After being released in March, a talk on April 18 was bound to generate interest specially as two of the 'co-culprits' (Sunil Khilnani and Shyam Saran) in the production of the document were the speakers. The third speaker was Dr Jaimini Bhagwati, Indian High Commissioner to UK, a career diplomat whose CV is equally impressive for his work in the finance/economics sector.
Much of the derision towards the document has come with its naming. Why NAM 2.0? Profoundly aware of it, the first speaker Sunil Khilnani made it clear very early going into his 10-minute talk that 'Shyam will speak about it'. Khilnani effectively set out what the paper talks about.
"The idea is to initiate debate and not prescribe policies."-Sunil Khilnani on NAM 2.0
 |
| Sunil Khilnani, Director, KII, London |
According to Khilnani, the idea was to 'initiate debate' and not to 'prescribe policies'. He spoke majorly on what the document contained. He touched upon the need to have better co-ordination between different ministries (like MOD, commerce). Touching upon the need on knowledge as an important requisite, he put the emphasis on knowledge as 'national security is rooted in it'. This is in line with his recent article that spoke about the increasing use of the word 'innovation'. The point that it conveyed was that innovation is 'not a simple outcome of spontaneous, Eureka responses'. Hence the emphasis on knowledge that would help chart a long term plan.
India needs to 'maintain diplomatic contacts with Pakistan' and 'increase exports to China'. One amazing reminder of China's prowess in manufacturing is the Dubai Dragon Mart. Situated in the lap of luxury, it is a reminder of what it means of attaching value to cost of production. Perhaps taking a cue from its presence (and expansion) there are reports of a pound shop style store opening in Dubai.
The upheaval in the Middle East has brought the focus on democracy as a concept in the kingdoms of Middle East. According to Khilnani, India needs 'to use sophisticated argument for use of force'. Khilnani also made a case for opening up the defence sector to private sector. 'Absence of competition, bureaucracy' have made institutes like the DRDO perform not that well. Food for thought to the proudly smiling news anchors celebrating the launch of Agni V!
Shyam Saran started by defending the title of the document. Why NAM 2.0? Why invoke the past? It is a throwback to the Nehruvian era? According to the former foreign secretary, it was the 'strategic underpinning' of NAM that was 'valuable'. "Hence we thought we should use that in changed circumstances of today." Saran made it clear that during the earlier avatar of NAM 'the bottomline was what was best for India'. Did we maintain equal distance between US and Russia during the cold war days? The answer is not difficult to find out. There was a clear tilt towards Russia.
Taking the point beyond the US-Russia matrix, Saran elaborated in simple language what was Nehru's prescription during crucial votings. "First what is the merit of the case. Second what is in India's interest. If there was any conflict between the two, country's interest came first." Nehru's prescription perhaps is what is being applied now. Unlike the cold war days when the divisions were much well defined, now we are at a stage when the dynamics of what constitutes national interest changes rapidly and vigorously. "Old divisions have gone," said Saran. Example: At G-20 India aligns with US on Quantitative Easing but makes common ground with UK and EU on regulatory frameworks.
I remember watching the scramble in Parliament during Bill Clinton's visit. The actor Vinod Khanna jostled and rushed towards Clinton breaking into a smile on getting the opportunity to shake hands. The current police commissioner of Mumbai proudly had his picture with Clinton framed in his office during an earlier posting. For those, who are hurt, annoyed, irked that the NAM 2.0 document takes away the due importance to US that India should give can be assured that any further visit of the US President will garner the same enthusiasm. Be happy with that!
The document says that India is at a favourable stage today and strategic decisions have to be taken now to take full advantage. I wished the document had elaborated on what are the variables that made them infer about the criticality of time. Khilnani and Saran both talked about the timing factor (the latter more vigorously). Saran spelled out the advantages: favourable demography, good entrepreneurial class, ability to adjust easily, advantage of English language. Are any of these going to change in the next few years? The English media continues to grow with more and more percentage of the population reading and conversing in English. Living in a country within a lot of countries makes us adjust easily! More states and new capital cities will continue to add to the diversity. Is it just the timing or the manouverings of the actors in the global theatre that might make India lose the bus?
It was not expected of Dr Jaimini Bhagwati, Indian high commissioner to UK, who assumed office a couple of months ago to speak for the government. He was in the running to be the SEBI chairman and chose to talk on the economic/financial aspect. Having done stints with international agencies he raised the level of the debate. "Do not worry about criticality of time. Every day, every year is critical," he said, emphasising on the fact that 'political executive has to form consensus'. This was perhaps in response to the contention that India needs to take steps soon to capitalise on the situation. He also spoke about what India cannot experiment with by virtue of being an 'old civilisation and new nation'.
 |
| Former Ambassador Shyam Saran |
"First what is the merit of the case. Second what is in India's interest. If there was any conflict between the two, country's interest came first."- Shyam Saran on Nehru's prescription
I remember watching the scramble in Parliament during Bill Clinton's visit. The actor Vinod Khanna jostled and rushed towards Clinton breaking into a smile on getting the opportunity to shake hands. The current police commissioner of Mumbai proudly had his picture with Clinton framed in his office during an earlier posting. For those, who are hurt, annoyed, irked that the NAM 2.0 document takes away the due importance to US that India should give can be assured that any further visit of the US President will garner the same enthusiasm. Be happy with that!
The document says that India is at a favourable stage today and strategic decisions have to be taken now to take full advantage. I wished the document had elaborated on what are the variables that made them infer about the criticality of time. Khilnani and Saran both talked about the timing factor (the latter more vigorously). Saran spelled out the advantages: favourable demography, good entrepreneurial class, ability to adjust easily, advantage of English language. Are any of these going to change in the next few years? The English media continues to grow with more and more percentage of the population reading and conversing in English. Living in a country within a lot of countries makes us adjust easily! More states and new capital cities will continue to add to the diversity. Is it just the timing or the manouverings of the actors in the global theatre that might make India lose the bus?
 |
| Dr. Jaimini Bhagwati, India High Commissioner to UK |
"Do not worry about criticality of time. Every day, every year is critical."
- Dr. Jaimini Bhagwati on the contention that India should act now
When I had a few minutes with Bhagwati I told him that it would have been great if he had spoken about the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and shared an article in the Economist that came a few months ago (apart from the recent Feb issue where it describes it as 'among the world's best central banks). The article described the conservative hold of India's central bank on the FIs, and spoke about the elaborate security before the reporter could meet, not the Governor but a general manager. It very well characterised the near impossibility of a housing bubble in India that struck US (am I being too positive?). Our own conservative central bank can teach a thing or two on keeping banks on tight leash.
PS: The then Mumbai police commissioner did not yield to several demands (during Obama's visit) of the US security guards who have a way of getting their way around.
