Posted by: John Elliott | October 7, 2008

Nehru was lost for years in a trunk ………

Kulwant Roy in Japan, 1961

Kulwant Roy in Japan, 1961

………well, not actually Jawaharlal Nehru himself, but hundreds if not thousands of photographs taken of him by long-forgotten Associated Press (AP) photographer, Kulwant Roy – one of the first of a distinguished line of Indian writer-photographers working for the foreign and domestic media.

Negatives and prints of Mr Roy’s prolific work were locked up and forgotten in boxes and trunks for over 25 years till they were opened and restored by his photographer nephew, Aditya Arya.

There are well over 7,000 – maybe even 10,000 – images in the collection. A tiny sample of 85 are now on show in Delhi, till October 21, at the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts – History in the Making – the Visual Archives of Kulwant Roy.

Nehru, Gandhi and Sardar Patel (right) at an All India Congress Committee meeting in 1946, considering forming an interim government

Nehru, Gandhi and Sardar Patel (right) at an All India Congress Committee meeting in 1946, considering forming an interim government

The collection highlights India’s nationalist history with its meetings and marches. There are marvellous pictures of Mr Nehru, many with Mahatma Gandhi and others including Lord Mountbatten and Edwina, his wife and Mr Nehru’s close friend.

Nehru with Pamela Mountbatten as she was about to leave India in June 1948

Nehru with Pamela Mountbatten as she was about to leave India in June 1948

Born in  Ludhiana in 1914, Mr Roy started work as a photographer in Lahore in the 1930s. He joined the Royal Indian Air Force near Quetta in 1941 and took aerial pictures from the cockpits of aircraft planes. But, says an introduction to the exhibition, Mr Roy “found it difficult to tolerate the discriminatory policies of his British superiors and had to leave the air force after being court martialled”.

Nehru and a visitor at his Delhi home, Teen Murti House

Nehru and a visitor at his Delhi home, Teen Murti House

Just before partition he set up Associated Press Photos in old Delhi – and some of what followed is now on view.

Jawaharlal Nehru with reporters

Jawaharlal Nehru with reporters

In 1958 he left India for three years travelling abroad taking pictures with him to sell with his stories. In 1963 Roy put all his prints and negatives together in boxes and mailed them to his address in Delhi. When he returned, none of them had arrived and he never found them. Now they have been recovered and are on view here. He died in 1984.

It is worth a visit if you are in Delhi.  Later the organisers, the Indian Council for Cultural Relations, will take the exhibition elsewhere, maybe London and Mumbai. Harper Collins India will be publishing a book of the works in August next year.

In Simla for the 1946 independence conference - Abdul Ghafar Khan, Nehru, and Sardar Patel (in the rickshaw)

In Simla for the 1946 independence conference – Abdul Ghafar Khan, Nehru, and Sardar Patel (in the rickshaw)

All images © Aditya Arya Archive

WHO WAS REALLY BEHIND TATA’S TROUBLES AT SINGUR?

So it’s happened. After months of violent protests over loss of farming land, after vicious battles by self-serving regional politicians, and after seemingly endless attempts at a compromise, Ratan Tata has pulled down the shutters on Tata Motors’ low cost Nano car plant in West Bengal and is off to make the car elsewhere.

“We have little choice but to move out of Bengal. We cannot run a factory with police around all the time,” was one of several memorable wrap-up quotes that he produced last night to explain his decision.

Ratan Tata leaving an earlier Singur press conference in Kolkata when it seemed likely he would pull out

Ratan Tata leaving an earlier Singur press conference in Kolkata when it seemed likely he would pull out

He wasn’t blaming the police – they have been guarding the site at Singur from protestors organised by Mamata Banerjee, leader of the Trinamool Congress, a regional political party. Ms Banerjee  has been using the project to try to score points against the state’s Communist-led Left Front government that has ruled West Bengal for 30 years.

 

“We have to shift because of Mamata Banerjee,” Mr Tata said at a press conference in Kolkata last night. So this fiery politician’s ambitions have robbed a state that desperately needs industrial development of a $350m project that would have generated thousands of jobs in the main car factory, in component suppliers located on the same site, and in other downstream businesses.

