Asia's quest for wealth

Going for growth

See article

Readers' comments



First thing one learns about America is that there ain't no free lunch. The willingness to promote trsde in the past was pure self-interest. What is worrying, and the article briefly mentions it, is that the current penchant for IP protection threatens its very own self-interest in the long run.


I love how the article mentions the various personalities and politics of asia's economic ascendence, really boring stuff. But then at the end he gives america credit for being a willing trade partner, a place to buy technology and expertise, and thus the comments section needs to be entirely about how america isn't actually good, or it wasn't actually important. god forbid america get credit for its willingness to promote trade and openness, that evil country!


D.Gunz wrote: "In my opinion, a relative lack of western interest in Asia was probably beneficial to its growth."

I don't know how one defines "a relative lack", but this seems to me like an odd opinion given centuries of British presence in India, Pakistan, Singapore, Hong Kong, the post-WWII US presence in Japan, Korea, US assistance to Taiwan, the Phillipines, etc. , the Vietnam war and so on. And, of course, the expansion of two way trade and investment between major Asian countries and the USA, Australia, Canada, the EU speaks for itself.


You also need to add leaders like Dhirubahi Ambani (Reliance) of India and JRD Tata of the Tata group (again of India).


Corporate and competite, friend and enemy. That's the real world. Thanks to the colonialism, for they bring the less advanced countries advanced technology.Anyway,if they want to ask them to appreciate for their colonization, then NO WAY!!!


Thanks to the miracle growth of Asia, and facilitating role of USA, the whole world is happily tolerating extreme inequalities, with little or no policy discourse on the issue.


In business and trade, self interest and market forces work and not benevolence or altruism. When the USA bought TV from Japan or outsourced software development to India, it was a business decision out of self interest. The seller sold and the buyer bought. Neither side did a favor to the other side.
The US and others did not send advisors and technical specialists unless their services were purchased at market price.



And the western world has also sent armies of advisors, technical specialists and aid money to transform Africa, Latin America, Middle East. What did they accomplish?

In my opinion, a relative lack of western interest in Asia was probably beneficial to its growth. The West by its very presence already creates too much turbulence and friction in the Third World.


This is certainly an interesting subject. I haven't read the book, but the review neglects to mention that the US (and others) provided armies of advisors and technical specialists that helped to transform Asia.



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

