More BRIC-type nations today?

With a POD of around WWII or preferably after, how could more third world or former colonial states have risen to economic superpowerdom?

How about a stable Indonesia + Malaysia (possibly + Singapore) SE superstate?
 
There are more BRICs, it's just that BRIC is a handy easy-to-remember acronym. Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Peru, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Ghana have all had strong economic growth figures, and along with the rise of China and India, have contributed to the Developing World's growing influence on world affairs.

Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and parts of Eastern Europe have already graduated to first world status. Chile, Malaysia, and Thailand will probably do so within the next 10-20 years. Poverty CAN be overcome, and not just in East Asia.
 
Yeah, but I mean those that can be also political/military regional/global powers.

A more stable, even more prosperous Mexico would qualify. South Africa too I guess though they're strictly regional. (What about an SA that somehow held on to Namibia...)
 
A more stable, even more prosperous Mexico would qualify.

Right next to the United States? Doubtful. The US, bar some major change, will always be the big kid on that block.

South Africa too I guess though they're strictly regional. (What about an SA that somehow held on to Namibia...)

SA already is considerably influential across pretty much all of Sub-Saharan Africa, particularly with its economic power. Holding on to Namibia without butterflying apartheid is a tall order.
 
There are more BRICs, it's just that BRIC is a handy easy-to-remember acronym. Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Peru, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Ghana have all had strong economic growth figures, and along with the rise of China and India, have contributed to the Developing World's growing influence on world affairs.

1. Possible, but it's going to live in China's shadow and be a sort of an Asian Canada in the absolute best case scenario for them.

2. This one will be a standalone power almost in and of itself, probably with significant US support to counterbalance China, possibly a lot of USN guarantees of protection and such, keeping Malacca open for trade is very much in US interests, making sure Indonesia doesn't actually challenge USN hegemony by taking on their security detail is gravy.

3. It kind of already is that way to a large degree.

4. Yep, possible.

5. Also possible, EU membership is probably a prerequisite for a better Turkish economy though.

6. Has to have Russia's approval, which likely means the rise to prominence of Kazakhstan has to be Russian-engineered.

7. Avoid Abacha and Boko Haram issues in the north and you're on a better track, ultimately though to allow a stable Nigeria you have to have a stable Western Africa in general (that means lesser AIDS epidemic, no diamond wars, better UN/WHO efforts at controlling diseases), otherwise all the economic and political troubles of its neighbors will be exported across the border.

8. Sort of the same issues as Nigeria, slightly different region.
 
Peru? I have no doubt it can be a rapidly rising developing economy, but compared to Brazil? Wouldn't Argentina or Chile be more comparable?

SA already is considerably influential across pretty much all of Sub-Saharan Africa, particularly with its economic power. Holding on to Namibia without butterflying apartheid is a tall order.

Would they want to federalize post-apartheid?
 
Peru? I have no doubt it can be a rapidly rising developing economy, but compared to Brazil? Wouldn't Argentina or Chile be more comparable?

Chile is the most developed South American country, so in a sense it's already arrived. It doesn't have the population or geography to be a global power, but it already is a significant regional power. Argentina had the greatest potential of any Latin American country in the early 20th century, but it's fallen on hard times: a succession of bad governments, economic mismanagement, capital flight, and bad luck have doomed it to fall behind.
 
Peru? I have no doubt it can be a rapidly rising developing economy, but compared to Brazil? Wouldn't Argentina or Chile be more comparable?

Definitely, Peru's demographics, along with a whole lot of other places, really confine it to being a regionally important economy like a bunch of others. It's basically the European question, it's not that say... Denmark isn't a strong developed nation, it's just that her population, resources and overall size relative to other major economies are always going to keep her behind those nations.

Places like Mexico, or Indonesia, if they overcome their problems, have the capacity to be significant players on the world stage.
 
Would they want to federalize post-apartheid?

A Federal Republic would fit South Africa well, but Namibia had been a battleground between SWAPO and the SADF for decades, and when that war ended there was not a hope in hell that Namibia would still answer to Pretoria, no matter what color the government officials were. Like I said, you'd have to stop that whole crapfight, which effectively means either butterflying apartheid altogether or making a considerably bigger English white population in South Africa, enough that they aren't politically dominated by the Afrikaners. It would be better to have black suffrage grow over time, but that's very difficult to engineer, doubly so if the Afrikaners have considerable power.
 
I want to keep this thread for AH "third world emerging superpowers" like say More Stable Mexico or Bigger Turkey or maybe Iran Chills Out, but I think I'll do a future one too.
 
Iran seems to have mostly been ignored in this thread. A US-backed Iran, say where the Shah has yeilded to constitutional monarchy or a republic has been established, would be a very important up and comer.

Considering fear of a Tehran bomb these days, the American backing for Iranian nuclear research in the 1970s could offer some interesting possibilities. Also, as an enemy of Arabism, a democratic Iran would be an invaluable counterweight to Saddam. If there's no Revolution, there's no Iran-Iraq War, so Iraq's economy remains strong, meaning no need to gamble on Kuwait, not to mention the obvious deterrant of having not one (Saudi Arabia) but two powerful states on his border with stronger links to the USA.
 
There are more BRICs, it's just that BRIC is a handy easy-to-remember acronym. Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Peru, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Ghana have all had strong economic growth figures, and along with the rise of China and India, have contributed to the Developing World's growing influence on world affairs.

Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and parts of Eastern Europe have already graduated to first world status. Chile, Malaysia, and Thailand will probably do so within the next 10-20 years. Poverty CAN be overcome, and not just in East Asia.

First thing you have to do is strip away population growth to see if there is economic growth. If the economy grows 4% and the population grows 5%, that is negative growth.

I think Nigeria would be an interesting case. I do know they use to have an automobile manufacturing capability in the 50s and 60s. What if they had had no civil war, no famine and no oil discovery.

They might have have seen a developing industrial economy...

Argentina was a relatively prosperous country in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Peron had driven it into the ground with his useless economic policies? Perhaps it would have become an industrial powerhouse.
 
First thing you have to do is strip away population growth to see if there is economic growth. If the economy grows 4% and the population grows 5%, that is negative growth.

I think Nigeria would be an interesting case. I do know they use to have an automobile manufacturing capability in the 50s and 60s. What if they had had no civil war, no famine and no oil discovery.

They might have have seen a developing industrial economy...

Argentina was a relatively prosperous country in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Peron had driven it into the ground with his useless economic policies? Perhaps it would have become an industrial powerhouse.

Except that no country on earth has a 5% population growth rate. Only a few in Africa and the Middle East even come close. Over the last 20 years, fertility rates have fallen almost everywhere. The population bomb is a myth.

Let's look at the population growth rates of the countries I listed, all numbers are taken from the 2009 CIA World Factbook:

Indonesia 1.14%
Ghana 1.9%
Kazakhstan 0.39%*
Nigeria 2%
Peru 1.23%
South Africa 0.28%*
Turkey 1.31%
Vietnam 1.14%

*= below world average

All these countries have pretty moderate population growth, and all of them had higher economic growth than population growth, even in the worst years of the economic crisis.
 
Top