In ancient times we have heard the phrase clash of kings in which motive behind the wars was to capture the other kingdom. But today you will be witnessing something that no one has ever heard or seen-Clash of Globalisation & Aatmanirbhar. On one side we have the great Globalisation since 1991 and on the other side our new born concept of Aatmanirbhar emerged out of Covid 19. Motive of this clash is to see who will win this fight and emerge as the sole winner. So, grab someone popcorn and get ready:

Globalisation: I have been serving the country for past 30 years and during this time I have been the major contributor in the long run average growth of the economy.

Aatmanirbhar: Yes, no doubt you had been a major contributor but focus on the word “had” here, you were the past and I am the future. As every day comes to an end similarly your era has reached its zenith. The ongoing pandemic has showed the world your weakest link.

Globalisation: How can you term yourself to be the future? It has been just one year since you emerged, you haven’t proved anything and talking about my era coming to an end. You are highly mistaken. No one is perfect and people learn with time and so does this pandemic taught us to improve upon our mistakes. I will make the desired changes and stand strong.

Aatmanirbhar: Let me show you a glimpse of what havoc has been created by this pandemic and how because of you everyone is suffering. Instead of Globalisation you should change your name to “Slowbalisation”.

Globalisation: I am not denying that damages have not been done but one cannot ignore the positive side as well. If it wasn’t for me, intellectual and technological advances across various countries could not have been made accessible to develop vaccine and one country would not have helped the other.

So, you see the arguments are never ending. The above stated points are what have been circulating around but one should not forget that if a glass is half empty it also means it is half full.

There is no denying to the fact that Globalisation is not a full proof solution and it has its pros and cons but why are we substituting Globalisation with Aatmanirbhar, why can’t we use these terms as complementary with each other?

Aatmanirbhar means” Self-Reliant” but people are confusing it with “Protectionism”. The Government of India took this crisis head-on and turned it into an opportunity by launching “Aatmanirbhar Baharat Abhiyan” which aims to move from reliance to self-reliance and accentuates the export driven manufacturing growth. It does not imply protectionism but is about making India self-reliant by creating an ecosystem which will allow Indian firms to be highly competitive on the global stage. This is not something new and India is not the first one to traverse on this path. Japan created a policy environment that allowed its auto industry to dominate the globe while South Korea did the same for consumer durables. If we dissect the steps taken by Aatma Nirbhar Bharat then we can see that they do not signify revolution but continuation of various measures that would have been taken sooner or later even if the pandemic did not have occur. Onset of the pandemic has just accelerated the setting up of these reforms.

The ongoing pandemic reiterated the fact that it is time for developing economies of the world to move from self-sufficiency to self-reliance.

As mentioned in this diagram when a country is self-sufficient it means it only produces for itself without indulging in international trade, however when an economy is self-reliant it is capable enough to handle such unprecedented times and also contribute in the international market. Let us understand this with an example: India under Aatma Nirbhar Abhiyan has launched PLI (Productive Linked Incentive) scheme for various strategic sectors like Pharma, Automobile, Technology etc. The main behind this is for India to gain competitive advantage and get a lion’s market share.

One does not have to see Aatmanirbhar as anti-thesis of Globalisation rather Globalisation has acted as a parent that helps a child to walk and grow and Aatmanirbhar is like a partner in life which gives the acceleration in life along with parental love and helps to run and learn from exposure. Being a finance student explaining everything on the basis of number and figures has become an integral part of my existence, so let me explain this analogy with the help of some facts.

FDI BOOM

Total FDI inflow grew by 55%, i.e., from $231.37 bn in 2008–14 to $358.29 bn in 2014–20 and FDI equity inflow also increased by 57% from $160.46 billion during 2008–14 to $252.42 bn (2014–20).

Total FDI inflows in the country in the last 20 years (April 2000 — September 2020) are $729.8 bn while the total FDI inflows received in the last 5 years (April 2014- September 2019) was $319 bn which amounts to nearly 50% of total FDI inflow in last 20 years.

During FY 2020–21, total FDI inflow of $58.37 bn, 22% higher as compared to the first 8 months of 2019–20. FDI equity inflows received during April — November 2020 is $43.85 bn which is 37% more compared to April — November 2020 ($32.11 bn).

FOREIGN TRADE EXPANSION

We can see how Aatmanirbhar gave impetus to FDI and Foreign Trade which is contrary to the notion of Protectionism or even opposite of Globalisation.

So, yes India has a long way ahead to complete the journey of achieving Self Reliant however in this journey Globalisation will act as a companion to Aatma Nirbhar and as a result in this clash there is no sole winner.

PS: The main aim of this article was not to load you with various facts and figures because for that we all have google but to provide you with a different perspective and opinion. I hope you enjoyed this clash.

Happy Reading!

References:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/atmanirbhar-india-self-reliance-or-protectionism/articleshow/80168539.cms

https://thediplomat.com/2020/06/no-the-self-reliant-india-campaign-is-not-about-protectionism/

617-Covid19_Report%20(1).pdf

An avid reader. Economics Enthusiast. Optimist. For her, writing is a calling and not a choice.