Modernization Hub

Modernization and Improvement

Davos Annual Meeting 2010 – Will India Meet Global Expectations?


Over the years, I have often here at Davos sat right here
and seen BBC debates, CNBC debates, and CNN debates. This is the first time that an Indian
channel is doing a debate as part of the Davos agenda and that in a sense
I guess is at the fraction of the changed position of India itself.
So, it’s a privilege and honor to be doing this debate out here
at Davos. Now of course if I can also quote from Spiderman, “With great power
comes great responsibility.” So as well very well
that India has risen, but is India gonna be able to meet
the responsibilities that come with that rising. I don’t know if there has been a panel
to discuss India’s place in the world like the one which we have assembled
out here. So, let me just start by introducing the Minister
of Commerce and Industry of India, Mr. Anand Sharma.
Great to have you with us, sir. Robert Homats, U.S.
Undersecretary of State for Economic, Energy, and Agricultural Affairs India
and the United States since there’s been a lot of their time arguing.
They still argue, but are probably much better friends in the world
before and that’s one changed. Anand Mahindra,
wonderful to have you with us as well. Sir Martin Sorrell, you have been
watching India and the rise of India for a while and I’m sure
you have opinions about India. With great interest
and enthusiasm, yeah. With great interest and enthusiasm.
I’m delighted to hear that. Some of the global Indians
that we have with us as well. I think India’s rise
was in a sense spearheaded by some individuals who went to make
a mark for themselves on the global business stage. None also than Rajat Gupta of McKinsey
who’s with us on this panel. It’s wonderful to have you with us.
Sitting next to him is Zakir Mahmood, President and Chief Executive Officer
of the Habib Bank of Pakistan. We are not gonna convert this session
into an India-Pakistan debate which might have become 20 years back
or even five years ago. I think we’re moving on,
but it’s wonderful to have you on the panel with us, Sir.
And finally, give me great, great pleasure to welcome,
Manvinder Banga, President Food, Home & Personal Care Unilever
United Kingdom, another Indian businessman who has
really made his mark on the global stage.
And we have fantastic members of the audience here as well whom I will
keep on turning to promote the CNN. Randi Zuckerberg of Facebook who is
with us is going to be taking part on this and we’re going to be taking
questions from Facebook as part of this session.
Right. Now that I’ve said it all,
Sir, let me just start with you. What do you think the world expects
of India and is India going to be meeting global expectations or no? Yes, India will be meeting
global expectations as well as what the world expects from India
is to provide leadership and growth in the 21st century
as mature democracy, the largest one in this planet, effector of regional
stability and peace inclusive growth. And as far as delivering on those
expectations? Yes. India is capable. India has the resources.
India has not only convictions, but the capabilities
which are developing as we talk. And it has the will to do it?
Definitely so. Alright.
here shouldn’t be any doubt on that. Sir Hormats,
would you like to see India playing a leadership role
in the 21st century. Yes, I would. With all the reasons
the Minister has mentioned, I think India
will play a major leadership role. I think it’s interesting
that we’re having this panel at all. Twenty years ago, this subject
perhaps wouldn’t have come up but if you look at what’s happened
over the last 20 years, one mark, one important indicator,
the first and only state visit in the Obama administration
has been the visit of Prime Minister Singh to Washington
that took place a couple of months ago. This underscore the importance
of United States attaches to the relationship with India.
Second, India plays an important regional role,
strategic regional role. Not just with one or two countries,
but in the broader context, India is a source of stability,
a source of wisdom in the region it finds itself and with respect
to a lot of countries, that stability is important. Second,
India has earned a spot in the world Today by virtue of the growth
that’s taking place. The dynamism of the Indian economy
and third, India now is a major player on the global economic scene.
India is a leader in the group of 20. So, India’s context in the world
has changed from a country where we had difficult bilateral
relations 20 years ago to the only state visit we’ve had
to a strategic regional partner to a growth generator and to part
of this new global system of 20 countries where India plays
a predominant leadership role and that I think is India’s role today and I think India is gonna continue
to play that role in the future. Of course, you still do argue
with India in many areas and we’ll return
to them in a couple of minutes. Countries always argue,
but the world is constructive and we’re arguing over things
where the context is one of positivism as opposed to the old Cold War
kinds of issues which were relatively negative.So,
arguing with the context in a positive… We argue with Canada,
we argue with Britain, we argue with a lot of countries. Let it me put it differently.
Debate in a democracy is healthy. Democracy cannot sustain itself
and continue to grow without debate, without discussion. Okay, so as long as you’re debating
constructively enough for the sake of argument.
Anand Mahindra, you’ve come to Davos of course lots of lots
of times before, but I think the main factor that we’re doing
a debate like this also underscores in a sense the changed role
that India plays. Is there, do you think in Indian policy makers
full awareness of the different stakes that India has in the global?Well,
we have a number of policy makers in the audience, so I’m sure
you can throw that question. But if you’d ask me this question
12 months ago or more than 12 months before the meltdown, I might have had
a different answer but I think post the meltdown, post the recession,
there’s a qualitatively different expectation from India that I think
the world has. The missing link today in the world is trust whether
it’s trust of corporations, trust of governments, there’s a general
expectation that can we get people we trust from an integrity
point of view with more leadership and yet get the growth
the world needs. Now, this sounds like India is going back to its old
model high horse which have been chastised for many times in the past,
but I do believe that if we can within our democratic framework,
within our value-driven framework, if we can demonstrate the kind
of steroidal growth that the world expects, well clearly that’s
something that will set us apart from the other nation that is always
spoken about in China because there is clearly an unspoken
uneasiness about growth that comes within a more autocratic framework.
We have an incredible opportunity to set an example and prove that you can get the kind of growth
that we need and the world needs, but within that democratic framework
that the world wants to see remain. Sir Martin,
I think that growth is there and I think that growth will happen
in India, but when you’re talking about trust, I think there’s also
an expectation that India should play a certain role in the global system
itself. Yeah. Whether it is trade or climate change.
Right. All the other major issues.
Do you think the world trust India on these issues or
is still there a doubt as to the role that India will play? Well, answering basing on that. I basically think we have no choice.
In other words, India has to succeed and I put it in the context of Bob’s
and in the and I know you want to turn this into debate
about India or Pakistan, but I would be similarly bullish
about the opportunities in Pakistan. I wouldn’t underestimate certainly
what we see from clients’. So, in the context of what has happened
in the last year or two and just picking up on the point
that you just made which I think is fundamental.
