Is-Growth-of-Indian-Economy-Slowing-Down-–-WESP-Report

The revisionist mind is one that fails to reconcile with prevailing narratives, facts, or experiences. Whether in the outcomes of historical battles or the manipulation of undesirable economic figures, the revisionist mind goes about reworking all aspects that do not concede to its interpretations.

The current government of Republic of India, ruled by ideologues of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP), seeks to not simply reinterpret history but also revise its precepts entirely. It similarly discards the rigor of economic statistics to try and fool both the domestic public and investors abroad.

Regarding history, the BJP’s strategy is two-fold. First, it highlights exclusively the contributions of those who cohere with a Hindu Rashtra. Second, it minimises the contributions of any groups they deem “foreign” and re-portray their presence as largely negative and undesirable.

Regarding economics, the BJP’s strategy is also two-fold. First, the BJP unremittingly manipulates and exaggerates the national economic growth statistics of India. What many central bankers and economic analysts, both within and beyond India, have found to be the case is that the BJP has been over-stating its GDP statistics by more than 3 percentage points for countless successive quarters.

In other words, instead of the high and mighty 7 per cent GDP growth they touted to the world, they were growing at nothing more than 4 per cent. This is a much bleaker reality that the BJP has sought to conceal through manipulation. At the very least, it is nothing remarkable and certainly not worth the constant harping of a self-professed “economic tiger.”

Second, once the illusion of their growth became untenable, the BJP tried to ascribe the blame for this to the Congress party, and even to Pakistan. Recently, the myth of the juggernaut economy appeared to unravel as unemployment figures hit a historic high (6.1%, well above the historical mean of 3%). But further still, industrial output has been in decline, inflation has risen, and even runs on some of the Indian banks seem imminent.

The irredentist element in this is that the BJP shifts the blame to everyone but themselves, and insists to its increasingly radicalised base that “traitors” and “foreigners” have left them unredeemed. If these [Muslim] foreigners were to disappear, then clearly the economy would soar. If the BJP could have its way with everything, then only would India return to glory.

Invariably, they despise the reality that they shall not attain their glorious destiny of a five trillion dollar economy in the time frame that they had been touting. Congress is squarely to blame for this, not to mention its Pakistani benefactors, and the time has come for the thorns in their side to be eradicated.

What must be gleaned from economic example is that the nature of the revisionist mind is such that it permeates all walks of life and must be warned against not just in the spheres of history, politics, violence, and geography but must be guarded against and unveiled in every facet of totalitarian projects.

Economics is but one lens, yet the BJP revises history in the same way that it revises its economic statistics. It manipulates historical grievances (real or imagined); the same way that it manipulates economic data. In the same way that it shifts the blame for historical setbacks to foreigners, it shifts the blame for its economic setbacks on just about anyone but themselves.

But as with its exaggerated historical edits, its economic figures are raising eyebrows. Foreign investors are scrambling for the door and now refuse to buy the BJP’s line on sugar-coated figures. The Indian public itself is no longer persuaded by Modi’s numbers – a different reality of economic hardship stares them in the face.

This is an instructive lesson in the breadth of the revisionist mind. No history is a correct history until it reflects their vision of what is right. No economics is correct economics until it portrays them in the best possible light.

The writer is the Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). He can be reached at [email protected]. This article was first published in The Nation newspaper https://nation.com.pk/E-Paper/islamabad/2020-01-23/page-14/detail-4.


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »