Video of the day

You rise good points, truly.

But the connection between culture and institutions is deeper than you seem to think. I would argue it is where ethic, confucian or otherwise, comes into play.

You are right in what you write about Japan in Meiji era. I would argue with location part: top 25 trade powers are all maritime countries. It is rather hard to trade when you depend on goodwill of others to export your produce, ask Bolivians if you doubt. Best wearing a Chilean soccer team shirt... Seriously, few landlocked countries ever sported great commerce.

China could land as a poor rice exporting country a la Campucha only in case of really bad governance... Yes, I agree with you on that from the beginning, as you happen not to notice.

Alas, those doing the governance are humans, not faceless institutions. Humans think according to their culture. I will give you an example. There were two maritime, agriculture based countries in the 19th century: Japan and Egypt. Both hired Western advisers, modernized, set up schools, factories, modern armies and navies... Japan got to be a Great Power, Egypt, a colony.

There were of course many factors that contributed to it, but the case study is still interesting, as both countries have little to no natural resources.
I see the main differential in the cultural field: even after similar on paper European governments were introduced, people manning them thought as they learned before. Japanese were then task oriented and competitive, Egyptians looked where to employ their relatives, regardless of their competences. I learned this from my Egyptian co-PhD student, who was shocked and amused to find the same attitude in Poland...
The result was of course enormous and totally indolent administration, unable to achieve anything on time, if at all (as is in Poland).
Japanese official of the Meiji era would have committed seppuku after failing as much...

To sum up: of course I agree geographical location is not all. It provides barriers to what could be done, as well as potential. Then there are people who live in a given country, with their culture and institutions.
It is like Dostoevsky  put it in "Anna Karenina". To paraphrase: all successful countries are similar.
Of all the failed ones, each is failed in its own way.

By chance, have you read any of the books by Jared Diamond? He explains rather well why civilizations thrive or fail. Broadens how you look at things. I think you would like them.