What we don146;t say

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is reported to have expressed disappointment on the structure of the G8 meetings...

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is reported to have expressed disappointment on the structure of the G8 meetings, where India was invited along with the others in the Outreach 5. A Japanese diplomat apparently said that the meeting is becoming a joke, with the Outreach becoming a trade union. While China has always claimed that it validates its global position by pursuing the interest of the third world, it has certainly steadfastly pursued its own global interest. In fact, it has made an art of pursuing both as two sides of the same coin and in that sense has followed the received core of Indian foreign policy. It is possible, necessary and in fact very productive for India to represent and pursue its own and larger interests at the high table, which in fact it can do in an inventive manner rather than mouthing clicheacute;s from the past.

In energy, for example,nbsp;to keep on repeating the same Kyoto-related arguments at home and abroad is tiresome. This business of per capita emissions is correct but old hat. One does not hear, either from the Carbon Plan at home or repeated in the dullest possible manner by a retired diplomat abroad, that we are, together with Japan and the United Kingdom, one of the most efficient energy users in the world; or that we will share this with the third world and everywhere else, since it is an objective we will continue to follow. We do not say that this is an integral part of our reform strategy which aimed at strategic modernisation of continuous-process single-product large industry although, according to the International Association of Energy Economists, we have progressed since the mid-8217;80s in this field and are at the top. China contributes to energy discussions because it is a player in creating newer strategies to reorder global energy flows.

We have not said a word on how the OECD derailed a near-consensus arrived at before Doha in the WTO Special Committee on Agriculture. We carry diplomatic and conceptual baggage of third-worldism to the G5, the G20 and the G33. We don8217;t show how the food crisis links up with core global development issues: sustainable land and water usage, widespread and diversified rural development. We don8217;t explain that our Eleventhnbsp;Plan is at the cutting edge in terms of solutions in rural and agricultural modernisation.nbsp;

We don8217;t do all this and more because our global perspectives are shrinking. In terms of the great global debates, Indira Gandhi8217;s Stockholm Conference on 8220;poverty is polluting8221; was written by Pitamber Pant in the Planning Commission. In 1974, as his successor at the Commission, I had seen the file. India8217;s pioneering stand at the Budapest First Population Conference, which linked population policy to development and which eventually led to the UNDP8217;s MDGs, was crafted by Sukhomoy Chakravarti, again when he was with the Planning Commission. But today, I am told, the division 8212; the Perspective Planning Division 8212; which did all the thinking has shrunk in size and become a non-entity, its last wizard sent to Statistics. Delhi8217;s think-tanks, living off consultancy contracts from foreign capitals, need contribute little that is original. Chambers of Commerce are essential but don8217;t really go beyond the interest groups they represent. The government is perfectly entitled to honour NRI economists, but in the global bazaar we also need to develop and market our own experience and strengths. It wasn8217;t the media-splashed CIA or Goldman Sachs reports which first said that India was the fourth-largest economy in the world, but John Kirton, a Canadian economist working in their G8 Institute. nbsp;

In writing for the L-20, the global think-tank CIGI8217;s pioneering book arguing for third world representation in the G8, I was not facetious in saying that in addition to sherpas you also need coolies. My main point was that in global debates the language of the other has to be understood. India is ideally placed to explain and advocate this language. The pursuit of our national interest abroad has to be a part of a larger campaign of our designs for the globe, at present sadly lacking.nbsp;

The writer, a former Union minister, is chairman, Institute of Rural Management, Anand

expressexpressindia.com