Talk:Asian Century/Archives/2012

Untitled
Delete the paragraph about the India and China comparison. This is about Asian century, not about China vs. India.

Quotes
"It was subsequently affirmed by Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Chinese President Hu Jin Tao at St Peterberg in 2003."

What city is St Peterberg? Saint Petersburg, Russia?

"Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov formulated the idea of a triple alliance between Russia, China and India at the same meeting to counter the dominance of the USA and support the idea of a multi-polar world."

According to the 'Prime Minister of Russa' Wikipedia entry, Yevgeny Primakov wasn't holding that office at the time of the 2003 meeting.


 * Not to mention that a cooperation between Russia, China and India already exists and is currently growing - the SCO. Joffeloff 19:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Analysis not Summary
It seems to me that this article not only is lacking most sources, but is much more analysis in tone and substance than a wikipedia article should be. Some analysis is obviously needed because the topic is speculative in nature, but these speculations should be well documented from other sources. I'm going to delete a lot of the current article and make it more in line with the American Century article, mainly by removing the excess analysis/speculation/uncited info. You can find the old material in the history if you think that it should be reincluded. Please help out, thanks Joshdboz 23:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the verify tag because I think most of the unverified statements have been cited or removed. Joshdboz 16:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Century?
We have an Indian Century article, and business magazines frequently mention a "Chinese Century", shouldn't such an article exist?


 * Chinese Century/Asian Century/Indian Century


 * Sure, it seems appropriate. Of course, all of these articles and the emerging superpower articles will have a lot of overlap. Joshdboz 15:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The "Reasons" section
Obviously, the reasons underlying a possible Asian Century are subtle and complicated, and so a one-paragraph section would not be expected to do them justice. Notwithstanding that, what appears

"Most of the speculation as to a future Asian century is based on population growth and economic growth forecasts, as well as the growth that has already occurred in much of Asia. While much emphasis is focused on the growing power of China, India, Korea, Japan and Indonesia, the term Asian Century generally refers to all growth in East Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. Russia may also be considered a rising economy in Asia, but it is usually not being referred to in the use of this term.[2][3] And Asians have been saving their money for bad days, among the top 10 largest holders of reserves of foreign exchange and gold, all of them except Brazil, and possible Saudi Arabia and Russia(depends on how Asia is defined) are in Asia, China and Japan being the first and second bigest holders,[4] and people tend to gravitate towards creditors rather than debtors. I.e., it is predicted people will go to Asia."

is incoherent, is declarative without being obviously verifiable or verified, and isn't even grammatically correct in large part. I suggest this section be replaced by something very low-key but that points to a longer, more complete section (to be written? Or already available?). An example stub paragraph might be:

Asia's robust economic performance over the 3 decades preceding 2010, compared to that in the rest of the world, made perhaps the strongest case yet for the possibility of an Asian Century. Although this difference in economic performance had been recognized for some time, specific individual setbacks (e.g., the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis) tended to hide the broad sweep and general tendency. By the early 21st century, however, a strong case could be made that this stronger Asian performance was not just sustainable but held a force and magnitude that could significantly alter the distribution of power on the planet. Coming in its wake, global leadership in a range of significant areas - international diplomacy, military strength, technology, and soft power - might also, as a consequence, be assumed by one or more of Asia's nation states.

Z1x4 (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)