63 Years After Independence, India Remains Home to World's Largest Population of Poor, Hungry and Illiterates

In today's Times of India piece titled "Our freedom was born with hunger, we're still not free", one of India's Green Revolution leaders Monkombu Sambasivan Swaminathan says, "Our freedom was born with hunger. It was born in the backdrop of the Bengal famine. If you read the newspapers dated August 15, 1947, one part was about freedom, the other was food shortage".



As India celebrates its 63rd independence anniversary today, it is very unfortunate that economically resurgent India still remains home to the world's largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate people. Tragically, hunger remains India's biggest problem, with an estimated 7000 Indians dying of hunger every single day. Over 200 million Indians will go to bed hungry tonight, as they do every night, according to Bhookh.com. Along with chronic hunger, deep poverty and high illiteracy also continue to blight the lives of hundreds of millions of Indians on a daily basis.





Source:  Where Are the Poor and Where Are the Poorest?

India ranks 66th on the 2008 Global Hunger Index of 88 countries while Pakistan is slightly better at 61 and Bangladesh slightly worse at 70. Though the problems of poverty and hunger in Pakistan are a bit less serious than in India, Pakistan also suffers from high illiteracy and low levels of human development that pose a serious threat to its future.



India has the dubious distinction of being among the top ten on two very different lists: It ranks at the top of the nations of the world with its 270 million illiterate adults, the largest in the world, as detailed by a just released UNESCO report on education; India also shows up at number four in military spending in terms of purchasing power parity, behind United States, China and Russia.

Not only is India the lowest among BRIC nations in terms of human development, India is also the only country among the top ten military spenders which, at 134 on a list of 182 nations, ranks near the bottom of the UNDP's human development rankings. Pakistan, at 141, ranks even lower than India.

India also fares badly on the 2009 World Hunger Index, ranking at 65 along with several sub-Saharan nations. Pakistan ranks at 58 on the same index.

Agriculture Value Added Per Capita (Source: World Bank)

A recent Oxford study on multi-dimensional poverty confirmed that Indians are far more deprived than Pakistanis and the poorest of the poor Africans. The study reveals that there are more "MPI poor" people in eight Indian states (421 million in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh , Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal) than in the 26 poorest African countries combined (410 million).



Developed at Oxford University, the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) goes beyond income poverty based on $1.25 or $2 a day income levels. It measures a range of "deprivations" at household levels, such as schooling, nutrition, and access to health, clean water, electricity and sanitation. According to Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) country briefings 2010, 55% of Indians and 51% of Pakistanis are poor.

Access to healhcare in South Asia, particularly due to the wide gender gap, presents a huge challenge, and it requires greater focus to ensure improvement in human resources. Though the life expectancy has increased to 66.2 years in Pakistan and 63.4 years in India, it is still low relative to the rest of the world. The infant mortality rate remains stubbornly high, particular in Pakistan, though it has come down down from 76 per 1000 live births in 2003 to 65 in 2009. With 320 mothers dying per 100,000 live births in Pakistan and 450 in India, the maternal mortality rate in South Asia is very high, according to UNICEF.

The health problems in India are compounded by serious lack of sanitation. According to a joint study conducted by the World Health Organization and UNICEF, 665 million Indians, or nearly two-thirds of them defecate in the open. While a mere 14 percent of people in rural areas of the country - that account for 65 percent of its 1.1 billion population - had access to toilets in 1990, the number had gone up to 28 percent in 2006. In comparison, 33 percent rural Pakistanis had access to toilets in 1990 and it went up to an impressive 58 percent in 2006, according to UNICEF officials.

In its issue earlier this year, the harsh reality of hunger and malnutrition in India was described by the Economist magazine as follows:

"India-wide, more than 43% of Indian children under five are malnourished, a third of the world’s total. Over 35% of Indians are illiterate and over 20m children out of school. For all its successes, including six decades of elections and a constitution that introduced the notion of equal rights to an inequitable society, India’s abiding failure is its inability to provide aid and economic opportunity to millions of its impoverished citizens."

The reality of grinding poverty in resurgent India was recently summed up well by a BBC commentator Soutik Biswas as follows:

A sobering thought to keep in mind though. Impressive growth figures are unlikely to stun the poor into mindless optimism about their future. India has long been used to illustrate how extensive poverty coexists with growth. It has a shabby record in pulling people out of poverty - in the last two decades the number of absolutely poor in India has declined by 17 percentage points compared to China, which brought down its absolutely poor by some 45 percentage points. The number of Indian billionaires rose from nine in 2004 to 40 in 2007, says Forbes magazine. That's higher than Japan which had 24, while France and Italy had 14 billionaires each. When one of the world's highest number of billionaires coexist with what one economist calls the world's "largest number of homeless, ill-fed illiterates", something is gravely wrong. This is what rankles many in this happy season of positive thinking.

As India and Pakistan celebrate their 63rd independence day, it is time for both major South Asian nations to reflect and act on the urgent need for careful balancing of their genuine defense requirements against the need to spend more to solve the very serious problems of food, education, health care and human resource development for securing a better future of their peoples.

Here's a video clip showing grinding poverty in resurgent India:



Here's a video clip of Indian environment minister Jairam Ramesh saying "if there was a Nobel Prize for dirt and filth, India would win it hands down":



Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Disaster Dampens Spirits on Pakistan's 63rd Independence Day
UNESCO Education For All Report 2010

India's Arms Build-up: Guns Versus Bread

South Asia Slipping in Human Development

World Hunger Index 2009

Challenges of 2010-2020 in South Asia

India and Pakistan Contrasted 2010

Food, Clothing and Shelter in India and Pakistan

Introduction to Defense Economics

India's Share of World's Poorest Jumped From 22% to 33% in 30 Years!

