The Raise of China and India, Questions and Answers

Recently, and especially since the 1990s, a popular conception of the world is that the age of empires and superpowers is waning, rapidly being replaced by a kind of global community made up of interdependent states and deeply connected through economics and technology. In this view, the United States' role following the Cold War is one of almost benign preeminence, in which it seeks to spread liberal democracy through economic globalization, and, failing that, military intervention. Even then, however, this military intervention is framed as part of a globalizing process, rather than any kind of unilateral imperialist endeavor. However, examining the history of the United States since nearly its inception all the way up to today reveals that nothing could be farther from the truth. The United States is an empire in the truest sense of the word, expanding its control through military force with seemingly no end other than its own enrichment. The United States' misadventure in Iraq puts the lie to the notion that US economic and military action is geared towards any kind of global progression towards liberal democracy, and forces one to re-imagine the United States' role in contemporary global affairs by recognizing the way in which it has attempted to secure its own hegemony by crippling any potential threats.

At this point in time, the main actors in the international system are nation-states seeking an agenda of their own based on personal gain and national interest. Significantly, the most important actor is the United States, a liberal international economy, appointed its power after the interwar period becoming the dominant economy and in turn attained the position of hegemonic stability in the international system. The reason why the United States is dominating is imbedded in their intrinsic desire to continuously strive for their own national interest both political and economic. Further, there are other nature of actors that are not just nation-states, including non-states or transnational,

In Classical India and Classical China, the development of institutions and traditions were very different yet very similar in many ways. For instance, India and China both put women below men and considered merchants as a middle class. However, they differed in areas such as centralized government. Outside of the Mauryas and the Guptas, India was run by the religion-based caste system while China had a very centralized government, except for the Warring States period and the Three Kingdoms period. If you look closely, Classical China and Classical India are like opposites drawn in the same colours. They both socially stratified their people in ways dictated by their beliefs but while India made it impossible to move any way but down, China allowed movement in any direction through the pyramid of society if you could earn it. Furthermore, while China worshipped their ancestors and looked to learn from the past, India believed in reincarnation and looked to the future.

Both the authors agree that the west is most certainly the main superpower in the world today. There were arguments worldwide, that the cause for the poverty in communist and/or third-world countries was the result of the rise in Western prosperity and the West was therefore able to dictate the rules of the game. These factors, both in Totalitarian and Authoritarian states, began to bring China and Latin America down one by one. It could be seen that there was only one successful factor left on the world stage, Liberal Democracies.

India and China are two republics that have experienced very opposing political regimes throughout history. China has been fundamentally stable country with a lack of a distinct authority figure (Desai, 2003). Being a single party state China has been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party since the 5th National Congress held in 1927 (Wang, 2013). Correspondingly India, have always been a federal parliamentary democratic republic where the President of India elected is head of state and the Prime Minister elected is the head of government (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 2013). This

No One’s World begins by discussing the waning power of the West. Kupchan staes that the West is wearing due to their economies have been growing sluggishly, prolonged conflicts in the Middle East,

Because of Europe’s industrialization their relations with China, India, and Japan were all severely compromised. First, China had previously rejected all foreigners in order to protect their country from Western philosophy. However, Europe then invaded China in order to control their trade. This reinforced China’s hatred for foreigners and destroyed any trust China placed in Europe. Japan was very similar. Japan is a country of tradition and honor. They did not want to be influenced by Western thought, and previously rejected Europe. But just like China, Europe eventually invaded in order to control their trades. The end result was the same, Japan then despised the foreigners even more and all trust was destroyed. Last was India. India was a central point of the East Indies Trade, and because of that, England desired full control. In similar fashion to Japan and China, Britain overtook India in order to control their ports and goods. In the end, India lost all faith and trust in the English people and desired for their removal. All three countries, with the exact same story; industrialization destroyed relations with these countries all because the West desired more power.

