India and China as Emerging Superpowers in World Affairs

Defining the Superpower in International Relations

Some avid moviegoers or comic book readers are already familiar with the term "superpower." There are also a number of informed economists, political scientists, and trend forecasters who understand the term in a very different sense. This word is thrown around frequently in the press and media when referring to countries of distinctive power and influence — yet the threshold for that designation is rarely described or qualified. This prompts an important question: what is a superpower, and what makes a country one?

For the purposes of this paper, the focus is limited to the applicability of the term "superpower" with regard to two specific countries recently deemed potential superpowers by various experts and analysts around the world: India and China. The paper seeks to understand how such a transformation came about in each country, what achieving superpower status means for them domestically, and what their potential rise means for the wider world. As Doug Bandow has observed, "Globalization has been a force for good. China and India are its greatest success stories" (Bandow, 2011).

A country that is a superpower retains a great deal of power and influence across an array of areas and industries. Superpowers function within an international — and in the 21st century, increasingly global — system of economic and cultural interaction and integration. One hallmark of superpower status is the ability to project and protect a country's power on a worldwide scale. Superpowers exert their economic, industrial, cultural, and technological influence around the world in order to maintain that power and to protect the interests that sustain their dominant position.

Within the field of international relations, countries are commonly distinguished as small powers, great powers, or superpowers. Superpowers additionally have the ability to project their influence in multiple parts of the world simultaneously — as demonstrated by the United States, which often engages in multiple military actions at once while simultaneously exporting its culture through music, film, and food. The concept is also closely related to military power and history.

The term "superpower" is relatively young. Professionals in international relations have reached a consensus that it emerged into the lexicon following World War II. As a result of the events and outcome of that war, the United States was regarded as the first superpower nation on Earth. Though only several decades old, the concept has evolved from a somewhat obscure idea into a significant marker of a country's international reputation and success in the global market economy. These are reasons why it is essential to understand what a superpower is, what it means, and what the local and international implications of superpower status are.

Each of the two countries examined here is considered a potential superpower for reasons indigenous to its own circumstances, while also sharing characteristics that qualify both as emerging superpowers. Regardless of the label applied, India and China have already changed the economic, educational, technological, and social landscapes of their own countries and of the world at large. The paper's central contention is that if these countries continue on an upward trajectory of development in key areas affecting the global market economy, they will be regarded as world superpowers within several years to a few decades. Growing into a superpower is not a spontaneous process; it requires time and a convergence of favorable factors. A culmination of conditions and circumstances have set the stage for India and China to emerge as superpowers on par with the United States, the United Kingdom, the former Soviet Union, and Japan.

Population Dynamics and China's Economic Rise

The sizable populations of both China and India have worked in their favor in the pursuit of superpower status. In China's case, the movements of its population carry national and international implications that some experts have tracked and predicted for decades. Just as with other superpower industrial revolutions — and the cultural and economic revolutions that followed — the distribution of a country's rural population can be a significant measure of national strength.

As Jerry Harris observed in his analysis of emerging third-world powers: "The massive expansion of the Chinese economy is being driven by the huge movement of the rural population to the cities, plus an industrial revolution that is transforming China into the centre of world production. Eight hundred million people still live in rural China, but it is predicted that, over the next fifteen years, 250 million will move to urban centres. That is nearly equivalent to the population of the United States. The implications for building the infrastructure necessary to accommodate such a move over such a short period of time are almost incomprehensible" (Harris, 2005, p. 10).

Within a single country, a population equivalent to that of the first superpower will migrate into urban areas, fundamentally altering the nature of urban economics and industry for decades to come. A country's strength need not be measured solely by the number of soldiers it commands; the distribution of its population into productive industries can be an equally significant — or even greater — source of national power.

Labor, Outsourcing, and Foreign Investment

China is well known for its role in global outsourcing. Both China and India, once regarded as developing or "third world" nations, have become leaders in cost-effective labor. Critics have raised objections to outsourcing on behalf of both the countries doing the outsourcing and those receiving it. Nevertheless, these two nations — through different industries and methods — have made labor a highly viable commodity and created conditions in which outsourced foreign labor can benefit all parties involved.

China in particular has been at the forefront of attracting foreign direct investment through its accommodating business environment and the incentives it offers to international investors. As Harris notes: "To attract transnationals, the government offers cheap land, low taxes and, when necessary, seven day work weeks. But Chinese officials see this as part of a long-term strategy to higher-value and indigenous-based production. One example of higher-end work is Microsoft's research lab in Beijing, which employs 150 of the best programmers in China. The lab has already developed more than seventy technologies that are used in Microsoft products, and two of the lab's previous directors are now vice-presidents at Microsoft's headquarters in Seattle" (Harris, 2005, p. 14).

India's entry into the global economy has followed a different path. India's primary insertion comes through its rapid advances in information technology and pharmaceuticals. These sectors fit into a high-end strategy that has drawn significant international attention, particularly as India became the preferred destination for IT offshoring from the United States. As Bandow notes: "Where India shines is in its outstanding world-class education system in information technology and business. It is estimated that India's middle class has grown to 150 million people. Although currently the IT sector only employs 1 million workers, future growth projections predict a rapid rise. U.S. studies show that, within four years, IT outsourcing will be an industry worth U.S.$57 billion per year, employing 4 million people" (Bandow, 2011).

This model is the opposite of China's massive integration based on low-wage manufacturing. India's industrial base lags significantly behind China's, offering fewer opportunities for broad-based foreign direct investment. While India's factory wages are low, they remain above Chinese levels. Even so, both countries offer competitive labor costs: India's is somewhat cheaper within a narrower range of industries, while China's is the lowest overall and comes with more incentives that appeal to a wider range of investors.

Conclusion

A culmination of factors in conjunction with fortuitous circumstances have set the right conditions for India and China to emerge as superpowers on par with the United States, the United Kingdom, the former Soviet Union, and Japan. From population dynamics and urbanization to labor markets, foreign investment, technological innovation, and soft power, both countries have assembled the building blocks of global preeminence. The differences between them are real and significant — China's strength lies in low-cost manufacturing and large-scale infrastructure, while India's advantage resides in high-value IT services and education — yet both trajectories point in the same direction. If India and China continue on their current developmental paths, they will increasingly be regarded as world superpowers within the coming decades. The central challenge for each will be ensuring that the social conditions of their populations keep pace with their economic ambitions.

References

Badkar, Mamta. "RACE OF THE CENTURY: Is India or China the Next Economic Superpower?" Business Insider, 2011.

Bandow, Doug. "Is India an Economic Superpower in the Making?" Forbes, March 7, 2011.

Chin, Curtis S., and Jose B. Collazo. "Tracking China to its 'Superpower Moment.'" The Japan Times Online, 2012.

Harris, Jerry. "Emerging Third World Powers: China, India, and Brazil." Race & Class, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 7–27, 2005.

Hirwade, Mangala Anil, and D. Rajyalakshmi. "Open Access: India is Moving Towards Third World Superpower." 4th International Convention, Gulbarga. INFLIBNET Centre, Ahmedabad, 2006.