A billion people were lifted from abject poverty between 1980 and 2010. China accounts for nearly three quarters of these, or 680 million people brought out of misery, by reducing its extreme-poverty rate from 84% in 1980 to 10% now, according to a report in The Economist.  The report adds that with "poorer governance in India and Africa, the next two targets, means that China’s experience is unlikely to be swiftly replicated there".

Source: Where Are the Poor and Where Are the Poorest?

As China's share of the world's extreme poor (living below $1.25 per day per person level) has dramatically declined, India's share has significantly increased.  India now contributes 33% (up from 22 % in 1981). While the extreme poor in Sub-Saharan Africa represented only 11 percent of the world’s total in 1981, they now account for 34% of the world’s extreme poor, and China comes next contributing 13 percent (down from 43 percent in 1981), according to the World Bank report titled State of the Poor.

Pakistan's Share of World's Poor Equals its Share of World Population

The share of poverty in  South Asia region excluding India has slightly increased from 7% in 1981 to 9% now, according to the report.

The Economist offers a description of what extreme poverty means in the poor countries and how it compares with poverty in the developed world as follows:  Nobody in the developed world comes remotely close to the poverty level that $1.25 a day represents. America’s poverty line is $63 a day for a family of four. In the richer parts of the emerging world $4 a day is the poverty barrier. But poverty’s scourge is fiercest below $1.25 (the average of the 15 poorest countries’ own poverty lines, measured in 2005 dollars and adjusted for differences in purchasing power): people below that level live lives that are poor, nasty, brutish and short. They lack not just education, health care, proper clothing and shelter—which most people in most of the world take for granted—but even enough food for physical and mental health. Raising people above that level of wretchedness is not a sufficient ambition for a prosperous planet, but it is a necessary one.



How poor is India? An Oxford study found last year that India has more poor than the poor population of all of sub-Saharan Africa. The latest World Bank data shows that India's poverty rate of 27.5%, based on India's current poverty line of $1.03 per person per day, is more than 10 percentage points higher than Pakistan's 17.2%. Assam (urban), Punjab and Himachal Pradesh are the only three Indian states with similar or lower poverty rates than Pakistan's.




Chinese success can at least partially be attributed to its communist party's heavy handed actions to suppress political chaos on the streets and sustain rapid economic growth since 1980s. Tienanmen Square in Beijing was the scene of the communist government crackdown by the units of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) against mass students protests in 1989, an action that was widely condemned by the western world and the United Nations. Since the death of Chairman Mao and passing of the leadership to late Deng Xiaoping in 1980s, the Chinese communist party has pursued liberalizing the nation's economy without political liberalization, in the same way other East Asians did earlier.

The Chinese strategy has allowed the nation to pursue rapid industrialization with accelerated economic growth over the last two decades, while forcefully controlling the chaos on the streets, to lift a record number people out of poverty.

Unlike "autocratic" China, "democratic" India has failed to use a period of high economic growth to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, falling far short of China’s record in protecting its population from the ravages of chronic hunger, a United Nations officials has said.


Here's a video clip on grinding poverty in resurgent India:



Richest 300 people together have as much wealth as the bottom 3 billion people. On average, people in rich countries have 80 times more wealth than the people in the poor countries. Watch this video on extreme wealth inequality in the world today:



Related Links:

Haq's Musings

World Bank on Poverty Across India

Superpoor India's Superpower Delusions

Are India and Pakistan Failed States?

India Home to World's Largest Number of Poor, Hungry and Illiterate

India Leads the World in Open Defecation

India Tops in Illiteracy and Defense Spending

Indians Poorer than sub-Saharan Africans

Can Superpoor India Become a Superpower?

"India is superpoor, not superpower"
Sashi Tharoor

“It is still 80 percent nation and 50 percent democracy”
Ramachandra Guha

Source: Where Are the Poor and Where Are the Poorest?

Last year, Indian writer, diplomat and politician Sashi Tharoor said "India is superpoor, not superpower". This week, Indian historian Ramachandra Guha went a step further and suggested that "India can not and must not become a superpower". Guha added that “India should not try to be a dominant and powerful country, but a less discontented nation.”



How poor is India? An Oxford study found last year that India has more poor than the poor population of all of sub-Saharan Africa. The latest World Bank data shows that India's poverty rate of 27.5%, based on India's current poverty line of $1.03 per person per day, is more than 10 percentage points higher than Pakistan's 17.2%. Assam (urban), Punjab and Himachal Pradesh are the only three Indian states with similar or lower poverty rates than Pakistan's.



“A superpower is a political, economic and military giant that has global reach,” Tharoor said. “The US still holds that position. It can fight a war in East Asia or any other part of the world. But I can’t imagine China or India doing that.”



Given the many ethnic, regional, religious and caste fault lines running through the length and breadth of India, there have long been questions raised about India's identity as a nation. Speaking about it, the US South Asia expert Stephen Cohen of Brookings Institution said, " But there is no all-Indian Hindu identity—India is riven by caste and linguistic differences, and Aishwarya Rai and Sachin Tendulkar are more relevant rallying points for more Indians than any Hindu caste or sect, let alone the Sanskritized Hindi that is officially promulgated".

