sauravjha wrote:Before we get into The exact contours of the " its the economy .. stupid argument" I just want to say a few things. the thread itself is very topical .
so the debate from my side will no longer be on the need to test , but on
1. how debilitating the cons really are ,
2. how the so called cons may be turned into pros
3.and the extant geo-economic environment which actually gives us the latitude to test .
Before I get into detailed posts ... I have one observation to make . thus far I find some of us , myself included, compelled to continually answer a set of questions that keep changing form like Mahishasur . if those posing these questions are already *very clear* about the answer, i would request them to forgive me if I don't try to answer them from my perspective, in the course of this debate.
Fair post I don't have any issues with it. Look, I personally think we need to test at some point of time or the other.
However, the question is when is the right time?
Whenever that time is, Iâ€™m sure itâ€™s not in the next 10 years. The Indian economy will be at a particularly vulnerable point during this period. I'll repeat what I wrote in the previous version of the thread to explain why I think so.
The economy is in a far better shape than it was in 1998. However, the downside of that is the economy is much more integrated with the world economy today than it was in 1998.
The caveat is, it is not yet massively enough
engaged to ensure if a sanctions regime is put on us by say the US, they will hurt just as much as we would - I personally think China has already reached that particular inflexion point and hence the US treats them with kid gloves, despite Tibet.
Unfortunately there exists no econometric equation, which can predict exactly what the dollar figure is - for the GDP - for India to reach such an inflexion point. As a result we have to, much to the displeasure of some, work with notional numbers of what that figure could be. Using Chinaâ€™s example, I would hazard a guess that a $2.5- $3 trillion figure would be a pretty safe bet. Take this number for what its worth.
Look boss it's not just about a sanction regime, which denies, using Doc Shiv's example, aluminum for the LCA. It can be a far more insidious and harmful. As an example I would postulate that if a sanctions regime were in place then all the big-ticket acquisitions made by Indian firms, like Tata taking over Corrus, as one example, would not have taken place. Heck the Tata's would have been hard pressed to get the Nano on the road at the price point it is looking at present.
One could look at these examples and say, righteously, so what? We have to make sacrifices for our Honour and Dignity and for the security of Mother India. Which is absolutely true. You, me and I dare say everyone else who takes time to come to this forum would understand the need to do so.
However, how do you convince the aam janta about the need to go through pain? That's the big dilemma IMO.
From a sanctions regime, there may be small little pain points, each looking managable on their own. But taken together it could be enough to seriously derail economic growth.
We are already half crippled by the oil shock as youâ€™ve posted in the Economy thread. Can you imagine what a sanctions regime on top of that would entail? And less discount the fact that this UPA government is bad, corrupt etc. As Doc Shiv has said, letâ€™s take all that as a given.
The question is will the benefits from one test of 20 tests be worth the pain that it will entail if we undertook one in the next 10 years? That's the question being asked by the folks who don't think the "economy bullshit" argument is valid. And, finally, how do we get a buy in from a majority of Indians for this?
I for one am convinced that irrespective of which government comes to power in the next election we are not going to have any tests unless there is some major geopolitical event which forces a test by India.
JMT, so please take it for what itâ€™s worth.
: After seeing your other posts, I must also say that you also have to answer why you think the economy can absorb a sanctions regime that will inevitably follow a nuclear test. That question shouldn't be sidestepped either.