Following is a message developed by a
young Silicon Valley scientist,
Arindam Banerji:*****
You've quite possibly heard about the resolution initially passed by the
House, in the US Congress; the one that banned France, Russia, Germany and
Syria from getting contracts in the rebuilding of Iraq. Eventually, it did
not get through the Senate, but what most of us did not see was that an
amendment to add China's name to the list got voted down without any
consideration at all. What do you think would have happened, if India's name
had been on the list?
I'm not certain, but, I'm sure all of us can make a pretty good guess;
after all, CNN thought well enough about China's business environment to do a
multi-part series on it, business magazines fall over themselves to do cover
stories on China's extraordinary growth and recently, on MSNBC Jack Welch was
drooling about new opportunities in China. Notice no one is talking about
China's handing out nukes to any old mad dictator that comes along or that
China busily set up Iraq's command and control links.
All the while, we Indian Americans have a panic attack trying to defend
ourselves against the latest allegations of state terrorism by Pakistan or
every third week face an article or two about how these brown South Asians
should be denuked, since we couldn't possibly understand how dangerous these
bombs could be. May be once in a while we get a news report or two on IITs,
or an article on how IT jobs are going to India, but most of the focus talks
about dangerous flashpoints, Kashmir, Hindu fundamentalists and what not.
I'm quite sure that there is some truth to all this - there always is, but
India of today is not just about this!! Just walk into any research lab in
the US, count the number of Indians - chances are, you'll find more Indian
Americans than anyone else. Look up the startups in the last 5 years in
Silicon Valley - 60% of the time, you'll find Indian Americans in the
founding team. Survey any Fortune 500 company, almost certainly you'll find
them sending their operations off-shore to India and quite possibly you'll
find an Indian American or two in the board-room. So, how widely is all this
known; for example, do people know that:
**Over the past seven years, John Levack, Asia managing director for
British venture-capital firm Electra Partners, has taken in $54 million in
profits on his Indian investments. Earlier this year, he wound up his venture
in China in frustration after making just $1 million on an investment of $4
million. That's not a bad return, but far below expectations for pure venture
capitalists who don't bet unless they think they can at least double their
money. "Our sole experience in China, though ultimately marginally profitable
for us, was a disappointment," says Levack.
**Moser Baer has clocked up an 11-fold return in just four years--have
more than doubled in value, from $35 million to $86 million as of the end of
October.
**During the Anthrax scare of 2001, the first country that the US turned
to was India to acquire "Ciproxin Ciprofloxacin" - one of the few known
medications for the disease. Similarly, the mysterious virus of SARS has
increased demand for macrolides, resulting in severely affected countries
like China approaching the Indian pharmaceutical companies for additional
supplies of macrolides, a family of antibiotics that treat a wide range of
bacterial infections.
**India has become the first country in the world to produce seamless
calandria tubes used in nuclear reactors, with the Nuclear Fuel Complex
developing the equipment after years of research. The calandria tubes are
seam-welded elsewhere in the world. Canadian nuclear scientists, who have
been observing the nuclear research in India, have now decided to go in for
the seamless technology in calandria tubes after the breakthrough achieved by
the NFC.
**An entire gigabit switch fabric ASIC used in a gig-ethernet switching
product has been designed in Cisco India. The whole deal, not just a part.
The question isn't whether you or I know these facts or even whether the
American media has reported on this, but how many Americans associate India
with the above? Do you think that most Americans associate India with the
above facts and not with stereotypical cows on roads scene or the
Pakistan-Kashmir nuclear conflict? How many Americans will remember in the
recent past, CBS has done two shows on South Asian educational institutions,
the first one focused on the most visible educational institutions of
Pakistan, that is, Binori and Haqqania madrassas, with their noxious
connection to jihad; while, the second show was on India's IITs with the
deduced conclusion that they might well be better than Harvard and Princeton?
But, is this the association that Americans make when they think (if they do
so at all) about India.
I can bet you though, that when they think of China, they remember that
it's where most of their TVs and toys now get manufactured; they know about
its advanced manufacturing, huge markets and growing trade with the US. Some
probably may think about the whole democracy thing or lack thereof - but,
what do they focus on ultimately?
There is after all, not that much difference between China's technological
prowess and India's; in fact, even though they may beat us on labor laws and
taxation, in terms of creativity one might put Indian man-power ahead; but
does the world know about this? China, however has built a very different
image for itself than India has, primarily, through its lobbying and
marketing. China could have focused on Taiwan issues in its lobbying, but it
didn't. Never ever will you hear the Tibet issues raised anywhere in the US
or a whole lot said about Taiwan or for that matter, anything much said about
China's tendency to hand out nuclear weapons to rogue nations. Yes, China has
a larger economy, but China has had this image in the mid-nineties, when its
economy was not much larger than India's current GDP.