Acknowledging the reality of deep fault lines in Indian polity, Guha says: "Because of its size and diversity, because of the continuing poverty of many of its citizens, because it is (in historical terms) still a relatively young nation state, and because it remains the most recklessly ambitious experiment in history, the Republic of India was never going to have anything but a rocky ride.

Pakistan share of the world poor about the same as its share of the world population

"National unity and democratic consolidation were always going to be more difficult to achieve than in smaller, richer, more homogeneous and older countries."

Mr Guha argues that democracy and nationhood in India face the following major challenges:

1. India is home to some of the world's fiercest insurgencies which Indian military is attempting to put down in northeast, northwest and central India.

2. Religious fanaticism is "receding but by no means vanquished." A "sullen peace rather than an even-tempered tranquility" prevails in the country

3. There is increasing corrosion of public institutions. Political parties are becoming family businesses; the police and bureaucracy are heavily politicized; corruption is rampant and patronage trumps competence

4. Natural resources are rapidly degrading and depleting as population grows, causing severe problems for the rural poor.

5. There is growing economic disparity. One example: India's richest man, Mukesh Ambani, is worth more than $20bn, and his new home is a 27-storey high, 400,000 sq ft building in Mumbai, where 60% of the people live in subhuman conditions in overcrowded slums.



I think both Tharoor and Guha make a lot of sense. The sad reality is that India is home to the world's largest population of poor, hungry and illiterates, a country where nearly two-thirds of the people still practice open defecation. India really needs to focus on solving these basic domestic problems rather than trying to become a superpower through a massive arms buildup.

Here's a video of Ramachandra Guha on the subject:



Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Are India and Pakistan Failed States?

India Home to World's Largest Number of Poor, Hungry and Illiterate

India Leads the World in Open Defecation

India Tops in Illiteracy & Defense Spending

Indians Poorer than sub-Saharan Africans

South Asia's Progress Lags in Meeting UN Millennium Development Goals

In year 2000, leaders of rich and poor nations pledged to build a better world by 2015. Among their key goals now called Millennium Development Goals: halving extreme poverty and hunger from 1990 levels, reducing by two-thirds the child-mortality rate and slashing maternal mortality by three-quarters and achieving universal primary education.

The good news is that the share of people living on less than $1.25 a day seems on track to meet the goal of halving the extreme poverty rate. However, the bulk of those gains have occurred in China and other East Asian countries. In fact, East Asia, Southeast Asia and North Africa are all on track to achieve almost all of the MDGs by 2015, but South Asia and the rest of the developing world have made insufficient progress so far, according to the current assessment by UN agencies.



The three-day summit to press world leaders to meet U.N. MDGs by significantly reducing poverty by 2015 concluded Wednesday with new financial pledges from countries but no guarantee that there will be enough money and political will to meet the targets. With many countries under financial stress from the effects of the global economic crisis as well as rising food and energy prices, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has asked member nations not to abandon the 1 billion people living on less than $1.25 a day. While the MDG goals encompass a variety of areas including education, health and gender parity, the first and the most important of these goals is to reduce poverty

With South Asia as the region with the largest share of the one billion global poor, the world will not meet its targets unless there is much greater focus and strong commitment to meet MDG goals in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. In fact, even South Asia has a better chance of meeting the poverty and hunger reduction goals excluding India. Let's discuss the status of South Asian nations to assess where they are and what needs to be done.



India alone has the world's largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate people living within its borders. A new multi-dimensional measure of poverty confirms that there is grinding poverty in resurgent India. It highlights the fact that just eight Indian states account for more poor people than the 26 poorest African countries combined, according to media reports. The Indian states, including Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, have 421 million "poor" people, compared to 410 million poor in the poorest African countries.

OPHI 2010 country briefings on India and Pakistan contain the following comparisons of multi-dimensional (MPI) and income poverty figures:

India
MPI= 55%,Under$1.25=42%,Under$2=76%,India_BPL=29%

Pakistan
MPI=51%,Under$1.25=23%,Under$2=60%,Pakistan_BPL=33%

Lesotho MPI=48%,Under$1.25=43%,Under$2=62%,Lesotho_BPL=68%

China
MPI=12%,Under$1.25=16%,Under$2=36%,China_BPL=3%

Among other South Asian nations, MPI index measures poverty in Bangladesh at 58 per cent and 65 per cent in Nepal.

On poverty in Pakistan, World Bank economist Sanket Mohapatra has said in a recent post that remittances by overseas Pakistanis have played a significant role in Pakistan's economic improvement. Not only have such remittances contributed to significant poverty reduction in Pakistan "by an impressive 17.3 percentage points between 2001 and 2008 (from 34.5 percent in 2001-02 to 17.2 percent in 2007-08)", but "continued strong growth in worker’s remittances in the past few years has also contributed to improvements in the external current account balance” and “have facilitated improvement in the country’s external position”, according to a World Bank report released on July 30, 2010.

There are now fears, however, that some of the gains made in poverty reduction have reversed due to widespread devastation in massive floods and Pakistan's economic woes since 2008 for which the poverty rate of 17% was reported by the World Bank. Thousands of schools and clinics have been destroyed in the recent deluge, setting back Pakistan's efforts toward meeting health and education related millennium development goals by 2015.

In addition to lagging in poverty reduction, South Asians are also doing poorly in terms of hunger and health indicators.

According to a recently-released FAO report's highlights as published in The Guardian, there are 847.5 million undernourished people in the world. India tops the list with 237.7 million, followed by China with 130.4 million, Pakistan 43.4 million, Democratic Republic of Congo 41.9 million, Bangladesh 41.7 million, Ethiopia 31.6 million and Indonesia 29.9 million.

A recent report by World Health Organization (WHO) claims that India accounts for most maternal deaths in the world, with at least 63,000 such deaths taking place in 2008 alone. In fact, India fared worse than even Nigeria (50,000 maternal deaths in 2008), Congo (19,000), Afghanistan (18,000), Ethiopia (14,000), Pakistan (14,000), Tanzania (14,000), Bangladesh (12,000), Indonesia (10,000), Sudan (9,700) and Kenya (7,900). An estimated 65% of maternal deaths globally occurred in these 11 countries in 2008, with India contributing the most.

As South Asians lurch toward the 2015 deadline for meeting the MDG goals, it is important to recognize their governments' role and the need for help from rich donor nations to significantly increase spending on human development for poverty reduction. However, the South Asian governments alone can not do it. The private sector organizations, NGOs and civil society have to come forward to make their contribution toward meeting the important MDG goals to reduce poverty and hunger and improve health and literacy.

In Pakistan's case in particular, the overseas Pakistanis and Pakistan's middle class need to step forward to do their part in rebuilding the shattered lives of millions of their poor fellow citizens affected by the recent floods.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

MDGs in Pakistani Village

Explore the World--Gapminder.org

UN Millennium Development Goals Report 2010

India Poorer Than Africa

India is Home to the World's Largest Population of Poor, Hungry and Illiterate People

Can Global Pakistanis Invest $10 billion in Reconstruction?

India's War Budget to Be World's 3rd Biggest Despite High Poverty

In 2016, India surpassed Saudi Arabia and Russia to claim the 4th spot among the top five defense spenders globally for the first time, according to Jane's Defense.  India, a country with 33% of the world's poor, is projected to surpass the United Kingdom to rise to the 3rd spot for defense spending by 2018.

Sources: FT/IHS Jane's (Defense Budgets) and World Bank (Poverty)

India's military spending has grown rapidly from $38.17 billion in 2010 to $50.7 billion in 2016. It is projected to rise further to $56.5 billion in 2018 and $64.07 billion in 2020, according to Jane's.  For comparison, India's south Asian neighbor Pakistan's defense budget for 2016 is only $8 billion.

India's rapid rise to the list of world's top defense spenders stands in sharp contrast to the reality that it remains home to the world's largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate citizens. India also leads the world for lack of hygiene, disease burdens and open defecation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi's rule has seen dramatic growth of wealth inequality in India. Top 1% of Indians now own 58.4% of India's wealth, up from 49% in 2014 when Mr. Modi was elected Prime Minister, according to Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2016.

Median wealth data compiled by Credit Suisse for 2016 shows that average Pakistani adult is 20% richer than an average Indian adult and the median wealth of a Pakistani adult is 120% higher than that of his or her Indian counterpart, according to Credit Suisse Wealth Report 2016. Average household wealth in Pakistan has grown 2.1% while it has declined 0.8% in India since the end of last year.

CS Wealth Report 2016 indicates that 50% of Pakistanis own more than $1,180 per adult which is 120% more than the $608 per adult owned by 50% of Indians.

The Credit-Suisse report says that the richest 1% of Indians own 58.4% of India's wealth, second only to Russia's at 74.5%. That makes India the 2nd biggest oligarchy in the world.

The CS wealth data, particularly the median wealth figures,  clearly show that Pakistan has much lower levels of inequality than India.

Share of World's Poor Population By Countries  Source: Our World in Data

Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI)'s MPI, multi-dimensional poverty index, brings together 10 indicators, with equal weighting for education, health and living standards. In South Asia region, Afghanistan has the highest level of destitution at 38%, according to OPHI's MPI index. This is followed by India at 28.5%. Bangladesh (17.2%) and Pakistan (20.7%) have much lower levels.

Rapid growth in India's defense expenditures conveys Prime Minister Modi's priorities. It seems that he believes the way for India to achieve great power status is through building a massive military regardless of the deep deprivations of the Indian people.

Mr. Modi's massive military buildup poses a serious threat to India's neighbors, particularly Pakistan, a much smaller country which was invaded and split in two by the Indian military in 1971.  The Indian invasion resulted in the creation of Bangladesh.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2016

India Massive Military Buildup

Modi's Israel Envy

India Home to World's Largest Population of Poor, Hungry & Illiterates

India Leads the World in Open Defecation

MPI Captures Depth of Deprivation in India

Slumdog Inspires India's "Big Switch" TV Show

The 2008 release of the Academy award winning Slumdog Millionaire movie showing extreme poverty in India's financial capital was met by expressions of anger and embarrassment by the Indian elite.



Decried by many in the Indian media as "racist poverty porn" and condemned by Bollywood superstar Amitabh Bachan in his blog for showing India as "a third world dirty under belly developing nation (sic)", the movie Slumdog Millionaire was greeted by howls of protests in India. But it received wide acclaim in the West.



With the Indian reality TV series "Big Switch" focusing on poverty, it now appears that India's entertainment moguls see an opportunity in what has been called "poverty porn" to make big bucks. The first season began airing in October, 2009 and ended in February, 2010. The run was a big success with nearly 26 million viewers tuning in every week.

