In his new book, Superpower, Eurasia Group’s Ian Bremmer suggests three strategic options for America to remain a global superpower. But while many lawmakers appear to be taking his preferred option of an “Independent America” to heart, we believe it’s the wrong choice. In fact, Bremmer leaves out a fourth approach that we feel is the best strategy for America to win not only on the current global chessboard, but on the next one as well.
With the US reluctantly being drawn back into putting out fires in the Middle East, warily watching Russian aggression, facing a stop-and-start “Asia pivot,” and on the sidelines the Greek crisis unfolds or Chinese stock markets go through turmoil, reviewing these options is timely for President Obama; they may be even more important for his successor.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a major potential trade agreement between the United States and 11 countries at very different levels of economic development, including Japan, Mexico and Vietnam. Will the agreement boost U.S. growth, address wage stagnation, help our strategic partners and create legitimate rules for international trade in the 21st century? The answer hangs in the balance.
With negotiations reported to be entering the final stages, it is critical that Congress focus at this point not on how to “fast track” approval of an agreement — through passing Trade Promotion Authority — but on making sure the TPP itself is on the right track.
There is a real choice to be made between two different approaches to international trade.
The first approach is based on the unbridled free-market view that more trade is necessarily better. The focus here is on eliminating regulatory barriers to exports and foreign investment. It is claimed that market forces will not just increase economic efficiency, but also improve governance in developing countries. Similarly, trade imbalances between nations will work themselves out.
Director of the MIT Sloan Office of International Programs Stuart Krusell
When a business in Latin America forms a partnership with one of MIT Sloan’s Action Learning programs, both the company and the students in the program emerge as winners.
A small team of students is assigned to work with the company. Most of the participants are second-year MBA students, who already had considerable work experience before starting their graduate studies. For the previous year or longer, the students have been gaining core management knowledge and skills in Sloan classrooms.
The company typically wants help considering the merits of a business initiative, such as entering a new market or launching a product. Many of the initiatives have an important technology component.
The Global Entrepreneurship Lab or G-Lab is the Sloan School’s largest Action Learning program, and it has a strong presence in Latin America. G-Lab participants spend three months studying the company remotely from MIT, learning about the business and its industry. Then, for three weeks, the students go to the company’s site, meeting with top executives and getting an up-close look at the operation. At the conclusion of the project, the team presents its recommendations.
In an exclusive interview with CNBC-TV18’s Malvika Jain on July 02, 2014, SP Kothari, Deputy Dean, MIT Sloan School of Management gave his take on the expectations from Arun Jaitely’s maiden Union Budget and his outlook on the road ahead for the Indian economy.
Below is the verbatim transcript of the interview:
Q: Government is in the process of preparing its first Budget since it took charge. What should be the priority areas where the government should focus?
A: Mr. Jaitley has to recognize and Mr. Modi also has to recognize that changing the furniture around the house is not going to make the house look that much different. It might make it look somewhat different but that is not a game changer and they have to think in terms of policies that dramatically alter if the goal is to increase the per capita income from where it is currently at about 1500 to say about USD 5000 in 10 years. Those game changing policies will have to focus on population growth, they will have to focus on FDI, they’ll have to focus on how our governance is and how our law enforcement is. Just to name a few set of policies that Mr. Jaitley should pay attention to in the maiden budget that he would be presenting on the 10th of July.
Q: Arun Jaitley has indicated that sector specific FDI is something that the government is going to be looking at. Do you think that that is going to be sufficient to spur investment flow into the country?
A: People’s decision to spur investment only partially hinges on what sectors are open for an investment. People’s decision to invest is influenced to a large extent by what kind of climate there is; climate includes what kind of law enforcement there is, what kind of labour supply there is, what kind of tax regime there is, what kind of regulation exists in general and is it easy to do business or not – open new businesses as well as close new businesses. So, the look has to be much more holistic in attracting foreign investment rather than a piecemeal approach by saying that we will open certain sectors for investment and wait for foreign investment to flow. I don’t think that is going to change or make a dramatic improvement in the investment climate.