|
Perceptions of Today's India in America: how
far off are we?
Dear Friends:
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.
Best wishes,
Ram Narayanan
US India Friendship
|