The show brings rich Indians to live with poor slum dwellers for two to three weeks, though it stretches "reality" by putting them in a dormitory specially built near shanties for the show, while cameras roll. "When you bring people from two clashing worlds together, it makes for great television," says UTV Bindaas chief executive, Zarina Mehta, as quoted by the Wall Street Journal. The show marks a new direction for Indian TV, which in the past has steered clear of plots that focus on the poor in India. "Even if you have a driver as a main character, he always turns out later to be a prince," says media critic Parsa Venkateshwar Rao, who writes for the newspaper DNA.

Here are some excerpts from the Wall Street Journal story on "Big Switch":

Ms. Mehta, the TV executive, recalls a scene she will never forget involving Siddhartha Khanna, 25, heir to a real-estate empire who admits he leaves his clothes where he drops them and has never cleared up a cup of tea. One of Mr. Khanna's tasks was to clean up cow dung with his bare hands, a chore he tackled without complaint. The points he earned -- which translated into 200,000 rupees ($4,350) -- would go toward helping his slum partner, Samir Pagare, set up an event-management company.

Siddhartha Khanna, heir to a real-estate empire, won the 'Big Switch' contest by doing such things as cleaning up cow dung with his hands.

"I did it because I wanted to help Samir, to give him hope. I want this program to build bridges, to make young Indians realize they can do a lot to help the poor realize their dreams," says Mr. Khanna, who went on to win the contest for his partner.

In India, the rich and poor rarely cross paths. More than 80% of people live on 20 rupees a day (43 U.S. cents) or less. Of the country's 1.17 billion population, less than 1% earns more than 85,000 rupees ($1,850) a month. On "Big Switch," many of the rich participants earn more than that. And some of the highest earners among the slum dwellers pulled in about 5,000 to 7,000 rupees ($109 to $152 a month).

Slum dweller Abhishek Kushwah, 24, wants to be a chef. He grew up in Mumbai's Dharavi, India's largest slum, in one room with his parents and two brothers. They share a single toilet with 60 families. Says Mr. Kushwah. "I'd thought the super rich were lazy and selfish but my partner put in a lot of effort to help me."

On the first day of shooting last October on the "Big Switch" set, the two sides viewed one another warily. Their first impressions were revealing. Most of the slum dwellers were overwhelmed at simply being addressed politely.

"I never dreamed that the rich could be so nice," says Ms. Gaekwad.

The second reaction was shock. "Dreamer" Neelam Dumbre, 18, gasped when she heard her rich partner, Bindi Mehta, a researcher with a television news channel, talk about her closets full of outfits that cost 40,000 rupees (about $870) each. Another slum dweller was speechless when her rich counterpart showed her the 110 pairs of shoes she'd brought for the duration of the show. And then there was Sunny Sara, a 28-year-old nightclub owner in Mumbai, who unpacked 60 T-shirts. "I had no idea the rich were so rich," says Ms. Dumbre.

"Slumdog Millionaire" inspired the creators of "Big Switch," but given the controversy that erupted in India over its graphic depiction of poverty, UTV Bindaas channel head Heather Gupta, a British national who moved to Mumbai six years ago, was determined to avoid any hint of "condescension or using the poor participants as circus freaks."

"We're not blaming the rich for anything, but we want to jolt them into paying some attention to poverty," says Ms. Gupta. It is very easy in India, she adds, to become inured to the plight of the poor.

Model and budding actor Adam Bedi, 26, says he was filled with admiration for the resilience, drive and resourcefulness of the slum dwellers. "They just get on with their lives without moaning about everything they haven't got," he says. "They really impressed me."

Ms. Suri, the former beauty queen, described the experience as humbling. "These conditions are a daily reality for millions and yet, in their struggle to survive, they manage to be cheerful and dignified."

The chasm between the two sides reopened on the last day of shooting in early December. The rich kids were impatient to get home, desperate for a hot bath and good food. The poor dragged their feet; the dormitory, bare as it was, was more spacious than any of the slums they had lived in. As everyone packed, declarations of undying friendship were made amid hugs, displays of genuine affection and exchanging of numbers.

Two weeks later, back in their respective milieus, many of the participants say they talk to one another on the phone occasionally. But once the common link of being on the show has gone, what connection will remain, and for how long?

Ms. Gaekwad has no illusions. "On the show the rich were great. But if I walk out on the road now and try to speak to a rich person, they won't respond," she says.

I think the popularity of reality TV shows depicting Indian poverty is a sign of a maturing society that recognizes the depth and breadth of extreme deprivation in economically resurgent India. And I hope this recognition will spur a more serious effort to alleviate the suffering of the world's largest population of poor, hungry and illiterate people.

Related Links:

Mumbai's Slumdog Millionaire

Poverty Tours in India, Brazil and South Africa

South Asia's War on Hunger Takes Back Seat

British TV Accused of Making "Poverty Porn"

Orangi is Not Dharavi

Bollywood and Hollywood Mix Up Combos

Grinding Poverty in Resurgent India

Slumdog Is No Hit in India

Pakistani Children's Plight

UNESCO Education For All Report 2010

India's Arms Build-up: Guns Versus Bread

South Asia Slipping in Human Development

World Hunger Index 2009

Challenges of 2010-2020 in South Asia

India and Pakistan Contrasted 2010

Food, Clothing and Shelter in India and Pakistan

Introduction to Defense Economics

Border Skirmishes Mar 67th Independence Day Celebrations in India and Pakistan

India and Pakistan are preparing to observe their 67th Independence Anniversary amid growing tensions at the Line of Control (LoC) in the disputed Kashmir region. The current dangerous escalation between two nuclear-armed South Asian neighbors is a reminder of the 66-year old conflict rooted in continuing denial of basic rights to the people of Indian-held Kashmir.

