李光耀：India's Peaceful Rise
Even though the economy's annual growth rate has been 8% to 9% forthe last five years, India's peaceful rise hasn't led to unease overthe country's future. Instead, Americans, Japanese and westernEuropeans are keen to invest in India, ride on its growth and helpdevelop another heavyweight country.I recently had the opportunity to visit New Delhi twice. In November [b]JPMorgan Chase[/b] (nyse: [url=http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=JPM]JPM[/url] - [url=http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=JPM]news[/url] - [url=http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=JPM]people[/url])brought its international advisory board, its European board and itsprincipal officers from many parts of the world to the city for atwo-day meeting. And earlier this month [b]Citigroup[/b] (nyse: [url=http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=C]C[/url] - [url=http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=C]news[/url] - [url=http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=C]people[/url])invited me to speak along with the bank's top leaders at anAsia-Pacific Business Leaders' Summit there. Two of the largest U.S.banks consider India to be a growth story and are eager to serviceAmerican and Indian companies. I did not detect any anxiety over Indiabecoming a problem to the present world order.
Why has China'speaceful rise, however, raised apprehensions? Is it because India is ademocracy in which numerous political forces are constantly at work,making for an internal system of checks and balances? Most probably,yes--especially as India's governments have tended to be made up oflarge coalitions of 10 to 20 parties.
One example of India's"checks and balances" at work was the suspension of its talks on a U.S.nuclear power deal. Although this deal is manifestly in India'sinterests, 60 communist MPs--part of the Congress Party-led coalitiongovernment--opposed the deal. Subsequently, the Communists allowednegotiations to resume, reserving their position on the outcome.India's development will, from time to time, run into domesticobstruction.
Contrast this with the singleness of purpose in policy and its execution displayed by China's Communist government.
India'snavy has an aircraft-carrier force; its air force has the latest Sukhoiand MiG aircraft; its army is among the best trained and equipped inAsia. India can project power across its borders farther and betterthan China can, yet there is no fear that India has aggressiveintentions.
Could this be because India is surrounded by statesin turmoil? Pakistan is in crisis; a bad outcome there will increasethe terrorist threat to India. As Pervez Musharraf is now an electedcivilian president, he won't have the same command over the army he hashad as army chief. And any other elected president will have even lesssway over the military. Nepal is a deeply divided and troubled country.Sri Lanka is embroiled in an unending civil war, with the Tamil Tigerscarrying out endless suicide bombings. India obviously haspreoccupations enough to keep its focus fixed on its border regions.
[b]Different Impact[/b]
Suppose China were also a democracy with multiple parties andpolitical power bases? Would a multiparty China with a yearly economicgrowth rate of 9% to 12% be viewed with the same equanimity as Indiais? Such a China would probably continue to make big strides on theeconomic, social and military fronts, with more sophisticatedcapabilities on the ground and sea and in the air and space, and wouldeventually become a peer competitor, if not an adversary, of the U.S.
Thespeed of China's change and the thoroughness, energy and drive withwhich the Chinese have built up their infrastructure and pursued theirgoals spring from their culture, one that is shared by the Koreans,Japanese and Vietnamese, who adopted the Chinese written script andabsorbed Confucian culture. The Chinese are determined to catch up withthe U.S., the EU and Japan. Fast-forward 20 to 30 years and the worldwill have to accommodate a more technologically advanced andeconomically more sophisticated China, whether under a single- ormultiparty system.
India does not pose such a challenge--andwon't until it gets its social infrastructure up to First Worldstandards and further liberalizes its economy. Indeed, the U.S., the EUand Japan root for India because they want a better-balanced world, inwhich India approximates China's weight.
The Indian elite alsospeak, write and publish in English. They hold a wide range of diverseviews--and to the degree that Amartya Sen, a Nobel winner in economics,entitled one of his books [i]The Argumentative Indian[/i]. FewChinese, on the other hand, speak--let alone write in--English, andwhat they publish in Chinese doesn't always disclose their innermostthoughts.
What if India were well ahead of China? Would Americansand Europeans be rooting for China? I doubt it. They still have aphobia of the "yellow peril," one reinforced by memories of theoutrages of the Cultural Revolution and the massacres in TiananmenSquare, not to mention their strong feelings against Chinese governmentcensorship. China will have to live with these hang-ups. To reinforcethe idea that theirs will be a peaceful path going forward, the Chinesehave rephrased the term "peaceful rise" to "peaceful development."Greater openness and transparency in Chinese society would also help.
Singaporeand Southeast Asia (Asean), sandwiched between these two behemoths,need China and India to achieve a balanced relationship, one thatallows both to grow and prosper, pulling up the rest of Asia--East,Southeast and South--with them.
