India (Superthread)

[a_majoor]

India is already a major power, and getting them on side (through free trade or some sort of formal or informal "Anglosphere" pact) will be one of tghe most pressing issues for Canada and the West in the coming decades. A nation with a middle class population of 300 million will certainly be a very important trading partner at the very least. Dr. Rice makes the case for the United States, I don't think our situation is that much different:

http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/98706

Building a New Relationship with India
by Condoleezza Rice (Thomas and Barbara Stephenson Senior Fellow and member of the Task Force on Energy Policy)
And managing our hot-headed allies, Pakistan and Afghanistan, in the war on terror.
Editor's note: The following essay is an excerpt from the book, "No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington," by Condoleezza Rice

…On February 28 [2006], the President left for India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. The trip required the most delicate balancing act to get the messaging right in each of the places. Our delinking of relations with Islamabad and New Delhi was working—there was no more talk of U.S. policy toward India-Pakistan, or Indo-Pak, as it was sometimes called. We now had distinct approaches to both important countries. And we were doing really well with India: while there the President would sign the landmark civil nuclear deal.

The nuclear deal was the centerpiece of our effort to build a fundamentally different relationship with India. From the earliest stages of the 2000 campaign, it had been our intention to change the terms of U.S.-Indian engagement. As I noted earlier, the crucial nuclear agreement required breaking many taboos. India had refused to sign the NPT in 1968 and had then conducted a nuclear test in 1974. Only five countries had been “grandfathered” as nuclear powers in 1968—the United States, the Soviet Union, Great Britain, France, and China. Any country that subsequently acquired a nuclear capability was deemed to be in violation of this important set of prohibitions. In 1978 President Jimmy Carter signed a bill that cut off all nuclear trade with India.

 
Photo credit: Google images
The United States thus maintained a web of restrictions on technology transfer and cooperation with India. The list of prohibitions grew over the years, with the condemnation reaching its height in 1998. That year, in response to a long-range missile test by Pakistan, Prime Minister Atal Vajpayee authorized the Indian military to conduct a series of underground nuclear tests, including India’s first test of a thermonuclear weapon. When Pakistan followed up with its own nuclear test, the two countries became linked as the poster children for crimes against the non-proliferation regime.

Their behavior was different, however. India had developed an excellent record of respecting proliferation safeguards in terms of not transferring technology to other countries. Pakistan—well, it was the home of the nuclear proliferation entrepreneur A. Q. Khan, who had spread nuclear enrichment technology to North Korea and Iran, among other places.

India needed civil nuclear power and wanted to break out of the constraints on high-technology cooperation that were stunting its growth. The proposed civil nuclear deal would make it possible for the United States—and American companies—to help India develop its potentially rich market for this environmentally friendly energy source. But the breakthrough was not just about nuclear power—it would unlock a wide range of possible areas of cooperation with a country that was an emerging power in the knowledge-based revolution in economic affairs. The Indians made clear, too, that they hoped to become a customer for U.S. military hardware. That was an exciting prospect for the defense industry. And for us, even though we were not seeking to “balance” China, cooperation with another emerging power in Asia, especially a democratic one, was a welcome development.

The interests of the United States and India were in substantial alignment. But any change of this magnitude brings resistance. In Washington, the high priests of non-proliferation accused us of gutting the NPT, a treaty that had significantly limited the emergence of nuclear weapons states.

Our problems were considerable in 2006 but Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s were far more complicated, stemming from the Indian national security elite’s almost existential attachment to the “independence” of its nuclear program. For some officials, the requirement to place India’s nuclear reactors (only the existing civilian ones and any new ones) under IAEA supervision amounted to nothing less than an attack on India’s sovereignty. Many of those Indian bureaucrats and pundits also valued their country’s “non-aligned status,” a relic of the Cold War, when India had declared itself as belonging to neither the Soviet nor the American “bloc.” When confronted with that argument, my Indian counterpart, K. Natwar Singh, said, “The Cold War is over. Exactly against whom are we non-aligned?” Good point. But for many in New Delhi the idea of close technological cooperation with the United States was just too much to swallow.

To some, the requirement to place India’s nuclear reactors under IAEA supervision amounted to an attack on India’s sovereignty.

As a result of these tensions, the deal suffered several near-death experiences before and after Singh and Bush signed it in New Delhi. The first had come a year before in Washington, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visited the United States in July 2005.

The two leaders were expected to sign a framework document to end the moratorium on nuclear trade and pave the way for a full agreement on civil-nuclear cooperation. I met the day before with my Indian counterpart Natwar Singh in his suite at the Willard Hotel. Frankly, there was so much buzz around the State Department that we wanted to work in a location away from the press and where the atmosphere was more informal. I also thought it a sign of respect to go to him, even though we were in Washington.

Natwar was adamant. He wanted the deal, but the prime minister wasn’t sure he could sell it in New Delhi. We pushed as far as we could toward agreement. Finally, Natwar said that he would take the document to the prime minister and let me know.

That evening, [Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs] Nick Burns asked to see me. With Bob Zoellick, the deputy secretary, and several members of the senior staff, Phil Zelikow, Brian Gunderson, and Sean McCormack, in tow, he came down the hall from his office and entered mine. “It isn’t going to work,” Nick said. “The foreign minister tried, but the prime minister just can’t sign on to the agreement.”

I was a bit surprised, perhaps having misread Natwar’s determination as an indicator that he had the authority to speak for his government. It was late, and I was tired. “Well, if they don’t want to get out of the nuclear ghetto, I can’t do anything about it,” I said. “Why don’t you go and meet with the Indians and try one more time.” I called the President. “It isn’t going to work. Singh just can’t make it happen,” I said.

“Too bad,” he answered and didn’t press further. Later that night Nick called to tell me what I already knew—there wouldn’t be a deal. I went to bed, constructing a script in my head for the press the next day about needing more time for the negotiations. That sounds lame, I thought as I drifted into a fitful sleep.

I woke up at 4:30 a.m. and sat straight up in bed. I am not letting this go down, I thought. I called Nick at 5:00 a.m. “I am not prepared to let this fail. Arrange for me to see the prime minister,” I said. The meeting with the President was set for ten. “How about breakfast at eight?” Nick called while I was exercising to say that the prime minister didn’t want to meet. “Get the foreign minister,” I answered. Natwar picked up the phone. My heart was beating pretty fast—maybe from the exercise, maybe from the sense of an important initiative slipping through my fingers. “Natwar, why won’t the PM see me?”

“He doesn’t want to tell you no,” he said. “I’ve done my best. I told him that the United States wants to take this thirty-year millstone from around your neck. You should do it. But he can’t sell it in New Delhi.”

I wasn’t ready to surrender. “Ask him again,” I pleaded. A few minutes later, Natwar called to say that the prime minister would receive me at his hotel at 8 a.m.

I went to the office for a few minutes and then to the Willard, having called the President to tell him I would try personally one more time. Steve asked if I wanted him to go with me. “No, I think I need to do this alone,” I said. I entered the prime minister’s suite and sat there with Natwar and his boss—all three of us not bothering to touch the pastries and coffee that had been served.

“Mr. Prime Minister, this is the deal of a lifetime. You and President Bush are about to put U.S.-Indian relations on a fundamentally new footing. I know it’s hard for you, but it’s hard for the President too. I didn’t come here to negotiate language—only to ask you to tell your officials to get this done. And let’s get it done before you see the President.” Prime Minister Singh, a mild-mannered man who speaks slowly and softly, pushed back but eventually gave the nod to his people to try again.

