggest and the most immediate fallout from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to the United States should be this: India allows 100 per cent FDI in defence. This is the crying need of the Indian armed forces, neglected for decades, if the national security issues have to be redressed hundred per cent.
  
  The sooner this is done, the better. In the US, PM Modi had extensive and formal discussions with at least 17 captains of American corporate world and chatted with many more in a more informal set-up. Many of the American corporate honchos Modi met happen to be giants in the defence industry.
  
  Incidentally, Modi had gone to the US after his government had raised the FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) cap in the defence sector from 26 to 49 per cent. But this is just not enough and Modi was conveyed this in as many terms by the American industrialist czars. They wanted 100 per cent FDI in defence, to begin with.
  
  Right now, the Indian armed forces are in a state of pitiful neglect. Billions of dollars would be required to put the national security back on rails. If all the pressing needs of the three armed forces - the army, the navy and the air force - were to be met fully, the nation would require funds in excess of $100 billion.
  
  And this has to be managed within the next three or four years, not decades, if India has to bolster its defence and come up with a credible and effective deterrent vis-a-vis China and Pakistan.
  
  A developing country like India cannot generate this kind of money on its own. In fact, no developing country can afford to do so, barring one: China. And China is already doing this with an annual defence budget of over $ 188 billion, compared to the Indian defence budget of $47.4 billion as per the 2013 figures.
  
  In fact, one needs to look at the top ten countries of the world with highest military expenditures for better clarity in this context.
  
  According to a SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) Fact Sheet of April 2014, the top ten countries in terms of their defence budgets in 2013 were as follows: the US ($640 billion) China ($188 billion), Russia ($87.8 billion), Saudi Arabia ($67 billion), France ($61.2 billion), UK ($57.9 billion), Germany ($48.8 billion), Japan ($48.6 billion), India (47.4 billion) and South Korea ($33.9 billion).
  
  Modi's favourite punch line for attracting foreign investments - "no red tape, only red carpet" - is just not enough. Modi has to go beyond the rhetoric and after 140 days in office he has to walk his talk. His recently concluded US visit should be an eye opener in this context.
  
  In fact, even allowing 100 per cent FDI in defence won't be enough. It would just be a signal that India is ready for foreign investment in a sensitive sector like defence. It would be a firm indication that India no longer treats the defence sector as a holy cow.
  
  Consider the highly capital intensive defence projects that India needs to complete in double quick time to bolster its defences: the China-specific mountain strike corps ($11 billion), the MMRCA (Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft ($13 billion), the FGFA (Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft, a joint venture with Russia with at least $2 billion as India's cost share to begin with), the submarines project (which will cost minimum of $10 billion or so), and the artillery modernization project ($4 billion).
  
  This totals to $40 billion and pertains to only a handful of big-ticket defence projects. There are dozens of other defence projects waiting for implementation, held up for either want of funds or technology or both.
  
  Any serious attempt by the Modi government to deliver on the pressing requirements of the three armed forces will have two prerequisites: money and technology. Both these challenges can be effectively met if the government embarks on the 100 per cent FDI in defence route, to begin with.
  
  But, as stated before, this alone won't be enough. Any prospective foreign investor would bring in his money into India only if he is hundred per cent assured that his investment will be worth it.
  
  For this, the Modi government will have to drastically change the archaic rules and create a business-friendly environment. The argument that India has a strong and a stable government won't be enough insurance may be valid in context of the Modi government but it won't lead to foreign investors loosening their purse strings.
  
  The Modi government will have to think big and act fast. Even after allowing 100 per cent FDI in defence, the government will have to persuade foreign investors to come and invest in India.
  
  It is high time that the Modi government came up with not one but several Special Economic Zones (SEZ) exclusively for defence. The foreign investors will have to be wooed with liberal laws and business-friendly conditions like liberal tax holidays. India does not have a single SEZ exclusively for defence at present.
  
  Indian private companies specialising in defence will have to be encouraged to forge tie-ups with leading foreign companies on a much bigger scale than presently. Only then will PM Modi's "Make in India" campaign will truly produce results.

India became a weak country or a country which could not act as per her true potential because of a weak regime which was loyal to a family than country. All the decisions were made considering vote bank politics in Mind. They spend the money to appease the vote bank.

Now we have a regime which can act considering national interest in Mind. Correct allocation of fund and timely decision in right direction shall definitely strengthen the country. It is happening now. Infrastructure along the China border and Tit for Tat response in LOC are the example.

 

[hunter_hunted]

Modi the Supa Dupa Pawa Man will lead the Glorious India to victory against Evil Pakistan and China

 

[truthseeker2010]

Neither China's economic model is unique, nor such growth happened for the first time in history, come out of myths. And China is yet to produce anything groundbreaking in defence R&D.

tell me which other country developed at the pace of china in history? you should face the reality that india try to project itself as the next china in terms of growth but has failed to achieve it so far..... as for defence, what do you mean by "groundbreaking", they have tested ICBM, their SSBN is on sea trials, they are on their way to induct 5th gen fighters, they are making AC's, more or less China will be on par with USA in terms of military know-how, so that is a big achievement in itself, considering US is in the business for about a century..... what has india achieved?, indian air force has rejected TEJAS for induction...