There has been a great change I think in the attitude in India that we’ve
noticed over the last couple of years. Coming to Davos, the positioning
of India as the fastest growing democracy in the world I think
was a good one. I just figured out the point about democracy
and autocracy in different systems. I just point out that we in the West
have goneto state directly that capitalism ironically
in the last year or so, but what I think has changed in India
is that and forgive me for saying this in a way, but India has become
much more self confident. A few years ago, there was a feeling
that we in the West could teach India something or teach the Chinese
or the Russians or the Brazilians something.
Having gone through, having sort of been in control
on what happened in the last year or so and having messed it up a bit,
putting it mildly, the feeling I think in the East and the South
is that there’s very little maybe that we can teach them. And therefore,
I think India has become much more self confident. I would say
the major issue from my perspective in comparing China for example
with India and there is, in my view if you’re running a global company,
no choice. You have to expand your operations and build
your operations in the high growth areas of the world,
and India and China, there is the issue of infrastructure. That is the key
difference and I think for India to succeed, that has to be and I know
it’s a priority and we can talk maybe a little bit more about it,
but that investment infrastructure that is the big distinction between
China and India and I was there with Scott and my colleagues
and Damian and we went to India for a week just last three months
and you look at it and it really comes home
that difference in infrastructure. That is the difference
and that’s I think where the major and I know that and others
really focused on that building 20 kilometers a day whatever
the objective is. Alright.
India is of course a far more self confident place right now,
but do you think the full awareness of the changes that still need
to be brought in India and that this comes both
to the internal changes that Sir Martin was talking about
building infrastructure, getting education under control,
things like that but also how India interacts with the rest
of the world and I think there has to be probably some
sort of confidence even in those dealings. But let me go back
to your original question what the world expects of India.
I think the biggest contribution India can actually make
is the development of its own people. If you think about it, the India
clearly has the potential for the largest middle class
in the world. The development of its own people will create enormous
opportunities for the global system. And I think that’s the first
responsibility which actually has many implications and primarily
in the social field. I mean we’ve talked
about growth – fantastic, but we should talk
about inclusive growth and how far it reaches
which means education, health care, infrastructure, urbanization, so on.
That is the fundamental responsibility. I think all this about
position in the world and etc., etc., will be a natural byproduct if we are
successful in developing our own people and that is a big
challenge, not a small challenge. Okay, let’s me just get in you
in before I come back to the others. Would you agree with that,
that basically the most important thing India has to do is set some of its own
house in order in fixing things like infrastructure, making sure
poverty goes, making sure that there’s inclusive growth, is that pretty much
the perception of the government itself? Of course and I think that has been
a priority of the government. It is clearly reflected
in all the major policy, initiatives, and decisions. If you look at India
where we were in say 1980 and where we are today in less
than three decades, it does not happen accidentally.
It’s naturally that the world has suddenly discovered
India or we are on a journey to discover the rest of the world.
India has invested in institutions, in human resources,
mindful of the fact that we are a country of paradoxes.
If we are talking as Rajat mentioned of one of the largest middle class
which India would create becoming maybe in a couple of years
the fifth largest market in the world and the third largest economy in less
than two decades. But the human resources, the median age
in India is 25 years so we are home to 20% of the world’s children.
17% of the world’s population and today, investment is taking
place in universities, dabbling the IITs and the IIMs.
The only time they did tell you whoever was the Prime Minister
in the decade of the 50s and Rajat referred to 80. Let’s not forget,
we first talked of preparing India for the 21st century
that was Rajiv Gandhi as Prime Minister. The technology
mission and India leapfrogged from a country which was a victim
I’ll still say of an accident of history we missed out
on industrial revolution, so did China and other developing countries.
We were not free nations, but you catch the technology changes
and to straddle that huge demand particularly the high end
of technology when you look at the space science today, the IT,
the communications, and the more and more human resources that come out
of India not in the next few decades. You can say that when the world faces
a major challenge because of declining populations,
aging populations, and there will be shortage of skilled
man power projected maybe to the extent of 40%.
America is not going to suffer it, but Europe and some other parts
of the world. It is countries like India which have stepped up.
That’s what I meant about leadership and inclusive growth, yes.
Because how do you empower your people? By giving them access
to the nation’s resources and opportunities and institutions.
These are the programs that whether it is investment in rural India,
creation and expansion of infrastructure, rural employment,
current skill. If you look at the resources which India
has been able to commit, it would have been unthinkable
that India, a country which has so many poor people,
a country which has so many developmental challenges, a
nd has aspirations of its people and their dreams to deal with,
will be able to mobilize and commit resources to create one of the largest
social security next in five years. I’m not saying that we have reached
where we want to be, but certainly our direction is clear,
our mission is clear, the leadership has a vision,
and the world is recognizing what India can do today
and in the coming decades. Alright, Sir.
When you look at the position of India from the point of view of Pakistan
and from the neighborhood in general, is that good enough, India is setting
its own house in order, India is growing very fast,
India will be an engine of growth paths of the world. Would you like
to see a change in the way India deals with its neighborhood
and the rest of the world itself? Well in the region, India is admired
as it has a mission globally also for its growth and the progresses
made in the last couple of decades, but India’s growth has really not had
the kind of multiplier effect on the region as it should have had.
If you look at China for example where China’s growth has done has had
that multiplier effect on ASEAN and other neighbor countries,
we’re still waiting for their multiplier effect.
And why is that? I think one view is that India is really not engaged
enough with the region and there’s one region, the SARC.
If you look at India trade overall within SARC, it is about less than 3%
of its whole trade. So I think from a regional perspective,
what we’re looking for is India to get more economically trade.
Trade is very, very limited and I think from the Pakistan point of view,
we hope that we’d see more of that. But when you say that India
is unengaged enough with its neighborhood, and you’re right
that sort of trade which is happening in the region is a small fraction
of what it perhaps could be, is it also because
of the bilateral problems that do exist? I mean when
you’re talking about building a trade between India and Pakistan,
it would always be held hostage to some of the other problems
that would be there in the two countries. Clearly, that’s the case
but I think notwithstanding the bilateral problems,
I think there are also opportunities to open up and create more.
What we have a basic framework, the SAFTA in place,
but what we don’t see on the ground is the actual progress being made.
There are all kinds of barriers. Minister, if I could just get you
to respond to that. Is the region an important area or arena for India
to be in or to play in or do you see India now having
a slightly different view of itself in the world
where it doesn’t see the region that important and wants to be
in global world. You see we are rooted to reality
and we are pragmatic and truthful in approach.
There’s no question of India even thinking that it will race ahead
and leave its neighbors behind and that’s why India has been insisting
to make SAFTA meaningful like NAFTA is. Why can’t be South Asia
be the same? Why can’t we open up our hearts in their borders?
