Listen as audio
” I claim that in losing the spinning wheel we lost our left lung. We are therefore suffering from galloping consumption. The restoration of the wheel arrests the progress of the fell disease.” – Mahatma Gandhi
Drawing the precedent from the landmark Swadeshi movement started by the father of the nation, provides eloquent importance of self made in national economy and nation building.
India’s typical development stories had been littered with near incursions and dependency upon developed nations for major import practices. Thus, taking all this chaos in consideration, India took a stepping stone to a major national programme ‘Make in India’ in 2014 to facilitate investment, faster innovation, enhance skill development and manufacturing infrastructure in the country.
This major revolution of the past is all set for its second shift to uplift our nation in three basic domains mainly self employment, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and a boost in the national economy. Through the idea of self made, the nation is all set to spin the thread of Swadeshi or Make in India.
A lot of prominent philosophers have given practical analysis and philosophies regarding the economic upheaval and reducing dependency upon imports through the Make in India programme. The one basic question arises is why is there a certain urgency for our nation to become independent.
The one fundamental argument that all economists propose is a ‘twin deficit hypothesis’ which means that a growing budget drives a widening trade deficit which simply implies that a country is importing more goods than exporting and however the government is spending more amount than the total generated revenue. This theory is more likely to fit in the Indian economy due to the ongoing Covid-19 crisis where we are looking at an economic devastation.
On the contrary a second issue that deserves immediate public attention is the nation’s dependence on Chinese products. According to the reports of the Ministry of External Affairs, 52% of the goods in India were imported from China in the past 4 years. The horrendous danger of this modelling scenario is that China earns nearly 70 billion US dollars per year from its Indian market whereas India is generating only a trivial amount of 17 billion US dollars from China per year.
Well these statistics become even more agonizing when we closely analyse the bilateral relations between India and China. The two countries share similarity of ideas on numerous fronts like World Trade Organization, International climate change talks and International Monetary Fund but the emerging developments had also led to a list of mutinies in the India-China relationship. For instance, stapled visa given by China to the visitor from Kashmir, stapled visa to the residents of Arunachal Pradesh which China consider it’s own territory, development of ports in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh to increase its cloud in Indian Ocean, China’s open military, financial and atomic support to Pakistan doesn’t go well with India.
Despite all these mutinies, China is the biggest trade partner with India which indirectly can be said that it drives a major portion of its GDP from Indian market.
Considering the diplomatic aspect of China, it has turned into a major international creditor to the underdeveloped and developing countries in past few years introducing a ‘Debt trap diplomatic strategy’ to intentionally extend excessive credit to another debtor country with the alleged intention of extracting economic or political concessions from the debtor country when it becomes unable to honor it’s debt obligations. These countries are namely- Djibouti, Kenya, Burma, Pakistan, Srilanka, Palau, Malaysia, Cambodia, Papua Guinea which are geographically situated close to the Indian ports so that Chinese government can easily use these ports to attack India during any unrest between the countries. Minor incursions along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) have been seen largely in the past.
Now the question arises how financial trading can lead to border disputes or a state of war between two nations. The answer is completely understandable that the money earned from India is invested in purchase of arms and ammunition to use in war against India itself.
If China’s role in international finance continues in the shadows, global risk assessments and country surveillance work will remain in danger. So, there comes a state of urgency of boycotting Chinese products realistically and the trade can be replaced with other countries for the time being, giving a symbol not of commercial war but of commercial peace and a revival of Indian economy. As said by Bapu-
“For every revolution of the wheel spins peace, goodwill and love. And with all that, in as much as the loss of it brought about India’s slavery, it’s voluntary revival with all its implications must mean India’s freedom.”