Will not order more , but OK with Export : IAF on Tejas Mk-1

 

[American_Millenium]

Who told you that GDP growth is calculated by simple arithmetic of compounding YoY growth rate? Take the 2003 & 2014 GDP (Nominal) figures of China, and YoY real GDP growth rate for the same period, and try to do the simple arithmetic, let me know what figure you get...

Btw, do you have any idea where India's economy would be even if it grows at you suggested rate of 15-20% for just one decade?

If India grew at 17% per annum for a decade, it would have an $8.9 trillion economy in 2024, which is smaller than China's today.

Most optimistic estimates IMO are 8% total growth for India over 20 years. I don't think it's going to happen but lets say it does. $1.85 trillion in 2013 at 8% per annum (meaning the rupee is appreciating every year) = $8.62 trillion in 2033. Pretty darn small comparatively speaking, and most probably smaller than the size of Germany circa 2033. And it won't happen anyway.

This is why Indians should temper their expectations. Expect to surpass Germany sometime mid-century, and Japan maybe never.

 

[dray]

If India grew at 17% per annum for a decade, it would have an $8.9 trillion economy in 2024, which is smaller than China's today.

Most optimistic estimates IMO are 8% total growth for India over 20 years. I don't think it's going to happen but lets say it does. $1.85 trillion in 2013 at 8% per annum (meaning the rupee is appreciating every year) = $8.62 trillion in 2033. Pretty darn small comparatively speaking, and most probably smaller than the size of Germany circa 2033. And it won't happen anyway.

This is why Indians should temper their expectations. Expect to surpass Germany sometime mid-century, and Japan maybe never.

You have no idea how hopelessly wrong you are, you don't know much about economics, right? I told you to do a math on China's GDP figures vis a vis growth rate, you should have done that before posting further. Do it and you will learn something today.

 

[American_Millenium]

You have no idea how hopelessly wrong you are, you don't know much about economics, right? I told you to do a math on China's GDP figures vis a vis growth rate, you should have done that before posting further. Do it and you will learn something today.

How does anything you are saying refute what I'm saying? Even if I magically found out that China was growing at a rate of -150,000% per annum or vice versa, it literally has nothing to do with the growth figures above (which really are simple math).

But please, enlighten me... what is it about China's growth figures that are related to the simple math that states India isn't surpassing China, let alone Japan, let alone smaller economies anytime in the next half-century? I doubt it's meaningful but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and asking you to expand beyond non-informative, meaningless statements.

 

[TheTruth]

I'm always shocked to see that India has a $2 trillion economy, it definitely acts with the arrogance of a much larger power

 

[dray]

How does anything you are saying refute what I'm saying? Even if I magically found out that China was growing at a rate of -150,000% per annum or vice versa, it literally has nothing to do with the growth figures above (which really are simple math).

But please, enlighten me... what is it about China's growth figures that are related to the simple math that states India isn't surpassing China, let alone Japan, let alone smaller economies anytime in the next half-century? I doubt it's meaningful but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and asking you to expand beyond non-informative, meaningless statements.

Simple math of compounding doesn't work here because of multiple factors that also increase or decrease GDP figures. That's why I asked you to calculate the YoY growth of chinese nominal GDP in USD by taking 2003 as the base year and YoY growth rates till 2014, you wouldn't reach half the present GDP of China with your simple math.

 

[American_Millenium]

Simple math of compounding doesn't work here because of multiple factors that also increase or decrease GDP figures. That's why I asked you to calculate the YoY growth of chinese nominal

GDP is the nominal GDP growth rate plus currency change + inflation. It's very clear I took those into acccount. Just look at the above comments.

GDP in USD by taking 2003 as the base year and YoY growth rates till 2014, you wouldn't reach half the present GDP of China with your simple math.

Hence the reason I said China has been growing at 15-20% per year, because I included all three of the components for growth. The point is, India is not growing anywhere near 15-20% per year. GDP growth is 5% and rupee depreciates 5-7% per annum for the last 2-3 years, which is why India's GDP has been stable or slightly decreasing.

I hope you finally get it instead of regurgitating things I've already said and presenting them to me as a rebuttal.

 

[dray]

GDP is the nominal GDP growth rate plus currency change + inflation. It's very clear I took those into acccount. Just look at the above comments.


Hence the reason I said China has been growing at 15-20% per year, because I included all three of the components for growth. The point is, India is not growing anywhere near 15-20% per year. GDP growth is 5% and rupee depreciates 5-7% per annum for the last 2-3 years, which is why India's GDP has been stable or slightly decreasing.

I hope you finally get it instead of regurgitating things I've already said and presenting them to me as a rebuttal.

If you know how GDP is calculated, then how did you come up with that nonsense below? You expect that if a country grows at 17% (as stated by you) then its currency won't appreciate and inflation won't rise?

