SUBHADEEP SANTRA : Superpower in world politics has varying connotations. A superpower is not a comic book superhero who can be described to be having exponential strength or supernatural powers. There are a plethora of criteria that makes a nation a superpower in the political arena. A nation that exercises influence in areas of interest over the globe is a superpower.
The most important aspects of being a superpower are economic strength, military might and diplomatic relations with powerful allies.
If you tend to believe the CEOWORLD magazine report, India is the 5th largest economy in the world. The report further assured that India at the present pace may conquer the 3rd place in line by 2033. USA and China is estimated to be at the top. Growing Economy implies increase in average income of the citizens.
Consequent to such hike, tax base of the government enhances. Allocation to subsidies and other poverty and malnutrition programs would reduce. The funds so saved may be deployed in developing the military strength of India or scientific research in the field of defence.
In 2012, the London school of economics published a report titled “ India:the next superpower? “ The report completely defied the possibility of India becoming a superpower in near future. Nevertheless, it admitted that India is a great military power quoting her to be the 3rd largest fighting force with 1.3 crore million men and women in uniform and 665 combat ready air vehicles.
However, as a contrast it also advocated that the average jawan remains poorly equipped armed with outdated rifles which frequently cease to operate in the rugged mountainous terrains.
At the diplomatic level India had sometimes reacted in fashion contrary to popular belief. In 1971 refugees from East Pakistan mobbed at the refugee camps in India putting huge economic burden on India. Smt Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India declared war against Pakistan giving no heed to world powers.
Similarly, driven by age old friendly relationship with Russia, India had no choice but to remain “restraint and objective” on the the Russia Ukraine war against popular sentiments.