It was not the appointment of Dr Singh which initiated liberlaization process, rather it was India's 1990 economic meltdown, it's total bankruptcy and the demand from the IMF which forced her to reform her economy - IMF point-blank told India that the only way she was going to get any World Bank funds to bail her out, would be predicated on India liberalizing her economy - India had no choice but to accede to IMF's demands and initiate economic reforms, and just by coincidence, Dr Singh happened to be the Finance Minister this time. Fact is, had India's major trading partner, the Soviet Union, not collapsed and disintegrated, India would have still been following the same destructive socialist economic model with govt controlling the commanding heights of the economy, and the License and Permit Raj still running rampant, strangling and emasculating the economy and pauperizing the masses. So to Mr Dhotekar, I say 'Reforms' were voluntarily initiated - it was mandated by the World Bank as a precondtion for granting a desperate India a few measly billions loan to keep her bankrupt economy from total collapse and catastrophy.
RE:5 decisions???
by Pradip Parekh on Aug 15, 2007 10:53 PM Permalink
great observation. frankly, india has made all the wrong decisions throughtout its history of independence. the simple truth is india's luck turned. eg, hitler was the no. 1 reason for india's independence because he blew the british might to smithreens. india gained its economic freedom because the imf's hard squeeze when ussr was coming unravelled; economic liberalization was forced upon india and people were clearly scared as hell at what it might portend. about the only factor that gave india some confidence was the tremendous success of the nris in usa.
a country that starts out with a gandhi-imposed commie nehru for pm, a maulana for education minister never got it on the right track from day one, and never had a chance to get it right. so, it's luck, and time to admit god is hindu.
RE:5 decisions???
by ROMESH KUMAR on Aug 16, 2007 01:18 AM Permalink
Many many thanks Mr Parekh.It is much more than truth and reality that british were not going to set India free under pressure from either,be it armed struggle or unarmed struggle and their leaders respectively.Of course many people have made super and supreme sacrifices depending upon the circumstances which can neither be ignored nor undervalued.It definitely has made positive contribution.Hitler had broken the military might thereby opressive might followed by morale of british govt,british forces and british public as well.They had experienced and tasted death and destruction (like Uncle Sam did on and after 9/11).On the other hand a new world scenario had emerged.Now also Soviet monster was roaming freely at their court yard who had pushed Hitler back to his bunkers and ultimate destination.In other words this monster had rescued them from another monster,Hitler.In this scenario another monster Uncle Sam was already in race for superemacy in Europe and world.As such british monster was struggling looking here and there for her own survival as a nation.So they were left with no choice and option but to leave South Asia to her own fate which they did. JAI HIND.
Scenario after that is the story of three monsters,A,B & C. A & B helped C for one reason or another unwillingly as a policy matter.A succeeded in killing B with the help of C. Now C being foolish & spoiled child of both A & B went out of hands and challanged A. A-US B-USSR C-ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM. JAI HIND.
RE:5 decisions???
by Prof R K Gupta-India on Aug 15, 2007 10:49 PM Permalink
That is right.i just posted reply but it seems to have been taken off.It was Uruguy round,bankruptcy and washington consensus that made india head for so called half hearted reforms.WE were already sunk thanks to all these big experts and economists.Where were they before 1990? Only USA told us how to come out of mess like to many other countries.Wohi dubate hein wohi terna bhi sikhate hein.Hum toa bus haath paanv chalete hein.Dimag nahi.