There was a lot of discussion—but no commitment—regarding India’s pursuit of a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.

end part 1

 

[a_majoor]

Part 2

http://www.hoover.org/publications/defining-ideas/article/98706

I went directly to the White House and told the President what I’d done. When the Indians arrived, our negotiators and theirs sat in the Roosevelt Room, trying to find agreement, while the President, Prime Minister Singh, Natwar, and I sat nervously in the Oval pretending to focus on other matters. Finally, I got a note to join the negotiators. Natwar and I entered the room to the smiling Nick Burns and his counterpart. “We’ve got it,” Nick said.

The two leaders released the framework agreement to the press, most of whom were already writing stories of failure. Bob Zoellick came into my office. “Sometimes the secretary of state gets tested. You wouldn’t take no for an answer,” he said. I felt very good, but the New York Times’s editorial board soon reminded me that there would be a push back. The U.S.-India deal, it opined, would cause responsible NPT signatories to “be more inclined to regard the non-proliferation treaty as an anachronism, reconsider their self-restraint, and be tempted by the precedent that India has successfully established and that now, in effect, has an American blessing.”

The arguments from the non-proliferation community were not without merit. The whole premise of the regime was that countries who pursued civilian nuclear power under safeguards—inspections, reporting, and so on—would not pursue military weapons programs. It was too easy, it was thought, to divert technology from one to the other. That, some said, had been the argument vis-à-vis Iran. How could we argue that India was different?

It was a good question, but, unlike Iran, India was not lying to the IAEA about its enrichment activities and the fact of the existence of a military program was well known. Though ideally India—or Pakistan, for that matter—would not have built a nuclear weapons program, this was now a fact of life. The key from our point of view was to get India within the IAEA regime, even if they could not and would not be party to the NPT. Our thinking tracked closely with that of Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the IAEA and thus the guardian of the NPT. Better to have India in the tent in some fashion, even if New Delhi could not formally join the NPT. ElBaradei understood this point.

At least new construction of reactors would be under safeguard. India already had more than enough nuclear material for its military program. It needed help on the civilian side and we needed the strategic breakthrough with this emerging, democratic power.

The work to move from that initial announcement of a civil-nuclear deal in 2005 to a more detailed framework agreement by March 2006, when the President would visit New Delhi, was extremely difficult and the effort almost failed several times. The prime minister had indeed encountered difficulty when he returned home from Washington in the summer of 2005. By the time of the trip, the Indian delegation was trying to walk back some of the language on IAEA safeguards. Steve and Nick went to the Foreign Ministry to try to hammer out a solution. I thought that I would stay away this time, giving us another bite at the apple should they fail. After several ups and downs and near misses over a period of eight hours, they succeeded. The United States and India had a civil-nuclear deal. Now the really hard work would begin. The reality was that the deal could not go into force until we met a number of criteria stipulated by U.S. law. But we’d lived to fight another day—and that was good enough for the time being.

The nuclear deal was the news of the President’s visit to India. Yet other elements of the trip demonstrated why it was time to change the relationship with this emerging global power. I remember well the President’s meeting with students at the business school in Hyderabad, a center of technological sophistication that personified India’s potential as a high-tech leader and economic dynamo. This could be Stanford, I thought.

There was a lot of discussion—but no commitment—regarding India’s pursuit of a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The Indians had a good argument and one for which I had some sympathy. The UN Security Council did not reflect the changes in the balance of power that had taken place with World War II. International institutions are like the rings of a tree—you can date their birth by looking at their membership. The original permanent five members of the Security Council (those with veto authority) were the Soviet Union (Russia became the successor state in 1991), China (with the PRC replacing Chang Kai Shek’s ROC in Taiwan in 1971), France, the UK, and the United States. But now there were other important powers and whole continents that were not represented. What about Japan, the world’s third largest economy? What about the Middle East? And of course the emerging market powers of Brazil and India did not hold permanent membership either.

The meeting with Pakistan’s President Musharraf was dominated by talk of terrorism and our response.

The United States had long championed Japan’s case but frankly the politics of UNSC reform were just too complicated to take on. The incorporation of India was opposed by China. Brazil’s candidacy raised the question of Mexico’s exclusion. The Africans could never settle on a candidate to represent a continent split between the Arab north and the Sub-Saharan black south. And reform would have raised a sticky question for our closest allies. Germany wanted membership, too. Did it make sense to have three European representatives—particularly when the European Union was supposed to have a common foreign policy?

We adopted a strategy of acknowledging the importance of reform and welcoming reasonable proposals, but we never acted on any of them. That said, the continued focus on the issue by emerging powers such as India underscored their growing insistence on a voice in international affairs.

***

By way of contrast to our time in New Delhi, the trip to Pakistan began with the news upon arrival that there had been an attack on the U.S. consulate in Karachi. A U.S. consular officer had been killed. The President, always gracious to his hosts, endeavored to convince the Pakistanis that this in no way cast a shadow on the visit. But of course it did. There was an air of unreality as we fought to make the visit appear normal. The Pakistanis had been insistent that the President sleep just one night in Islamabad to show that it was safe. After a lot of debate, he decided to push the Secret Service beyond its comfort zone and grant the Pakistanis’ request: we’d stay at our ambassador’s fortress-like home.

The contrasts continued. The meetings with Prime Minister Singh had been focused on technological cooperation and removing bureaucratic barriers to foreign investment. The President met for lunch with the members of a joint U.S.-Indian CEO council. But the meeting with Pakistan’s President Musharraf was dominated by talk of terrorism and our response.

And it wasn’t just the conversation that was different. In India, we were treated to a beautiful dinner outdoors on the veranda of the Presidential Palace, a fresh breeze blowing through as we looked out across the beautifully manicured grounds. In Pakistan, aware that we needed to be wheels up for Washington that evening, we sat in the Palace for a hurried two-hour dinner and a “cultural performance” that oddly featured a Western-style fashion show.

Still, the visit to Islamabad allowed us to see a glimpse of a different Pakistan. Musharraf, a classic “man on horseback” who came to power in a military coup, was making important changes in his country. I was struck by the presence of strong women ministers representing the Pakistani government in our meetings. It was also encouraging to see a vibrant press corps peppering both presidents with questions about everything from the possibility of a civil-nuclear deal with Pakistan—not possible from our point of view—to expectations about coming elections in the country. For all his limitations, with the freeing of the press and of the judiciary, Musharraf had laid the groundwork for a civilian government to return. Ironically, those changes would soon turn out to be his undoing.

India and Pakistan were successfully delinked. Unfortunately, the stop in Kabul underscored a link of another kind—Pakistan and Afghanistan were tied together more than ever as the problem of cross-border terrorism deepened. And a proposed policy change in Pakistan would only exacerbate the problem.

In September 2006 we had first gotten wind of a possible deal between the Pakistani military and the tribal leaders in North Waziristan, the territory deep in the mountainous region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Negotiating with the Pakistani Taliban, Musharraf agreed to withdraw troops from their territory in exchange for assurances that the tribal leaders would cease attacks on the military and stop the infiltration of militants across the Afghan border. The territory has been ungoverned throughout its history. The British had tried and failed, and the Soviet Union had simply left the suspicious, pious, and xenophobic tribes to their own devices. Pakistan had rarely interfered in the area either, but the war on terror required military engagement in the region, as al Qaeda and the Taliban had fled there after our invasion of Afghanistan.

The Pakistani military proved unequipped and poorly trained for the mission and reluctant to transform its capabilities to do a better job. Still focused on India, the Pakistani army was ready for an engagement in Kashmir but not in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the North-West Frontier province. Though we had already given Pakistan more than $4.5 billion in security-related assistance by October 2005, Pakistan had accomplished very little in restructuring its armed forces. In fact, Islamabad’s primary concern was the release of the F-16s that had been purchased and then withheld in 1990 when Pakistan was suspected of secretly producing nuclear weapons.

