What's ahead of South Asia?

[roy]

"Will India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan ever truly become advanced, developed nations, or are they trapped in permanent stagnation? Despite boasting booming tech sectors and massive economic potential, all three countries remain heavily weighed down by deep-rooted issues like corruption, weak infrastructure, political instability, and poverty. Do you think these structural hurdles and regional rivalries will permanently stunt South Asia's growth, or can these nations actually transition into fully modern societies ever?

 

[Watandar]

The political evolution into something like European cooperation after WW2 is decades away, maybe 50 years, and will likely require some bloody wars before it can happen.

Another example is East/Southeast Asia where there were huge wars from 1930's to early 1980s across many countries and then the whole region focused on peace and development.

 

[roy]

The political evolution into something like European cooperation after WW2 is decades away, maybe 50 years, and will likely require some bloody wars before it can happen.

Another example is East/Southeast Asia where there were huge wars from 1930's to early 1980s across many countries and then the whole region focused on peace and development.

south asia is the real culprit and the mess. do you think they need to fight wars to develop?

 

[Big_Strong_Brother_India]

Ah yes, the classic “South Asia = India, Bangladesh & Pakistan, therefore they’re all equally doomed” analysis. Truly groundbreaking stuff ...... funniest part is pretending that putting India in the same sentence as Pakistan & Bangladesh somehow makes the comparison intellectually meaningful. Three neighboring countries ≠ three identical development trajectories lol.

India has problems plenty of them but lumping indian scale economy with a vastly different economic & institutional trajectory, simply to manufacture a South Asia is intellectual laziness disguised as analysis.

India has built globally competitive industries, a huge domestic consumer economy, major space & nuclear capabilities, one of the world's largest digital public infrastructures & increasingly important positions in global manufacturing & supply chains which can't be said about the other two.

Meanwhile, the OP brilliant methodology appears to be South Asia has problems so therefore India, Pakistan & Bangladesh are basically the same, therefore none of them can develop lmao. India's future isn't determined by whether Pakistan or Bangladesh succeed or fail. India will rise or stumble based on its own institutions & ability. It's an abomination of nature to lump India with the other two regards.

 

[Aghor Warrior]

south asia is the real culprit and the mess. do you think they need to fight wars to develop?

South Korea did not become a developed nation by establishing good relations with North Korea. Israel did not become a developed state by establishing good relations with its hostile neighbours. There is a phenomenon that can be described as the “Hostility-Driven Development Paradox”—where prolonged strategic rivalry creates pressure that can accelerate a country’s economic, technological, industrial and military development.

The US–Soviet rivalry, for example, played a major role in accelerating American technological, military and industrial capabilities. A similar argument can be made about China’s strategic competition with Taiwan and Japan.

India appears to have its own Hostility-Driven Development Paradox vis-à-vis Pakistan. According to World Bank data, India’s extreme poverty declined sharply from 16.2% in 2011–12 to 2.3% in 2022–23. Rural extreme poverty fell from 18.4% to 2.8%, while urban extreme poverty fell from 10.7% to 1.1%. The World Bank estimates that 378 million people were lifted out of poverty, including 171 million lifted out of extreme poverty.

Pakistan, meanwhile, continues to have significantly higher poverty levels. According to the World Bank, the poverty rate at $3.00 a day (2021 PPP) stood at 22.96% in Pakistan in 2024.

This does not prove that hostility with Pakistan was the only reason behind India’s development—India’s progress has many causes. But it does demonstrate why the claim that simply improving relations with Pakistan will automatically produce peace and prosperity is far too simplistic. There is no clear empirical basis for assuming that reducing strategic competition would necessarily accelerate India’s development, and it could potentially have unintended consequences.

And this is without even considering India’s expanding military-industrial complex, defence exports, domestic defence manufacturing and civilian technological spin-offs. The security pressure created by the rivalry with Pakistan has been one of the factors pushing India toward greater defence indigenisation and technological self-reliance.

The real question, therefore, is not whether India should seek peace, but whether peace necessarily requires reducing strategic competition and defence preparedness. Those are two very different propositions.

 

[kankan326]

I worry India will become not habitable land

 

[Aghor Warrior]

south asia is the real culprit and the mess. do you think they need to fight wars to develop?

War is never desirable, but history shows that wars have sometimes led to lasting political solutions. Bangladesh, for example, was created as a result of the 1971 war. Nobody is saying that war is good or that it should be pursued, but wars can sometimes resolve conflicts that diplomacy alone has failed to settle and, in certain circumstances, can contribute to long-term peace and stability.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

I worry India will become not habitable land

Don’t worry about India. It’s not going to become some kind of Switzerland, which is what many people in South Asia dream about when they think about where they’d like to live. However, India will survive and continue to develop in its own way.

In fact, most people don’t necessarily dream of living in countries like China either, because it simply doesn’t qualify that kind of aspirational lifestyle for them. India may not become a country like Switzerland, but that doesn’t mean it won’t survive or prosper. It will follow its own path, shaped by its population, economy, culture, and circumstances.

 

[Aghor Warrior]

Don’t worry about India. It’s not going to become some kind of Switzerland, which is what many people in South Asia dream about when they think about where they’d like to live. However, India will survive and continue to develop in its own way.

In fact, most people don’t necessarily dream of living in countries like China either, because it simply doesn’t represent that kind of aspirational lifestyle for them. India may not become a country like Switzerland, but that doesn’t mean it won’t survive or prosper. It will follow its own path, shaped by its population, economy, culture, and circumstances.

India can achieve a GDP per capita comparable to the US, but reaching Switzerland-level human development requires a different approach. In a country as large and diverse as India, the question should be whether individual states can replicate aspects of the Swiss model suited to their circumstances. This is not the responsibility of the Central Government alone; state and local governments have an equally important role.