Can India catch up to China?

The international press for years now has clamored for a new counterweight to the American superpower since the implosion of the Soviet Union. With cracks in the American armor becoming more readily apparent, talk of China not only matching but eventually superseding America has intensified. Although I don't believe China can match America in per capita terms, China will most definitely overtake us in gross terms. Naturally, the press has also championed the rise of China's neighbor to the south, India. Could India be the counterweight to China in Asia, and be a powerful democratic ally for America in the region?

For now, unless things drastically change, I would have to say no. The main problem with Indian growth is that it's fundamentally top-down in its orientation. Although India's economy has grown at a torrid pace, I believe that it has largely benefitted a small group of individuals living in the megalopolises like Mumbai and Bangalore. The vast underclass in mid-sized cities and rural areas still live much as they did a century ago. IT is nice, but it's not the basis for wide-scale economic growth. India is moving towards becoming like Brazil, where you have pockets of extreme wealth (levels of affluence like in any Western country) surrounded by third-world impoverishment.

For India to catch up to China, Indians need to concentrate on getting their infrastructure up to par. And indeed, this will be a MONUMENTAL task in India. For example I remember driving from Delhi to Agra to see the Taj Mahal. This would definitely be a high-volume highway one would think, but one wouldn't be able to tell looking at the highway itself. It's a very narrow two-lane highway, one lane for each direction, going pretty much all the way from Delhi to Agra. Farmers with ox-pulled carts constantly slow you down and add hours to the trip. It's absolutely dreadful, and inexcusable for a country vying to be a superpower.

In addition, the Delhi airport, the first place foreigners come through, is literally falling apart. It's dimly lit and ancient-looking. The lack of runways means that most foreigners have to take flights in the wee hours. The cities themselves appear to be falling apart except for a few of the modern buildings. To see what I mean, compare the skyline of Mumbai, India's financial capital, with Shanghai's. Shanghai is a glittering, contemporary sky-reaching city while Mumbai is short and decrepit by comparison. Civic aspirations have to be bolseterd for India to become a financial power, a prerequisite to becoming a global superpower.

China, by contrast, has taken a bottom-top approach and now is in position to vault past America (once again in gross terms). Obviously I realize that it's tough for a democratic country like India to emulate the Chinese model, based on heavy, sometimes totalitarian-style, government control, but India is in real danger of becoming like Latin American countries in this hemisphere. Those countries are rife with social issues concomitant with their vast income discrepancies.

However, this isn't to say that democracy for India is a bad thing. In fact, it proffers one clear advantage: it fosters a system where people have a stake in the direction the country takes. In addition, having democratic freedom fosters creativity and entrepreneurial -minded people. These are positives the Indian government must mine if they want to go beyond regional power and become an international one.