[b]Lee Kuan Yew[/b][i], minister mentor of Singapore; [/i][b]Paul Johnson[/b][i], eminent British historian and author; [/i][b]Ernesto Zedillo[/b][i],director, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, and formerpresident of Mexico, rotate in writing this column. To see past CurrentEvents columns, visit our Web site at [/i][url=http://www.forbes.com/currentevents]www.forbes.com/currentevents.[/url] 中文大意：
李光耀非常重新加坡与印度和中国的关系，他曾预料，中国和印度的GDP将雄占全球总值的一半。
中评社香港12月19日电／新加坡内阁资政李光耀在最新一期的著名财经杂志Forbes Asia上发表的时评专栏中提出这两个问题时，指出世界对中印两国的不同态度，主要源于两国政治和文化上的差异。例如印度的多党联合政府中的各党派势力持续互动，就符合了西方所习惯的内部互相制衡的原则。
同时，印度精英都能书写英文，对问题也有各种各样的见解，而能讲和书写英文的中国人就很少，而他们以华文表达思想及观点时，往往又不透露本身内心最深处的想法，更无助于中西方的沟通。
他在评论中质疑，如果目前是印度的发展领先于中国，欧美国家是否也会以同样的态度支援中国？
“我对此相当怀疑。他们对‘黄祸’仍存有恐惧。”
李光耀指出，中国为了强调本身的发展是遵循一条和平的道路，还特地将“和平崛起”的口号改为“和平发展”。如果中国能进一步开放并提高社会透明度，也将有助世界对它改观。
李光耀表示，他最近两度访问新德里，发现美国两家最大型的银行，即花旗集团和摩根大通（JP Morgan Chase）都对开发印度业务表现得很积极，也完全没流露出半点关于印度崛起是否会对当前的世界秩序造成影响的焦虑。
他在这篇文章中说，相对于中国GCD政府制定与执行政策的单一性，印度由多党，有时甚至是多达十几二十个政党组成的联合政府，免不了时不时会遇到各种阻挠，而这股制衡力量，在作为国大党所领导的联合政府一员的印度GCD的60名议员阻止印度同美国针对核能合作进行谈判时，就得到了印证。
他还指出，印度海军拥有航空母舰，空军又拥有最先进的苏恺和米格战斗机，整支军队是亚洲最训练有素，而且装备最精良之一，也比中国更有能力将其军事力量延伸到国境之外，但是世界却从来都不担忧印度有侵略意图。
“这难道是因为印度周边的国家都处在动乱之中吗？巴基斯坦处在危机之中，任何不利的发展都将加重印度所面对的恐怖主义威胁，而穆沙拉夫现在是个民选总统，对军队的支配权已不如过去担任陆军总司令的时候，而日后其他的民选总统对军队的影响力将更不如他。尼泊尔现在严重分裂，处在动乱之中，至于斯里兰卡也卷入与淡米尔之虎没完没了的内战之中。印度在把注意力放在周边国家之际，显然已力不从心。”
李光耀说，无论中国是不是个多党的民主国家，或是欧美国家是否也会以跟对待印度同样的态度看待它，以中国目前改变的速度及其贯彻始终，决意在基础设施方面追赶美国、欧盟与日本发展水准的驱动力，以及加强文化影响力的目标，世界在二三十年后必定得学习如何容纳一个在技术上更先进、在经济上也更为成熟的中国。
“但是，在印度在把本身的社会基础设施提升至第一世界国家水准，并使其经济进一步自由化之前，印度将还不足以构成这样的挑战。的确，美国、欧盟和日本都支援印度，因为它们都希望印度能有更接近中国的分量，以维持一个更为平衡的世界。”
至于被夹在中印这两个泱泱大国之间的新加坡及东南亚其他国家，李资政认为自然会乐见中印双方能形成一种既可促进彼此繁荣发展，又能拉亚洲其他地区，包括东亚、东南亚及南亚一把的平衡关系。 新加坡内阁资政李光耀最近再度于知名财经杂志《福布斯》亚洲版撰文为中国崛起辩护，指印度和中国都在崛起，为何西方仅对中国忧虑？这主要是因为印度为多党联合政府，符合西方习惯，且印度菁英都能书写英文等文化差异所致。
据“中央社”报道，李光耀撰文指出，印度过去五年取得每年百分之八到百分之九的快速经济成长，为何不仅没引起世界的忧虑，美国、日本和西欧国家反而热中到印度投资，以协助另一个重量级国家发展？为何以同样速度和平崛起的中国，却引来西方的忧虑？
李光耀认为，世界对中、印两国的不同态度，主要源自两国政治和文化上的差异，例如印度的多党联合政府中各党派势力持续互动，符合西方习惯的内部互相制衡原则。
李光耀并再度以自身的观点批评印度的民主政治，认为相对于中国GCD政府制定与执行政策的单一性，印度由多党，有时候甚至多达十几、二十几个政党组成的联合政府，免不了不时会遭遇各种阻挠。
李光耀举例说，这股制衡力量，如作为印度国大党所领导联合政府一员的印度GCD，其六十几名议员就能阻止印度和美国就核能合作进行谈判，可获得印证。
李光耀指出，印度海军拥有航空母舰，空军又拥有最先进的米格战机，整支军队是亚洲最训练有素，也是最精良之一，也比中国更有能力将其军事力量延伸到国境之外，但西方却不担心印度有侵略意图。
李光耀认为，不论中国是否是多党的民主国家，或是欧美国家是否也会以对待印度同样的态度来看待中国，以中国目前改变的速度和贯彻，决意在基础设施上追赶美国、欧洲联盟和日本发展的动能，还有加强文化影响力的目标，世界在二、三十年后必定要学习如何容纳一个在技术上更先进、在经济上也更为成熟的中国。
页:
[1]