Who Answers When Economic Targets Are Missed? Surjit Bhalla Raises Tough Questions At ABP India@2047 Conclave

India’s economic challenge is not the West Asia war alone but the inability to translate stronger infra, improved human capital and political stability into faster growth, economist Surjit Bhalla said

India's economic challenge is not merely about navigating the fallout of the West Asia conflict or managing short-term global disruptions. The bigger question, according to economist Surjit Singh Bhalla, is whether the country's policymaking ecosystem is sufficiently accountable to deliver the growth rates needed for a developed India by 2047.

Speaking at the ABP Network India@2047 Conclave on Wednesday, Bhalla argued that while the ongoing conflict in West Asia has created uncertainty across the world, it would be incorrect to view the current situation as a crisis unique to India.

"Every country in the world is in a crisis in 2026 because of the West Asia war," Bhalla said during a session on 'The Economic Crisis: What Should the Government Do?'

However, he suggested that India's more pressing concern lies elsewhere.

If Infrastructure Is Better, Why Is Growth Still At 6%?

Bhalla pointed out that India today is significantly stronger than it was in previous decades. Infrastructure has improved, educational attainment has risen and the country's human capital base has expanded considerably.

Yet, despite these gains, growth remains around 6 per cent.

"The crisis is we are growing at 6 per cent," he said, noting that India's average growth rate has been around 6.34 per cent.

According to Bhalla, this falls short of what is required to achieve the government's Viksit Bharat vision.

"The target of 9 per cent comes from the target of Viksit Bharat," he said.

He argued that India should be growing substantially faster than it currently is.

"We should be growing much faster."

Bhalla suggested that sustaining growth closer to 9 per cent or even 9.5 per cent annually would be necessary to transform India into a developed economy over the coming decades.

"Nine and a half per cent per year. We have never grown at that rate," he said.

Where Is The Accountability In Policymaking?

Bhalla's sharpest criticism was directed at what he described as a lack of accountability within India's policymaking system.

According to him, elected leaders remain answerable to voters, while corporate executives are accountable to shareholders. However, he questioned who holds senior policymakers and bureaucrats accountable for economic outcomes.

"Politicians are accountable in the system. Then there are corporates who have to answer to the public, to shareholders. Who do the bureaucrats have to answer to?" he asked.

"The senior policymakers, who is there to ask them?"

Bhalla argued that many policy decisions continue to follow legacy frameworks without sufficient scrutiny or public debate.

"Whoever is making the policy, they are following the same set protocols from the past times."

"There is no one to answer for economic decisions. So we have to ask the policymakers why they are making the decisions that they are."

Why Aren't Indian Companies Investing More?

The economist also questioned why domestic private investment remains weaker than many analysts believe it should be.

"We should be asking why our own companies are not investing in our country," he said.

The remarks come amid ongoing discussions about how India can attract larger flows of both domestic and foreign investment to support manufacturing, infrastructure and job creation.

Manufacturing Target Remains Elusive

Bhalla also highlighted the gap between policy objectives and actual outcomes.

For years, economists and policymakers have argued that manufacturing should account for 25 per cent of India's GDP. Yet that target remains elusive.

"Every analyst in the country has asked that the share of manufacturing to GDP should be increased to 25 per cent," he said.

"Who will answer as to why this has not happened?"

The question, he suggested, reflects a broader challenge of accountability within the economic policy ecosystem.

What Happened To The Think Tank Model?

Bhalla also reflected on the role of institutions designed to shape policy.

When NITI Aayog replaced the Planning Commission, he initially viewed the move as a positive step. "When the NITI Aayog was announced, I thought it was a brilliant idea as it will be a major think tank," he said.

However, he questioned whether the institution has evolved into the independent policy forum many had envisioned.

"Now I don't know of anyone who thinks the NITI Aayog as a think tank."

According to Bhalla, effective think tanks need intellectual independence and the freedom to challenge prevailing assumptions. "Think tanks normally are not bureaucratic and this is a problem in India."

He added that there is often a reluctance among institutions to openly debate policy choices.

"There is a fear of being open by the think tanks also."

The 'Deep State' Problem

Bhalla also referred to what he described as the influence of entrenched bureaucratic structures on policymaking.

Discussing India's inability to conclude certain economic agreements, including trade arrangements with the United States, he suggested that deeper institutional factors may be at play.

"We have been trying to do a deal with the US for so long, but it doesn't happen. Why? That's what we should be asking."

"What seems to be inaction is the operation of the deep state."

According to Bhalla, efforts by successive governments to bring external expertise into policymaking have often struggled against institutional resistance.

"Manmohan Singh and Modi both tried to bring outside talent, both have failed due to the state of the deep state."

For Bhalla, the central paradox facing India is clear.

"We have increased our education, talent and we are still growing at 6 per cent," he said.

The country has stronger infrastructure, better human capital, greater political stability and larger economic ambitions than ever before. Yet growth remains near 6 per cent rather than the 9 per cent-plus pace required to achieve developed-country status by 2047.