Western civilization has had an enormous outsize impact on the wider world in the last two centuries, primarily through spreading western ideas and assumptions about society. The source of the capability of these western civilizations to impact other regions of the world comes from their political philosophies. The two political philosophies that have allowed western civilizations to have such an impact are Leninism and liberalism. Both of these political philosophies generate immense power for a nation, albeit liberalism generates power much slower than Leninism. It was these political philosophies that allowed Europe and the United States to develop into super powers capable of establishing dominance around the globe.

In an anarchical international order, the modern rising powers is very crucial in the security of states as it would create a bi-polar world and would undoubtedly pose a threat to smaller states around the world as they strive to maintain the balance of power. China is seen as the main power challenging the uni-polar world, however China seems to be more focused on economic power and might rather than military might due to their lack of an airforce that would be able to successfully challenge the US’s. If China does continue to rise and gain the power and momentum needed to be a great power on par with the US, then it is believed by realist Mearsheimer (2004) that the rise of China would not be peaceful and that they would engage in an intense security competition which would create a considerable potential for war. This fear of war would shift the balance of power therefore cause other states, especially those neighbouring China, to form alliances due to the anarchical international order.

At the time, these four countries only accounted for a fraction of global Gross National Product. It is believed that between 40 and 50 years from now, these nations may catch up to the OECD countries, countries which include the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and over a dozen others, in economic ability and performance. By means of standard of living, political agenda, and religious and cultural background, the BRICs represent four incredibly diverse countries. All, however, are marked by large economic growth potential and have caught the attention and dollars of international investors everywhere.

In the current anarchic world, The United States acts as the global hegemon. However, China’s recent rise to power has lead international relations experts, Ikenberry, Mearsheimer, Subramanian, and Friedberg, to predict an upcoming power shift in the international system. China’s increasing control over the Asia-Pacific region has threatened U.S. power. According to Waltz, the realism paradigm interprets the anarchic structure of the international community, as a constant power struggle. Although each country may be different, to survive, they must all strive for power. Under the liberalism paradigm, the system is still anarchical but cooperation may be achieved by shared norms, and aligned political and economical interests.

The BRIC a powerful force in the global environment but do they have the power to shift the center of gravity away from the traditional G6 and over to the BRIC? First it is imperative that we understand who and what the BRIC is and how they interact in the economy. Moreover, it is vital to discern how quickly the economy can be altered and the implications that that change has on the rest of the world. An economic growth can stimulate the entirety of a country or it can singularly affect a percentage of the population, depending on how government manages it. The government involvement can influence many things such as resources, demography and the population as well as conflicts with other countries.

International change takes place when great powers rise and fall and followed by the shift in the balance of power (Jackson and Sorensen, 2003).

BRICS also known as the Big five is a grouping acronym that refers to the countries of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa that are deemed to all be at a similar stage of newly advanced economic development over the next few decades Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa will become large, powerful players in the world economy. Regardless of their social, political, or environmental challenges, the BRICS will play an ever-increasing role in the world economy, China and India will remain the dominant pair of the five some thanks to their large and increasingly better-educated populations, their low-cost labour, and their increasing openness. The BRICS thesis posits that China and India will become the world's dominant

Throughout history, South Asia has struggled to protect its’ borders from both foreigners and their own states. India, especially, has been known for it’s long history of dealing with security issues which has weakened the state. Conflicts risen from affairs such as the Partition have caused civilian battles that India struggled to contain. Other regional conflicts such as the Kashmir conflict and Indo-Pakistani war has led to India’s involvement and struggle to protect their own borders and welfare of their people. India has been forced to deal with maintaining stability not only within their own state but between themselves and other states as well. Despite India’s strain to provide welfare and security for their people, superpowers such as the United States and China view it as a legitimate state and worth having a relationship with. The dynamic of India’s insecurity yet legitimacy as a global force has coined the country to be known as a “strong-weak” state. India has the ability to be seen as a dominating state not only internationally, but in South Asia as well if they were able to overcome their security issues. The multidimensional insecurity of India is the main reason the state is a strong-weak state.