There are certain painful realities, that’s violence and terrorism
that exist in our region. That is hurting everyone,
but there’s Pakistan, India, and the region. We know
what’s happening in Afghanistan. Now, these are not the things
which are beyond our control, but collectively, we have to put
our minds and hearts together. The leaders,
the leaders of the civil society. India has made unilateral offers
to give access to the Indian market to all these countries. I did so
at the last SAFTA Ministerial in Kathmandu and if you look
at the number of tariff lines where India has zero duty,
more than 90% of the tariff line and we’re happy that Pakistan has also
increasingly realized that this is the way to move forward.
But when you look at India’s engagement with the region, I would just like
slight correction here without quarreling with their perception
because we want to work together is that we are engaged
with the region, you know with our extended neighborhood.
India has signed FTA with the ASEAN countries.
Look at our trade with ASEAN. I mean you can feel free to quarrel
with that perception. You have full permission to do so. No, what I’m saying that perception
because history is not true. I have given the details. We signed FTA
with ASEAN. You referred to ASEAN. Look at our trade with China.
We may have issues at the balance of trade with China. So, my commitment I really want to go withMr. Banga
on this note. Do you see – I’m just trying to figure out how important
you see the region. When you look at it either from within India
or when you look at it from our company like Unilever.
Do you see the region as being important, would you say,
“Look, there’s India and India has to be viewed
in a completely different category and the region is not important
per se when you”. I think there’s no doubt
that the region is important and its region
as just been said actually is all around India and its culture
got a lot of similarities, and therefore, it does come together.
But I want to say one thing before that, I think that actually
the world will expect much more from India than India will expect
from the world. And I think this has to do with India’s ethos,
history, self reliance, and way of thinking.
It’s very deep rooted in that and I think
that is going to be the case. Now, as we look forward today,
what does the world expect from India. I think many things have been said,
but I think we are at an inflection point in the world
and some large parts of the world we have seen perhaps
the end of recession. And I say perhaps, but we certainly
haven’t seen the beginning of growth. People are looking for new development
models, new society models, new growth models, everywhere
these questions are being asked. And if they’re not being asked,
they’re certainly within people’s minds and hearts. And I think
India has the unique opportunity to provide the source of inspiration.
It’s been talked about earlier its vibrant democracy,
but more importantly creating new growth models,
inclusive growth model which no one has done before. All other democracies
have huge distribution of income issues or a source
of inspiration for business where businessmen in India
have for years done more with less, or for consumers actually.
As consumers in the West learn to grapple with this new reality,
I think the Indian consumers approach to frugality and value consciousness
will be a source of inspiration. I think apart from this of course
the world expects India to be a huge market place
as we move from one billion people to becoming one billion consumers,
and that’s important of course for India in its own development,
but also for the world. But perhaps one last thing,
as certainly it’s not been said thus far in this session,
I think with all of this inflection, there is another question
and it’s about responsibility. And whether we like or not,
I think the world will expect India to be part of the climate
change solution, even though it was not the problem. Right. As part
of the climate change solution, as part of the trade solution as well,
and I do want to come to some of those areas
where the world will be expecting India to play a more responsible role,
but if I could just your reaction, Sir Hormats to some of the stuffs
that has been discussed so far, when the United States
looks at India now. You used to see India
in a certain regional context and specifically India-Pakistan
for a long, long period of time off to the prism of the Cold War.
Where do you see India now? Do you see it as a global partner,
as a global ally, as rooted more from a global
point of view or from a regional point of view? We see India as global partner.
I think if you look at the world has changed from seven rates
industrialized countries as being the sort of board of directors
of the global economy, now it’s 20. But among those 20 are certain number
of countries that really are particularly dynamic
and are particularly important in this overall system and India
is one of them. So, we very much see India as a partner.
We see India as a partner in improving the global trading system.
We see India as a partner in addressing global energy problems and I think
that is one dimension to the relationship. It’s sort of G20,
but it’s beyond that. The other thing though that’s very interesting
for Americans in particular is we see India also as a partner
in some of the newer areas of technology. One of the things
that we would like to do is because we know from the fact
there are so many Indians in the United States
who are so successful, there’s a very personal
set of relationships that are developed.
It’s not just at the political or head of state level. You know,
if you look at entrepreneurs in United States, many of them come
from India though and this was stressed
in Prime Minister Singh’s visit in the United States. The dynamic role
of the Indian community in the United States
has done two things. It’s pull this together
not just on a political ground, but on culture, on scientific,
on personal grounds. So, what we do is we’re hoping as to resolve a lot
of agreements that have been signed during the summit, but a number
of other areas of communality as well to work with Indian scientific
community to work on breakthroughs and agriculture, to work with India
on breakthroughs in medicine. We see this at the high levels
of global partnership, but also at the level
of actual practical progress in dealing with some of the fundamental issues
that our world has to deal with in a very pragmatic level. I just want to support
on the Civil Nuclear Treaty. I don’t think really
the Indian community in the U.S. made an enormous contribution
and a great role in getting that over the line when it was… It’s a confidence issue too
because it develops that trust and not just that the government level
but at a personal level. So, that was to the good
and the civil nuclear deal obviously have moved India
into a slightly better position. It got one of the problems out.
Mr. Martin, I just wanted to come back to the point that Mr. Banga was making
just a short while back. There are still many areas
where India needs to do things. I mean the world is expecting India
to be part of the solution even if it’s not part of the problem.
Climate is one of them, trade is another. And it could be a number of other issues
around could beyond tell. Yeah, but the thing I wanted
to just inject was if you – You know, I’ve always thought about
why was that India took off at the time that it did
and obviously there, if you go back through
the history in 90s, there are a number of significant
political, economic, and social changes that triggered that.
But I always thought the neighborhood, if you look at the rise
of the Chinese Tiger that exerted an influence and pushed politicians
with all due respect and others to focus on the issue.
And coming back to this… That’s an interesting point
you’re making. Using the fact that China really took off,
almost propelled India.. speech in 85 and the measures
that we’ve been alive at WPV of 25 years and for 22 of those,
23 of those 25 years, you know we’ve had significant operations
in India and China. We were blessed really half by chances
as a result to that. But the point I’m making is this that
and I think India, again I don’t wanna be critical,
because there’s a lot going on, there’s lot to be done,
there’s a lot of internal things that have to be done
whether it would be education, development of people,
or with the 1.1 to 1.2 billion people population base the world
as Indians always do, but India has become
more externally focused that the issue is this.
China has subtly was the West, been focused on Iran and Iraq
and Afghanistan. China has started to spread soft diplomatic influence
throughout the world. You see it in Africa,
you see it in Latin America, you see it in Asia in general.
