Colonialism in the 21st century?

[Yusuf]

As a new world order slowly emerges in the next few decades and with natural resources depleting all over the world, I was wondering if towards the next half of this century we would see attempts made by the econo-military powers going back to colonization of resources rich but less powerful states.

We already see that these days its all worked out by alliances. The battle ground is Africa these days as it is the most under developed region and has unrecovered and un-discovered resources. India and China are doing every bit to influence matters there with friendship and alliances. But then the British too came to India to trade and then ruled the country.

So as the population in both india and China rising and resources depleting, but with a powerful economy to feed, will these two countries in particular look at what happened 400 years ago when europe started to colonize to gain more resources and do the same?

 

[ajtr]

When india is unable to control its backyard thesouth asia how can india be called a super power or for that matter a regional power,who can colonize other country.india has soft power but u need to wield hard power to protect it.As Us hollywood soft power but it has 12 super cruise aircraft carriers to protect its soft power.India has has hard power but its leaders were always afraid to weld it except for indira.I read a nice article by US diplomat WILLIAM H AVERY in financial express which im posting here.

How the next decade can be India’s

In the past decade India has proved its resilience. The nation survived two global recessions and multiple terrorist attacks with its secular democracy intact and its economy stronger than ever. Along the way it gained de facto admission to the club of nuclear weapon states and established itself as a future world power.

India’s task in the coming decade is to make this future a reality. For the world to accept India as a major power, it has to start acting like one, not just talking like one. Here are 10 things that should be on India’s to-do list for the next 10 years:

Quit NAM: The organisation’s membership is a who’s who of third rate powers. To be in NAM is a declaration of impotence. India has outgrown it, and should withdraw. The remaining members can then non-align themselves against India if they wish.

Forget the UN Security Council: Indians should be embarrassed at its government’s repeated requests for a permanent seat on the UNSC. It is a legacy institution comprised of the victors of a war that ended 65 years ago. Three of its five members are declining powers. India should look towards the 21st century and prepare itself for the new conflicts that will confer great power status.

Build a world-class navy: India has the fourth largest navy in the world—in terms of manpower. But wars are won by tonnage, not by headcount. In tonnage, India’s navy is currently seventh, behind France and at one half of China’s strength. India needs to be among the top three in navy: at par with China and behind only the US.

Complete the NPT Two-Step: It’s a nice dance move. Say the NPT is discriminatory and you will not sign it. Get an exemption to trade in nuclear technology anyway. Then, once you are a de facto nuclear weapon state, say you would like to be admitted to the NPT. It will be another triumph of nuclear cunning if India can pull it off.

Police the neighbourhood: India was traumatised by the IPKF experience but must get over it. Great powers do not let anyone mess with them in their neighbourhood. A young America declared in the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 that it would not tolerate any further European colonies in the Western Hemisphere. Britain sees as an act of aggression occupation of the low country ports of Holland or Belgium by another power. Russia fought a war in 2008 to keep Georgia from getting too chummy with NATO. So, why is India letting the Chinese build a port in Sri Lanka? India has to defend its perimeter or it will find itself vulnerable to more strategic-thinking adversaries.

Lock up natural resources: Here India needs to take a page from China’s playbook. From South America to Africa, China has been sealing deals for the minerals to feed its growing industrial base. India has to start to catch up, and quickly.

Start India’s own H-1B programme: It is time for India to become a net importer of talent. Smart employees worldwide will flock to India’s growth. If Mumbai is to become a global financial centre, it will have to have as many foreigners as Hong Kong or London.

Open up the higher education sector: Apart from infrastructure, education is India’s greatest barrier to faster, more inclusive economic growth. For higher education, many students have no choice but to go abroad for studies, and their parents’ money goes with them. Others can neither afford to go abroad nor get a place in India. This is an intolerable situation for a nation that values education and self-improvement. The only way to change it fast is with outside help. The government should pass the Foreign Education Providers Bill.

Sell Indian culture overseas: Global powers enhance their influence by exporting their popular culture to the world. The English and the French did it with literature; America has done it with film and television. India has a thriving English-language creative industry that is an untapped instrument of influence. The Indian government should devote more energy and taxpayer money to selling Indian culture overseas, from Bollywood to high literature. The Chinese are nowhere in this regard, having hardly encouraged artistic expression, much less in English. India has a real opportunity to step forward and define new global artistic motifs for Asia’s Century.

Find India’s own Teddy Roosevelt: A century ago, America had a thoroughly modern, young President unafraid to stake a claim to global power status. TR mediated an end to the Russo-Japanese War, dug the Panama Canal and showed off the US navy on a world tour. India needs its own TR for the 21st century. He or she will change the way the world sees India and the way India sees itself.

India’s restraint in the face of provocations over the past decade has earned it the world’s respect and paid economic dividends. To become a world power, India will have to continue to build its economic and military strength, flex its muscles and—where necessary—shed its blood. Nations become great powers by winning wars. There is no other way

 

[Yusuf]

I was hoping that this thread that I opened some time back would have got in some good thoughts. Unfortunately it has not. Come on guys, pour in.

 

[Rage]

It's quiet in here. Can you hear the jab roll?

...


In a sense, colonialism occurs in the modern era via globalization, innit? That sort of 'neo-colonialism' is used by post-colonial critics to refer to the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in nations which were former colonies, stripping them bare of their resources, while financially aggrandizing only a small section of their populace. That sort of targeted 'financial enlargement' helps keeps things in place, as it were, by ensuring that the material status, social elevation and accruing political/social power of those that become 'elites' remain inextricably and inexorably linked to them. Not a bad ploy, if external sector, corporate competition for resources were limited. But in a global environment, with rapidly expanding third-world economies like India and China, the logical progression to an alternative strategy for this in the backdrop of public discontent arising from the limited, selective aggrandizement of the neo-colonialist style resource exploitation, would be to develop large scale, public infrastructure projects in return. That is what China, to a large extent, and India, to a more limited extent, have been doing in Africa. They realize that the 'old' style of 'neo-colonial' exploitation simply won't work anymore. In the context of a number of Latin Am and Afrikan countries that have become 'democratic' over the last half century, and where leaders have begun to realize that indefinite, protracted exploitation of the masses breeds seething discontent of the kind that topples governments and makes the holding on to political power ever more difficult, and that political power does indeed, to a great deal, hinge on the publique, that seems a feasible strategy. The logical progression to an alternative for this strategy as the neo - neo colonialists consolidate power is, in my opinion, to breed local, vicious wars - sponsor one insurgent community against another, so that political regimes recrudesce to becoming dependent on their military suppliers, rather than on those that espouse meeting their economic needs. In this context, countries with higher technological capabilities in the military arena will dominate the race for natural resources, so long as they maintain their technological prowess, and the insurgent weapons with which they sponsor insurgent communities remain of a higher degree than those the latter section of countries, the neo -neo colonialists that advocate economic development and geo-economics, are willing to part with.


Within states, the kind of colonialism I believe we'll witness in the 21ist century is a sort of 'gentrification', where college-educated, urban 'elites' displace low-income, often longtime residents of cities or towns, both residentially, as also occupationally. 'Gentrification' will become a serious concern in most Northern states, as also those developing states where literacy rates do not keep pace with development, and where forceful measures of land removal are not used; it will have particular implications for India.