Indian occupied Kashmir is described by the Guardian newspaper as "the biggest, bloodiest and also the most obscure military occupation in the world." The paper adds: "With more than 80,000 people dead in an anti-India insurgency backed by Pakistan, the killings fields of Kashmir dwarf those of Palestine and Tibet. In addition to the everyday regime of arbitrary arrests, curfews, raids, and checkpoints enforced by nearly 700,000 Indian soldiers, the valley's 4 million Muslims are exposed to extra-judicial execution, rape and torture, with such barbaric variations as live electric wires inserted into penises".

Instead of acknowledging the reality of the world's most brutal occupation, the Indian government and media are engaging in whipping up anti-Pakistan hysteria to divert attention from it by periodically sparking border incidents with Pakistan.  There have also been violent protests orchestrated by Indian politicians outside Pakistani High Commission building in New Delhi. Such tactics raise the fears of escalation and obscure the core issue of Kashmir which underlies the tensions.

Pakistan's Women Rangers on Duty at Wagah Border

The rising Kashmir tensions and Pakistan-bashing help Indian politicians take the focus away from the daily indignities suffered by the ordinary Indians:

1. India as home to the world's largest population of poor hungry and illiterate people.

2. Multiple fierce insurgencies in North East, North West and Central India.

3. India's growing twin deficits,  falling rupee and shrinking GDP in USD terms. At current exchange rate, India's GDP is down to $1.66 trillion, more than $200 billion less than it was in Fiscal 2011-12.

4. India leading the world in open defecation.

5. Over 200,000 Indian farmers' suicides in the last ten years.

6. Tens of millions of  missing daughters in India.

7. India's high disease burdens and high rates of premature deaths.

Tensions initiated by India to divert attention from its problems also take Pakistan's focus away from its most pressing issues of domestic terrorism, economic crisis and energy shortages.

The result of it is that the ordinary people of the South Asian twins bear the brunt of the long festering problems which get in the way of improving their daily lives. As the two nations celebrate their Independence Day, it's time for their leaders to assess how much damage the continuing confrontation has done to both and resolve to end this conflict through sincere and sustained dialogue.


66 Years of Pakistan's Independence; Standoff in Islamabad from WBT TV on Vimeo.

Here's a video by Pervez Hoodbhoy putting Kashmir in context:


Related Links:

Haq's Musings

India Home to World's Largest Population of Poor, Hungry and Illiterates

India Leads the World in Open Defecation

Farmers' Suicides in India

Are India and Pakistan Failed States?

Please Don't Forget Terror Victims

India's Shrinking GDP

Disease Burdens and Premature Deaths in South Asia

Indian Government and Media Whipping Up Anti-Pakistan Hysteria

Kashmir in Context

India- The World's Biggest Oligarchy?

Is India an oligarchy controlled by its 55 recently-minted billionaires whose wealth equals one-sixth of their country's GDP?

The answer to this question came when, as part of India's 2G scandal revelations, the Billionaire businessman Mukesh Ambani was quoted as bragging that the ruling Congress Party is "Apni Dukan" (our shop), implying that he owns the ruling party. The scandal also produced evidence of collusion of India's corporate-owned mainstream media in their deliberate attempts to impose a blackout on the whole affair until it was finally broken by the relatively obscure Open magazine.



Here's an excerpt from today's New York Times story that captures the essence of crony capitalism and the rise of Indian oligarchy as being among the world's largest:

"India’s billionaires control a considerably larger share of the national wealth than do the superrich in bigger economies like those of Germany, Britain and Japan. Among the Indian billionaires included on the most recent Forbes rich list, a majority have derived their wealth from land, natural resources or government contracts and licenses, all areas that require support from politicians."

Among India's powerful billionaires, the New York Times story particularly features Gautam Adani whose cozy relationship with Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has made him the tenth richest man in India. It says that "Mr. Adani has benefited from various governmental approvals and also bought coastal land from the Gujarat government at very low prices — in one instance paying as little as $540 an acre. Once he completed infrastructure, Mr. Adani sold land at a handsome profit to corporations locating inside the economic zone, including one parcel to Indian Oil Corporation, a state-owned firm, for $54,000 an acre."

The New York Times compares India's new billionaires with America's robber barons during the Gilded Age, a period of rapid economic growth which preceded the deep depression of 1893-1897.

The extraordinary power and influence of India's super rich has played out to the detriment of ordinary Indians who make up the world's largest population of poor, hungry, illiterate and sick people. It poses a serious challenge to India's democracy, often claimed as the world's largest, to meet the very basic needs of its people in whose name the rulers supposedly govern the country. It also raises the specter of significant social strife which could spark a bloody revolution shaking the Indian society to its core.

Back in 1988, Pakistani economist Dr. Mahbub ul Haq said that "our system has all the worst features of oligarchy and democracy put together." It now appears that India's system today is not much better than Pakistan's which has less inequality between the rich and the poor.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

India's 2G Scandal

Bloody Revolution in India?

Is There a Threat of Oligarchy in India?

Political Patronage in Pakistan

India at Davos 2011: Story of Corruption and Governance Deficit

Challenges to Indian Democracy

India After 63 Years of Independence

Asian Tiger Dictators Brought Prosperity; Democracy Followed

Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea  experienced a dramatic rise under authoritarian regimes from 1960s through 1990s. The dictators who led these states also showed the way to fellow Asian dictators in Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and China who also industrialized and prospered using the same formula that rejected the Washington Consensus of democracy and free markets as the basis for development of all nations.

Per Capita GDP (Constant 2000 US$) Source: World Bank

East and Southeast Asia:

The Asian Tigers have managed their massive growth mainly through export-driven economies that catered to the industrialized West. Each of them has built huge trade surpluses to fund their growth. These countries have invested in  improving education and training to build significant human capital in a couple of decades.

The improved productivity of the workforce, coupled with relatively low wages in Asia's developing economies, have resulted in enormous foreign investments. The large amount of foreign capital has allowed for massive growth. Their export-driven industry has spawned finance and service based industries that we now see, allowing the Tigers to maintain their high GDP. With rapid economic growth and human development, each has built a large middle class, paving the way for democracy to take root. As a result, dictatorships have given way to democracy in recent decades in most of these nations.

South Asia's Performance:

South Asia has been a laggard in economic development when compared with countries in East Asia and South East Asia. No South Asian nation has seen comparable growth in human and economic development. China, a country of 1.4 billion people run by one-party system, is far ahead of India, an equally large country run as a multi-party parliamentary democracy.

Source: Where Are the Poor and Where Are the Poorest?

A billion people were lifted from abject poverty between 1980 and 2010. China accounts for nearly three quarters of these, or 680 million people brought out of misery, by reducing its extreme-poverty rate from 84% in 1980 to 10% now, according to a report in The Economist.  The report adds that with "poorer governance in India and Africa, the next two targets, means that China’s experience is unlikely to be swiftly replicated there".

India: 

As China's share of the world's extreme poor (living below $1.25 per day per person level) has dramatically declined, India's share has significantly increased.  India now contributes 33% (up from 22 % in 1981). While the extreme poor in Sub-Saharan Africa represented only 11 percent of the world’s total in 1981, they now account for 34% of the world’s extreme poor, and China comes next contributing 13 percent (down from 43 percent in 1981), according to the World Bank report titled State of the Poor.

The share of poverty in  South Asia region excluding India has slightly increased from 7% in 1981 to 9% now, according to the report. India now has the world's largest share of the world's poor, hungry, illiterate and sick who still lack access to very basic sanitation.

In a recent book "Street Smarts", a hedge fund Manager Jim Rogers makes some important points to explain how East Asians have succeeded in rapidly developing while others have failed:

 "Many Asians say that the Asian Way is first to open your economy, to bring prosperity to your country, and then, only after that, to open up your political system. They say that the reason the Russians failed is that did it the other way around. Russia opened up its political system in the absence of a sound economy, everybody bitched and complained, and chaos inevitably ensued. As an example of the Asian path to political openness, they point to South Korea and Taiwan, both of which were once vicious dictatorships supported by the United States. Japan was at one time a one-party state supported by the US military. Singapore achieved its current status under one-party, authoritarian rule. All these countries have since become more prosperous and more open. 

Plato, in The Republic, says that the way societies evolve is by going from dictatorship to oligarchy to democracy to chaos and back to dictatorship. It has a certain logic, and Plato was a very smart guy. I do not know if the Asians ever read The Republic, but the Asian way seems to suggest that Plato knew whereof he spoke." Not only is the Asian model different from that of the Soviets, it stands China in marked contrast to those thirty-year dictatorships previously mentioned. Chinese leaders have put a high premium upon changing the country's economy, presumably to seek prosperity for the 1.3 people who live there." 

"And yet,in 1947, when it achieved independence, India was one of the more successful countries in the world, a democratic country. But despite democracy, or maybe because of it, India has never lived up to its potential. China was a shambles as recently as 1980. India was far ahead of it. Bt since then China has left India, literally in the dust....As China rises, India continues to decline relatively. Its debt-to-GDP ratio is now 90 percent, making a strong growth rate virtually impossible."

1960s Pakistan:

Pakistan was on a similar trajectory as the Asian Tigers during 1960s under Gen Ayub Khan's rule. GDP growth in this decade jumped to an average annual rate of 6 percent from 3 percent in the 1950s, according to Pakistani economist Dr. Ishrat Husain. Dr. Husain says: "The manufacturing sector expanded by 9 percent annually and various new industries were set up. Agriculture grew at a respectable rate of 4 percent with the introduction of Green Revolution technology. Governance improved with a major expansion in the government’s capacity for policy analysis, design and implementation, as well as the far-reaching process of institution building.7 The Pakistani polity evolved from what political scientists called a “soft state” to a “developmental” one that had acquired the semblance of political legitimacy. By 1969, Pakistan’s manufactured exports were higher than the exports of Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia combined."

Bangladesh:

Some argue that it was Ayub Khan's rule in 1960s that resulted in the loss of Pakistan's eastern wing and the creation of Bangladesh. I strongly disagree with this view. I believe that ill-conceived general elections of 1970 gave the opportunity to Pakistani politicians to lie to mostly poor and illiterate electorate of the time to win their votes. Shaikh Mujib exploited normal regional economic disparities that can be found in any country, including India and US, to argue that Bengalis were unfairly treated. Just look at the income data for various states in US or in India and you'll see huge gaps in incomes and standards of living. Indian Punjab's per capita income of Rs. 88,783 is 1.4 times higher than West Bengal's Rs. 62,831. Bihar's per capita income of Rs. 28,317 is less than a quarter of Haryana's Rs. 122,660. New Jersey's per capita income of  $53,628 is much higher than Mississippi's $33,073. 

