O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida;

Meu Twitter: https://twitter.com/PauloAlmeida53

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paulobooks

Mostrando postagens com marcador India. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador India. Mostrar todas as postagens

sábado, 24 de setembro de 2016

China's pivot, Brazil's stance: a personal view - Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Invited, at the last minute, to a GIBSA (Germany, India, Brazil, South Africa) conference in Brasilia, to express myself about China's pivot in Asia Pacific and its implications for Brazil, I have chosen to put a few ideas on paper about this important relationship, much more of a mere commercial nature than having greater geopolitical implications. Brazil is not part of the big geopolitical game of the Asia Pacific region, we are just a middle country struggling to recover ourselves from the Great Destruction brought by the criminal government of Worker's Party and its mafia kind of government.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

This is the meeting: 

GIBSA Workshop: Germany, India, Brazil and South Africa:A Strategic Quadrilogue 2016
Geoeconomics and Geopolitics at Play:
The outlook from Europe, South Asia, South America and Africa

Brasilia, September 25 – 27


The GIBSA Quadrilogue was launched in 2007 as a collaboration between four Think Tanks: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) in Berlin, the Centro Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (CEBRI) in Rio de Janeiro, the Institute of Peace & Conflict Studies (IPCS) in New Delhi, and the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) in Pretoria. The forum is supposed to facilitate exchanges of ideas between these countries with regard to their respective perceptions and analyses of international relations.

And this is my paper: 


China’s pivot, Brazil’s stance: a personal view

Paulo Roberto de Almeida
 [GIBSA meeting, Brasília, September 26, 2016]

Since August, I’m Director of the Brazilian International Relations Research Institute, supposedly a think tank for Itamaraty, today much more a tank than a think. Let’s assume, then, that we are capable of doing some free think work, as we do not have financial resources of our own, or a proper research staff to fill the tank side of this dependent body of the Alexandre de Gusmão Foundation.
Alexandre de Gusmão is said to be the grand-father of the Brazilian diplomacy, as the role of father is reserved to our Grand Priest, Baron of Rio Branco, for once minister in Berlin, before being the most famous Brazilian diplomat, the sole to be reproduced in at least six of our last eight currencies throughout the 20th century. Gusmão, a Brazilian diplomat on behalf of the Portuguese crown, negotiated the 1750 partition of South America between Spain and Portugal, redrawing the geopolitical map of the region and in fact abolishing the famous Tordesillas treaty (1494), a kind of Yalta partition of the world at the dawn of modern era.
Being currently outside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I cannot pretend to speak on behalf of this respectable, traditional and very old institution, older than the corresponding bodies of Germany, India and South Africa. As I cannot speak for the Ministry, and as I cannot either redraw any geopolitical map for today’s international relations of Brazil, I’ll speak for myself, trying to express personal views about, not exactly China’s role in the world, but Brazil’s stance towards the new giant of the 21st geopolitical scenario. I will try to correct some misperceptions, among our friends from abroad, about Brazil’s stance in relation to the new kids in the block, that is, IBSA and BRICS, the innovations of the 2000s, and about Brazil’s recent partisan diplomacy.
What is important to perceive, at the start, and I stress this for our guests, is that we have to make a very clear distinction between Brazilian traditional, and professional, diplomacy, and that other “diplomacy”, the one that was publicized and practiced by the Worker’s Party governments, both under Lula and Dilma, a diplomacy that was based much more on ideological choices than well reflected decisions, a foreign policy that pursued old beliefs based on a North-South divide, and on an delusional and futile attempt to unite “non-hegemonic” countries in the restructuring of global relations.
(...)

Available at Academia.edu: 

https://www.academia.edu/s/42e5a419f5/3041-chinas-pivot-brazils-stance-a-personal-view-2016

In Twetter: 
Join my feedback session on "3041) China's pivot, Brazil's stance: a personal view (2016)." https://www.academia.edu/s/42e5a419f5/3041-chinas-pivot-brazils-stance-a-personal-view-2016?source=twitter

sábado, 24 de maio de 2014

India: an economic regime change? Unlikely - Deepak Lal

Deepak Lal: A change in economic regime?

At a panel discussion on "The economic agenda of the next government: is an economic regime change necessary and possible?" at the Indian School of Business in Mohali, I answered that such a change was necessary but not likely. This column elaborates on these answers.

The 1991 reforms ended the Nehruvian licence permit raj, removing major policy-induced distortions in the commodity markets, but failed to do so in the markets for labour and land. Most of these distortions go back to Indira Gandhi's leftward turn after she won her "Garibi Hatao" election in 1971, with the nationalisation of banks and coal, the attempt to nationalise the wholesale grain trade, and the tightening of the  for establishments employing more than 100 workers. These and other dirigiste measures still cripple the Indian economy. , her son, loosened the licence permit raj, but , his widow - by promoting various "rights-based" subsidies in her decade-long reign - has saddled India with a premature European-style welfare state. My suggestion at the panel, that it would be best for India's future economic performance if the incoming government rescinded all the economic Acts passed during the Indira and Sonia reigns, got loud cheers from the assembled students. My answer to the second question was that such a change was unlikely, since the intellectual hegemony of Nehruvian  was still in place, though the coming crisis of the demographic dividend turning into a demographic bomb might at last induce a change.