And only real growth rate is considered as the official figure, if China can become almost a $10 trillion GDP from less than $2 trillion in 10 years with an average growth rate of roughly 10%, then India will reach nowhere with 8% growth as per you?

If India grew at 17% per annum for a decade, it would have an $8.9 trillion economy in 2024, which is smaller than China's today.

Most optimistic estimates IMO are 8% total growth for India over 20 years. I don't think it's going to happen but lets say it does. $1.85 trillion in 2013 at 8% per annum (meaning the rupee is appreciating every year) = $8.62 trillion in 2033. Pretty darn small comparatively speaking, and most probably smaller than the size of Germany circa 2033. And it won't happen anyway.

This is why Indians should temper their expectations. Expect to surpass Germany sometime mid-century, and Japan maybe never.

 

[American_Millenium]

If you know how GDP is calculated, then how did you come up with that nonsense below? You expect that if a country grows at 17% (as stated by you) then its currency won't appreciate and inflation won't rise?

And only real growth rate is considered as the official figure, if China can become almost a $10 trillion GDP from less than $2 trillion in 10 years with an average growth rate of roughly 10%

No, I was referring to the TOTAL growth rate. That is GDP + currency appreciation + inflation. China's total was around that for 35 years, and India is not getting anywhere near that.

Be specific. What is nonsense.

then India will reach nowhere with 8% growth as per you?

Well, once again, you are not listening to what I'm saying. First of all, India is growing at around 5% per annum. Secondly, even if India were to reach 8% per annum and somehow HOLD that for decades on end like China, factoring in the performance of the rupee radically reduces the net growth that India experiences.

For example, India has been growing at 5 or 6 or 7 whatever percent per year for the last three years right? Then WHY is it staying stable (in one year actually contracting) and not experiencing any real gain? Because it's currency doesn't perform well, and with the exception of like two years, it never has.

In that time period, India experienced no growth and in fact contracted a little. Instead of 10-15% (~5-7% per annum) growth in total from 2011-2013, it experienced -0.2% growth for that time period. In the same time period, the US, a developed country growing at a snail-like pace (compared to superfast emerging-market India) experienced a $1.25 trillion increase, and a legit emerging-market, China, experienced a $2.155 trillion increase. India experienced a $3 billion contraction during the same time period.

 

[dray]

No, I was referring to the TOTAL growth rate. That is GDP + currency appreciation + inflation. China's total was around that for 35 years, and India is not getting anywhere near that.

Be specific. What is nonsense.

This one. You should know why.

If India grew at 17% per annum for a decade, it would have an $8.9 trillion economy in 2024, which is smaller than China's today.

Most optimistic estimates IMO are 8% total growth for India over 20 years. I don't think it's going to happen but lets say it does. $1.85 trillion in 2013 at 8% per annum (meaning the rupee is appreciating every year) = $8.62 trillion in 2033. Pretty darn small comparatively speaking, and most probably smaller than the size of Germany circa 2033. And it won't happen anyway.

This is why Indians should temper their expectations. Expect to surpass Germany sometime mid-century, and Japan maybe never.

Well, once again, you are not listening to what I'm saying. First of all, India is growing at around 5% per annum. Secondly, even if India were to reach 8% per annum and somehow HOLD that for decades on end like China, factoring in the performance of the rupee radically reduces the net growth that India experiences.

For example, India has been growing at 5 or 6 or 7 whatever percent per year for the last 3 years right? Then WHY is it staying stable (in one year actually contracting) and not experiencing any real gain? Because it's currency doesn't perform well, and with the exception of like 2 years, it never has.

View attachment 180181

Indian economy was goofed up in last four years by the ruling party, and that's why they were wiped out in the last election in 2014, what made you think that the last four years were gold standard for India? And rupee itself carries a major upward potential, the normal rate of rupee is 40-45, not 60+.

 

[Soulspeek]

Caste System is alive and kicking in India. Have a look at matrimonials on any newspaper. Out of 1000s of advertisements only 4-5 people say 'Caste no Bar'. Even then most of those are the guys/gals who are about to cross marriageable age.

There's no cast system in India its been barred long ago, it exists only in people's monds. to build the infrastructure 20 years?? are you crazy one or two term for the current regime is enough and after 5 years economy would be in boost.

ya that's the only problem, the reason why China is successful is because whatever CCP wants can be implemented without a questions from opposition or fro people, but for us its simply a BIG NO. but with BJP forming a government on its own with majority of seats i couldn't give a little trust that at least half of the planed projects can be implemented.



Hahha good one.



Idiot... How long you are going to repeat the same sentence????

FYI there's no such thing as Dragon it only exists in Chinese Minds of dreams



For that Pakistan civilian government should have the complete control of both Pakistan Military and the foreign policy.

 

[$@rJen]

Caste System is alive and kicking in India. Have a look at matrimonials on any newspaper. Out of 1000s of advertisements only 4-5 people say 'Caste no Bar'. Even then most of those are the guys/gals who are about to cross marriageable age.

that's why i said. it exist only in the minds of people, legally its been banned and educated people
s mind i mean most of the young generations would be avoiding those thing, may be not now but atlease next gen would do