The President had acceded to Musharraf’s plea to deliver the airplanes. “This will make it easier to work with my military and build a spirit of partnership,” Musharraf told me on one occasion. But it said something about the mind-set of the Pakistanis that high-performance aircraft, rather than the nuts-and-bolts of equipment and training for counter-terrorism, dominated our conversations.

The truth is that the Pakistanis had no stomach for fighting in the rugged border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Musharraf decided to cut a deal with the tribal leaders—a kind of live and let live. In exchange for a stand-down of the Pakistani military, the tribes agreed to control their “guests,” the terrorists. Only the first half of that deal was realized and the region became a safe haven for several terrorist groups: fighters commanded by Baitullah Mehsud; the Haqqani network, still active after we left office; and remnants of al Qaeda.

In late September 2006, Musharraf would come to Washington to present this deal to the President. We told Musharraf that the United States wouldn’t criticize him publicly and that we’d give the deal a chance to work. But the President made clear to him in the Oval Office meeting that the United States would take action itself if we learned of an imminent threat to our territory or if we learned that key al Qaeda figures were being harbored there. Musharraf was told point blank that we considered it our prerogative to act without permission or—possibly—Islamabad’s knowledge.

Karzai was proving to be a brilliant prosecutor, and Musharraf had few answers.

That night, the President invited Musharraf, Afghan President Karzai, and their respective ambassadors to a small dinner in the family dining room at the White House. The Vice President, Steve Hadley, and I joined President Bush at what turned out to be a contentious affair.

The dinner started routinely enough, with Karzai and Musharraf sharing their thoughts about how things were going against the Taliban and al Qaeda. But after about an hour, Musharraf started to explain the agreement that he’d made with the tribes. Sugarcoating the facts and overselling the potential benefits, he talked for more than thirty minutes. Karzai suddenly interrupted, saying that Musharraf had made a deal not with the tribal leaders but with the terrorists. When Musharraf protested, Karzai dramatically pulled out a piece of paper from his long flowing cape. “See, it says right here that the Taliban will not be disturbed,” he said. Musharraf tried to answer, but Karzai was on a roll, stopping just short of accusing the Pakistani of complicity in the cross-border raids into his country.

Things were getting pretty hot. The ambassadors were shifting in their seats, and, frankly, so were we. It was as if we were watching a heavyweight bout where one overmatched fighter had somehow gotten into the ring by mistake. Karzai was proving to be a brilliant prosecutor, and Musharraf had few answers; he seemed suddenly not to know what he’d signed.

President Bush interjected the thought that perhaps they could monitor the progress on the deal together. It was a bit lame but about all anyone could think of at the moment to separate the verbal combatants. It didn’t work, and the two were getting hotter under the collar by the moment. A photograph from that dinner says it all: Karzai and Musharraf glaring at each other while we, the ever-sunny Americans, sit with nervous—almost silly—grins on our faces.

Finally Karzai mentioned something about a joint loya jirga (tribal council) that he’d proposed. He’d never received an answer. We jumped on the opening, turning the conversation to getting such a council established. I said that I’d call Ryan Crocker and Ronald Neumann, our ambassadors in Islamabad and Kabul, to help coordinate the establishment of the jirga. When the two men left, the Vice President, Steve, the President, and I looked at one another in amazement. “They almost came to blows,” the President said. Everyone nodded in agreement.

The management of the relationship between our allies in the war on terror suddenly seemed daunting in the extreme. However, the relationship between the two men had soured well before that dinner, and the strains were very much on display as we visited Afghanistan during the President’s trip on March 1, 2006, months before their Washington encounter. When we arrived in Kabul, Karzai vented about Musharraf, whom he accused of wanting to annex Afghan Pashtuns into Pakistan. Musharraf had made a similar claim about Karzai’s desire for a greater Pashtunistan during our time in Islamabad.

The President turned the conversation with President Karzai to the training of the Afghan security forces, fighting corruption, and—most troubling—the failing effort to rid Afghanistan of poppy. The President gently suggested that we might have to use some of the methods that had succeeded in Colombia, including aerial spraying.

Hamid Karzai is a proud man, and, as had been the case in my encounter with him the year before, he tended to emphasize the positive. But it was frustrating as he declared problem after problem to be under control. “We’re making real progress with the governors on poppy eradication,” he said, a statement belied by the estimates of numerous monitoring organizations. “All we need are some alternative crops—maybe pomegranates—for them to grow,” he continued, only to note that the road network didn’t allow for the transport of perishable fruits and vegetables to market. “So we need roads, roads, roads—as quickly as possible,” he added. There was always a story of villagers who’d come to him promising to plant good crops, not bad ones.

In fact, it was good that Karzai was an optimist—maybe that was what got him up in the morning to do one of the hardest jobs on Earth. But sometimes I couldn’t tell if Karzai believed what he was saying or just thought that we might. He did not want to even acknowledge the possibility of dramatic measures such as crop destruction through aerial spraying. The issue would be a source of tension between our two countries for the remainder of the President’s term. But as frustrating as the relationship with Karzai sometimes was, he was the elected president of Afghanistan. Though in time we would come to see the importance of the governors of the provinces in addressing the country’s challenges, there was no alternative to Karzai, who stepped up to be the first freely elected president of his country.

That afternoon, the President and Laura, Karzai, our ambassador Ron Neumann, and I cut the ribbon dedicating the gigantic but not particularly attractive new U.S. Embassy in Kabul. The President asked if I’d had anything to do with the architectural design. I made clear that I hadn’t. But the big, ugly building would serve its purpose and it sent the message that, for better or worse, we were in Afghanistan for the long run.

Condoleezza Rice is the Thomas and Barbara Stephenson Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, professor of political economy in the Stanford Graduate School of Business, and professor of political science at Stanford University.

From January 2005 to 2009, she served as the 66th secretary of state of the United States. Before serving as America’s chief diplomat, she served as assistant to the president for national security affairs (national security adviser) from January 2001 to 2005.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Not everything works as expected according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/asian-pacific/indias-nano-hits-bumps-on-the-road/article2229888/

India’s Nano hits bumps on the road

STEPHANIE NOLEN
NEW DELHI— From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

Last updated Wednesday, Nov. 09, 2011

When Indian industrial giant Tata launched the Nano, the hype was huge. Sleek and cute in buttercup yellow, its sticker price was $2,000, making it the “world’s cheapest car.”

It promised to revolutionize both its market – putting low-income consumers behind the wheel – and car-making, through a process called “frugal engineering.” The Indian public clamoured with excitement; people lined up for hours at events to sit in a prototype. Auto companies outside India watched with great anticipation, too: was this the future for emerging markets in developing countries?

Two years later, the Nano is a cute, yellow disaster – not because there’s anything wrong with the car, which remains something of an engineering triumph, but because of a series of surprising blunders on the part of Tata.

Nano sales were predicted to be 25,000 cars a month by this point. Instead, the company sold just 2,936 in September, half as many as a year before. August was even worse, with just 1,202 Nanos sold countrywide.

Image from the Globe and Mail

So what went wrong? Missteps in everything from distribution, advertising, marketing and financing plans hobbled the car from the start.

The Nano, so the story goes, was the brainchild of Ratan Tata, the venerable head of the Tata Group. He had a vision for what the Nano would do, and it wasn’t as simple as selling millions: He said he wanted to get low-income Indian families who typically travel by scooter (families of four, five, even six, piled on a single cycle, helmet-less) off their two-wheeler, as they are called here, and into something safer. As a side benefit, he hoped the car could be produced in an IKEA-esque flat pack and shipped to remote corners of the country, creating a business opportunity for mechanics to assemble them.

Some who have watched sales of the teeny car sputter speculate that Mr. Tata’s altruistic intentions may have blinded him to some harsh marketing realities.

In essence, the Nano was marketed as the car for people who could barely afford a car. But in a market where car purchases are hugely aspirational, nobody wants that car, said Vinay Sharma, a professor of marketing and strategic management at the Indian Institute of Technology at Roorkee, whose classes study the fate of the Nano. People save for years for their first vehicle; if they drive a Nano home, the reaction from the kids is, “ ‘What have you brought, a compromise, a car that is almost a motorcycle?’ This was not the car people were dreaming of,” he said.

Most of those who have driven the Nano come away full of praise: It’s remarkably roomy, a pleasure to steer and is economical with fuel. It doesn’t feel like the world’s cheapest car.

But that hasn’t translated into people buying them.

The Nano faced two big problems early on. Its original production facility, in West Bengal, got tangled up in messy politics with the state’s Marxist then-government, and at the 11th hour the plant was shifted to Gujarat – so the company wasn’t able to meet an early rush of orders.

Once cars were on the road, there were safety fears. A few early Nanos burst into flames while being driven, and Tata didn’t mount the public relations offensive it should have over those incidents, said Ray Titus, professor of marketing and consumer behaviour at Alliance University in Bangalore.

But the company had larger woes. There was barely any print or television advertising to give the Nano a brand identity beyond cheap, and the company made equally severe missteps in distribution. Tata marketed the Nano through showrooms in big cities, which meant that much of its target market in small cities and towns never saw one.

In addition, although the car was cheap (about $2,500 once it finally went on sale), the company failed to make it easy for the lowest earners to obtain financing – the Nano needed below-market interest rates and fast onsite loans, Prof. Titus said. Instead, as would-be buyers struggled through the process of getting a bank loan based on their low-wage jobs, they realized they could get a slightly larger loan, and perhaps buy a Maruti Swift, the lowest-price vehicle from Tata’s main competitor, which has none of the stigma of being a poor person’s car.

Tata is scrambling to address some of these problems: today a buyer can put down 15,000 rupees, or $300, and drive off with the car; there are finance plans with local banks. The base price has been pushed down again. Debases Ray, spokesman for Tata Motors, said the company is currently setting up a network of Nano dealerships in towns with populations of less than 500,000 people; it hopes to have 300 by March, 2012.

Mr. Ray also noted that a big hike in fuel prices and interest rates last summer squashed all of India’s car market, not just the Nano, and that the Nano’s target customers are the most vulnerable to those kinds of expense increases. While there is gaping overcapacity at the Gujarat plant, which can produce 250,000 units a year, the company has begun exports to Sri Lanka and Nepal.

The Nano story has been followed closely by the automotive world outside India – as the first experiment with low-income consumers in developing countries that represent a massive vein of new sales potential for car markers the world over. The “frugal engineering” idea, of making a low-cost product as simply as possible (which originated with the French car maker Renault, but has been embraced by a number of firms in India) involves stripping the manufacturing process down to its component parts, and doing each as cheaply and simply as possible.

It worked for the product, said Ferdinand Dudenhoeffer, who teaches in the centre for automotive research at the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany; the Nano is a good one. But the collapse of sales have prompted other companies that had plans for a Nano-esque product of their own, for India or elsewhere, to shelve those plans for now. Still, if they learn from Tata’s errors with the Nano, the basic idea is still solid, he said. “They just have to refine it – the production system and design system are good,” he said. “It will just need a different approach.”

This doesn't mean that "frugal engineering" is a bad idea, nor that Nano like cars will not appear, soon, in China, India, Indonesia, Philippines and so on.

 

[a_majoor]

The global economy catches up with India as well:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/12/india’s-economy

Slip-sliding away
Dec 12th 2011, 17:25 by P.F. | KOLKATA

EXPECTATIONS for India’s economic growth rate have been sliding inexorably. In the early spring there was still heady talk about 9-10% being the new natural rate of expansion, a trajectory which if maintained would make the country an economic superpower in a couple of decades. Now things look very different. The latest GDP growth figure slipped to 6.9% and industrial production numbers just released, on December 12th, showed a decline of 5.1% compared with the previous period, a miserable state of affairs. The slump looks broadly based, from mining to capital goods, and in severity compares with that experienced at the height of the financial crisis, in February 2009, when a drop of 7.2% took place. Bombast is turning to panic.

Several riders apply. The industrial production series is notoriously volatile—most economists admit to being baffled by its swings. The comparison with the prior year period was unflattering. And it would be surprising if India were not hurt by the agonies of the rich world—after all from China to Brazil investors are jittery about the outlook, too. Moreover the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has been raising rates through the year to try to bring inflation, running at some 9%, under control. At Mumbai drinks parties, after a scotch too many, industrialists can be reduced to apoplexy on this subject—the central bank, they argue, has overreacted, killing growth to tame an inflation problem that is largely the result of structural factors such as poor food supply chains.

Yet another factor looms. Years of government drift have meant a loss of momentum on reform, from building infrastructure to controlling graft. That drift was symbolised by the ruling coalition’s decision this month to allow in foreign supermarkets into India, which it was forced to reverse two weeks later after widespread protests and objections from the smaller parties it relies on to stay in power. India’s economy can seem like a bicycle—it needs to keep moving fast to be stable. Once conviction in the destination falters, companies curb investment and hope turns to fear that the country’s problems may be intractable.

An optimistic reading of these latest numbers is that they might force India’s politicians to move beyond the rancour of recent months and agree a program of reforms that would bolster confidence at home and abroad. But given a busy electoral cycle the odds of that seem poor. The concern now is that if growth slows a whole lot of other worries come to the fore, from potential bad debts in the banking system, the government’s poor fiscal position and the challenge of funding a current-account deficit when outside investors have got cold feet. Already the rupee has slid reflecting the last of those worries. India’s finances look solid when it is motoring along at close to double digits and weak when it is expanding at half that rate.

Given all this an uncomfortable burden of expectation now sits on the shoulders of the RBI, one of the few government institutions in India that commands respect, albeit grudgingly from some business folk. It could start cutting rates. But given inflation is still quite persistent, this would involve a theological U-turn. It has other tools available to try to ease the supply of credit, such as lowering the amount of cash banks must hold as reserves, creating room on their balance sheets to lend more. Unless there is a sudden change in government policy—or those statistics are shown to be cranky—action now seems likely. But as in the rich world, India may find that central banks cannot always work short-term economic miracles, nor sustain long-term ones all on their own.

 

[a_majoor]

India seems quite optomistic about their prospects and long term planning:

http://www.asianscientist.com/topnews/isro-indian-mission-to-mars-red-planet-2013/

Indian Scientists Propose 10 Experiments For 2013 Mission To Mars

Srinivas Laxman
January 9, 2012

A Indian mission to Mars is taking shape with space scientists proposing 10 experiments, mostly related to the study of the Red Planet’s atmosphere.

Proof that this challenging mission is no longer a dream is amply evident in a report of the Planetary Sciences and Exploration conference, organized by the Ahmedabad-based Planex group of the Physical Research Laboratory (PRL), an affiliate of ISRO, between December 12 and 14, 2011.

The report shows that scientists from various ISRO centers and the PRL are extremely enthusiastic about the flight to the Red Planet, and are awaiting a formal ‘go’ from ISRO, the Space Commission, and the Union Cabinet.

As a precursor to the mission, a Mars Mission Study Team has already been formed to prepare the science and mission scenarios for ISRO.

In addition, a brainstorming session on Mars science and exploration was held at the PRL on March 24 and 25, 2011, as a preparatory step for ISRO’s Mars exploration plans. This two-day session served as an initial platform for scientists and students to fuel up their proposals and plans for an Indian Mars mission.