It’s not just the contiguous countries, not just the region
that we’re talking about and I think India as a world — I mean
my view is this is a 200-year swing. Go back to the early 19th century,
go back to 1825. India and China accounted for 40% of worldwide GNP
and according to Goldman’s prognostications or other forecasts
by 2040 or 50, we’ll be back to that and the BRICs and the next 11
will be back to 50% of worldwide GNP which again where they were
200 years ago. So, history wasn’t on the side
of India or in China for 200 years. Now, either give me another 200 years,
but it will be now. This is an inexorable force.
This is unstoppable in my view and there’s a major shift
and we in the West have to come to terms with that,
have to understand it. But India will have
as a result of this, very significant external
responsibilities as well which I think — having said that,
there’s a lot to do. A lot to do internally and externally. I think the external responsibilities,
I know for example we had Jairam Ramesh
in India who wants to be a deal maker now at global forums
and not a deal breaker. Is that something that you think
is really crucial and really important going forward? Again, it is something
which would change the way that India is presenting its.
Politicians sometimes within India have a problem in saying
we’re changing our position on global fora.
Why has India changed its stance? Sometimes, we may have to change
that stance if you want to play a leadership role at a global level. Well, I just have
a little interpretation of our trying to interpret the meaning
of the word dealmaker. Particularly what Jairam meant by that.
There could be a lot of prerogative connotations to that.
But let me put it in a different way, I think India wants to be part
of the specs sheet. When the specs sheet is being said.
That’s a very mundane business phrase, but the question is are you there
when the terms are being said for dialogue,
for negotiation, for any major global issue
and if you really go less everything that this panel has said
and everything happens, whether it’s Vindi’s point
or it’s about infrastructure, middle class growth which Rajat said.
There is no way that the world can keep India out from being on the table
when those said. I just want to make one very quick point
which Zakir mentioned earlier. Zakir you’re talking about needing
India to create a multiplier. You can create a multiplier
only when there’s interconnectedness. When two countries are part
of each other’s value chains and supply chains. And from a vague
ground level view as a company, we’ve been trying to sell in Pakistan
for a while and in fact, I got the crazy answer last year
in Davos from one of your policy makers saying,
“You know you can sell from your factories, from your company
in China or the U.S. I can’t let you sell from India.”
How are we being given an opportunity to build
a multiplier if the doors are shut. I believe the cases that Pakistani
businessmen are worried about being inundated. I think
there should be more confidence. I’m going to play
and see who wins or loses. Okay, before I turn to Facebook.
You wanna quickly respond to that? Are the neighbors of India
may be sometimes worried about being completely some failure? No, I don’t think so. I think
there is a possibility so much that we can do in terms of trade
and Pakistani businessmen I can say that for certainty
are actually looking for opportunity to export into India. They feel
that’s a very large market and their economy of skill
that they can achieve for their own products. So, I think
if the politicians say that, I’ll say I think the business community needs
to do some more convincing of that, but there’s this whole issue
of bilateral relations which I think need to be addressed and that’s
the subject for the politicians Alright, I just want to move here
from the panel for a couple of minutes because we’ve heard
what the panel has been saying, but also been asking
some of the questions to all the people out there in the world on Facebook
and also on NDTV.com. I would just like to welcome
onto the program and to the show, Randi Zuckerberg. We all know
what Mark has done on Facebook but in many ways, Randi is now
the face of Facebook if I can you call that.
You did a special poll on the subject on Facebook
What was it and what did you find? That’s right. So, this is clearly
an issue that many people are passionate around the world
and over the past few days, we’ve been asking Facebook users
all over the world what they think what should the world
expect from India. It’s interesting, a lot people in the panel
mentioned leadership in major areas, something that we only lightly touch
on this climate change but overwhelmingly,
that was the response that most of people on Facebook
thought that the world should expect from India was to be leader
in climate change over the next few years
across every age group that was unanimously
the majority answer. Alright, Randi.
Solving the problem of global poverty where about 19% acting
as an Indian of economic, growth about 13%,
but cooperating on global issues was the big one. That’s right. You did ask a couple
of other questions, Randi, and I wanna come back to those
in a couple of minutes. But Minister if I can just get
your reaction to this. It comes back to that point
which I’m making earlier about wanting to be dealmaker
on big global issues. Is that something that you think India has been,
I don’t want to use the word obstructionist, but I mean
we landed here at Davos. There was an article that we read
in foreign policy that said India is holding up too many
international treaties. Is that a fair comment to make
and is it true particularly in your ministry when it comes
to treaty? Well, I do not know
if there is selective amnesia on the part of the author
because India has taken major initiatives.
There was the Doha Round of the WTO which was told for 15 months
frozen literally. I’m not going into the merits or demerits
that we were right or the others were wrong.
When countries negotiate a multilateral treaty or a regime,
they come from different levels of development, different aspirations,
and their national positions. And that’s where you meet, talk,
and try to find a common middle ground. India took
the initiative to reenergize the Doha process back in winning
the ministerial in Deli in the first week of September. It was
a rainbow coalition put together, not our key partners
in the developing countries, all the caucuses,
but key developed world whether it’s the U.S., Canada, Japan,
and EU. And we were responsible which has been acknowledged in the G20
fifth’s world summit. That talks have resumed,
negotiators returned to Geneva and today text-based negotiations
are proceeding and Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh
was very happy. I will not dare if Pittsburgh Montauk was there.
He’s here. But that is what we can do. We cannot decide for 153 countries.
We can only take a leader’s initiative and quickly I would like
to also mention that it’s not only on trade and climate change.
It’s not a question of dealmaking. Deal is how you harmonize position
in the larger good of humankind and planet earth. Same goes for trade
so that you bring about a trade regime which is truly global which addresses
the legitimate aspirations and challenges, also the developing
countries and the poor countries because poverty is very high
on your agenda and we are in 2010. And let’s not forget
the Millenium Summit and the millennium development goals.
So, I would rather go first for the eradication of poverty.
You cannot address the challenge of climate change
without eradicating poverty. This is a painful truth. Okay, Mr. Hormats. This is the time
that you can do some of that friendly arguing
which you were talking about a little earlier. Well I think our countries
are working together. Ministers are working with Ron Kirk,
our U.S. Trade Representative very closely and I would simply make
the point that we’re in a negotiation now
and the success of anything on the environmental side and anything
of the trade side depends very heavily on contributions
from the United States and contributions from India.
It’s almost impossible to see a satisfactory resolution
of these issues without these two major countries
contributing on trade liberalization and dealing with the environment.
But not just us, China, Brazil, and a number of others. Each country
has set aside internally how far it’s going to go,
but I think looking at it from a global point of view.
The contributions of these countries are essential,
whether we can get there or not remains to be seen, but the dialogue
is going on. It’s very constructive. There are differences of opinion.
There is no question about that and the process has gone
somewhat slower than I think either India
or the United States would want. We have to work these things out
for the interest of the global economy and that means digging deep into our
domestic politics to try to bring people along to solutions
that they might not intuitively want to go along
with given domestic pressures. So it’s a constructive dialogue.
It’s not the sort of dialogue that makes you tear your hair out. It’s very constructive. We actually
had a meeting this morning. It was very constructive.
When a minister meets with Ronald Kirk,
it’s very constructive. We have a long way to go.
India has a long way to go. All of us have a long way to go,
but the dialogue is a constructive one and I think the goal
is one that’s quite similar, whether we can there
or not still remains. I’ll just give another word,
constructive engagement. Constructive engagement. That’s right.
Can I make one other point on the following that Martin’s point
on why India made these changes and he correctly pointed out
there was competition from the rest of the world.
The other thing that was important I think was that India had
a very difficult period in the latter part of the 1980s,
early part of the 1990s and I think that traumatic period
led people in India, the government certainly,
the Prime Minister when he was doing other things at that point
and the country that we realized that the old model didn’t work.
It was broken and that made the people of India I think more willing
to go along with a lot of these reforms and reforms that perhaps wouldn’t have
been accomplished five years ago. Crisis tends to enable you
to mobilize domestic support for things that, otherwise,
couldn’t have happened. Alright, I just want to get
a quick stop ball from all the other members
of the panel. Maybe one more line? Would you agree with the priorities
as they said out there and what the minister said India has
to first solve the problem of poverty and only then can it start
playing a role in things like climate change. No, I didn’t say condition. I said
that has to be addressed. I think that’s what I’d like
to pick up. I think that I don’t think these issues can be dealt
with sequentially because they’re all out there
at the same time. Now, actually where I think India is quite unique.
It is very special. It’s got a lot of diversities,
it’s got a lot of multiple cultures, it’s got a pluralism in its ethos.
It embraces diversity. It’s got openness of discussion
and views with democratic process. It is there for the ideal
crucible for innovation. And I think, therein will lie the solution
to many of these issues because I think we are well positioned
as a nation to articulate solutions that embrace and tackle three or four
of these issues at the same time. I was listening just today
to the story about solar light and hundreds of business.
Now, those ideas of innovative business models got across many
of these issues and I think one important point we’ve touched
upon in terms of this whole issue of trade, climate change, and so on. I think just as the world
can expect a lot from India. Anand talked about it.
India has the right to be at the table in the start and I think
that is correct. I think the world started a process of globalization.
This process is inexorable and irreversible. And I think
the current climate is taking people to actually stop and pause,
and actually turn left and right and so on. And I think
that’s actually got to be challenged, but constructively. I think
the world has to be truly flat in all the aspects we’ve discussed. Okay, quick comment from you
and then I wanna turn to the question about India should expect
to the world. I just want to build on this point and say that India
has the most vibrant civil society of any place. It has extraordinarily
entrepreneurial business community that is getting more and more socially
conscious and has a government which has now the resouces and programs
to get the problems of poverty, etc. But one thing that is crucial I think
is how to get all these three sectors to work well together
and sometimes that doesn’t happen. I think government programs
are fantastic. All of the programs that Minister said. However, I think
that there has to be an external catalyst
in terms of coalition of a public-private partnership
that should drive it and make sure that happens. That’s important. Randi, I wanna just turn
to the second question which you asked which is about what India
expects of the world and you asked that same question we asked
that in NDTV.com. It would be interesting to compare
what the conclusion. Can I just ask is the sample
an Indian sample or global sample or what? Yeah, that’s a great question.
So when we asked what the world can expect from India,
that was a global sample. What India can expect from the world
was a sample of Facebook users within the India. I think it was so interesting to ask
the Indians the reverse question for the reverse sample. Certainly we can ask that
right after the session. Because it may well be that environment
and climate change is very important to people outside India,
but Indians may be saying that the economic engine
is the critical issue. Sir Martin, to take that point,
but we’ll continue this to be running both on Facebook and also on NDTV.com,
we’re gonna keep that poll and. No, that’s a great way.
We’re definitely gonna continue to ask questions. So, what are the responses
to the second one? So, we asked thousands of users
within India what India should expect from the rest of the world.
As you can see, overwhelming a seat at the UN Security Council.
Also, very interesting echoes a lot of the discussion
that we’ve heard here and a few people have also mentioned that the rest
of the world seems to expect a lot more from India than India
expects from the world and the responses
seem to suggest that as well. Right, what is really fascinating
is you asked that question on Facebook. We asked
exactly that same question on NDTV.com as well and we again asked what India
should expect from the world and the similar sort of questions,
but this was what was thrown up on NDTV.com. Take a look at this
and perhaps you can notice some similarity out there. Once again,
permanency to the United Nations up there at number one.
Protecting India’s security interests’ was number two and fair treatment
on trade and commerce was number three. Interesting points
that were also made was India needs to be equated now more with China
than with Pakistan and that was one of the things that were thrown up
on NDTV.com as well. Now, I just wanna ask the panel
very quickly, this business about a seat to the United Nations
Security Council and the permanency, that’s obviously very important
within India which in a sense is almost unfortunate
because these may be one of those issues
which could be held up because of global politics.
But let me ask you that, do you think this is a realistic hope
or do you think it’s gonna be difficult to do for other reasons,
nothing specifically to do with India? Well, let me say my area
with state department is economic. Fortunately, I don’t have to deal
with that issue. Let me make a point though which I think does relate
to this and that is that India and the people of India have a right
to expect that the rest of the world gives India in global councils,
global meetings of all sort. The kind of respect, the kind of voice,
the kind of leadership role which India has earned
by what it has done over the last 20 years.
Now, whether how you manifest that in the security council
or other vehicles, it does seem to me that the issue
is one of respect for India’s accomplishments, respect for the voice
that India can and should have as part of the overall
global leadership group that makes the decisions
or drives change in the global economy and the global political system.
And I think that is the case. I think that the fact
that there was this state visit was not just for show,
not just for White House dinner. It was basically to demonstrate
that U.S. listens to India and I think I’ve been
in a lot of these G20 preparatory meetings. I was
at the Pittsburgh meeting, Montauk was there and you can see
in the way the Prime Minister is respected.
You can see in the way India’s voice and views are respected.
That India is seen as part of the global leadership
and that is a very fundamental point and I think Indians who look
at the way their government is playing a global role and the kind of role
it’s playing should see this as demonstration that the respect
is there and the Indians’ voice is regarded in a very,
very positive way by the rest of the world.
