Continuing from yesterday (Struggle to find a balance).
From the developments, events, and engagements in the past two decades, it is evident that India has been making credible efforts to sustain an affirmative engagement with the global community. These efforts include opening the Indian economy to the global business community; actively participating in global alliances and forums; developing social and physical infrastructure; committing to global agreements in the areas like economic cooperation, climate change, transparency in fund flows & investments, crime prevention, terrorism, etc.
These efforts have been made at three broad levels –
(i) At the state level through suitable changes in policy framework. This includes, inter alia, deeper strategic alliances with Western countries (civil nuclear deal, QUAD, etc.); bilateral (free) trade agreements, liberalized FDI regime; BRICS and G-20 cooperation; etc. The vaccine diplomacy during Covid was a significant effort in wider global outreach by the Indian state. The Indian state’s resolute refusal to align with any side in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is widely cited as a good example of its strategic efforts to stay non-aligned while protecting its interests.
(ii) At the private enterprise level through deeper and wider engagement with global businesses. This includes deeper and wider engagement with global technology leaders and innovators; making large-scale investments in foreign countries (Corus, JLR, Novelis, to name a few); providing competitive manufacturing platforms (mobile and white goods manufacturing) to global brands; partnering with global leaders to produce/Service in India for India and world; etc.
(iii) At the individual level through the deeper and wider engagement of Indian citizens (or persons of Indian origin) with the global community – business, governments, civil society, academia, scientific research, art, and culture. The number of students admitted to various courses in foreign universities has risen exponentially; so has the role of Indian professionals in the senior-level management of top global enterprises.
These efforts have indubitably earned wider acceptability for India’s official narrative across the global socio-political spectrum.
However, it cannot be denied that India’s internal struggle to redefine its socio-economic identity as an “ultra-nationalist free market economy with a socialist overtone” has allowed various interest groups and lobbies to challenge the credibility of India as a democratic secular system with equal opportunity and progressive outlook. These interest groups have been building a strong narrative to dissuade the global communities from further deepening their engagement with the Indian state. This narrative could have influenced global opinion to some extent, as reflected in a much slower pace of progress in trade, FDI, VISA regulations, technology transfer, nuclear cooperation, etc. I also see the recent spurt in separatist movements, like the Khalistan movement, adverse press coverage during the prime minister’s foreign visits, etc. as an extension of this trend only.
These interest groups appear to have the tacit support of the local politicians, intelligentsia, civil society members, etc. who are either opposed to the policies, methods, and style of functioning of the incumbent government; or are struggling to find a space for themselves in the scheme of things.
In this context; I find the India narrative in the recent issue of The Economist (July 15the-21st, 2023). The 78-page issue has the following 7 mentions of India. The economic mentions are all bracketed with China which has over 100 mentions in the magazine.
1. At least ten people were killed in election day violence in West Bengal. The Indian state went to the polls to choose rural councils. Dozens of people have died in violence in the state since the election date was called a month ago.
2. In a setback to India’s ambition to become a global hub of chipmaking, Foxconn, best known for assembling the iPhone, pulled out of a $19.5bn joint venture to develop semiconductors at a factory in Gujarat. The deal had been announced with much fanfare last year. Press reports suggested the project had been held up by the government’s dithering on state support.
3. India’s central government is subsidizing a Micron factory in Gujarat to “assemble and test” chips, spending an amount equal to a quarter of its annual budget for higher education.
4. India’s attempt to boost its mobile phone industry appears to have brought mainly low-value assembly work. The lesson from South Korea is that national champions must be exposed to global competition and allowed to fail. The temptation today will be to protect them, come what may.
5. While he is gradually being welcomed back into the Arab world, Mr. Assad hopes his multifaith policy will help him end his isolation elsewhere. Yoga has helped him strengthen ties with India.
6. Vietnam, which is hardly friendly towards China, has adopted some of its methods for controlling data. Authoritarian regimes are not the only ones to slide toward digital protectionism. India insists data must be stored locally: to give its law enforcement agencies easy access, to protect against foreign snooping, and as a way to boost investment in the tech sector.
7. India’s “Make in India” strategy hopes to boost the industrial share of the economy to 25% of value added by 2025. In China and India industry’s share of economic output appears to be roughly where it was three decades ago, but even in these countries, it has slipped in recent years.
Despite the efforts of local officials and strong geopolitical incentives for Apple to move away from China, India has struggled to become anything other than a destination for the device’s final assembly
The oft-lauded superior productivity growth of manufacturing—versus services as well as agriculture—comes with caveats. Economists have found that financial, it, and legal services can boost productivity elsewhere, including in industry. According to the IMF, the gap between manufacturing and services productivity growth has shrunk in many countries since the turn of the millennium. In China and India, its direction has flipped, with service productivity rising faster.
The following podcast of The Strait Times, featuring Mr. Sanjay Baru, a geo-economist and commentator who was Media Adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also makes an interesting listening in this context.
‘Closet Nehru’ Modi has played Indian foreign policy well