This is the second time that politicians and powerful pressure groups have turned investment away from West Bengal. A battle between the Communist-led Left Front and Trinamool for control of another part of West Bengal led last year to plans being abandoned for a 25,000-acre chemicals special economic zone (SEZ) at Nandigram amid violent protests where 14 people were killed.

Protests by farmers and the landless labourers against their land being used for industrial development are understandable – and in many cases justified. As Kamal Nath, India’s Minister for Commerce and Industry, said to me last month when I was talking to him about delays in Orissa on a steel plant planned by Posco from Korea, “In a democracy all the stake-holders have to have a voice – and in India they have a particularly loud voice”.

The irony is that Ratan Tata, who heads a government –sponsored Investment Commission set up to help foreign companies like Posco manage their projects in India, could not turn Singur round  – which brings me to a final thought………Is there something happening here that has not been publicised? 

Was someone else encouraging the protests?

I would not be surprised to hear that Tata’s problems were fanned by another autos manufacturer wanting to disrupt the “one lakh” Nano’s launch. I have no evidence of this but such dirty tricks are not unknown. Ratan Tata himself has said publicly that he wonders “who’s financing the protests”.

Ratan Tata in a Nano at the launch

Ratan Tata in a Nano at the launch

There were rumours a few years ago that bureaucrats and politicians were being paid by a foreign car company to disrupt the appointment of top management at Maruti Suzuki, a highly successful Japanese-India joint venture, in order to delay the launch of an important new Maruti model. Has the same sort of thing happened here? Politicians always need funds!

The Tata Nano was unveiled at Delhi’s auto show  in January with a price tag of around 100,000 rupees ($2,130). and was due to be launched on the market this month. The plan was to make 250,000 cars a year at Singur, rising later to 350,000. That will not now happen. Instead the car will be produced in smaller numbers at other Tata locations till a new permanent site is found.

So who has gained? Not Tata, nor West Bengal – nor, in political terms, either the Left Front which has been shown to be weak, or Mamata Banerjee, whose protests have lost jobs, nor the people living in the area, some of whom have lost both their land and Tata jobs.

The only winners are other auto firms that need longer to get their rival cars ready for market.

A new era has opened up for India this morning with the US Senate’s approval of the two countries’ nuclear deal. India has attained a new level of international respectability and has access to nuclear power deals, and freedom to trade internationally in sensitive technologies .

In terms of historical importance, this stands alongside India’s economic liberalisation that began in earnest in 1991, which in turn was the biggest event since independence in 1947 – ushered in by Jawaharlal Nehru as India’s “tryst with destiny”.

The price India has to pay for its new status is a close diplomatic relationship with America that looks fine now but could prove restrictive in the future.

Whether the deal proves to have been worthwhile will therefore depend on how successfully the Indian government and its companies utilise the access to nuclear and allied technologies, especially to solve India’s dreadful power shortages, and how far the government manages to remain independent of the US in its foreign policy – for example on its close ties with Iran and Russia.
 
Both the 1991 and today’s events were ushered in by Manmohan Singh, now the prime minister and in 1991 the finance minister. But he was not the architect of the 1991 policy, though he is frequently given that title, because it had been designed earlier. Nor was he the instigator – that was Narasimha Rao, the prime minister who never gets the credit he deserves for appointing Mr Singh and telling him to get on with liberalisation and rescue India from a dire international financial crisis. (There’s a story that, when asked why he had chosen Mr Singh, Mr Rao said something like “because as a bureaucrat he’ll get the blame if it goes wrong but I’ll get the credit as a politician if it works” – how wrong he was!)

This time President Bush and his Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice instigated the initiative, and were later backed up by Sonia Gandhi, president of the Congress Party and political head of the governing coalition. This paved the way for Mr Singh to introduce the deal.

But there is a major difference between 1991 and now. Last time Mr Singh toned down economic liberalisation as soon as Mr Rao decided that it was not good electoral politics. This time he has stuck to the deal, defying political opposition.

He let the tiresomely negative Left Front parties withdraw support from his Congress-led coalition, and then pushed the deal at the last minute, just before America’s imminent presidential elections. As a journalist used to writing a story right up to my editors’ deadlines, one has to admire Mr Singh’s sense of brinkmanship, reviving the deal when even the Bush regime thought it was dead.

What a surprise this is from an academic economist, former top bureaucrat, and reluctant politician. For most of his prime ministership, Mr Singh has been squeezed politically both by other ministers in the government, who have paid him scant respect and have preferred to cosy up to Sonia Gandhi, and by Mrs Gandhi herself who has always made it clear that she is in charge – she has a veto power over anything that the government does.

This time she let Mr Singh get on with his nuclear dream, but she also let it slide towards failure when faced with opposition from the Left, with whom she felt personally comfortable as allies. Rahul Gandhi, her son and the Congress Party’s anointed future prime minister, is reported to have tipped the balance by backing the deal and persuading his mother to let the Left withdraw. That gave Mr Singh the support he needed.

India can now move ahead on implementing its nuclear power programme. It wants to negotiate contracts quickly with French and Russian companies. France signed a civil nuclear co-operation deal on Tuesday and Areva is already talking to the government-owned Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL). Talks are also on with Rosatom State Nuclear Energy. And US firms such as GE and Westinghouse, which regard contracts as virtually their right, are in line – as are major defence companies such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin for aircraft and other deals.

India can also maintain its nuclear weapons programme, without international inspections, while knowing that the US will probably pull out of the deal if it ever conducts another nuclear test.

Indian companies will get large chunks of business constructing nuclear power stations and many will also benefit from being able to buy and sell high technology equipment in other areas that have been blocked for decades. The list includes companies such as Tata, Reliance (RIL), Larsen & Toubro, GMR, Hindustan Construction,  and Godrej, as well as NPCIL and other public sector corporations.

There will however be problems. It is relatively easy for India to run its relationship with the US while the current leaders are in power in both countries – and it has been in America’s interest to leave India relatively free while the deal has been going through. That though tells us nothing about how a future US government would react to India breaking ranks from an American line on, say, Iran.

But that’s for the future. Today India enters its new era and my guess is that history could well see Manmohan Singh as India’s greatest prime minister since Jawaharlal Nehru.

We’ve just finished working on Fortune magazine’s annual list of the most powerful business women and it’s in the latest issue of the magazine, which is now on the net and will be on sale next Monday.

There are two lists of 50 women – one for the US, which is headed this year by Indra Nooyi of Pepsi (below) and one called International Power 50 for the rest of the world.

.

.

Top internationally is Cynthia Carroll, ceo of UK-based Anglo American, the mining group, followed by Gail Kelly, ceo of Australia’s Westpac bank. 

But we’ve only got two new names from India in the list – along with Chanda Kochhar, joint managing director of ICICI Bank, who has been in before. She is tipped to be named as the next ceo and managing director within a few weeks, so is number 25.  

There are no more because most big Indian companies have not encouraged women to rise to the top.

One of the two new names, at number 34, is Shobhana Bhartia, who became chairperson and managing director of the HT Media group following the death in August of her father, industrialist and parliamentarian K.K. Birla. She is also editor-in-chief of the group, which includes the Hindustan Times English language newspaper, the Hindi Hindustan, and Mint that is produced in collaboration with the Wall Street Journal, plus other expanding media businesses.

Mint has raised India’s standards of business journalism. It doesn’t always have the newsiest news at the top of its sometimes quirky front page, but it produces a consistent quality of reporting and analysis, and keeps a regular watch on leading industries and companies instead of just writing about them when information is planted or easily available.

Chanda Kochhar (bottom), Kalpana Morparia (middle) and Lalita Gupte, now retired, in a Fortune magazine article October 19, 2006. Photograph by Pablo Bartholomew

Chanda Kochhar (bottom), Kalpana Morparia (middle) and Lalita Gupte, now retired, in a Fortune magazine article October 19, 2006. Photograph by Pablo Bartholomew

The second new name, at number 44, is Kalpana Morparia, who was appointed J.P.Morgan’s first-ever ceo for India in August. A lawyer turned banker, who worked at India’s ICICI bank for 33 years, Morparia  is respected in Mumbai and Delhi as an experienced banker. She was ICICI’s joint md till May 2007 when she became vice chairperson of its insurance and asset management businesses. I reckon she’ll be influential not just in India but also with JPMorgan abroad.

It’s a tough task for the editors in New York to decide who should be in and in what order, and two Indian names have fallen off this year – Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw, founder and head of Biocon, the biotech company, and Naina Lal Kidwai, who runs the HSBC banking group in India.

Ideally there should be more from India, but it’s not really possible to increase the number – and remember its just 50 people from all over the world outside America – because there are relatively few women at the top of large and influential private sector companies.

There are of course many more well known names such as Shikhar Sharma of ICICI Prudential, Rajshree Pathy of Rajshree Sugars and Chemicals, Minosh Girotra of UBS Securities, Anu Aga of Thermax, Neelam Dhawan who recently moved from Microsoft to Hewlett-Packard India, Vinita Bali of Britannia Industries, Swati Piramal of Nicholas Piramal, Rohini Kalyani of Bharat Forge, Ashu Suyaash of Fidelity Fund Management, and several others.

But there is no-one at the top of Tata companies, nor Reliance (neither Mukesh Ambani’s nor Anil’s), nor Wipro, Infosys, most of the Birla family businesses, Bajaj Auto, Bharti Telecom, Ranbaxy, Maruti Suzuki, Mahindra & Mahindra  and Hindustan Unilever – the list is endless. Till these companies recruit and promote women on merit to the top, India’s list in Fortune will not get much bigger.

The exception is ICICI Bank, which has made a name for itself by recognizing and promoting female talent. Three of the five members of the bank’s executive board, and 13 of its 40 top managers, were women two years ago when I wrote an article in Fortune  (see picture) on all of them, including Chanda Kochhar and Kalpana Morparia, alongside that year’s top list.

I spent a amazing three days interviewing them – all friendly, ambitious and vivacious. Once dubbed the “petticoat brigade” by Mumbai’s chauvinistic male bankers, these highly competitive women have helped build a business known for its aggressive and risk-taking attitude, and its growth from a sleepy, bureaucratic development institution into India’s most diversified and customer-oriented bank.

“Almost all the leaders we have picked have succeeded, and most have been women,” K.V.Kamath, the ceo who has been responsible for empowering them, told me. He is expected to become chairman when he hands over his job to Mrs Kochhar.

Mr Kamath has consistently chosen women rather than men. But he denies giving them preference for top jobs, telling me it was “clearly a result of merit”.  His criteria was to pick “leaders with ability, intellect, and the entrepreneurial ability to lead teams”. He  valued women’s “ability to think in a much more detached manner than men.”

Either way, Mr Kamath called it a “win-win” situation, adding: “Only if male bosses have a closed mind does gender rear its head. . . .Then you could get into confrontation.”

Closed minds also stop women moving to the top of more top Indian companies.

Posted by: John Elliott | September 27, 2008

“Foreign Correspondent” – a best selling anthology

.Nov ’09: Now available in an updated paper back – see http://www.penguinbooksindia.com/Bookdetail.aspx?bookId=3743

______________________________________________

I’ve just seen that a book I co-edited is doing well in the best seller lists, so it seems a good time to give a plug to this unique round-up of India’s past 50 or 60 years of history, as seen by foreign correspondents.It’s Foreign Correspondent – 50 Years of Reporting South Asia, which was published by Penguin India in the spring. It marks the 50th anniversary of the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of South Asia, where I’m the current president (see About this Blog, above).

We decided to mark the event with an anthology, and Penguin India’s editor in chief, Ravi Singh, was enthusiastic. He helped us produce it in record time so that we could present it to Manmohan Singh, the prime minister, at a tea party he gave for the club’s 50th.

This week the book is the 7th best seller in a non-fiction list run by Bahri’s, the bookshop in Delhi’s Khan Market, which I guess many of you know. It’s only available on the Indian subcontinent (we’d like to find a publisher in the UK or US) and is in all the leading India bookshops.

I presented the book to the Prime Minister

I presented the book to the Prime Minister

There are about 80 articles written by foreign journalists posted in Delhi and by Indian journalists on the staff of foreign news media – all are or have been FCC members. It was a daunting task choosing the articles from a total of about 400, but we think we got a fair spread of the 50 years’ history and reporting.

One of the main controversies to appear early on in the book is the fiercely-debated verdict on Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister. Neville Maxwell, who was The Times correspondent in Delhi from 1959 to 1967, writes a scathing analysis, “Tarnished Image of Mr Nehru“, detailing what he saw as Nehru’s failures.

Correspondents on the airport road to strike-hit Kathmandu in 1991 - photo Bob Nickelsberg/Getty Images

Correspondents on the airport road to strike-hit Kathmandu in 1991 – photo Bob Nickelsberg/Getty Images

But it is neatly balanced by another piece by James Cameron, one of Britain’s leading foreign reporters of the time, who was a regular visitor here from the 1940s and wrote a lovely and illuminating book, An Indian Summer (Penguin London 1974, Penguin India 1994) that is still in print.

After Mr Nehru’s death, Mr Cameron mourned the loss of a “luminous, elaborate, obstinate, inspirational human being”.

Mr Maxwell is known for a book, India’s China War, that blames India, and in particular Mr Nehru, for “irrational policy-making”, which pushed the country into a military confrontation with China in 1962 that it could not win – and for failing since then to settle the border dispute.

The book horrified the Indian authorities to such an extent that it was banned soon after it came out in 1970, but it was republished in India in 1997 (Natraj Publishers Dehradun). Its views run counter to the Delhi line that China’s intransigence blocks the path to peace.

Either way, India’s devastating 1962 defeat, and the way that China marched into the country’s mountains and then walked out again when it chose to, has I believe affected India’s international pride and self-confidence ever since. Only now, with its new international economic importance and its strong relationship with the US, has India got most of that confidence back again.

Indira Gandhi with daughter-in-law Sonia and grandchildren Priyanka and Rahul - photograph by Raghu Rai

Indira Gandhi with daughter-in-law Sonia and grandchildren Priyanka and Rahul – photograph by Raghu Rai

There’s much else in the anthology. The past 25 years include Dean Brelis of Time magazine reporting a bleak future for Sri Lanka in 1983 as the Tamil troubles erupted, a great report by Matt Miller in the Asian Wall Street Journal of the controversial rise of Reliance Industries and the Ambani family, Mark Tully on the Nehru dynasty, and Trevor Fishlock on a Kashmir kidnapping (of Kim Housego, son of a former Financial Times correspondent) in the Daily Telegraph.

Simon Denyer (one of the book’s editors) of Reuters goes travelling with Nepal’s Maoists, Somini Sengupta of the New York Times with India’s Naxalites, and Simon Long of The Economist is in Bhutan studying the pursuit of happiness. There are various reports on the plight of India’s farmers and landless, plus much more – and splendid photographs including the Gandhi family above.

I hope you enjoy it!

Violence is becoming more prevalent as Indian workers protest against their lot – usually over the transfer of agricultural land to industry and property speculators (which has finally led to Tata Motors moving its Nano car production out of West Bengal).

But not for many years has the ceo of a business been killed by angry workers (in the past there have been killings on tea estates in the north-east). Yet that is what happened on September 22 in Delhi’s satellite city of Noida, when Lalit Kishore Chaudhury, the chief executive of Graziano Trasmissioni India, an Italian auto parts company, was beaten to death at his office.

A dreadful tragedy for Mr Chaudhury’s family, the killing is also a blow for India’s image abroad. “Is this what happens when executives upset their workforce,” company headquarters overseas will be asking. “Is there no police protection quickly available when situations become violent?”

Yet  Oscar Fernandes, India’s Labour Minister, chose yesterday to criticise foreign managements in remarks widely reported this morning.  “Indian govt backs workers who killed boss” was the headline on the AFP news agency story.

“This should serve as a warning for the managements,“ he said.

“It is my appeal to the managements that the workers should be dealt with compassion. There are disparities in the wages of permanent employees and contract workers. The workers should not be pushed so hard that they resort to whatever happened in Noida.”

That was crass, and surprising coming from an experienced (Congress Party) politician. We have not yet heard what the problems were at Graziano that led to such a serious labour dispute and Monday’s extreme violence – but, whatever they were, Mr Fernandes could have done better. He made a valid point about gaps between wages of contract workers and permanent employees, but yesterday was not the time to say it.

He has now been firmly criticised by top businessmen and industry federations, and has apologised. More than 100 people have been jailed, some charged with killing and others with rioting.

But that is not the end of the affair. It appears that the company warned the government about its labour problems that have been rumbling for nearly a year, and apparently received no help. So what till recently seems to have been a successful auto parts company, part of the Oerlinkon Graziano group, has been seriously let down.

Foreign companies will have learned of another peril of investing in India.

Posted by: John Elliott | September 22, 2008

“Family Silver” at risk on Hyderabad metro project

At last a top official has spoken out about a possible land scam, blowing a whistle (almost) before it allegedly happens. The Economic Times reported on September 21 that E. Sreedharan, md of the Delhi Metro , has alleged that there is a possible land scam on the proposed Hyderabad Metro railway project. He also expressed concern about the slow progress of the Mumbai metro.

Both projects are build-operate-transfer (BOT) partnerships with private sector companies. In a letter earlier this month to Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of Planning Commission, Mr Sreedharan (seen below right) cautions against using the BOT deals for building metro railways.

..................................

…………………………….

On a BOT project, the developer bids for and obtains land for the project, which he then builds and operates, usually for about 30-35 years, and then transfers ownership back to the government.

Update September 23 2008: The Andhra Pradesh State government has refuted Mr Sreedharan’s allegations about the Hyderabad Metro. It has demanded an apology and threatened legal action. But local community groups and some politicians have supported Mr Sreedharan and repeated the charges. Mr Sreedharan’s Delhi Metro has been a consultant on the project but that ended on Sept 23.

The problem – illustrated by Mr Sreedharan’s allegations – is that developers frequently ask for far more land than is needed for a project so that they can make massive profits out of land development and speculation, cashing in as the project pushes up surrounding land values. That was clearly why so many companies were interested in developing Delhi and Mumbai airports, and why so many rushed last year into Special Economic Zones (SEZs).

The Economic Times quoted Mr Sreedharan’s letter:

“The Hyderabad Metro project is being cited as a successful example of BOT approach. Here, I would like to caution that the example of Hyderabad Metro is quite misleading as the negative viability gap funding has resulted solely on account of 296 acres of prime land being made available to the BOT operator for commercial exploitation.

“This is like selling family silver. Apart from the fact that this might lead to a big political scandal sometime later, it is apparent that the BOT operator has a hidden agenda which appears to be to extend the metro network to a large tract of his private land holdings so as to reap a windfall profit of four to five times the land price”.

He also criticised the Mumbai Metro for “moving at an extremely slow pace” – a hint that the developer is not primarily interested in building a railway:

“World-wide the experience has been that no metro project has succeeded so far on BOT basis. …Our sole example of Mumbai Metro-I has not given us the required confidence in the BOT route”.

The Mumbai Metro is a joint venture between Reliance Infrastructure, controlled by Anil Ambani, and the state-owned Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA).

The Hyderabad project has been won by a consortium led by Maytas Infrastructure of Hyderabad, with the state government only having an 11% stake. The formal concession agreement was signed last Friday . It seems to have been a controversial decision, with Mytas and its partners defeating foreign companies that have vast metro experience.

Update December 26, 2008:  Maytas is controlled by the Raju family, which also controls Satyam, a leading software company. The Rajus  have run into corporate governance trouble for trying to get Satyam to take over Maytas (Satyam spelt backwards).

Update July 8, 2009:  Maytas Metro contract cancelled following fraud scandal collapse of Satyam in January 2009 .

Mr Sreedharan speaks with authority, having built and run the fast-expanding Delhi Metro on time and within budget. That is a wholly government-controlled project, and it shows what governments can achieve if they hire efficient and non-corrupt top officials.

Let’s hope Mr Alhuwalia, who has special responsibility for infrastructure development, listens to him, and looks into projects where more “family silver” may be lost.

Posted by: John Elliott | September 21, 2008

Islamabad hotel devastation “a battle for the soul of Pakistan”

Symbolically,  the devastation last night of Islamabad’s Marriott Hotel by a massive truck bomb is one of the worst events to happen as the battle between the Islamic militants and the Pakistan establishment escalates. More than 50 people died and over 200 were hurt

For years the Marriott – earlier a Holiday Inn – has been a landmark providing some sort of normalcy in an increasingly dangerous country. With splendid views of the green Margalla Hills, it has for decades been a regular for foreign visitors, even though it has been hit by bombs twice in the past. Many foreign journalists have stayed – I was there with my family in the 1980s, as well as on many work assignments before and since. It seemed a fixture on the Islamabad landscape.

Reports suggest the bombers’ real target may have been the prime minister’s residence nearby, where President Asif Zardari was having dinner with ministers, but the truck driver saw massive security cordons and drove a few hundred yards to the Marriott instead. Others suggested it was because there were CIA officials staying in the hotel.

Earlier Zardari had made his first speech to the parliament, pledging to fight terror and not talk to those who perpetuated it. The bombing was a devastating answer to that.

Coming just a week of bombs hit three markets in Delhi, and following other attacks both in northern Pakistan and other Indian cities, this demonstrates how this region is being targeted by militants who originally fought their battles in the West.

India has a strong democracy and economy to help it weather such attacks. Pakistan does not – it has never had enough stability to develop either in its 61 years of independence. That is why the Marriott attack is significant.

A BBC report last night  on the blast from Syed Shoaib Hasan in Islamabad had an emotional but graphic conclusion about the war between Pakistan’s militants and government:

“It is no more a stop-start battle of wavering ideals. It is now, without doubt, a battle to the death for the soul of Pakistan”.

Posted by: John Elliott | September 20, 2008

India opens up for The Economist, Time, Newsweek, Fortune and others

At last the Indian government has begun to take a sane approach over foreign news publications being allowed to publish and print in the country – it announced on Thursday that foreign news magazines can come, though sadly not yet newspapers.

Previously this has been blocked by vested interests in general news and current affairs publishing that have not wanted to face India-based foreign competition for readers, advertising and staff in either newspapers or magazines. (Foreign general interest publications have been allowed for some time.)

Those vested interests are mainly big publishing houses such as the Times of India’s Bennett Coleman group, plus one or two more ideological lobbyists such as N.Ram of the Hindu group, and the political Left.

The reason (excuse would be a better word) has been that Indian minds should be protected from such foreign influence – an insulting idea at any time, and a nonsense in an era of rolling international tv news and the internet.

As a result, till this week, foreign news publications could only publish and print facsimile copies of an edition published abroad. This has meant that they have not been allowed to insert Indian advertising into a local edition, which has made such editions financially unviable. The alternative has been to produce a new publication, with a maximum 26% foreign direct investment (FDI) but with only 20% of the editorial content from abroad.

Consequently most stayed away, with some exceptions, as people tested the policy.

Three foreign daily newspapers have appeared here in different forms, and one has failed:

– The Asian Age and Deccan Chronicle group has been publishing a slimmed down version of the International Herald Tribune for some time from Hyderabad, basically busting the policy but uninterrupted by the government which did not seem to know how to stop it.

– The India Today group last year launched Mail Today with 26% FDI from publishers of the UK’s Daily Mail, producing a lively look-alike of the UK product, primarily with local content but with some from the UK.

– The Wall Street Journal has helped (without any FDI) to produce the HT Media group’s excellent business daily, Mint, which was launched last year with restricted content from the Journal and has raised the bar for Indian standards of business journalism.

– The Financial Times tried from the mid-1980s to establish itself – first through a relationship, and then a 13.85% equity stake, in the Business Standard. It also tried to print a foreign edition. But it was blocked on both counts by supposed-friends as well as foes.

Among magazines, Fortune and Forbes have both been in talks for a year or so with Aveek Sarkar of Calcutta’s ABP (Anand Bazaar Patrika) group and TV-18’s Network-18 group to produce their publications. Till this week, these would have had to have 80% local content and different titles, and it would have been extremely difficult for them to produce magazines that matched their US versions.

That will now change. The government’s statement said that news magazines editorial “content would be allowed to be up to 100% identical to the foreign magazine concerned and the India publisher would be free to add local content……and local advertisements.” Foreign titles are also being allowed.

That dramatically changes the commercial viability of opening up in India, even though some of the old rules will still apply – the publishers will have to be Indian registered companies holding no more than 26% foreign equity, with the businesses and editing run primarily by Indian nationals.

So Fortune and Forbes can use their foreign titles and have as much foreign content and local advertising as they like.
 
Watch out for The Economist, Time, Newsweek and Business Week moving in too. Some will editionalise for India. Others, presumably including The Economist that produces the same edition (slightly rearranged) all over the world, will not.

I wonder if this would have happened if the Communist-led Left Front were still supporting the Congress-led government! They were a front for commercial interests and have lost their clout.

Freed of those shackles, the government announcement said: “The decision will provide Indian readers access to foreign magazines at cheaper rates in comparison to the same magazines imported at much higher rates. The Indian reader would be benefited immensely as he/she would be able to keep abreast with the latest events and happenings on the global scale”.

Isn’t it amazing that the government has suddenly discovered this! The next step should be to allow foreign newspapers – soon.

Posted by: John Elliott | September 17, 2008

Posco on a learning curve about India’s “social process”

ORISSA: I was talking on the phone this morning to Kamal Nath, India’s Minister for Commerce and Industry, about the $12bn integrated steelworks planned for Orissa by Posco of Korea. I am writing an article about Posco’s problems – the project is running at least 18 months behind schedule and construction will probably not start till early next year, so I wanted to hear Mr Nath’s view.
 
He made an important point: “This is one of the flagship foreign investment projects in the country but in India one has to weave one’s way through the procedures. That is not just a legal process or a financial process – it’s a social process.”

The Posco site at Paradip in Orissa

The Posco site at Paradip in Orissa

He added that “in a democracy all the stake-holders have to have a voice – and in India they have a particularly loud voice – so Posco has been through that learning curve”

Posco has indeed been on a steep learning curve since it signed an agreement in June 2005 for the project, as I discovered when I visited the company, and the site, in Orissa a few days ago.

It came to India looking for iron ore reserves and downstream customers to bolster its position as the world’s fourth largest steelmaker. It expected to move ahead quickly with the first ever integrated project undertaken on a greenfield site by any steel company outside its home country – and the biggest-ever foreign direct investment in India.

Instead, it has found itself mired in a mass of seemingly interminable delays – similar to those that have hit Lakshmi Mittal’s Arcelor Mittal projects in Orissa and Jharkhand. Posco is still waiting to get access to most of the steelworks site at Paradip – where staff have twice been briefly kidnapped and one protestor was killed during a violent demonstration at Dhinkia village – and to its proposed mining area .

Villagers block entry to Dhinkia village on the Posco site

Villagers block entry to Dhinkia village on the Posco site

 Some progress was made last month when the Supreme Court authorized moves that will lead to it getting its land, but the delays continue.

It’s not just foreign companies that have been on that learning curve. Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries (RIL) and others learned last year that they couldn’t steamroller SEZ projects through unwilling land owners. A Mumbai court has said there should be a referendum of 4,000 landowners on Reliance’s proposed site. The company is appealing against the order, but (updated Sept 21) villagers are being formally asked their views in a referendum-style survey. This is a good example of Mr Nath’s “social process” at work – the first trime it has happend in India

The Tata group is facing similar problems on its Nano car site in West Bengal and a steel project in Orissa. (It’s not turning out to be a very good year for Tata. It has also got environmentalists, led noisily by Greenpeace, opposing its plan for a port on the Orissa coast at Dhamra which is likely to disturb rare Olive Ridley turtles – a fact Tata is loath to accept). And it’s ironic that Mr Tata, who is chairman of the government’s Investment Commission that has been helping companies like Posco and Mittal, can’t ease Tata Motors’ plight.

It is easy to dismiss the Nano site row as a political battle between West Bengal’s ruling Left Front government and Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress, with Tata Motors cast as the unwitting victim. But that is too simple. There are questions about how much land Tata and its component suppliers actually need, which is not surprising given that many land developers in the past have often bought cheaply and then not used all their land for the designated purpose. That is what rightly arouses resentment among rural communities.

In many parts of the country there are empty sites where the poor should and could still be living. Tata Steel has one at Gopalpur in Orissa, where it hoped to start a steel plant on 3,000 acres in the 1990s but abandoned it in 2000 (partly because of local opposition) – it is lying idle awaiting Tata’s latest idea for an SEZ.

the Posco site alongside Dhinkia village

the Posco site alongside Dhinkia village

What is happening to Posco, Tata and Reliance now is actually good for the long term, even though it is causing the companies short-term problems and causing regrettable social disturbances and deplorable killings. The system for using agricultural land for industry has to be improved so that land owners and others who live and work in rural areas are not just swept aside.

As Mr Nath said, all stake-holders have to have a voice – and in India they have a particularly loud voice. Posco has learned that, and is now doing its best slowly and gradually to win local support.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories