I am afraid that most people do not have a good impression of India and Vietnam, they once said that they were the third largest country in the world, but in the end they were also defeated by another eastern power.
In recent decades, the fates of these two countries can also be said to be roughly similar, both are the world's major emerging economies, and they are also drawn to the Western world.
In the public opinion propaganda of European and American countries, it is even more said that India and Vietnam may become the new world factory at any time.
So what's going on here? Why does the Western world value India and Vietnam so much? And is it possible for them to become the so-called new world factory and achieve the strategic plan of domination in Asia? Let's take a look at it today.
India and Vietnam have something in common
India, the more favored the United States, and this is mainly because they all have something in common. Now let's analyze them all from the perspective of strategic geographical location, labor costs, future development potential and geopolitical environment.
First of all, India and Vietnam are Asian countries, India is the only big country on the South Asian subcontinent, and Vietnam is also one of the top two countries in Southeast Asia, one of the pillars of ASEAN, people have given nicknames "Southeast Asian small hegemons", it once proposed a strategic plan to establish Vietnam's Southeast Asian empire.
It is not difficult to see that they are all major countries within their geographical range. Not to mention that from the perspective of strategic location, India and The more it is, the more it has the value of co-opting.
India has a fairly long coastline and it is closely adjacent to the Indian Ocean. The Indian Ocean route itself is currently one of the busiest and most important routes in the international community.
More than 1/4 of the world's oil, as well as 1/5 of all manufactured products, are transported on the Indian Ocean route.
Vietnam is a country bordering the South China Sea, and the South China Sea transport route is also one of the most important maritime transport routes. China, Japan, South Korea, the world's most famous trading and manufacturing countries, transport ships, all have to pass through the South China Sea route, which also highlights Vietnam's strategic location.
The United States co-opted Vietnam, and India certainly hoped that it could play an indirect role in influencing these world-famous important routes.
From the perspective of labor costs, India, the more also has its own advantages. We all know that they are a populous country, and India has a population close to That of China. According to the last official statistics released by India, their total population has exceeded 1.3 billion.
Vietnam domestically
Vietnam's population is close to 100 million, and the huge population means that they have enough young labor, so the demographic dividend is very large, and the labor costs of these two countries will inevitably be quite low.
In 2021, vietnam's labor costs will only be about $60 to $100, while India's labor costs will be higher, but workers' average monthly wages will be only $160.
Compared to U.S. workers whose minimum wage is above $3,600 a month, Vietnamese and Indian laborers work for nothing, without money.
So the United States and its European allies are, of course, happy to get some industries with high pollution characteristics to India, and the more they become the middle and lower reaches of their own industrial chains.
This not only avoids the environmental pollution caused by industrial production, but also enjoys the advantages of production costs brought about by low labor.
Moreover, India, the more it still needs to ask European and American countries to get some of their low-end industrial chains to them, because they also need to develop.
Then the United States, a capitalist country that has always been unprofitable and unprofitable, of course, cannot give up the two chess pieces so well that Vietnam and India are so well used.
From the perspective of future development potential and history, India and Vietnam also have factors that can be supported. In today's society, whoever has a larger population will develop faster has become a consensus.
Because in the process of rapid industrialization and modernization, a sufficient number of people are needed, and without a population, industry cannot be carried out, and there is no rapid urbanization. Without so many low-end laborers, it is impossible to get rid of manufacturing at all.
Not to mention vietnam, both India and India rely on important trade routes, and exports to the outside world are quite easy. India is a large country with a territory of 2.98 million square kilometers, and its territory is huge, which means that it is rich in resources, so the development potential of these two countries is very impressive.
So for the United States, why not coax the Vietnamese, Indians, and then through economic, political, and diplomatic means, to tie the Indians to their chariots? When India and Vietnam developed, wouldn't they become two powerful little brothers of the United States?
As long as the U.S. means are a little insidious, such as using its own capital to infiltrate the economic markets of India and Vietnam and make them dependent on themselves, then there is no fear that they will betray themselves.
Not to mention India, Yuedu and its common neighbors have inextricable historical entanglements. Therefore, the United States is also willing to support these two countries and become the strategic support point of the United States in the Asian region.
So if you compare India to Vietnam, who is more powerful? Who is more worthy of wooing in the future, and who has more potential to become a new world factory?
India has a better future than Vietnam
In fact, from the perspective of the current level of national and social development, Vietnam is a little better than India. If we look at it from a data perspective, we can intuitively feel this.
After the outbreak of the new crown epidemic, Vietnam, with its stronger administrative efficiency and copying our operations, at least did a good job in the middle and early stages of the epidemic, and even achieved a global economic downturn for a while, but its own economy is still growing positively.
As a small government country, the local states have adopted a variety of epidemic prevention and control policies, and even run counter to each other.
India's epidemic prevention and control mechanism has never been unified, so there is no comprehensive prevention and control. So in 2021, Vietnam's economy is a little better than India's.
Vietnam's per capita GDP reached $3,700, compared to India's $2,100. As a fast-growing country, Vietnam has a particularly low unemployment rate of only 1.87%.
In India, the unemployment rate is as high as 8.8%, which means that 8 out of 100 Indians are unemployed, and they can only eat at home with government subsidies and wait for death.
And the average life expectancy of Vietnamese people has reached 72.91 years, but India is only 67.80 years old, and the average life expectancy is also an important factor to measure the overall social development level of a country.
In terms of power generation, Vietnam is also stronger than India. Vietnam's per capita electricity consumption has reached 1113 kWh, while India's per capita electricity consumption is less than half of Vietnam's. Whoever has more electricity will naturally develop faster, because everything needs electricity.
In India
And don't look at the indians more, more revenue, but India's annual per capita public and private health expenditure is only 61.4 US dollars, while Vietnam's expenditure has exceeded 100 US dollars.
Therefore, from the perspective of some social development and economic level data, Vietnam is much better than India at this stage, at least most Vietnamese can still afford to eat, but whether Indians can eat, it is really not certain.
However, from the perspective of development potential, India is more worthy of being co-opted than Vietnam, and India has more prospects than Vietnam.
From an objective point of view, India has a full 1.3 billion people, of which about 60% are young and middle-aged laborers who can be put into production at any time.
India's demographic dividend is much slower than Vietnam's, and according to projections released by the United Nations, india's labor dividend will take at least 40 years to consume, and India's population is growing rapidly.
But Vietnam is different, Vietnam has less than 100 million people, although there are more than 36 million age-appropriate labor force, but the volume is limited, their labor dividend consumption rate is very fast, even two or three times ours.
Moreover, India is, after all, a theoretical all-round power, with a huge population, a large agricultural production, and this military force that can be regarded as the first in South Asia. There are also some bright spots in terms of technology, such as their IT industry and pharmaceutical industry.
But Vietnam is completely different, Vietnam only has 329,600 square kilometers of territory, so resources are limited. Every year, Vietnam imports a large amount of intermediate goods from us to maintain its own manufacturing production.
And Vietnam can be said to have not even had a little bit of technological highlights, and Vietnam has not mastered any real core technology at all.
Vietnam now seems to be developing faster than India, mainly because of its institutional advantages. And because the territory is not so large, the population is not so much, but it is relatively better to develop. But as long as India can make rational use of its various resources, it can easily surpass Vietnam.
So in theory, India has more potential and ability to become a new world factory, but this is only a comparison between India and Vietnam.
If India really wants to become the world's factory, it still needs a long way to go. And whether this road can be passed or not, now is also a question mark.
India's shortcomings are too obvious
Although India has great potential for development, with a large population, resources and agricultural output, it can also be supported by European and American countries.
With so many positive buffs superimposed on top of each other, Indians just don't do anything and can still develop, but it's just a matter of the speed of development.
This is why India has dared to ambitiously propose to become a major power in East Asia, surpassing the development plans of China, Japan and South Korea. But the problem is that their shortcomings are also not too obvious.
India itself is a bulk country, India is more of a geographical term. Because within their country, there are a lot of local states. India's bizarre system even allows different local states to adopt diametrically opposed political systems and ideologies.
The Indian state of Gujarat adopts a capitalist system, while the states of West Bengal and Tripura, which are next door to it, adopt the exact opposite system.
We are also engaged in "one country, two systems", but allowing one's own highest-level local administrative units to adopt a completely contradictory system on such a large scale is unique in the international community.
This has led to frequent clashes and contradictions between the various local administrative agencies in India, and even sent militia forces to fight, which means common development.
The Indian government is almost helpless in this regard, because the so-called local states are free to choose their own policies for the future direction of development, but they are written in the constitution.
Such a loose system determines that India can never integrate all its forces to develop.
Moreover, India naturally has too strong dependence on European and American countries, and since the Cold War, India has been accustomed to receiving aid from the Soviet Union and the United States at the same time.
Since entering the new era, India has bought advanced weapons from Russia and received a large number of orders from Europe and the United States.
Over time, India has developed a habit that as long as it can't get it, it can always get it from European and American countries.
Therefore, India has lost its idea of its own development. Because it is too easy to take it from others, it is much easier than it is to develop it yourself. India has really become accustomed to the economic and technological dependence of European and American countries.
It is difficult to get India rid of this dependence, even if India can really achieve manufacturing and industrial construction work, India can only become a downstream country in the industrial chain of European and American countries, it can only be the OEM of manufacturing products needed by European and American countries, without any bit of autonomy.
European and American countries eat meat, Indians may only be able to drink some soup, India will never have the ability to upgrade the industrial chain like us, and truly go upstream of the global industry.
India's over-openness has also become an obstacle to the country's future development. Opening up is certainly a good thing, because it can attract international capital, which can promote the economic development of one's own country, which is conducive to the progress of foreign trade.
Studying in India is quite easy, as long as you have the money, you can choose any world-class school in Europe and the United States, which leads to the relatively high quality of education in india's upper middle class. But in the same way, these talents cannot come back after they go to Europe and the United States.
The policy of too much openness has led to those high-level talents in India who do not need to worry too much when immigrating to European and American countries, pack their luggage, pat their butts and take their families away.
The Indian government has nothing to say about this, and a country that cannot retain talents cannot become a truly world-class power. Without enough talent, it is impossible to create a strong country by relying solely on the large group of low-level civilians in India who do not even know a word.
So whether it's India or Vietnam, they have obvious limitations of their own. Compared with Vietnam, I am afraid that India's threat is slightly larger, but it is also too large to be limited.
At this stage, we are still a well-deserved world factory, and the pace of our move towards the world's high-end industrial chain will not stop, our future is bright, but India and Vietnam are also like this, there is a great power potential, does not mean that it can really become a big country.