Running head: ESSAY QUESTIONS 1
ESSAY QUESTIONS 6
Institution of Affiliation
Is Chindia a Friend or a Threat?
The role that a nation plays in the world is determined by its political, military, and economic strength. Each of these aspects affects the manner in which the country is perceived by others. The term Chindia refers to an alliance between China and India to form a formidable block, especially in trade. A heated debate has been propagated on whether the two countries can unite and become a threat to countries such as the United States. The ability of Chindia to be a threat to the Western countries depends on whether China and India consider each other friends or threats. The two countries are threats to each other and thus Chindia cannot succeed in threatening the United States and other countries.
Those who argue that the two countries are now friends and that will ensure Chindia works base their arguments on several recent occurrences. First, the emergence of China and India as the fastest growing economies and their complementary needs have convinced some people that the two can merge and become an economic bloc. China is renowned as a base for multinational manufacturers. As such, it produces a lot of hardware, which can be popular with Indias large population. On the other hand, India has proved its prowess in the software industry, which makes it an attractive trade partner with China, to offer software to Chinas manufactured electronics. This complementary economic situation has created a notion that it can hold together Chindia.
The second reason proponents of Chindia stability assume cordial relations between the two countries is their military capabilities. Chinas nuclear test in 1964 created Indias apprehension and led to Indias test in 1974. The two countries now have nuclear weapons whose usage would be catastrophic to each. They have increased their efforts to foster peace as a result of each others threat. The effort has been interpreted to mean the two are now permanent partners.
There are historical factors that make it impossible for Chindia to realize its intended goal. The conflict between the two traces its origin in 1959 when India offered Dalai Lama political asylum after an uprising against China in Tibet failed. It was followed by other incidences such as the forceful evacuation of Indian soldiers by Chinese troops from Dhola post. These unresolved issues invalidate the claims that the two countries are friends. As long as the territorial dispute between the two has not been resolved, they are still enemies, which inhibit their ability to form Chindia based on friendship. In addition, they are harmless to other nations such as America as long as they remain a threat to each other.
The argument that the two have decided to cooperate for peace does not show improved relations, but mutual interests while each country tries to undermine the other aggressively. The use of nuclear weapons would destabilize the whole region and the economies of both countries. That is a result that none of the two want. Consequently, they cooperate to prevent such an occurrence. Recent Chinese activities in the region have shown its intentions to undermine India. Its continued support to Pakistan, establishment of ports around India and the presence of its destroyer in the Gulf of Aden in the pretext of fighting piracy is an indication of its hostility towards India.
In conclusion, China and India are still hostile to each other to the extent of not allowing the formation and functioning of Chindia. They threaten each other and thus cannot act as a bloc to gain economic or military dominance of the United States. Their ambitions for individual dominance downplay their united effort to integrate and form Chindia.
Protectionism vs. Free Trade
The argument about free trade and protectionism depends on the trade partners in the agreement. When the trade is between developed and developing countries, developed countries support free trade while developing countries prefer protectionism. Despite the differences in views, free trade is beneficial to a great extent than protectionism. This essay will defend free trade by showing that its merits outweigh the advantages of protectionism.
The protectionisms objective is to protect the local economy against unfair competition from developed countries. It imposes trade barriers for imports and allows the local industries to thrive without external competition. The advantages of protectionism include protecting domestic firms from international competition. When there are few imports, the locally made products can find a market, because consumers have not alternatives. The second advantage is the protection of the environment against pollution caused by imported products. When imports are allowed in an economy, there may be pollution issues, especially if the importing country does not have strict environmental laws. Thirdly, employment within the local economies is protected. In the presence of imported goods, the local manufacturers may not compete effectively. Consequently, they may need to downsize the workforce because of the reduced demand, which may lead to job losses. The disadvantage of protectionism is that a country using barriers also faces the same fate when selling its goods abroad. Secondly, consumers are subjected to high prices because the local firms have a monopoly as there are no external competitors.
On the other hand, free trade aims to increase trade cooperation and opportunities across the world. The advantages of free trade include the availability of product varieties to the consumers. The presence of imported products increases the choices for the consumers. Additionally, it drives the prices down because the local producers must adjust to counter the increased competition. The second advantage is that it promotes innovation in the local industries in their attempt to cope with competition. In the long run, the local firms improve gradually through innovation. The disadvantages of free trade include trade imbalances between the trading partners. The differences in economic conditions make one of the partners benefit more than the other. In addition, free trade encourages dependency at the expense of self-sufficiency. Countries that constantly import may never think of manufacturing their products.
Free trade is better than protectionism because it provides consumers with high-quality products and drives the prices down. The protection offered to the local firms makes them relax and thus cannot innovate. The introduction of imports actually helps the local firms increase their innovation through competition. Pollution, which is a major reason for protectionism, can be eliminated in free trade by creating and enforcing effective laws. Consequently, protectionism would lose its viability. No country can be totally self-sufficient, which means it must rely on others. A country practicing protectionism may be isolated because other countries would impose trade barriers on its exports. Economic isolation would harm the local economy by limiting products and the ability to export. Such a disadvantage shows the need for free trade. Free trade increases the markets available for products. Companies around the world have an added opportunity through free trade to increase their productions to satisfy the available markets. The job losses that may arise due to free trade can be offset by the increased trade in imported goods. People can get employed by the importers to handle the extra trade. Additionally, the free trade creates opportunities for local people to engage in trade at the retail level.
In conclusion, free trade has more benefits to the individual countries economies than demerits. The free trade increases opportunities for existing local firms to thrive and individuals to be self-employed. The other problems associated with free trade can be mitigated through legislation such as the pollution issue. Most of the claims by those who support protectionism can be countered with viable solutions within the free trade system.