The intention of Mr Modi and his officials is clear: to ensure that China's savings glut can be turned to India's advantage. On paper, it looks like a match made in heaven: China has excess savings and infrastructure firms that are experienced in handling super-sized projects; India has an enormous infrastructure deficit. To top it all off, Japan has clearly been attempting to woo India with funds and investment, which means that the Chinese do not want to be left behind - thus, the promise of $100-billion investment, almost certainly calculated to grab the headlines as being three times Japan's promised involvement.
However, caution must be exercised. First of all, expectations of investment must be moderated by the understanding that only a fraction of promises translates into reality. Second, there is a larger strategic question to be kept in mind. Already, India has a neo-colonial relationship with China, one not so different from most African countries. Its enormous trade deficit with China - a quarter of India's total trade deficit - is caused mainly by manufactured goods. Manufactured goods from China are 11 per cent of India's total imports. Meanwhile, India exports practically nothing to China except raw materials - Indian iron ore helped China build up its steel industry in the 2000s. This is the very definition of the core-periphery economics that made up dependency theory. Whether India wants to enhance its economic dependence on a country with which it has a long and troubled border is a complicated strategic question, and should not be answered impulsively - one way or the other.
If anything, this should serve as a reminder of the importance of sweeping domestic reform. India today is 23 years into its reform process - the point China was at in 2001. Superficially, many indicators are similar, such as India's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, if adjusted for inflation, exports as a percentage of GDP, and domestic physical investment as a percentage of GDP. But the decade since 2001 for China was a period of take-off and explosive growth - fuelled, it must be noted, by internal factors. Today, India is streets behind a country that once was imagined to be a strategic rival. In order to match Chinese performance in the 2000s, which propelled it into the strategic stratosphere, India will need solid domestic reform that can encourage a domestic investment boom. Drumming up foreign investment should be a secondary concern.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