A little personal history might be in order to explain these answers. In 1972-73, I was working as an advisor in 's Planning Commission when Indira Gandhi's left turn was evident. Like my peers, I was still largely a Nehruvian social democrat. The commission was torn between ' voice of economic rationality and  's Marxist voice. Witnessing their heated debates and the absurdity that was Indian planning led to my Damascene conversion to.

After I returned to London, at events at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), I got to know Friedrich A Hayek and other leading classical liberals such as Milton Friedman, Peter Bauer and Alan Walters. This was also the period when  was converted to classical liberalism by her mentor, Keith Joseph. Many years later, when we became friends, Joseph told me that he had been shocked in the late 1960s when he met Walters, an old friend, on the street outside Parliament, who refused to shake hands, and instead wagged a finger exclaiming, "you are an inflationist". This shook Joseph, then part of the statist intellectual social democratic political consensus known as Butskellism. He got a reading list of classical liberal writings from Ralph Harris at the IEA. This was his Damascene conversion. He set up a think tank with Thatcher: the Centre for Policy Studies developed the classical liberal programme, which Thatcher implemented when she came to power in 1978. She would fling a copy of Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty at her colleagues, telling them they needed to read it to restore Britain's economic fortunes.

Her success in restoring Britian's economy and standing in the world led to a shift in the climate of opinion; the Labour Party under Tony Blair came to embrace Thatcherism. When his successor, Gordon Brown (much like the second term of the United Progressive Alliance, or UPA), tried to use the burgeoning tax proceeds of the ensuing economic prosperity to expand entitlements, he suffered a crushing defeat.

I wrote a book for the IEA, The Poverty of Development Economics (1983), in which I applied classical liberal ideas to the economics of developing countries. This was revised and updated, rebutting many of the fashionable arguments against classical liberalism, in my Reviving the Invisible Hand (2006). On my frequent visits to India, I found that these ideas had fallen on stony ground. Even after the 1991 economic liberalisation, after growth accelerated with the easy economic pickings from ending the licence raj, the same old social democratic mindset - reminiscent of Butskellism - prevailed. There were no think tanks in India - like the IEA, or the American Enterprise Institute, Cato Institute or the Heritage Foundation in the United States - to propagate the case for classical liberalism. With the demise of the Swatantra Party in the 1971 Indira wave, no leading politician supporting classical liberalism was left in politics. When the unreconstructed Left denounced even the limited 1991 reforms as hurting the interests of the poor, the stage was set for Sonia Gandhi to use the rising tax proceeds from growth to expand the entitlement economy.

What of the opposition by the Bharatiya Janata Party, which has just won a stunning and well-deserved election victory? Do its election slogans - "development, not doles", "maximum governance, minimum government", constantly reiterated by its incoming prime minister - mean that he and his party are shorn of the Nehruvian social democratic mindset? Note that during its reign, the UPA did not vote against various "rights-based" entitlements enacted at the behest of Sonia Gandhi's jholawalas in the . Moreover, in the 1980s, the BJP was burning effigies of Arthur Dunkel, former head of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (). Though its tune changed in the 1990s, the continuing hold of "Gandhian socialism", as Atal Bihari Vajpayee called it, is still evident in the party's support for "swadeshi", its backsliding on foreign direct investment in retail, and its purported support for public sector enterprises, instead of their privatisation, as in Thatcher's flagship programme. Maybe this will change with a Thatcherite Damascene conversion of Mr Modi and his party.

For me, this would be signalled if Mr Modi does battle with the "insiders" of the industrial labour aristocracy, who have kept the massive number of semi-skilled workers willing to work for much lower wages, as "outsiders" in the manufacturing sector. There seems to be widespread acceptance of the industrial caste system India has created, with its segmentation through distortions of the industrial labour market. As the experience of China and of the other Asian Tigers has shown, it is impossible to jump the labour-intensive industrialisation phase and move into a post- industrial service economy. It is not top-down skill development that India needs, but removing all the colonial labour market restrictions that prevent freedom to hire and fire labour, as China - an ostensibly socialist economy - has done. This requires rescinding the colonial-era labour laws (see my The Hindu Equilibrium, 2005) and the 1947 Industrial Disputes Act. Without this, India's demographic dividend will turn into a demographic nightmare, even as the millions of unemployed, semi-skilled and sex-starved youth increasingly disturb social order. Perhaps only then will India's continuing dirigiste intellectual mindset change.

sábado, 17 de maio de 2014

A India sob nova direcao: vai dar certo? - Le Monde

En Inde, les défis qui attendent Narendra Modi

Le Monde.fr | Par 
Narendra Modi est assuré de devenir le prochain premier ministre indien, à l'issue des législatives qui se sont tenues du 7 avril au 12 mai.

Narendra Modi, le leader du parti nationaliste hindou est en passe de devenir le nouveau premier ministre de l'Inde.

Son parti, le Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a remporté une victoire écrasante au terme de « la plus grande élection du monde », qui a mobilisé près de 551 millions d'électeurs après cinq semaines de vote, du 7 avril au 12 mai. Son triomphe met fin à la dynastie usée de Manmohan Singh et le parti du Congrès, au pouvoir depuis dix ans. 
  • Qui est Narendra Modi ?
A la tête du BJP, le parti du peuple indien donné vainqueur selon les premiers décomptes effectués vendredi 16 mai, Narendra Modi s’apprête à remporter une victoire écrasante aux législatives. Son parti dépasserait la majorité absolue des 272 sièges sur 543 à la chambre basse du parlement, la « Lok Sabha ».
Modi est issu d’une famille pauvre de la communauté des ghanchis, groupe hindoue située au bas de l’échelle sociale. Adepte du yoga et végétarien strict, il a été imprégné de l'idéologie nationaliste hindoue lors de sa jeunesse passée au sein du Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), une organisation aux méthodes paramilitaires.
Paroles d'entrepreneurs
Paroles d'entrepreneurs
Découvrez comment 4 entreprises ont optimisé leurs solutions Télécoms et Cloud grâce au Pack Business Entrepreneurs de SFR.
Le RSS, qui défend une conception intransigeante de l’hindouisme, a été interdit plusieurs fois depuis l'indépendance et ses cadres font souvent preuve d'hostilité envers les musulmans, la plus grande minorité religieuse de l’Inde (14 % de lapopulation, contre 80 % d’hindous).
Lire notre portrait de Narendra Modi, hindou à l'extrême ?
  • Pourquoi une victoire aussi nette ?
Face à l'arrogance des élites, Modi représente l'homme du peuple s'imposant par son seul labeur. Sa campagne repose essentiellement sur le bilan économique de son Etat du Gujarat, grâce auquel il s'est constitué une force de soutien chez les entrepreneurs et les chefs des grandes entreprises, leur promettant de relancerl'économie tout en réduisant la corruption.
Au-delà des nationalistes hindous, il a aussi rallié les classes moyennes et une partie des plus pauvres qui votaient traditionnellement pour le Congrès et ses programmes sociaux.
En face, le jeune candidat du Parti du Congrès, Rahul Gandhi, héritier de la dynastie Nehru-Gandhi, a subi une défaite cuisante en payant par les votes son manque de charisme et d’expérience, usé par des scandales de corruption à répétition et incapable de relancer la croissance du pays. La victoire du parti nationaliste marque donc un profond changement et une « nouvelle ère » après dix ans de pouvoir du Parti du Congrès.
  • Pourquoi inspire-t-il des inquiétudes ?
A 63 ans, Narendra Modi incarne l'aile dure de son parti, suscitant la méfiance y compris dans son propre camp. Son arrivée au pouvoir fait d’ailleurs craindre une montée du nationalisme et la fin du pluralisme religieux, tout en ravivant le souvenirdes émeutes antimusulmanes orchestrées par des extrémistes hindous.
Le Parti du Congrès accuse notamment Narendra Modi de l’absence de réaction des forces de l’ordre dans les sanglantes émeutes intercommunautaires qui avaient secoué son Etat du Gujarat en 2002. Plus d'un millier de personnes, essentiellement des musulmans, avaient été tuées. L'Inde est officiellement un Etat laïc qui reconnaît et respecte toutes les religions, mais avec Modi au pouvoir, il faut s'attendre à ce que « l’hindouisation de l’Etat » s’accélère aux dépens des minorités religieuses.
  • Quels défis attendent le nouveau régime ?
Dans un contexte de ralentissement de la croissance économique – après une décennie à plus de 9 %, elle a atteint 4,6 % en 2013 – et de hausse des prix, Modi devra faire à de nombreux défis hérités de l’ancienne coalition : sur le plan économique, il aura d’abord la lourde tâche de relancer la machine économique en espérant que son passé de dirigeant nationaliste hindou controversé ne la mette pas en péril.
Lire notre enquête (en édition abonnés) : Narendra Modi, une énigme indienne
Il héritera également de problèmes en matière de politique étrangère, notamment avec le Pakistan, dont le premier ministre Nawaz Sharif a pourtant salué sa« victoire impressionnante ».
Depuis leur indépendance en 1947, l'Inde et le Pakistan se sont affrontés à trois reprises, notamment pour le contrôle du Cachemire, région himalayenne revendiquée par les deux puissances voisines désormais dotées de l’armenucléaire.
Les relations entre les deux pays s'étaient encore détériorées après l'attaque contre un grand hôtel de Bombay en 2008 qui avait fait 166 morts, l'Inde imputant cette tragédie à des islamistes armés pakistanais.
Le décryptage du chercheur Christophe Jaffrelot : L'Inde face au péril nationaliste
Après plusieurs années de boycott par l’Europe et étant lui-même interdit de visa aux Etats-Unis, Modi devra enfin éclaircir ses relations avec l’Occident : convenance diplomatique oblige, l'arrivée de Narendra Modi au pouvoir devrait lui valoirfélicitations et promesses de coopération de la part des Etats-Unis comme de l’Europe, qui ne peut s'autoriser à bouder le nouveau dirigeant de ce poids lourd d'Asie du Sud, économie émergente de 1,2 milliard d'habitants.