While China is doing all this, what do we do? We complain loudly about
being equated with Pakistan, about being unfairly cornered on nuclear weapons
and of course end up fighting endlessly amongst ourselves about Hindutva or
not to Hindutva. Most of us do - not all, but most us do this; but who
cares?? Remember, if we say Pakistan is responsible for the killings in
Kashmir, Pakistan will immediately pay some one to fake injury from Indian
shelling - hard to win this battle isn't it!! But, suppose we take Siemens/Agilent
executivess to Andhra Pradesh and show them how interconnected telematics is
being used to reduce fuel consumption in APSRTC buses - for the first time in
the world. What if we take them to IIT Bombay and show them, how the joint
IIT-Microsoft research is going on? Better still take them to HAL and show
them the range of aircrafts and technologies we're building. Have we not
changed the equation?
Suppose, instead of taking senators, reporters and legislators to Kashmir
occasionally, let us:
**take them to the GE medical R&D lab in B'lore - invite Bristol Meyers
Squibb executives
**the HP services center that builds cutting-edge telecommunication
software for some of the largest telecommunications companies in the world -
invite 3Comm executives
**show them ISRO, with whom L&T is planning to manufacture
**walk them through HAL - invite struggling Boeing's execs
Show them once, show them again and when they've seen it, show them again.
Guess what! *We've just changed the equation*.
But, are we ready to CHANGE THE EQUATION? We tend to fret and fuss,
whenever someone brings up the issue of Kashmir and India in a negative
light. Not that we should not react to such misrepresentations. We must.
However, much more harmful strategic decisions that affect India economically
do not draw any reaction at all. Recently, a legislator from New Hampshire
got a resolution passed against Indian presence in Kashmir. Since then, many
Indian Americans spent countless hours writing to this legislator, in an
effort to change his mind. On the other hand, GE which was gung-ho about its
investments in India in the mid-nineties, has recently decided to make most
of its investments in China. The question is how many of us stayed up all
night, writing up petitions to Jeff Immelt or how many of us have called the
embassy of India to figure out what went wrong in this case? For all we know,
the Jeff Immelt decision may in time, have much more significance than the
one by a no-name legislator from New Hampshire. But, we were not ready to
define ourselves, with this bigger more complete view of what India really
is.
If we do not change this equation, we will never win - WE MUST CHANGE THE
EQUATION. Otherwise, 5 years from now even with an economy 10 or 15 times the
size of Pakistan, the State Department will happily equate a failed terrorist
state with a country that is on its way to becoming the
*intellectual/technology center of the world*; and, it will be our fault.
So, what are we waiting for?
Let's, now get to specifics:
First, lets NOT start yet-another US-India organization - there are enough
of those and they're doing just fine. What makes more sense at this stage is
a loose-knitting of individuals, groups and organizations US-wide that can
collaborate on a few specific goals and carry out simple, independent
activities to help achieve those goals.
The strategic goals for such efforts within the US should be:
1. Change Brand India - Project an image of India that highlights India's
*unique creative, highly talented* man-power. Show people that the second
center of innovation in the world after Silicon Valley, CA is
Bangalore/Hyderabad. Show people, that India's main claim to fame aren't cows
on roads, Kashmir, cheap labor or our proficiency in English, but the
*creativity that will bring the next generation of innovations*.
2. Facilitate better business environment for US businesses in India -
show US business managers why India is the place to invest for manufacturing
and not China; if this means we have to call the BJP office in Ahmedabad,
Delhi or Chennai to work around red-tape then so be it.
The activities that we, as a loose network of individuals with India's
interests at heart, could work together on, include:
**Inform Indian Americans in the US regularly about good news from India
**Inform US businesses about India the technology/intellectual center, and
not just a place to deflect operational price-pressures
**Create a stream of publications and reports on India's intellectual,
industrial and technology achievements
**Organize trips for reporters, legislators and businessmen to see the new
India, perhaps with the help of the Indian embassy/consulates
**Inform business men in the US that if they feel there are too many
stumbling blocks in India, we can help
**Push for better educational opportunities for 2nd or 3rd generations
Indians in India
Having said that, there are no hard and fast rules, please do write to us
with suggestions and criticisms and help make this campaign broad and
effective. LET US WORK TOGETHER TO CHANGE THE EQUATION.
*****
I am sure you will not disagree with the thrust of the Arindam Banerji
message conveyed above – the fact that we dissipate our energies in engaging
with a set of issues on which repeatedly there is an Indo-Pak equivalency in
the eyes of the beholder. Though much needed from India’s security point of
view, the ensuing discourse consistently saps the energies and intellect of
many of our well-meaning colleagues. Perhaps the time has come for the
community to fork out on two fronts – India’s security, and India as a brand.
Many of us who engage in such efforts in any case do try and do this; however
I would much agree with the author that we need a separate and well-thought
out campaign that addresses the "image", "perception", and a "branding" for
India in the comity of nations. I look forward to receiving your thoughts on
how to go about laying the building blocks of a new look US-India
relationship.
Ram Narayanan
US India Friendship
http://www.usindiafriendship.net