Archive for October 6th, 2015

Giving former Indian PM Narasimhan Rao due credit for 1991 changes…

October 6, 2015

Praveen Patil comments on the recent Jairam Ramesh book on 1991 crisis and changes thereon.

He wonders why people do not give any credit to then PM Narasimha Rao. The entire credit has been taken by then FM Dr. Manmohan Singh. All this is sop ridiculous as without the PM’s confidence, Finance Minister could have hardly done anything. Even the choice of a FM is made by the Prime Minister and as we know Dr Manmohan Singh was an unlikely choice:

How history was morphed to glorify Manmohan Singh as the sole architect of 1991 reforms while painting P.V. Narasimha Rao as a reluctant, indecisive and often communal Brahman.

Jairam Ramesh’s ‘To the brink and Back – India’s 1991 story’ is one such example of this intellectual snobbery

Q: Given the minority character of your government, do you feel confident as Prime Minister?

A: Yes, I do feel confident now. Although the responsibility is very heavy, the Congress party can discharge this very effectively. And the kind of response which the government has got from the people during the last three weeks has provided us greater confidence.

Q: Is it due to this that you have resorted to strong economic measures like steep depreciation of the rupee?

A: We mean business now. The country could not wait any longer. These decisions should have been taken long ago.

This is the snapshot of P.V. Narasimha Rao’s interview given to Prabhu Chawla of the Indian Express on 8th July 1991. The then Prime Minister of India, in this interview, comes across as an extremely confident leader who was aware of his historic duty to liberalize Indian economy, especially when he emphatically states, “We mean business now”!

Jairam Ramesh quotes this and another equally unequivocal interview given to K.K. Katyal of The Hindu a day before that, on 7th July 1991, in his book “To the brink and back – India’s 1991 Story.”

Yet, despite these publicly available proofs of Mr. Rao’s total belief in the reforms agenda, Jairam Ramesh presents a subtly contrarian picture when he writes that, “He (Rao) remained emphatic, although I very well knew, as did the Finance Minister, how deeply uncomfortable he was with the move (to devalue rupee), and had, in fact, tried hard to stop the July 3, devaluation”.

Essentially what Ramesh is telling us is simple – do not believe all the interviews, all the publically available records which forcefully state P.V. Narasimha Rao’s total faith in the reforms, but believe my own fantasies that he was a reluctant reformer.

This has been the intellectual snobbery of the last two and a half decades that India has lived with, wherein history has been subtly morphed to somehow glorify Manmohan Singh as the sole architect of 1991 reforms while trying to paint P.V. Narasimha Rao as this reluctant, indecisive and often communal Brahman.

Prime Minister Rao is that conjecture of India’s economic history whom everybody wants to forget by anointing a more pliable individual as the emperor of reforms. But alas, the decade of decay between 2004 and 2014 has put an emphatic full stop to any such effort and Jairam Ramesh’s latest attempt also fails to add any gloss to Manmohan Singh’s checkered CV.

Both Congress and Dr MMS are paying a huge price for this omission. They just could not carry forward the spirit raised by Narasimha Rao and ended up committing harakiri on several issues. This vacant space was ironically captured by BJP, the party which caused PVN huge heart burn during his tenure due to Ayodhya related issues.  Even more ironically, BJP was once a party which believed in Swadesi and now stands for foreign participation in Indian economy.

Though, I have a different take on all this reform business.

In India it is all about who was behind reforms with hardly any effort to institutionalise the process. What we and our media wants is this one person who can take on the system and create huge noise in the process. The end result is all these ideas are just hinged on this one/few person/persons. Things are rosy till that person can push things and factors favor it. As tides turn, we are again lost.

The media and markets had created huge hype around Dr. MMS getting second tenure without the left in 2009. The equity markets had to be closed due to upper circuit. There was a feeling that father of 1991 is going to create another round of magic in 2009.

What unravelled eventually was just unimaginable. The father of 1991 became the father of 2012-13 crisis as well. We can blame the Gandhi family for destroying all this expectations but we still need to question why the chaos could not be prevented? He had all the team and all the economists around him. There was an Economic Advisory Council, Planning Commission chief, Honorary Personal Economic Adviser, CEA in Finance Ministry and what not. I mean you just name it and it was there.

One important factor is lack of team work and institutionalising the process. I mean whichever countries have developed, they hardly care about who was behind the transformation. What is more important is the transformation process and belief in its continuity.

So even this article should not just look to credit PVN but the entire team behind the process. There are many unsung people who must have contributed immensely in the 1991 proposals. But we hardly know about them.

These are lessons for current administration as well which are busy creating this entire hype around select individuals. The efforts should be made to make India a better place not glorify/blemish certain careers/CVs..

India PM’s Silicon valley hug sparks swadeshi talk

October 6, 2015

One could not help but smile at this article. Amazing double talk all this.

Indian PM’s cosying to top IT companies in the world has raised concerns not with PM critics but people from Indian silicon valley.

His warm hug of Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg will perhaps be the most abiding image of Narendra Modi’s visit to the Silicon Valley. But that embrace, and what it conveyed, is now becoming the subject for an intense debate among techies here. Is Modi giving in too much to the Googles and Facebooks of the world, when there is so much technology talent within India? Is he taking the easy way out by handing out critical pieces of his Digital India vision to global incumbents rather than build domestic capabilities?

“When the government wanted to build a citizen engagement platform earlier this year, they depended on Google. Now when they want Wi-Fi in railway stations, it’s again Google. These are things that can be done by our companies, otherwise we will not be able to create our own digital industry. Remember, we are the people who built Aadhaar,” said an industry veteran who did not want to be named.

Nitin Pai, co-founder of Takshashila, an independent policy research and advocacy body that provides services for government agencies, NGOs and corporations, said Modi’s team should make a careful distinction between national interest and MNCs’ commercial interest. “Many MNCs have come forward to participate in Digital India initiatives. The government will have to look at offering sufficient incentives for innovation to domestic tech companies, many of whom are coming with innovative business models,” he said.

🙂 Really?

How things go in circles really. It is always a matter of huge debate in India that what is the stance of US Presidents on Indian IT industry. The same people would usually say let competition prevail and US policy should not inhibit free market forces. However now as Indian PM reaches out to global competition, there are calls for Swadesi.

Book Recommend: The Concise Oxford History of Indian Business

October 6, 2015

This is just a brilliant and a must read book for those interested in Indian economy and business. It is written by Prof Dwijendra Tripathi (formerly of IIM-A) and Jyoti Jumani.The book balances breadth and depth really well and all in some 220-30 odd pages. It really is concise.

Prof Tripathi was a rare scholar as he studied business history of India. Economic history used to be far more popular and atleast is known as subject (if not taught). But business history is like this poor branch of economic history – mostly ignored. However, it is business history which connects the dots of economic development and its impact on businesses. It takes the discussion from markets to firms and makes things look more realistic. You start reading familiar names of various companies and how they responded to the changing environment.

The book gives a good overview of how business history has shaped in India:

The Concise Oxford History of Indian Business is an adapted edition of The Oxford History of Business. The author traces the transformation of the Indian business class from merchants to industrialists and, more recently, service providers. The focus of this volume is on the modern or that phase of Indian business in free India and response of Indian business to the call of globalization.

There is a good detailed review of the book here as well. It sums up whatever there is in the book. It saves a lot of my effort. Hence the title of the post has been changed from review to recommend.

Superb stuff..


Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started