segunda-feira, 25 de novembro de 2013

BRICS: nossos aliados, universidades precarias (India)

Indian Universities Still Lag in World Rankings
By GAYATRI RANGACHARI SHAH
The New York Times, November 24, 2013

MUMBAI — India produces some of the world’s brightest students and academics, yet none of its universities appear in the top-200 lists of the leading world university ranking surveys, compiled by Times Higher Education, Quacquarelli Symonds and Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
Indian institutions fare worse than their counterparts in South Korea, Turkey and Israel, not to mention those in Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa, its companions among the so-called BRICS economies.
The results have caused dismay at the highest levels of government. India’s president, Pranab Mukherjee, speaking at Puducherry University’s convocation in September, said, “It is a sad reflection on us when the universal rankings of universities comes out.” Earlier this year, at a conference of academic heads of state-run universities, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh rued that “it is a sobering thought that not one Indian university figures in the top-200 universities of the world today.”
At 25.9 million, India has the world’s second-highest number of students enrolled in higher education, according to Ernst & Young. Yet although 58.9 percent of these students are enrolled in private colleges and universities, the smartest applicants are drawn to publicly funded ones, including the 17 much-lauded Indian Institutes of Technology (I.I.T.s) and the 13 Indian Institutes of Management (I.I.M.s). In the 2013 global rankings, only publicly funded institutions featured anywhere at all.
Competition to get into elite state-run colleges is fierce. Last year, 512,000 applicants sought admission for 9,647 spots in the 15 technology institutes and the Indian School of Mines. Indian news media regularly report on the exorbitant percentages required of graduating high school students to gain a spot at state-run institutions like Delhi University or Bombay University, sometimes upward of 99 percent in certain colleges for degrees in commerce or technology.
Although publicly funded colleges and universities are meant to be autonomous, in reality the government has a degree of control. “Our education sector is, in some respects, overregulated and undergoverned,” said Shashi Tharoor, head of the Ministry of Human Resource Development, which oversees higher education, in a telephone interview. “We need to be less regulated and better governed.”
The three ranking surveys use methodologies that emphasize academic research and faculty citation in journals, followed by other measures like employer reputation, academic reputation, faculty-student ratio, and the international composition of faculty and students. Indian universities lose out on many of these fronts. In addition to lack of research citations, they perform badly on other metrics like faculty-to-student ratios and lack of internationalism.
To be sure, there is a debate around rankings methodology and whether it is fair to rate Indian universities against older and richer Western institutions.
“India has domestic priorities to educate more young people,” said Phil Baty, editor of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Still, he said, “there should be an elite group of institutions that focus on global competitiveness.”
Ben Sowter, head of research at QS World University Rankings, also said that “with an economy the size of India’s, it’s a fundamental need for Indian higher education to be more globally competitive.”
Extensive conversations with policy makers and academics point to systemic flaws that prevent Indian universities from performing better. “The truth is, our universities are really way behind,” said Pramath Raj Sinha, a former partner at the consulting firm McKinsey who was founding dean at the Indian School of Business in Hyderabad.
While some Indian universities had excellent researchers, Mr. Sinha said, many higher education institutions were under pressure to teach increasingly large numbers of students, which took the focus away from research. At the same time, universities lacked resources, both in terms of infrastructure and faculty, he added, noting that bright college graduates, in search of careers in academia and research, tended to go abroad, where resources for research — and pay — were better than in India.
Meenakshi Gopinath, the principal of the elite all-women’s Lady Shri Ram College at Delhi University, said, “It is a decisive moment in Indian higher education. A lot of practices that are the norm within universities abroad are only now coming into effect here. If we can tackle issues of curriculum redesign, student services, unfilled teacher vacancies, attrition, recruitment processes and infrastructure, with imagination and sensitivity, we could be poised for a major takeoff.”
One way to improve higher education is to attract good faculty. Rishikesha T. Krishnan, a professor of corporate strategy and policy at the I.I.M. in Bangalore, and a former visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, said that in its quest to expand higher education capacity, the government had prioritized quantity above quality. Faculty recruitment was difficult, he said, because academic pay scales at publicly funded institutions were pegged to civil service rates. Mr. Krishnan said that a starting professor made up to 60,000 rupees a month, or about $950, while an established professor made about 115,000 rupees a month: His wife, who obtained a Ph.D. at the same time as he did, made many times his salary in the private sector, he said.
Indian universities also have focused on teaching at the expense of research, although that is slowly  changing.
“In the area of high-quality research there’s a big gap we need to br idge. For us, research is a key focus area,” said Subhasis Chaudhuri, deputy director of I.I.T. Bombay. “Today we  have 2,000 students in our Ph.D. program,” he added.
Dheeraj Sanghi, who teaches computer science and engineering at I.I.T. Kanpur, said that compared with a decade ago, his institution was now highly focused on research.
“We’ve had 20 percent growth every year in research papers,” he said. “We are doing high-quality work in science and the humanities, but no one knows about it.”
In fact, the Indian government is demonstrating renewed interest in higher education. The 12th Five Year Plan, the government’s main policy document for the next five years, has specific initiatives outlined for education, such as improvements in academic quality, better and more autonomous governance and enhanced financing for research and infrastructure.

Commenting on the role of the global rankings in shaping the Indian education debate, Mr. Tharoor, the minister, said: “The real answer lies in doing the things we need to do anyway, such as support more research in the universities, which will also reflect in the rankings. India has the brains; it simply lacks steering.”

quinta-feira, 22 de agosto de 2013

India: Sen e Bhagwati se opoem quanto aos caminhos do desenvolvimento (NYT)

MEMO FROM NEW DELHI

Rival Economists in Public Battle Over Cure for India’s Poverty


Mansi Thapliyal/Reuters
The role of the Indian government in programs like this one, in which a government-run school provides meals to the poor, is one area in which Amartya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati disagree.

quinta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2013

15 de Agosto de 1947: a violenta partilha India-Paquistao (NYT)

This Day in History;
Front Page Image

India and Pakistan Become Nations; Clashes Continue



Ceremonies at New Delhi and Karachi Mark Independence for 400,000,000 Persons

Nehru Acclaims Gandhi

But He Warns of Trials Ahead -- Death Toll in Communal Fighting Reaches 153

By ROBERT TRUMBULL
Special to THE NEW YORK TIMES

OTHER HEADLINES
Laws On Gambling Breed Corruption, O'Dwyer Declares: Mayor Says, However, He Will Enforce Them and Keep the Police Departments Clean: Asks Inquiries By Juries: Praises Wallander for the Job He Is Doing -- Inspector Kennedy Raids Dice Game
Truman Backs Price Inquiry As Possibly Showing Gouge: He Says Clark's Investigation May Reveal Who Is Causing High Cost Levels -- Plea for Labor-Farm-Industry Talk Is Rejected
U.S. Cancels Debts of Billion by Italy In Financial Pacts: Frees $60,000,000 in Blocked Properties -- Will Return 28 Freight Ships to Rome: Would Relieve Burdens: Lovett Expresses Hope Accords Will Reduce the Weight of Peace Treaty Clauses
World Peace Tied to Americas Talks: Marshall, at Rio de Janeiro, Says Hemisphere Defense Aim Is Within Framework of U.N.
'Crudest' U.S. Interference In Greece Charged by Soviet
Relief From Heat Likely Tomorrow: Continued High Temperatures Today Expected to Be Ended by Thunder Showers
U.S. Rent Curb Here Is Badly Snarled: Many Tenants Tell of Futile Attempts to Get Relief -- ORC Soon to Cut Staff
Tass Says Greeks Molest Russians: Charges Workers in Embassy Are Seized and 'Tortured' -- Sees Threat to Relations
Actors Win an Anti-Bias Contract In Fight on Negro Ban in Capital
Jews, Arabs Battle Amid Fires; Armed Zionist Troops Aid Police
NEW DELHI -- India achieved her long sought independence today through the transfer of British power to the two dominions into which that land of 400,000,000 persons has been divided, India and Pakistan.
While the ceremonies marking this major historic event were taking place communal strife continued to cast a grim shadow over future.
[Communal clashes, fires and looting continued in Landra, Punjab, with the rising death toll estimated at 158, The Associated Press reported. In London King George conferred an earldom on Viscount Mountbatten for his role in solving the Indian problem and the Government £ 35,000,000 of India's sterling balance.]
The Dominion of India reached the goal of freedom here at midnight with minimum celebration and a few speeches that stressed the gravity of the tasks ahead of the new nation.
In Karachi, capital of Pakistan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah will take the oath this morning as Governor General of the Moslem dominion which he was the primary figure in creating against the demand for a united India.
Viceroy at Both Ceremonies
This ceremony at the Sind Provincial Government House, which is now Mr. Jinnah's official residence, will be the only event marking the transfer of power from British to Indian hands in that dominion.
The Viceroy, Viscount Mountbatten, addressed the Pakistan Constituent Assembly yesterday -- his last official act as Viceroy -- and then flew back to New Delhi to attend the formal transfer here. No special events were scheduled in Karachi, as they were in New Delhi, to mark the actual moments when the rule of the King-Emperor came to an end at midnight except in so far as both dominions continued to owe formal allegiance to the British crown.
Mohandas K. Gandhi, the real hero of the New Delhi ceremony, was absent from the capital of his country in its triumphant hour. At the moment his great dream came true -- though not precisely in the form he wished -- Mr. Gandhi was in humble surroundings of his own choosing among the Moslems of Calcutta, where he felt he was needed more. But his name was publicly praised by others who remained here to carry on the work to which he has devoted his life.
Climax at Midnight
The Constituent Assembly or the Government of India assumed its sovereign power solemnly in a special session that began at 11 p.m. last night and reached its climax at twelve o'clock. As the hands of the clock in the stately assembly hall of the State Council building met at midnight India's Cabinet Ministers and Members of the Assembly listened in silence to the chimes of the hour.
As the last note died an unidentified member blew a conch shell of the kind used in Hindu temples to summon the gods to witness a great event. Instantly a great cheer arose. India at that moment had become a free member of the British Commonwealth of Nations -- free even to leave the commonwealth if she chooses. The members then stood and repeated after the Assembly President, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, this oath in Hindi and then in English:
"At this solemn moment when the people of India, through suffering and sacrifice, have secured freedom, I, a member of the Constituent Assembly of India do dedicate myself in all humility to the service of India and her people to the end that this ancient land attain her rightful place in the world peace and the welfare of mankind."
Then in accordance with a formal motion made by President Prasad and approved by the Assembly, the President and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of the Dominion Government drove half a mile to the VIceroy's hourse -- now to be known as Government House -- and passed to Viscount Mountbatten two momentous announcements.
Viscount Mountbatten, who ceased to be Viceroy at midnight and thus at that moment ended the long and sometimes illustrious line of British statesmen in India, was told by Dr. Prasad and Pandit Nehru first, that the Constituent Assembly of India had assumed the power of governance of this country and second that the same Assembly had endorsed a recommendation that Viscount Mountbatten be Governor General of India from today.
The chief justice of India will administer the oath of office to Viscount Mountbatten at 8:30 o'clock this morning after which the new Governor General will swear in the Indian Cabinet, headed by Pandit Nehru. Later in the morning Viscount Mountbatten will make his inaugural address to the Constituent Assembly.
Thousands at Council Building
Ten thousand Indians crowded about the entrance to the huge round Council of State building as the hour drew near for the Constituent Assembly's historic night meeting. Shopping centers of New Delhi and the adjacent ancient city of Delhi were gay with strings of the new national flag -- saffron, white and dark green -- the colors of the All-India Congress party -- with the symbolic wheel of the great Emperor Asoka.
Unusual crowds were on the streets in both cities. Public buildings and Hindu temples were outlined in electric lights.
A large illuminated flag painted on glass decorated the porch roof of Pandit Nehru's home.
There was, however, little of gaiety that would be associated with such an event as this in the Occident. It is said that exuberance is foreign to the Indian nature though there was no lack of shouting by the crowd at the Council of State building.
Pandit Nehru on entering and leaving received a tremendous ovation and the surging crowd soon broke through the police lines but there was no real disorder, and after the ceremony they soon dispersed.
Stars Held Inauspicious
As a matter of fact the enthusiasm for independence day was dampened by two factors. One was the division of India into Moslem and Hindu nations, leaving large and unhappy minorities in each dominion. The other -- a peculiarly Hindu thing that the West might mistakenly underestimate in importance -- was the fact that astrologers, on whom millions of Hindus place great dependence in all matters discovered an inauspicious mating of the stairs on Aug.15. In India this last is a serious consideration that receives no little attention in the press.
Tonight's program in the Assembly was bilingual; most of the speakers, including President Rajendra Prasad and Pandit Nehru employing Hindi first and then English. The official language of the Assembly is still a matter of debate in which for sentimental reasons, English is losing out to Urdu and Hindi.
The ceremony opened at 11 p.m. with the singing by a trio of sariclad women of Vande Mataram composed by the wife of Acharya J.B. Kripalini, President of the All India Congress party.
After President Prasad spoke the entire assembly arose and observed two minutes of silence "in memory of those who died in the struggle for freedom in India and elsewhere."
Dr. Prasad paid tribute to Mr. Gandhi whom he called "our beacon light, our guide and philosopher during the last thirty years or more."
Nehru Sees Trials Ahead
"And now the time has come when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially," Pandit Nehru began, "At the stroke of the midnight hour when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom." Pandit Nehru dwelt upon the trials that follow the assumption of such great responsibilities as are India's in the days to follow. He called upon his countrymen for an "ending of poverty, ignorance, disease and inequality of opportunity."
Referring to Mr. Gandhi he said: "The ambition of the greatest man of our generation has been to wipe every tear from every eye. That may be beyond us, but so long as there are tears and suffering, so long our work will not be over."
He reminded India of the indivisibility of "one world" and demanded an end to "petty and destructive criticism ... ill-will, or the blaming of others."
Pandit Nehru then moved the resolution for the solemn oath which all members took standing at midnight. He was seconded by a Moslem, Chaudry Khaliquzzaman, leader of the Moslem League party in the Constituent Assembly who promised the fealty for India's Moslems to their state.
Sir S. Radhakrishnan, noted Indian philosopher , paid tribute to the British and asked Indians to look within themselves for faults that in the past had made the Indians "ready victims" for the imperialists.
"From midnight on," he said, "we cannot crowd blame on the British." He called for an end to "nepotism and corruption, which have been a blot on the great name of the country."

Back to the top of this page.
Back to today's page.
Go to another day.

Front Page Image Provided by UMI

quarta-feira, 24 de julho de 2013

Os Brics NUNCA serao um bloco politico e economico - Ruchir Sharma

«Os BRIC nunca serão um bloco político e económico» (Ruchir Sharma)

A grande crise financeira iniciada em 2007 abriu-lhes uma janela de oportunidade. O domínio dos assuntos económicos mundiais pelo clube rico do G7 foi abalado. Mas os anos de 2011 e 2012 trouxeram uma surpresa paras as potências emergentes. O ritmo de crescimento dos BRIC abrandou significativamente. A dúvida instalou-se.
Entrevista com Ruchir Sharma
Diretor de Mercados Emergentes e Macroeconomia Global na Morgan Stanley International Management, autor de “Breakout Nations”
Por Jorge Nascimento Rodrigues
(c) JNR, 2013
O conceito de BRIC – acrónimo para Brasil, Rússia, Índia e China – foi inventado em 2001, antes da Grande Crise financeira, por Jim O’Neill, da Goldman Sachs. A primeira década do século XXI parecia ser um passeio triunfal do grupo desde a sua primeira reunião na Rússia em 2009 e dois anos depois juntaram ao clube a África do Sul e passaram a usar o acrónimo de BRICS. Em 2010, a China ultrapassou o Japão e chegou a segunda economia mundial. Mas os dois últimos anos trouxeram algum pessimismo para o grupo. O indiano Ruchir Sharma, da Morgan Stanley, chama a atenção para um novo grupo de economias emergentes a seguir com atenção e afirma que os BRIC nunca serão um bloco coeso no plano económico nem uma força geopolítica. Publicou em abril passado “Breakout Nations”. Sharma nasceu em Wellington, no estado de Tamil Nada, na Índia, e atualmente está baseado em Nova Iorque. Graduou-se na Escola de Comércio de Delhi.
A China, a atual segunda economia do mundo, vai seguir o mesmo caminho de declínio e crise ocorrido no Japão nos anos 1990? O “milagre” chinês caminha para o fim?
Todos os “milagres económicos”, desde o Japão, à Coreia do Sul ou a Taiwan, começaram a abrandar significativamente quando atingiram, no passado, o mesmo nível que a China tem hoje, com um rácio de urbanização de 50%. A China acabou de ultrapassar esse limiar e começou a abrandar o crescimento em virtude da “lei dos grandes números”. Começa a ser difícil crescer a partir de um ritmo elevado de crescimento.
Mas o “caminho japonês” é inevitável?
Ainda que a China partilhe com o Japão alguns pontos fracos, incluindo um problema de envelhecimento da população, não tem o mesmo problema básico do Japão nos anos 1990 – uma recusa em aceitar a realidade, um estado de negação da necessidade de reformas. A liderança chinesa entende claramente que a desaceleração é inevitável, e está a tentar gerir o abrandamento e não a inverte-lo artificialmente. O que reduz enormemente a probabilidade de um colapso da economia chinesa e o seu mergulho numa estagnação de longo prazo.
Há o risco de rebentarem em breve bolhas especulativas na China e no Brasil?
Não. Na frente económica, a China continua a abrandar gradualmente, e não catastroficamente. Quanto ao Brasil, já abrandou significativamente, para um crescimento à roda de 1% e provavelmente a longo prazo a taxa de crescimento andará nos 2 a 3%. No mercado de capitais, a China tem um desempenho muito fraco há mais de uma década e o Brasil desde há um ano e pouco. Estas bolsas não estão em níveis de bolha atualmente.
O Brasil continua a ser uma espécie de eterna futura potência, de promessa?
Não. Qualquer nação pode mover-se rapidamente no caminho das economias a despontarem. O Brasil, é verdade, está no nível de uma economia de rendimento médio, o que dificulta um crescimento tão rápido quanto o de outros que partem de um nível mais baixo. Também é certo que o Brasil tem algumas falhas óbvias, incluindo um nível de investimento baixo, que deixou as suas infraestruturas tão deficientes que mal podem satisfazer a procura. É, por isto, que o Brasil tem uma inflação acima de 5% com um crescimento que, no ano passado, foi de 1,5%. Em virtude do trauma com a hiperinflação, o governo tem desenvolvido um estado social que não consegue suportar, em vez de investir em escolas e estradas.
E está em vias de sucumbir à “doença holandesa” com toda a euforia em torno do petróleo a extrair do pré-sal?
A “doença holandesa” surge quando os preços das matérias-primas disparam, valorizando a moeda, o que, depois, começa a minar a competitividade das exportações que não se baseiam em matérias-primas, afetando sobretudo as exportações industriais. Mas essa doença evapora-se quando os preços caem, como começou a acontecer ultimamente. De qualquer modo, o Brasil tem de diversificar para além das matérias-primas, reduzindo a sua exposição a outro ataque da “doença holandesa”.
E a Índia continua a ser, também, uma promessa?
No meu livro – “Breakout Nations” – dou à Índia uma probabilidade de 50-50% em se tornar uma dessas nações a despontar, definidas como as que são capazes de crescer mais rápido do que os seus rivais no seu nível de rendimento per capita e de, claramente, baterem as expetativas. De momento, a economia indiana abrandou abruptamente, de uma taxa de crescimento perto de 9% para uma mais plausível de 6%, mas as expetativas, também, se reajustaram repentinamente. Ninguém, na Índia, fala mais de querer ser “a próxima China”, o que é uma mudança de estado de espírito assinalável.
Encara-a então com otimismo?
A Índia também tem um historial de reformas decente. É certo que as verdadeiras estrelas procedem às reformas necessárias sem parar, mesmo em tempos de vacas gordas. A Índia, apesar de tudo, está num segundo nível, o das economias eu avançam com reformas quando estão encostadas à parede. Enfrentando o risco de cortes na notação da dívida e outras ameaças, a Índia começou a abrir a sua economia, sobretudo recentemente, por exemplo, abrindo o sector do retalho às grandes cadeias internacionais.
No seu livro é muito crítico da Rússia. Porquê?
Ela permanece um dos piores exemplos. Os seus líderes agarram-se ao poder durante muito tempo, quando até os melhores perdem a pedalada ao fim de oito anos. A liderança russa está em pleno na sua segunda década de vida e sem fim à vista. O segundo aspeto é o domínio dos multimilionários. Não se deseja que uma oligarquia controle uma porção excessiva da riqueza nacional. Ela domina 20% do PIB, a mais alta percentagem do mundo. E não há sinais de mudança para melhor.

Os BRIC decidiram juntar ao clube a África do Sul para espanto do próprio Jim O’Neill, que inventou o acrónimo. O que é que se pode esperar desse país africano?
A África do Sul, segundo um estudo de investigação recente do Fundo Monetário Internacional tem uma das taxas potenciais de crescimento de longo prazo mais fracas no mundo emergente, apenas de 2%. Em larga medida, tal deriva do falhanço no processo de reformas pelos governos do ANC, que está agora perto da terceira década no poder. Muito do futuro depende se o descontentamento dos mineiros evoluirá para um desafio sério a uma situação que se tornou de monopólio do estado por um único partido.
O bloco dos BRICS vai desmoronar-se ou não?
Do meu ponto de vista, os BRICS nunca foram e nunca serão um bloco geopolítico e económico. Na realidade, nunca pertenceram ao mesmo acrónimo. O Brasil e a Rússia são exportadores de commodities, a China e a Índia são importadores. Há democracias e estados totalitários. Há países com baixa inflação e altas taxas de investimento, como a China, em contraste com países com uma dinâmica de inflação persistente e baixas taxas de investimento, como o Brasil. Como bloco comercial, a China, de facto, tem uma dinâmica de crescimento das trocas com os outros três, mas os outros três entre si não. É mais plausível que cada um destes países se afirme como líder regional do que cresçam como um bloco global.
Mas se os BRICS são um promessa frustrada, quais vão ser os próximos “milagres económicos”, segundo o seu livro sugestivamente intitulado “Breakout Nations”?
Vão ser estrelas inesperadas. Serão nações que não têm estado no centro do radar. Entre essas surpresas, um dos desenvolvimentos mais intrigantes parece-me ser o facto de que as próximas economias de dois biliões de dólares (de PIB) surgirão em grandes democracias muçulmanas – Indonésia e Turquia. O que espantará os que acham que o islamismo é uma cultura inerentemente retrógrada que não pode gerar sucessos económicos.
Destaques
“A liderança chinesa não está em estado de negação como a japonesa nos anos 1990”
“A oligarquia russa controla 20% do PIB do país, o nível mais alto do mundo”
“É mais plausível que cada um dos quatro BRIC se torne um líder regional, do que pensar que se tornarão um bloco global”
“As próximas economias de 2 biliões de dólares vão emergir de democracias muçulmanas. O Islão não é uma cultura inerentemente retrógrada”
As “economias a despontar”
Ruchir Sharma aposta em 9 economias que, em cada um dos seus níveis de PIB per capita, terão condições de superar as “médias” de crescimento do seu escalão.
# No escalão dos 20 a 25 mil dólares de PIB per capita, duas economias poderão exceder uma média de taxa de crescimento de 3% ao ano na próxima década: República Checa (membro da União Europeia) e Coreia do Sul.
# No escalão dos 10 a 15 mil dólares de PIB per capita, duas economias surgem, com probabilidade de exceder os 4 a 5% de crescimento: a Turquia, indiscutivelmente, e a Polónia (também membro da União Europeia).
# No escalão dos 5 a 10 mil dólares de PIB per capita, surge a Tailândia, como candidato isolado.
# Abaixo dos 5 mil dólares, a aposta vai sobretudo para a Indonésia, Nigéria, Filipinas e Sri Lanka.
Versão ampliada de entrevista originalmente publicada na revista portuguesa EXAME