In the end, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto refused to sit down and talk with Shaikh Mujib and forced the split. Here's how one of Bhutto's friends late Gov Salman Taseer offered his view in his book "Bhutto: A Political Biography"

"Blame can never be satisfactorily or finally apportioned to the major players in this grisly drama, but that Bhutto, Mujibur Rahman and Yahya Khan share responsibility there can be no doubt. Many, indeed, are inclined to the view that Bhutto, as the most sure-footed politician of the three and thus the best equipped to assess the consequences of his actions, must accept the lion's share of the blame. Argument on this point will remain one of the central themes of Pakistani politics, perhaps for decades."

The fact is that economic gap between former East Pakistan and Pakistan has grown over the last 40 years, and the per capita income in Pakistan now stands at more than twice Bangladesh's in 2012 in nominal dollar terms,  higher than 1.6X in 1971.

 Here are some figures from Economist magazine's EIU 2013:

Bangladesh GDP per head: $695 (PPP: $1,830)

Pakistan GDP per head: $1,410 (PPP: $2,960)

Pakistan-Bangladesh GDP per head Ratio: 2.03 ( PPP: 1.62)

Pakistan's Economic History:

Since 1947, Pakistan has seen three periods of military rule: 1960s, 1980s and 2000s. In each of these decades, Pakistan's economy has performed significantly better than in decades under political governments.

In a 10/12/1988 interview with Professor Anatol Lieven of King's College and quoted in a book "Pakistan-A Hard Country", here is how eminent Pakistani economist Dr. Mabubul Haq explained lower economic growth under "democratic" governments:

"..every time a new political government comes in they have to distribute huge amounts of state money and jobs as rewards to politicians who have supported them, and short term populist measures to try to convince the people that their election promises meant something, which leaves nothing for long-term development. As far as development is concerned, our system has all the worst features of oligarchy and democracy put together.

That is why only technocratic, non-political governments in Pakistan have ever been able to increase revenues. But they can not stay in power for long because they have no political support...For the same reason we have not been able to deregulate the economy as much as I wanted, despite seven years of trying, because the politicians and officials both like the system Bhutto (Late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto) put in place. It suits them both very well, because it gave them lots of lucrative state-sponsored jobs in industry and banking to take for themselves or distribute to their relatives and supporters."

Human and Economic Development under Musharraf:

Pakistan saw yet another confirmation of accelerated economic and human development under military rule in years 2000-2007.
Pakistan's HDI grew an average rate of 2.7% per year under President Musharraf from 2000 to 2007, and then its pace slowed to 0.7% per year in 2008 to 2012 under elected politicians, according to the 2013 Human Development Report titled “The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World”.

Source: Human Development Report 2013-Pakistan

 At 0.515, Pakistan's HDI is lower than the average HDI value of 0.558 for South Asia which is the second lowest among the various regions of the world tracked by UNDP. Between 2000 and 2012, the region registered annual growth of 1.43% in HDI value, which is the highest of the regions. Afghanistan achieved the fastest growth (3.9%), followed by Pakistan (1.7%) and India (1.5%), according to the United Nations Development Program.

Overall, Pakistan's human development score rose by 18.9% during Musharraf years and increased just 3.4% under elected leadership since 2008. The news on the human development front got even worse in the last three years, with HDI growth slowing down as low as 0.59% — a paltry average annual increase of under 0.20 per cent.

 Who's to blame for this dramatic slowdown in the nation's human development?  Who gave it a low priority? Zardari? Peoples' Party? Sharif brothers? PML (N)? PML (Q)? Awami National Party? Muttahida Qaumi Movement?  The answer is: All of them. They were all part of the government. In fact, the biggest share of the blame must be assigned to PML (N).

Sharif brothers weren't part of the ruling coalition at the center. So why should the PML (N) share the blame for falling growth in the nation's HDI? They must accept a large part of the blame because education and health, the biggest contributors to human development, are both provincial subjects and PML(N) was responsible for education and health care of more than half of Pakistan's population.

Pakistan R&D as Percentage of GDP Source: World Bank

Going further back to the  decade of 1990s when the civilian leadership of the country alternated between PML (N) and PPP,  the increase in Pakistan's HDI was 9.3% from 1990 to 2000, less than half of the HDI gain of 18.9% on Musharraf's watch from 2000 to 2007.



Acceleration of HDI growth during Musharraf years was not an accident.  Not only did Musharraf's policies accelerate economic growth, helped create 13 million new jobs, cut poverty in half and halved the country's total debt burden in the period from 2000 to 2007, his government also ensured significant investment and focus on education and health care. In 2011, a Pakistani government commission on education found that public funding for education has been cut from 2.5% of GDP in 2007 to just 1.5% - less than the annual subsidy given to the various PSUs including Pakistan Steel and PIA, both of which  continue to sustain huge losses due to patronage-based hiring.

Source: Pew Surveys in Pakistan

Summary: 

Looking at examples of nations such as the Asian Tigers which have achieved great success in the last few decades, the basic ingredient in each case has been large social sector investments they have made. It will be extremely difficult for Pakistan to catch up unless similar investments are made by Pakistani leaders.

Had Pakistan's development continued on the 1960s trajectory, it is quite conceivable that Pakistan would be a prosperous democracy like the Asian Tigers today.

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

Challenges of Indian Democracy

Pakistan's Economic History

Comparing Bangladesh with Pakistan

Economic and Human Development in Musharraf Years

India's Share of World;s Poor Up from 22% to 33%

Why is Democracy Failing in Pakistan?

Musharraf Era Higher Education Reforms in Pakistan

Comparing 30-Year Dictatorships in Indonesia and Pakistan