& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

To whom does the 21st century belong?

FTE KHAR AHMED CHOWDHURY
THERE is an on-going debate in the global analytical community about who the 21st century belongs to. America is in "elegant decline," as Robert Kaplan would have us believe, and in this post-American period the great story is "the rise of the rest" as Fareed Zakaria has powerfully argued. Some would hold that this "dichotomy" of the world between America and the rest is too lopsided. Also, "the rest" requires a sharper definition.
Kishore Mahbubani suggests that for "the rest" read "Asia," in his book The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East. Almost a decade ago, Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn had predicted that the "centre" of the world would eventually "settle in Asia" in their book Thunder from the East: Portrait of a Rising Asia. So is Asia to be the new Rome to America's Greece?
Many Asians hope so. It imparts them a sense of pride that they have long longed for. They believe it will make up for their having missed out on the fillips to civilisation provided to the West by the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Industrial Revolution, partly on account of their lethargy and partly, and this is a view much prevalent among Asian intellectuals, due to the fact that for much of the period through those phenomena they were under colonial domination.
But this does not explain why Asia was
conquered so easily by the Europeans in the first place. How could a few hundred English soldiers under Lord Clive defeat Nawab Sirajuddowla of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa at Plassey in 1757, or how did the mighty Moghuls of Delhi succumb to the British onslaught a century later? When Lord Byron had thought that the Greeks deserved a "blush" and a "tear" because "all except their sun was set," the same was true of the Indian or the Chinese empires!
So there was something terribly wrong with Asia. It was that somewhere along the line Asians had lost the leadership in thoughts and ideas. Perhaps, having their works fall into European hands after the sacking of Constantinople in 1453, Asian minds ceased to stimulate the world, be it in the sciences, politics or later economics! And ideas rule the world, as the Italian statesman Guiseppe Mazzini had said in the nineteenth century.
Amartya Sen speaks of a misconception nourished by some that India is the land of uncritical faiths and unquestioned practices. He speaks of some cultural theorists, "allegedly highly sympathetic" (in his words), who are happy to demonstrate the strength and superiority of the faith-based and unreasoning culture of India and the East, in contrast to the "shallow rationalism" and scientific priorities of the West. Sen asserts that even if this line of argument was inspired by sympathy, it ends up suppressing large parts of the sub-
continent's intellectual heritage.
In The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History Culture and Identity he shows how pluralism and the dialogic tradition of the land support democracy, secularism and the pursuit of mathematics and science. Thus, Asia may be strong on spiritualism, but by no means confined to it. Indeed, it is in its ability to
cultivate the other virtues, and blend those with its indigenous strengths, that the future of Asia will lie.
Contemporary times provide opportunities for Asia to leapfrog many of the stages of progress it may have missed out on, and come to the dominant position it has aspired to for centuries. The current global recession and the accom-
panying dizzying economic successes of India and China have spurred Asian confidence, as did the earlier economic miracles of japan and East Asia. Asian spirits are currently buoyant." Politicians, acad^rhibs, and analysts the abuzz with the talk that the Asian Century is already here!
The truth is, not yet. Though there are many possibilities, but they do not make a probability. In a recent article in Foreign Policy magazine, Minxin Pei has urged calm. He has provided some statistics to make his point. He says per capita Asian GDP is $5,800 compared to $48,000 in America.
He further states that it will take the average Asian 77 years to equal the income of an average American. The Chinese and the Indians would need 47 and 123 years respectively. Professor Pranab Bardhan has expressed similar sentiments in China, India Superpower? Not so Fast!
The fact remains, however, that the world is indeed on the cusp of great changes, and many of them are emanating from Asia. It is not a question of cutthroat competition, but cooperation with America.
The flip side of America’s success story is that there is no salvation for those who cannot make the grade. The Asian tale must be one of growth with equity. This would be in consonance with the Asian value of the responsibility of those who govern. This is why the report in the Financial Times of June 25 that a study funded by the Asian Development Bank has found that India had 50 "dollar billionaires" controlling wealth equivalent to 20% of GDP and 80% of the stock market capitalisation was so disturbing!
There is a prevalent Asian value, irrespective of ideologies, that those
who rule should take care of those they rule. If there are gaps in their capability to do so then other private or civil agencies must be facilitated to undertake those tasks. That is the'JOrigin j of Pt^of^sor Mobanfme'c/ Yunus's "Grameen" movement involving microcredit in Bangladesh or the "Edhi Foundation" of Abdus Sattar Edhi in Pakistan, or Mother Teresa's Home in India. Confucianism also propagates this in East Asia.
In many of these countries the state seeks to "walk on two legs." They try to follow market principles on the one hand, and spread the social safety-net on the other. This could be Asia's great contribution to human civilisation, the simultaneous and comprehensive advance of the society and the individual, helping create harmony rather than friction.
In an essay entitled America's Edge: Power in a Networked Century in Foreign Affairs of January-February 2009, Anne-Marie Slaughter has turned all the above arguments on their heads, and has affirmed that this century will be an American one because of America's unparalleled "connectedness." But then, how long must this argument continue?
The time may have come to put the debate on claims and counter-claims as to which continent this century belongs at rest. We may conclude that the century and futurity must belong to the totality of humankind, drawing upon America's skills, Europe’s reason and Asia's spirituality, even though no region of the world can claim complete ownership to any one of these attributes singly, and also ensuring that no one, not even deep in the heartland of Africa, is left behind!
Dr.lftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury is a former Adviser on Foreign Affairs to the caretaker government
***The fact remains, however, that the world is indeed on the cusp of great changes, and many of them are emanating from Asia.; It is not a question of cutthroat competition,' but cooperation with America.****