That is the fundamental element of the new global economy. Sir Martin,
is this partly a branding issue? A seat to the United Nation
because India brand and it also makes sure the India
has disparity with China. No, I think it’s iconic to worry
about security, about nuclear proliferation,
and nuclear weapons, and people around them may have access
to that sort of weapon you know. So whether it’s the seat,
I mean Rajat was just saying, well you should speak for yourself.
You thought it was almost an irrelevance. I think it is actually. I don’t think,
I mean not that I would aspire to it and all that, but it would be a result
of something once we get some place and it doesn’t really matter,
I don’t think it’s all that worth. That’s why I asked him
whether it’s a branding question. It’s one brand that you can get
as Sir Hormats is saying that India is being seen as a global leader. But it’s an iconic solution
to the problem. I just want to inject one thing. India is at a rapid stage
of growth. It’s come on to the world stage in the last
10 to 15 years, whatever it is. It’s now up there
with the other members of the BRICs and the next 11. I find it,
the summit is a bit cheeky of us in the West to expect India
or indeed China or Russia or Brazil to provide to the solution to issues
that we into a larger saying created ourselves. I mean,
India doesn’t have the way with all yet. The luxury
of surplus resources to be able to solve the problems
that we’ve to a larger extent created. So, I think it’s unreasonable for us.
Now, they have to be a part of the solution. They have to have
the seat at the G20 or whatever happens today,
but you know, it’s a sort of for us to turn around and impose
and for people to say you know on climate, we want India
to be the country that solves it all for us is unrealistic.
We have to solve it for ourselves with aid and cooperation
and bringing India into the process. Is that the way
you would view the priority. How important for the government
is the seat to the United Nations. I think it’s another question of brand.
It’s a question of what India looks in itself and its role
in the global order. When these institutions were created,
it was 1945. This present world order was dictated by the victors
of the Second World War. Can the world order,
political and economic, remain frozen in 1945 that more
than two-thirds member countries of the United Nations,
the overwhelming majority were not free nations. Today,
the security council or the Britain world institutions must reflect
the contemporary realities of the 21st century world. That’s why G8,
Robert you’re right, has given way to the G20 because the global problems
need global responses, coherent and correct.
The problems are enormous. They cannot be responded
by an exclusivist club. Similarly for the security council,
can you call it a global order, a global architecture which excludes
the largest democracy on the planet in decision making? Which excludes
the entire continent of Africa, 54 countries, entire Latin-American,
and Caribbean and we call it global and democratic? I say I’m sorry
I can’t accept it. It has to be representative,
it has to be democratic. You cannot have decisions
being taken about India, Africa, Latin America, two-third of humankind
without us being there. I know when I asked you to change
American policy in a live television. I’m not talking of policy. I responded.
You asked me a question, I’ve responded.
I think my people are right. Vikram, can I just comment there.
Actually, I think that you know we can get concerned about this issue.
But to the Minister’s point which I completely agree with,
what’s going to happen is that if these institutions
don’t change, they will become
increasingly irrelevant. Absolutely. And I think, therefore,
we don’t need to spend any time thinking about this.
I would rather go back and think about what India needs to do
to develop itself. And let me pick the issue of climate change,
but also trade. Many of the other issues
that have been picked up. I think, you know,
sometimes it’s quite good to come last or to come second last,
or to come in the middle of vanguard because you have an opportunity
to learn from everybody else and to see what all the mistakes
have been made. We have the opportunity
to learn about regulation. We have an opportunity to learn
about how societies of the world, economic ways of the world,
and also to make sure we don’t make the same mistakes
that happened in the case of climate change.
That’s our opportunity in India. Mr. Hormats, again as I’m saying,
I’m gonna get you to specify American policy on this,
but in general do you think global institutions will increasingly
have to reflect the changing nature of the world and are they doing it
in an adequate fashion right now? Absolutely, they do and if the UN were
to be reinvented today or invented today, the security council
will look a lot different. For the reasons
the Minister has described. I think the Minister’s point
is a good one and the people who subscribed to that
who answered that poll understand one thing that the world is not the same
as it was in 1945 or even the year 2000. It’s changing
and some institutions have the flexibility to change
more rapidly than the G20 went from the G7 or G8
and everyone looked at it to the G20 with India playing a major role.
The IMF and the World Bank are changing gradually,
the votes are changing, the voices changing. In other areas,
if you look at the way the environmental issue
was dealt with, there are relatively few countries
in the global leadership group that include India
and some of the bigger countries. So, institutions
that have the capability of being more flexible have moved in exactly
the direction the Minister has correctly indicated.
They should be moving and I think you’ll see
in the world trade organization, there’s a notion of unanimity,
but the real leadership core are a small group of countries
that include India, the United States, China, Brazil, and UN in Japan.
So, a lot of institutions have moved a very long way from a decade
or two ago and certainly from the post war period. The problems these institutions
that were built in the post war period,
some are capable of moving more rapidly and more flexibly than others,
and those are capable of doing that have moved in exactly
that direction. Before, I will turn to the audience,
your quick reaction to that end. I saw security coming up as number two
which is almost interesting. Maybe I would have told
that looking after Indian security especially because of the neighborhood
that India happens to be and may have been up there
at number one. But you wanted some debate,
so let me just take and see what something Martin said earlier.
He was being politically very correct and telling everybody here
that India shouldn’t be blamed for this which is probably what maybe
some people in this audience wanted to hear. But Martin
you risked a little condescension there. Because
if you look at the result, remember you were just telling me
or you’re asking Randi, what would the Indian people say?
Climate change is not their agenda. It was number three and I’m at pains
when I go around the world to correct people’s impressions
that you know, you people who are vehicle makers,
you’re belching pollution, your country wants growth
with no regard to the environment and I said,
“Look, the Indian middle class is just as responsible as citizen
of the world as anybody else.” We want our children to be safe.
So I say as a businessman also, I want that opportunity.
I see climate change as an opportunity. For God’s sake,
don’t let us get away with this. We should be here
and we should be innovative. No, no, no. Martin, I wouldn’t like you
to get away with it. The only point I’m saying
is people in glass houses should. What I saw very interesting.
What depressing but an opportunity, 26% of the people in the first world,
Randi, were not sure and that’s upsetting. They don’t know
what India stands for. Facebook and Twitter
are abbreviated thinking. It tells you more about
their troubled mind. Somebody spends a lot of his time
on Twitter. Clearly, there’s a scope
for a major branding. I was just gonna say,
so before I leave I’m gonna get Martin to sign India for branding. Let me turn to the audience,
but final thoughts from you. One word on climate change.
I think it’s very clear. It’s in India’s self interest
to develop a low-carbon economy. We should do that independent
or anything that happened in Copenhagen or negotiations or any place.
The problem with the negotiations, I was told back because I live
in the United States. I hear the point of view
and the dialogue going on. It is a completely
skewed perspective there. I mean nobody talks about the installed base,
we’re only talking about how much you are emitting
and the responsibility that exists. It is from Congress
to the White House. I didn’t see a perspective.
So when you travel around the world, you say, “Okay, let’s set aside
all this negotiation that’ll happen in the way it should happen.”
The fundamental point about let’s develop a low-carbon economy.
Let’s concentrate on innovation. Let’s steal the thunder
and I think quietly China is doing that in a fundamental way
and we ought to do that. Okay, I would like to know
in the last 10 minutes that we’ve got in this program turn to the audience
and try to get some views from them, anybody who has a view,
Vikram Akula. Can somebody can just get a mic to him. Yeah, my name is Vikram Akula
and I’m with SKS Microfinance. We serve about six million households
across the country with financial services.
My question is related to the fundamental failure I think
of India’s leadership story which is a problem of poverty,
both in percentage terms as well as absolute terms,
we have most number of poor people. When it comes to extreme poor,
the second only sub Sahara in Africa and while I know Mr. Minister
that the government has done a lot in terms of funding programs
to eradicate poverty. The question that I have for you
is couldn’t we do more to help have the private sector
get involved not just in the growth story of India,
but in the inclusive growth story of India and I’ll give you
just one example, you mentioned social safety nets
simply changing policy so that poor people can have
a safe place to save, through let’s say
microfinance institutions. We can radically change, you know,
the poverty equation for the poor without any additional expenditure.
Likewise, assistance for education is a way of harnessing
a market-based solution to bring about inclusive growth and why
is it that there are more thinking going on in those lines. All right, you wanna quickly respond
to that or should I take some more questions? I think
it’s a very fundamental question. I do not know
what makes you think that Prime Minister Manmohan is saying
or the Chairperson of the UPA, Sonia Ghandi or me as the Minister of.
They are not concerned of the leaders who were there in office.
Poverty is a painful reality in your country and my country,
but it’s also but an accident of history. What has happened
in the last two decades, that’s how we should be looking at.
That whether we are looking at a glass which is still half full
or a glass which is still half empty, tenths and tenths of millions
of Indians have been empowered and brought out of the poverty net
which when I was talking I clearly put poverty eradication
as number 1. It’s talking about so about
the climate change that it has to be tackled first.
It’s not a question of order or pre-conditions, the fact remains
that 500 million Indians do not have access
to commercial energy. So, if you want to empower them
and eradicate poverty, your energy consumption
is bound to grow. So, things are happening
out of democracy and criticism is important, but we acknowledge
what the private sector is doing, but private sector need to do
more today. It is no more a system the government makes the policies
or private sector takes its own decisions.
We work in a partnership. The Indian private sector
also has to grow to create the kind of global foundations
which other major private sector entities have done in the world. Okay, let me just try
and get some comments from members of the audience. is sitting out here,
wanna quickly add anything to the debate that we’ve heard.
We’ve enjoyed more by saying something on it. Well, I agree with the broad consensus
among the panelists that India has fortunately
not in a transient Viagra and that these rates of growth
are likely to be durable. What really troubles me
is that having reached this plateau I mean aspirationally and in terms
of policy doing enough to take us to the next higher trajectory
of growth and closer to the double digit area
and that involves a whole, whole strict policy measures
and governance features, some of which increasingly
we would need to focus on. All right. My name is Akram Segel.
I’m from Pakistan. I’ve been a member of the World Economic Forum
for 17 years and I’m a great admirer for India has done
and my proudest moment has been the CAI caught me on the India
economic advisory board as one of the five participants.. CAI. Well, always looking for recruits.
Unless there was a hidden agenda. It could be. I went on one-man campaign
to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka to press that there is necessary
for peace with India on a permanent basis. What hit me
when I was addressing the National Defense College
in that after having talked about peace should break out in India,
I was told that I was dangerously na�ve
and they were Sri Lankans among them and the police among them.
Now, I say to you that you will definitely progress.
There’s no way out of it, but the point is that you’ve got
to deal with your neighbors. You’ve got to have
constructive engagement as the Minister said
with your neighbors and you’ve got to go the extra mile
with your neighbors because unless you that, you’re going
to have a population forum which goes back. Now, I think
people like Anand Mahindra who want to have things
like the business community wants to have track with Pakistan.
I’m not to talk with the India-Pakistan thing,
but there are other neighbors in the vicinity
that we’ve got to have constructive engagement with. All right. Mr. In terms of what the world
expects from India. One of the things that I think is probably insufficient
realization across the world on how big stake everybody has
in India’s success. Because if you look around world,
where do you find a country that has the scale the number of people
we have in a democracy with the kind of diversity
that only exists globally and all of it exists in India,
religion, language, culture, you name it, and it doesn’t have oil.
So, it’s got to succeed based on just people
and if we get that right in this framework, then we become
an example for every country in the world that’s developing
which would believe that, you know, it can. So I think there’s a huge take
everybody has to that. Randi, you have an update. So, Sir Martin Sorrell asked us
to ask India the question what should the world expect
from India. We’ve seen over a thousand
responses come in, in the last few minutes
and the majority says to act as an engine for economic growth,
but very close to that is still to cooperate on global issues
like climate change. So, within India, it still echoes. So within India, people think
that acting as engine of growth is more important than the other issues. That’s correct. That’s an interesting quick reaction.
You can see the power of the internet. They can get you a response
within minutes. Any other question you have,
we have 30 seconds left before we end the program. I want to comment
on the engine of growth and I think that there’s something
about Indian growth which is very interesting.
It shouldn’t be compared as some people on the outside do to Chinese growth.
The growth models are different models. What I think
it’s interesting is that India’s participating in what kind of sort
of a second industrial revolution in one sense and an important one.
The old industrial revolution was based on an enormous
amount of power. Power was seen almost as a free good, heavy things,
using a lot of steel. The new model of India when you look at the Nano
for instance, it is producing items that people need
at very low price points, using resources, energy
and raw materials in a very efficient way
and developing markets for sort of the lower end of triangle,
the bottom billion as it’s called. If India can do that successfully
and I think it can, it is developing a new industrial model which will be
very useful not just for India but for selling things
throughout the world. It sets a different kind
of industrial revolution target which I’m think
can be very successful. I want to ask the entire panel now.
We are almost out of time. So I just want to get everyone
maybe with their final thoughts, just a couple of lines if you can
and I’m gonna start in reverse direction this time.
Let’s start with you, Mr. Banga. So, let me now repeat what’s been said
that wide consensus and pick up instead the point
that someone raised which is what can private sector
do more about poverty alleviation and I think
the most important principle to remember
is that the biggest stake holder for private sector is actually
the population base of any place, of any geography because in the end,
they are the potential consumers and therefore,
they are our responsibility and private sector is engaged
in a variety of ways and going well beyond engaging people
and actually helping them become part of this vibrant
growth model. I think that’s very important
and it is happening. All right. Firstly, I’m very encouraged
about what the Minister has said about trade. I look forward to that
actually expanding into something truly meaningful on both sides,
both have responsibilities. As far as climate change is concerned,
I think this is a very, very topical issue
for the entire subcontinent. In the next 30 years or 40 years
population will grow from 1.5 to 2.2 billion and we have
major challenges throughout the region particularly in terms of energy
as well as resource management, water resource management. And here,
all of us, much of South Asia depends on rivers so I think
what we’re looking for India particularly to take
that leadership role to get the region together to manage
the resources effectively. But Mr. Mahmood, As we just saw,
in India the question of security being so important and the question
of terrorism being so important and also in a sense of taking out
from what Mr. Banga said short while back, do you see
that there would be any possibility in moving in that direction
unless the question of terrorism, for example, is actually sorted out.
Practically speaking what had happened? Well, if you look at what’s happening
in South Pakistan, there’s a major war going on
at the North of Pakistan. The country is actually
tackling terrorism and has a big price that sets civil society also is paying
in terms of what’s happening over there. I think Pakistan
is demonstrating very seriously about rooting that out. I think
what Pakistan thus need from India particularly is more understanding
and I think if we can work together, there is going to be a time
when I think we will have much more stability in the region,
but I think India is going to be a major contributor for ensuring
that stability does arrive. All right. Mr. Gupta? I would concentrate
the biggest challenge is what we’ve talked about
which is inclusive growth, stress the word inclusive
and poverty elevation. To that, fundamental is education and health.
While I think the government is doing lots of stuff,
I think it’s not making progress fast enough and we need
the private sector and everybody to engage in these two issues
and I’ll raise one last one which is India has the risk
of unplanned urbanization which means urban poverty and urban slums
and it really has a great opportunity to do it in a planned way
to make wonderful livable cities, and that’s gonna be
a very important mission. Sir Martin, final thoughts from you. I think the conventional wisdom
is that the India is a service economy.
It would be a great service economy, that was breed out
of the outsourcing that we saw historically
and that China was a great manufacturer.
You’re seeing the reverse. I think that India will be not only
a great service-based economy, but also a great
manufacturing-based economy. The other point is that it’s clear
from this conservation that expectations are very high both
externally and internally. The die is cast..
It’s an irreversible process. India, China, etc. will progress.
This is gonna put great pressure on the government to deliver
and that question and the observation about taking India to another level
double digit growth as opposed to high single digit growth.
I think it’s a critical issue. So the pressure is gonna be great
not only internally, but as we’ve heard also externally too
of India’s role in the world economy as well as internally. Right. Mr. Mahindra? Final thoughts. Let me use the time just to focus
on something that came out of this innovation of yours,
using Facebook here. The first concern was a seat
at the security table, if I’m right Randi. To me,
this is not different. If you had gone back maybe
20 to 30 years, you might have had the same outcome
and I think it’s a function of a post colonial society’s
mental math. You want self esteem. You want respect when you come out
of that and my point is that mental image in my mind
is that earlier we were like baby at the table,
you are on a high chair, you got a bib around you,
and you’re just screaming and saying, “I want this
and I want to be at this table.” I think right now we are in a position
to become full member. So if you have potluck and everybody
brings a dish to this table, I think India can bring the dish
and perhaps the best one and be gourmet at this.
We have the talent in the corporate sector to do this.
I dare say we have talent in our political leaders.
I think it’s time we earn our way to that table. All right. Mr. Hormats?
India bringing tasty dishes to that global high table
and not wearing a bib. It’s a remarkable image.
What does brings to you. I think a hot dish of vindalu
which would give people a sense of the power of India
would actually be very symbolic. My view and I’ll go back
to something Rajat mentioned a little awhile ago. I think
there are three things that India can do to play an even greater role
in the global system while doing the kind of things
that need to strengthen itself internally. One of which
I think continued efforts to alleviate poverty and to bring
more people in the middle class. That’s good for India, but also,
strengthens India’s role in the global system.
Second is education. I think there is a lot of room
for improvement in education in India. The best strength of India
in addition to the infrastructure that needs to build up
is the human infrastructure. It is the intellectual, the creative,
the entrepreneurial talent of Indians that are gonna determine
whether it is a great success over the next 20 years or it is not.
It is topping that human capital that is extremely important.
And the third is that India needs to and will have a voice
in the global system. I think how India uses that voice
is very important. Dealing with the environment,
just to take that as an issue and I don’t wanna compare India to China
as I said, they’re very different things, but Chinese are making a major effort
to deal with environmental problems, a lot of emphasis
going into alternative energy sources and part because they see themselves
not just dealing with the environmental issue,
they want to be the world’s low cost exporter of all these things.
So, from India’s point of view, developing that kind of technology
which does two things. One, it helps to deal
with the environmental issue, but it also strengthens the capacity
of India to be the low cost supplier of goods,
products that the whole world is gonna need to deal
with the energy issues of the future. India can be a leader in that area.
So, when you look at somebody’s international pressures,
the key to that to dealing with them is to do the kind of things
domestically you need that strengthen your own economy and can respond
to these global pressures. Environmental technology
is one of them. All right, Mr. Hormats.
Final very quick thoughts from you out time of time now. Three days from today
will be 62 years that the father of Indian nation was assassinated,
Mahatma Ghandi. His message resonates
throughout the world. He talked of peace.
He talked of poverty eradication. He talked of education.
He talked of people’s empowerment. Therefore, India today
is ready to dedicate itself to fulfill that unfinished agenda
to create a society that all Indians feel that they are beneficiaries
of inclusive growth. They have access to opportunities,
not denied. They live in a society where the order is fair and equitable.
A country which engages with the world has a responsible democracy,
but also is a factor of regional stability and peace. All right, but I’m afraid
we have ran out of time in this particular debate.
Thank you all so much for joining us. The debate of course can
and will continue on the internet. You can log on to NDTV.com
for this continued debate. Keep on posting your comments
out there. Randi is going to tell us
how you can do it on Facebook. You can log on to Twitter as well.
I’m Vikram Chandra. Thank you all so much
for being with us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *