There is something called a ‘vision horizon’: a leader’s ability to look deep into the future. A political analyst once did an interesting exercise of examining the great leaders of our age, from Napoleon to Kennedy, and putting a notional time-scale to their respective vision horizons. Thus, according to his estimates, the leader who had the farthest vision horizon of all was, somewhat controversially, Churchill, who was apparently able to look 60 years into the future. Lee Kuan Yew was not included, but one can safely assume that he’d have left Churchill a few years behind. He is, after all, the person about whom the canny Richard Nixon once said, that if he had lived in another time and place, he might have achieved the historical stature of a Gladstone or Disraeli.
‘The grand master’ is now 91, and rumours say he’s nearing the end of his days. The authors, a team of eminent strategy thinkers, took the opportunity of recording his views on the world, and the way it’s likely to take shape over the next quarter century. The result is this concise, but important book, that looks at the futures of China, the US and India, as well as important contemporary issues, from globalisation and democracy to Islamic extremism—all delivered in Lee’s characteristically incisive, and occasionally politically incorrect manner. Thus, for example: “India is not a real country. Instead, it is 32 separate nations that happen to be arrayed along the British rail line”. Only Lee could say something like that and get away with it.
Of all the themes of the book, the single most important, of course, is China, and its global equation with the United States. And who better to discuss that than Lee, who has been a mentor to Chinese leaders going back to Deng Xiao Ping, as well as to American presidents going back to Nixon. We can, he cautions us, expect to see China assert itself as the No. 1 power in Asia—and ultimately in the world. The Chinese have calculated that they need perhaps fifty years to build up their capabilities—economic, technological and military—and then make the ultimate transition from communism to the market system. Until then the dictum is, apparently, “Keep your head down, and smile for forty or fifty years”. But after that, perhaps circa 2060, the smile is likely to be switched off. China cannot forget its dominant historical position as the ‘Middle Kingdom’, to which lesser nations offered tribute, Lee explains, and a sense of reawakened destiny now drives them to reclaim that position.
Yet, China’s journey to pre-eminent superpowerdom is not necessarily a certainty, and there are significant stumbling blocks that might still trip it up. Lee suggests three potential obstacles. First, China’s great cultural and linguistic complexities which make it difficult to attract, and integrate, the global talent necessary to drive its competitive engines for the future. Second, the deep-rooted need for order and discipline hard-wired into Chinese society, which tends to inhibit a culture of creativity and potential for innovation. And third, the inevitable question of governance in the long term. Especially coming from the man whom Xi Jinping, China’s new leader, deferentially calls “our senior, who has our respect”, these are things we need to pay careful attention to.
The chapter devoted to India is not particularly flattering, but it deserves to be read without prejudice. To sum up his position, Lee believes that India squandered its opportunities in the 1960s, and is held back today by issues ranging from its political system to its social infrastructure. “Do not talk about India and China in the same breath,” he says, slightly disdainfully, going on to note that India can grow to be an important regional power, though it “does not pose such a challenge to international order as China”.
So what should India’s China strategy be? Any form of confrontation is obviously to be avoided. One option might be to prudently craft our own positioning relative to, but alternative to,
China’s own positioning. Another option might be to deftly reposition China, by capitalising on its inherent weaknesses, such as cultural complexity and lack of innovativeness: in their greatest problems could lie our greatest opportunities. We might even evolve some delicately balanced hybrid of the options above. But whatever the path, we’d do well to remember the Chinese dictum of “keep your head down, and smile for forty or fifty years”.
Apropos the review of Lee Kuan Yew’s book A Soothsayer in Singapore (Apr 8), the Indian identity is continuously weakened by the silence or latent bias of our national parties on regional issues, discrimination and disputes, or favouritism in budget/fund allocations. And all this for short-sighted political gains. It is this which has led to the rise of regional parties. Now a harmful ‘referendum resolution’ on Sri Lanka has been passed unanimously in the TN assembly. If this trend goes unchecked, India will fragment into pieces, ruled by thugs serving vested interests.
The Indian identity is continuously weakened by the all India parties by their silence or latent approval to the regional issues, discrimination & disputes and favouritism in budget/fund allocations- for their short-sighted selfish political interests.Late PM Indira Gandhi encouraged it. In turn it led to the growth of the regional parties and weakening of the all India parties. For example 'donating' kachchaththeevu to Srilanka , disregarding the unanimous opposition in TN , gave fresh life to the otherwise weakening separatist tendencies. Now a harmful referendum resolution for separation in Srilanka was passed unanimously in TN assembly. If this trend is unchecked, India will fragment into Africa like countries ruled by the thugs serving the vested interests in the world, including China over "over the next quarter century."
The U. S. was friendly to Singapore under the noted leader mentioned. It is also marked, that the citizens of Singapore voted Mr. Lee Kuan Yew to power, in democracy. Perhaps, the proximity of Singapore and Hong Kong helped Britain and that nation, when Hong Kong was a British protectorate. It seems, that the presence of city states like Hong Kong, and Singapore, made other such regions not required, in the proximity, and indeed, in Asia. Perhaps, China made her Special Economic Zones, keeping in mind the two cities.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT