[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: National strategies

> "Cooperation as a strategic tool ... has been pioneered by Japanese
> firms. Licesing arrangemets, joint ventures, and technology-exchange
> agreements played a vital role in closig the post-war technology gap
> between Japan and the United States..."

Wasn't this MITI-led revival perfectly in line with American intentions, 
though? America had decided that a prosperous and stable Japan would 
make a great ally, and looked the other way even such practices were 
seen to be clearly anti-competitive. Today, when the equation has 
changed considerably, the US has no qualms about calling the Japanese 
system little more than "crony capitalism". Which in fact it is. A 
system where the government decides the winners either directly or 
through its arms runs the risk of falling behind in the competitive 
world. Such collusion must have contributed to the high death rate of 
Japanese banks these days.

Rather than promote any such cooperation, the government can do much 
better by remaining neutral to them. Businesses will find their own 
cooperative interests and pursue them. All the government has to do is 
stay away from blocking them, not necessarily swing the other way and 
take up arms on their behalf. Involvement is a natural pathway to power 
and further, to control. Let's leave the government out of things that 
are not its business, both literally and figuratively. 

I don't believe in government-led revival. It tends to be ultimately 
partisan and nepotistic. I would rather see unheralded Indians be able 
to lift themselves up with their own ideas than for the government to 
decide a priori who shall be entrusted with that onus in return for 
better assured profits. 

This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/