The December conference report states that the 10 Indian Martian experiments suggested are:

■Probe For Infrared Spectroscopy for Mars (Prism) which will study certain aspects of the Martian atmosphere and “spatial and seasonal variations of these gases over the lifetime of the mission.”
■Mars Exospheric Neutral Composition Analyzer (Menca) which will analyze the Martian upper atmosphere-exosphere region 400 km above the surface.
■Another instrument (Tis) will measure thermal emissions from the surface of the Red Planet. Its primary science goals include mapping the surface composition and mineralogy of Mars and understanding the dynamics of the Martian atmosphere by monitoring carbon dioxide levels.
■Using radio signals to study the atmosphere.
■Mars Color Camera (MCC) which can image from a highly elliptical orbit of 500 km x 80,000 km. It will be designed as a multi-purpose instrument which can image the topography of the Martian surface and map Martian polar caps. “It is expected to observe and help in furthering our understanding of events like dust storms and dust devils. From an elliptical orbit around Mars, the camera will return high quality visual images of Mars, its moons, asteroids and other celestial bodies from close quarters,” the report states.
■A Methane Sensor For Mars (MSM) has been recommended for detecting methane in the Martian atmosphere.
■A Mars Radiation Spectrometer (Maris) which can measure and characterize charged particle background levels during the cruise and orbit phase of the spacecraft. This instrument will play an important role for a possible future human mission to Mars as it will determine radiation exposure doses.
■A Plasma and Current Experiment (Pace) which will assess what is known as “atmospheric escape and processes of the Martian atmosphere and the structure of the Martian tail.”
■A microwave remote sensing technique for sounding the Martian atmosphere. Scientists connected with this instrument say that it will be designed to be minimally affected during a dust storm.
■A suite of instruments to detect plasma waves in the Martian atmosphere.
If this much-awaited mission finally gets off the ground with the required approvals, only some of the 10 experiments and payloads will be selected, with a focus on experiments that have not been done before, sources tell Asian Scientist Magazine.

Mars fever has gripped many scientists at the PRL, with an Indian chapter of the Mars Society formed at IIT-Mumbai.

Planning for the Mars lift off has progressed to such an extent that the provisional launch windows have already been fixed for either 2013, 2016, or 2018 from Sriharikota, India’s main spaceport near Chennai.

According to the scientists, if the launch takes place in November 2013, then the Indian spacecraft will enter the orbit around Mars in September 2014. It will be an orbiting mission and not a landing one. On reaching Mars after a 10-month flight, the spacecraft will operate and pick up scientific data in a highly elliptical orbit of 500 km x 80,000 km.

Some scientists even feel that the mission to Mars must be given precedence over the second Indian mission to the moon, Chandrayaan-2, since India has already done a lunar mission successfully.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not everything works as expected according to this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail:


This doesn't mean that "frugal engineering" is a bad idea, nor that Nano like cars will not appear, soon, in China, India, Indonesia, Philippines and so on.

I think a big problem is the nanos is nowhere near as flexiable as a scooter. A scooter can be be brought inside safe from flooding, thieves. Sidecars and hawker stalls can be bolted onto them.

 

[a_majoor]

The Atlantic on the "Two India" problem. This is a difficult issue given the various divisions in Indian society, but there are lots of different initiatives (ranging from sub $100 laptops for children to new cooking stoves that don't require animal dung as fuel, and lots of things in between [agricultural improvements, microloans etc.]).

How it plays out will be very important to the stability of India and the region; we can help by pushing free trade with India and broadening and deepening social, political and economic links between our countries:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/02/the-two-indias-astounding-poverty-in-the-backyard-of-amazing-growth/253340/

The Two Indias: Astounding Poverty in the Backyard of Amazing Growth
By Kentaro Toyama
Feb 20 2012, 1:50 PM ET 7

With the world's largest democracy in the embrace of a freer-than-free market capitalism, India may prove a bellwether for liberal societies everywhere.

"Incredible India" is the brand this country's Ministry of Tourism has been pushing in a global marketing campaign launched in 2002, and it couldn't be more fitting. Over the last decade, India has witnessed a stunning acceleration of rapid changes, both good and bad, that it began in the 1990s.

The most widely noticed metamorphosis is economic. Over the last ten years, India's GDP has grown between 7-9% per year, second only to China's sustained growth rates. In 2011, Forbes counted 57 Indian billionaires, up from only four a decade before. The same period saw Indian corporations vaulting onto the international stage. Tata Motors shocked the automobile industry with an acquisition of the British Jaguar Land Rover business in 2008. India's famed business-process outsourcing industry has expanded beyond call centers and software development to medicine, law, tax preparation, animation, and even music-video production. And, several IT giants have turned the tables on offshoring: No longer are jobs only "Bangalored." Today, Indian companies employ thousands of Americans on U.S. soil.

All of this is striking for an economy that languished for decades. From 1947, when India won its independence, through the 1980s, annual per-capita income grew at 1.3% per year, a snail's pace oft-derided by the Indian elite as the "Hindu rate of growth." Today, though, any social theorists walking the bustling streets of Mumbai might be tempted to revise Max Weber's classic treatise: The Hindu Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

Economic change has been accompanied by a less noted, but no less significant, political inflection point. Alongside the enthralling Arab Spring and China's stillborn Jasmine Revolution, something that might be called the "Turmeric Revolution" has been bubbling over in India.

Though theoretically a democracy, India's governance has resembled something of a feudal system in practice. Politicians and bureaucrats often act like dukes and barons with term limits. They routinely apply a corrupt layer of graft for their personal benefit.

A self-confident educated class, however, has risen up to say "No more!" Last year, hundreds of thousands of protesters rallied around a series of hunger strikes by social activist Anna Hazare. The movement shined a spotlight on the terms of an anti-corruption bill that many criticize as being too weak. In West Bengal, May elections saw an end to the 34-year reign of the communist Left Front alliance. It lost to the Trinamool Congress party, which made corruption-free governance the pillar of its campaign.

Meanwhile, the bar for being above the law appears to be rising, as high-profile culprits in corruption cases are brought to account. Karnataka Chief Minister B. S. Yeddyurappa was arrested over accusations of illicit land and iron mining deals that benefited his family. And, the headline-dominating "2G scam" was partially resolved this month with a Supreme Court decision to nullify all 122 2G wireless spectrum licenses issued under the tenure of former Telecommunications Minister A. Raja. Raja, who is believed to have personally pocketed $600 million at a cost to the government treasury of $39 billion, has been arrested and charged, along with several others implicated in the scandal.

HALF A BILLION ON $2 A DAY

These successes are far from being universally shared, however. Though rates of poverty are declining, in 2005 the World Bank estimated that 42% of India's population still lived at under $1.25 a day (PPP), and nearly twice as many under $2. Thus, 800-900 million Indians live in conditions that most developed-world citizens would consider destitution.

The challenges for this vast, voiceless majority are multidimensional and stark. Discrimination by caste, religion, and gender remains pervasive. Low literacy blocks meaningful social mobility. India's rate of child malnutrition is greater than in any other country in the world. In many communities, the sick and the elderly are left to die for lack of means to support them, and bonded slavery is not unheard of.

What's worse, there is some evidence that conditions for the least privileged are deteriorating. A paper by public policy researchers Anirudh Krishna and Devendra Bajpai points out that rural incomes are declining in absolute terms, likely due to systemic stresses to agriculture and differential access to markets and education. It is common to speak of "two Indias," and the widening canyon between them is the greatest threat to the nation's well-being.

What does the future hold? Much depends on how energetically the fruits of the country's success are applied towards greater equality of opportunity. The government's rural employment guarantee act is a start, despite its flaws. Healthcare, agriculture extension, and other government services that accrue to poorer communities deserve far greater resources and attention. Outdated constraints on industries that employ low-skill labor must be relaxed. The country's vibrant civil society should continue to give voice to the marginalized. Most importantly, public education could use a budgetary boost and a management miracle.

The next ten years may hold a lesson for developed countries, as well. With the world's largest democracy in the embrace of a freer-than-free market capitalism, India may prove a bellwether for liberal societies everywhere.

 

[GAP]

The Atlantic on the "Two India" problem. This is a difficult issue given the various divisions in Indian society, but there are lots of different initiatives (ranging from sub $100 laptops for children to new cooking stoves that don't require animal dung as fuel, and lots of things in between [agricultural improvements, microloans etc.]).

How it plays out will be very important to the stability of India and the region; we can help by pushing free trade with India and broadening and deepening social, political and economic links between our countries:

The other side of that is the insane corruption in India and others that just defeats a level playing field......

 

[a_majoor]

Growing signs of cooperation between India and Saudi Arabia. This could be both an interesting opportunity for India, or a possible threat (getting entangled in the various regional conflicts). As noted, India has had a long history of economic involvment with the region in the past (Oman comes to mind), so extending their connections here is probably a good thing overall:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/07/08/saudi-shocks-paks-with-pro-india-turn/

Saudi Shocks Paks With Pro-India Turn

In steps that point to Saudi Arabia’s concerns about Pakistan’s unsustainable national course, its fears of Iran and its renewed interest in its security relationship with the United States, the Washington Post reports that Saudi Arabia is stepping up its cooperation with Indian authorities on the sensitive question of Pakistani or Indian nationals suspected of terror activities and hiding in Saudi Arabia — in some cases people who are traveling on false documents apparently provided by people with access to the resources of the Pakistani state.

The highest profile case is that of Sayed Zabiuddin Ansari, an Indian citizen implicated in the Mumbai attacks. Known as Abu Jundal, he is an Indian citizen whose voice was allegedly heard on phone calls relaying instructions during the Mumbai terror incident. He was in Saudi Arabia on a Pakistani passport, and his handover to the Indians could not be more embarrassing for the Paks. Fasih Mehmood, another alleged Indian terrorist living in Saudi Arabia with Pakistani papers has also been arrested; he may soon follow Abu Jundal back home for interrogation and trial.

The Saudis are doing India some other favors as well, reports the Post. They want India’s help in putting pressure on Iran, and are helping India replace any oil lost as a result of declining purchases from what Saudi thinks of as the hated Persian heretics. There is even talk of Saudi good offices being used to help India expand its commercial networks in the Arab world. Historically, the Indian subcontinent had close economic links with the Arabs, and a revival of those connections would help India’s economy and partially offset China’s rising profile.

The Saudis are pretty good at foreign policy, and this shift seems to reflect several calculations.

The Saudis are really, really worried about Iran. Helping steer India away from reflexive “non-aligned” third world opposition to western power projection in the region helps clear the path for what many Saudis deeply hope will be an effective western military strike that puts Iran in its place.
The Saudis don’t like radical terrorism. Worries about Al-Qaeda at home and in neighboring Yemen have killed any illusions some Saudis may have had about terror groups. The Saudi state is theologically hardline but geopolitically moderate. It worries about Pakistan’s connections with terror groups and would like Pakistan to distance itself from groups whose violence endangers the Saudis at home.

The fears of terrorism, Iran and the Arab Spring have led the Saudis to put new importance on their relationship with the US. From the Saudi point of view, with Europe weak and China very far away, the US is the only possible ally that can help the Saudis with the problems that keep them up at night. Helping India with terrorism and to pull it away from Iran pleases Washington but also strengthens the configuration of forces that the Saudi authorities think are best placed to protect their state and their regime.

But it’s as important to understand what this isn’t as to see what it is. The Saudis are not turning their backs on Pakistan completely. Ties between the two countries are extremely deep. These two Sunni Islamic states that were aligned with Washington during the Cold War and that cooperated against the Soviets in Afghanistan have a lot of history together. Many observers believe that the Saudis provided financial support and other assistance in Pakistan’s nuclear program, and there are many indications that a range of prominent Pakistani politicians nurture close links with the Saudis, links from which they derive substantial benefits of various kinds. This isn’t going anywhere, but we can expect the Saudis to use their influence to try to cool Pakistan’s ardor for using radical groups as instruments of policy.

Second, this has nothing to do with liberalism, religious moderation or democracy. A diplomatic opening to secular, democratic India doesn’t mean that women are going to get permission to drive cars in Riyadh. If anything, it may mean the opposite. When Saudi leaders take a controversial foreign policy decision that offends pious clerics at home, they often balance this by making concessions to the clerics over social policy. There is a long history in Islamic political practice of giving the ruler a free hand in foreign affairs as long as the government supports Islamic principles and practice at home; the Saudi state is pretty careful to honor its end of the bargain.

Abu Jundal’s voice was allegedly heard giving instructions to the Mumbai attackers on a phone call from Pakistan. Pakistani authorities are not at all happy that his next public remarks will be made in a courtroom in India.

 

[a_majoor]

The scale and scope of the crisis is pretty impressive, the affected population is about the combined population of Canada and the United States. Of course many Indians are used to the grid being overloaded and shut down, and many hospitals, government offices and business have back up generators, but modernizing and hardening the grid should become one of the high priority efforts of the Indian government:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_INDIA_POWER_OUTAGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-30-08-12-48

370M Indians swelter in heat after power fails
By RAVI NESSMAN
Associated Press

Indian power failure puts 370M in dark for hours
370M Indians swelter in heat after power fails

NEW DELHI (AP) -- Northern India's power grid crashed Monday, halting trains, forcing hospitals and airports onto backup power and providing a dark reminder of the nation's inability to feed a growing hunger for energy as it strives to become an economic power.

While the midsummer outage was unique in its reach - it hit 370 million people, more than the population of the United States and Canada combined - its impact was softened by Indians' familiarity with almost daily blackouts of varying duration. Hospitals and major businesses have backup generators that seamlessly kick in during power cuts, and upscale homes are hooked to backup systems powered by truck batteries.

Nonetheless, some small businesses were forced to shut for the day. Buildings were without water because the pumps weren't working, and the vaunted New Delhi Metro, with 1.8 million daily riders, was paralyzed during the busy morning commute.

"This will obviously get worse," said Subhash Chawla, a 65-year-old retiree who took the Metro once power was restored. "Unless the Metro has a separate power supply, it will be chaos in the future."

The grid feeds the nation's breadbasket in Punjab, the war-wracked region of Kashmir, the burgeoning capital of New Delhi, the Dalai Lama's Himalayan headquarters in Dharmsala, and the world's most populous state, poverty-stricken Uttar Pradesh.

By late morning, less than nine hours after the outage started, most of the affected areas had their power back, officials said.

By evening, 15 hours after the outage began, officials said full power had been restored.

Many chafed at the inconvenience.

Amit Naik, a toy maker in New Delhi, was forced to close his workshop for the day.

"There was no water, so my machine couldn't run. Other people had the same difficulties," he said.

The Confederation of Indian Industry said the outage was a reminder of the urgent need for the government to fix the power sector, ensure a steady supply of coal for power plants and reform the electricity utilities.

Transmission and distribution losses in some states are as much as 50 percent because of theft and corruption by employees in the power industry. India's Central Electricity Authority reported power deficits of about 8 percent in recent months.

Power Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde deflected criticism, pointing out that the United States and Brazil also had huge power failures in recent years.

"I ask you to look at the power situation in other countries as well," he said.

The blackout, the worst to hit India in a decade, began about 2:30 a.m. when the grid covering eight northern states crashed. Officials in Uttar Pradesh, where the problem was believed to have begun, said the grid could not keep up with the huge demand for power in the hot summer.

But Shinde said he was not sure exactly what caused the collapse and had formed a committee to investigate.

The power outage left millions sweltering in the summer heat. Muslim families were forced to eat their pre-dawn meals by candlelight before beginning their daytime Ramadan fast. "It was really difficult," said farmer Mohammed Zaman.

As officials struggled to get the grid back on line, they drew power from the neighboring eastern and western grids as well as hydroelectric power from the small neighboring mountain kingdom of Bhutan.

New Delhi residents were roused from sleep when their fans and air conditioners stopped, and came out of their homes in the heat as the entire city turned dark. Temperatures in the city were in the mid-30s C (90s F) with 89 percent humidity.

Some trains across the northern region were stranded when their electric engines failed. Others were delayed by hours as they were hooked to diesel engines.

The failure was the first time since 2001 that the northern grid had collapsed. But India's demand for electricity has soared since then as its population and economy have grown sharply.

But any connection to the grid remains a luxury for many. One-third of India's households do not even have electricity to power a light bulb, according to last year's census.

The power deficit was worsened by a weak monsoon that lowered hydroelectric generation and kept temperatures higher, further increasing electricity usage as people seek to cool off. Shivpal Singh Yadav, the power minister in Uttar Pradesh, home to 200 million people, said that while demand during peak hours hits 11,000 megawatts, the state can only provide 9,000 megawatts.

Uttar Pradesh Power Corp. chief Avnish Awasthi blamed the grid collapse on states drawing more than their allotted power to meet the summer demand.

 

[a_majoor]

India's ongoing issues with the power grid can be traced back to politics, corruption and inefficiency. As Instapundit noted: "Bad government is expensive. But bad governors don’t care, because they’re getting theirs"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/huge-blackout-fuels-doubts-about-indias-economic-ambitions/2012/08/01/gJQAtjeYOX_print.html

Huge blackout fuels doubts about India’s economic ambitions
By Simon Denyer and Rama Lakshmi, Updated: Wednesday, August 1, 5:10 AM

NEW DELHI — Power was restored in India on Wednesday after two days of blackouts that had cast a huge shadow over the nation’s economic ambitions.

On Tuesday, the overburdened electrical grid had collapsed across the whole of northern and eastern India, depriving more than half the country, or around 600 million people, of power. It was the largest blackout in global history in terms of the number of people affected — about 10 percent of the world population.

“Superpower India, RIP,” said the banner headline in The Economic Times newspaper.

The crisis had reinforced concerns that industry leaders had been raising for years — that the nation’s horribly inefficient power sector could undermine its long-term economic ambitions.

More generally, it sharpened fears about India’s failure to invest in the infrastructure needed to support its rapidly growing economy, in sharp contrast to neighboring China. It also destroyed any lingering hope that the nation’s entrepreneurial spirit and vibrant private sector could somehow deliver a significantly brighter future without a dramatic improvement in the way the country is governed.

“As one of the emerging economies of the world, which is home to almost a sixth of the world population, it is imperative that our basic infrastructure requirements are in keeping with India’s aspirations,” Chandrajit Banerjee, director general of the Confederation of Indian Industry, said in a statement Tuesday. “The developments of yesterday and today have created a huge dent in the country’s reputation that is most unfortunate.”

Tuesday’s blackout, which hit the northern and eastern parts of the country, brought more than 500 trains screeching to a halt, left thousands of passengers stuck for nearly an hour inside the capital’s Metro line and trapped more than 200 miners underground.

There was gridlock on many streets in the capital as traffic lights stopped working. Bank ATMs also failed, but airports and major industries were unaffected, switching instantly to backup generators in a country used to power outages.

Power Minister Veerappa Moily said Wednesday that electricity had been fully restored in the 20 affected states.

Along with a lack of investment in infrastructure, the crisis also had roots in many of India’s familiar failings: the populist tone of much of its politics, rampant corruption and poor management in its government and public sector, weak law enforcement, and a maze of regulations that restrict many industries.

Officials said they did not know what caused the blackout Tuesday, although a similar failure Monday was blamed on individual states drawing too much power from the grid, in defiance of regulations.

“It is open lawbreaking that goes on all the time in India,” said a Power Ministry official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject. “This time, it went beyond limits.”

The official said the national coalition government is unable to rein in powerful state chief ministers on whose support it often depends.

“We are powerless to enforce grid discipline like they do in developed countries of the world,” he said. “There are political constraints. We are even afraid to name the [offending] states. But what happened yesterday and today is a warning for all of us.”

Moily, who was appointed power minister in a cabinet reshuffle Tuesday, said his first priority was to stabilize the grid, and then to work out a proper strategy to stop the problems recurring. He said he did not want to start apportioning blame, but that “discipline” had to be enforced.

“We are very proud, we have an excellent system,” he said. “Maybe there were certain localized features.”

‘Politically correct prices’

Most Indian consumers receive heavily subsidized electricity, while farmers get free power, supposedly to pump groundwater to irrigate their land. But officials say much of the free power is illegally diverted to factories. That has left the grid overburdened and electricity-distribution companies heavily in debt.

“India’s basic energy shortage is compounded by the policy of selling electricity to consumers at politically correct prices,” the Hindustan Times wrote in an editorial. “The government-owned distribution monopolies in the states have all but lost their ability to buy power because their political bosses force them to sell it cheap, sometimes free, to voters.”

Sajjid Chinoy, India economist at JPMorgan in Mumbai, put it more simply: “When you don’t have economically viable pricing, you will not have economically viable power generation,” he said.

India suffers a power deficit of 8 to 12 percent in peak periods, and power cuts of eight hours a day are common in many parts of the country. A quarter of the population, 300 million people, has no access to electricity at all.

Ranvir Singh Solanki, a 42-year-old neurosurgeon, said he had been forced to postpone surgery on an accident victim after his diesel-powered generator ran out of fuel. Baleshar Ray, a 55-year-old dairy farmer on the outskirts of Delhi, said he had been unable to bathe, wash clothes or pump water for his cows and buffaloes to drink.

“We live in a village, but our village is so close to the capital that we have never faced such problems before,” he said. “If this can happen to the capital, then what can we say about the smaller villages and towns in India?”

Even though India has the world’s fifth-largest reserves of coal, disputes over environmental and land permits have kept many new mines from opening, while a lack of investment in technology has prevented output from growing to keep up with demand.

Existing mines have strict limits on how much coal they can extract, supposedly to safeguard the environment but in practice simply arbitrary, said U. Kumar, an expert on coal who advises some of India’s top industry leaders. A six-month-old Coal Ministry proposal to raise those limits by 20 percent as an emergency measure has “fallen on deaf ears,” he said.

As a result, about 10 percent of power plants have no coal supply right now, Kumar said. “We are going to face a frightening scenario,” he added. “It is going to be very difficult to meet the demand of our people.”

To meet some of the shortfall, India has been forced to import expensive coal from abroad, but it is politically unable to pass those higher costs on to consumers, bankrupting the sector still further.

Losses in electricity transmission and distribution are also among the world’s highest, 24 to 40 percent, because of inefficiencies and theft.

A constraint to growth

Indian economic growth has slowed to around 6 percent, while inflation is in double digits. That is a sign, Chinoy said, that investment by the public and private sectors has not kept up with the country’s consumption-led boom of recent years, inhibiting the economy’s ability to sustain rapid growth without pushing up prices.

“The biggest constraint to India’s growth potential is lack of capacity,” he said, “and the biggest single constraint to growth is the lack of available and adequate power supply.”

On Tuesday, a senior power official in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, Avinash Awasthi, was transferred for failing to prevent Monday’s blackout. But officials found no obvious scapegoat for the second day’s failure.

“We are absolutely clueless why this has happened again today,” Shakti Sinha, an official in the power department of the Delhi government, said Tuesday. “Yesterday we knew it was overdrawing of power; today it looks like a technical fault. The system failed somewhere.”

 

[a_majoor]

Canada is still working on more trade with India. While this article suggests we don't have a lot of economic interests in common, the sheer size of the Indian economy suggests the effort is still well worth our while:

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/11/02/dont-expect-much-from-indian-mission/

Don’t expect much from Indian mission

Eugene Beaulieu, Special to Financial Post | Nov 2, 2012 9:28 PM ET

India won’t allow market access


Prime Minister Stephen Harper is leading a mission to India today. On this, his second official visit to India, Harper will meet with the prime minister of India, Manmohan Singh, with the goal of strengthening trade and investment links between the two countries. In fact, the two countries have been negotiating a trade agreement known as the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) since November 2010.

The case for Canada to pursue a comprehensive trade agreement with India appears to be ironclad. India is a large and rapidly growing economy with the second-largest population and 10th largest GDP in the world. India is open for business and began economic reforms to liberalize trade and investment, deregulate industry and privatize state-owned enterprises in the early 1990s. Moreover, India is a democracy and shares a colonial past with Canada. It seems like India has all the right ingredients for Canada to make the CEPA a priority. 

So, what can Canada really expect from these negotiations? Unfortunately, not much.

Prompted by demands from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), India undertook major economic reforms in the 1990s. The reforms brought India into the global economy in a major way, and the country quickly became a regional and global economic juggernaut. Prior to the reforms, India was not an open economy, with imports representing about 8% of GDP throughout the 1980s and as late as 1992. Exports hovered around 5% or 6% of GDP throughout the 1980s. After the reforms, trade grew at an even faster rate than the rapidly expanding Indian economy. By 2000, imports had reached 14% of GDP and had reached 22% by 2005. In 2011, imports into India reached 30% of GDP. Exports underwent a similar transformation, reaching 20% of GDP by 2000 and 25% of GDP in 2011.



Notwithstanding all of these success and growth stories, it is still difficult to be optimistic in expecting much to come out of the mission to India. Currently, the two countries are not what one would consider “natural” trading partners. The relatively low levels of economic integration are not the natural result of significant protectionism or policy-induced barriers to trade. Barriers have already come down significantly, and Canada’s trade and investment relations with India have grown, but have lagged behind India’s relations with larger and closer countries. Trade negotiations between Canada and India have been underway for two years now and seem to be going nowhere, fast, with the two countries seemingly on different pages when it comes to their respective goals for the agreement. One of Canada’s goals is to improve Canadian market access into India, something India has no interest in. Canada is also interested in negotiating the liberalization of services and procurement. Again, these are off the table as far as India is concerned. On the other hand, one of India’s goals is to improve the movement into Canada of people providing services.

Overall, our economic relationship is not very strong, which likely reflects geographic distance and the lack of complementary economic interests — rather than government policies limiting trade and investment between the two countries. Based on past economic missions of the sort happening next week, it is unlikely that much will be achieved during next week’s mission, other than possible individual deals forged between interested business partners.

India has a long list of countries it is negotiating trade deals with, and Canada is well down on the list of Indian priorities. Canada might be better off focusing its efforts on completing its trade negotiations with the EU and on its pursuit of membership in the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Financial Post

Eugene Beaulieu is program director, international economics,
at the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Most people, including Eugene Beaulieu at the Financial Post, are mesmerized by immediate results. As reported, this trip to India will, most likely, not produce major results, but Thucydides has hit the key point: India is a HUGE and still growing market (albeit with problems) and we want access to it. India is neither as impenetrable nor as aggressive as China but it matters, too, and, like China, it needs to be courted. What we are seeing is a step in that courtship ritual, a 'dance' which must be done in full view of both "prizes:" appealing to each while not alienating either. Despite some missteps in 2006/07, the Harper government is, now, firmly on course to joining the Pacific, just as we were joined by the Atlantic for all of the 19th and 20th centuries. But the process will take time ~ and we have lots of competition: notably from Australia and the USA.
 

 

[Edward Campbell]

And, as if to emphasize the importance of the old military principle of "maximum concurrent activity," David Aiken files a story about the 'other' aim of the trip to India: to shore up or improve the Conservatives' hold on the South Asian vote here in Canada.

Many Asian Canadian voters, especially East and South Asians, remain very interested in how Canada deals with their ancestral homes; "good" visits to China and India, visits which receive favourable coverage by the ethnic media - here and there - can pay dividends at the polls in 2015.

 

[a_majoor]

It is often noted that corruption is one of the factors (if not the key factor) holding India back. This BBC piece points out how various flaws in the property market support or encourage corruption. Oddly, the possible answer is from the Peruvian economist Hernando De Soto, who pointed out that when property ownership was not correctly accounted for or accountable, then literaly bilions of dollars of potential capital was "dead". This problem will take decades to resolve, but since local governments have a great deal of autonomy, it may be possible to see a few pockets where these problems are tackled:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-20457766

India: Why land is at the centre of all scandals

By Alam Srinivas
Business analyst

India's real estate sector is one of the worst offenders for generating illegal money

Recent estimates indicate that the size of India's shadow economy may vary from 25% to 50% of the country's annual gross domestic product (GDP).

Among the 176 nations ranked in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index (2012), India stood at 94, which was a lot worse than Brazil and China.

India's property sector is possibly the worst offender. Barun Mitra, the founder and director of the Delhi-based Liberty Institute, has calculated that all the land transactions, including those related to natural resources like mining, generate $20bn (£12.54bn) to $40bn of illegal money each year.

That equals 1%-2% of the GDP.

This is also evident from recent allegations made by activist-turned-politician Arvind Kejriwal about links between the Congress Party president Sonia Gandhi's son-in-law Robert Vadra and the country's biggest real estate developer, DLF.

Here are five reasons why the real estate sector contributes so much to the black economy in India.

DEMAND-SUPPLY MISMATCH

A government report concluded that the shortage of residential houses in urban India would rise from 24.71 million in 2007 to 26.53 million in 2012.

In addition, there is a huge pent-up demand for commercial spaces and land for building factories and huge infrastructure projects such as roads, ports and power plants.

Despite the huge scarcity of real estate, thousands of owners hoard properties and are reluctant to sell because they expect prices to rise in the near future.

The combination of a demand-supply mismatch and speculative urge provides opportunities for bribery.

Experts believe that a majority of real estate deals have "white" and "black" components, which implies that a part of the price - up to 50% in some cases - is paid in cash to avoid paying tax.

HUGE TRANSACTION COSTS

For both the buyer and seller of property, the taxes are too high. In many cases they can rise above 10% of the value of the property.

While the buyer pays a tax to register the land in their name, the seller has to pay capital gains on the difference between the purchase and sale prices.

So there is an incentive on both sides to understate the price in a bid to avoid the taxes, and pay the difference between actual and declared values in illegal money.

However, the government hopes to correct this distortion. Under a new bill to establish a central property regulator, the cost of land registration may be reduced to 5%.

NON-TRANSPARENT LAND RECORDS

In his book, The Mystery of Capital, Hernando de Soto has argued that a principal reason why capitalism does not work in developing and under-developed nations is because the ownership rights of land and property "are not adequately recorded".

Hence, "these assets cannot readily be turned into capital". By contrast, in the developed nations like the US, "every parcel of land, every building is represented in a legally binding property document".

It can take a builder three to four years to get official paperwork for a project
Land records in India are opaque, stored in inaccessible places, and most of the ownership is disputed either in a court of law or because of family fights.

The lack of trustworthy online ownership data and the use of incomplete documents make it difficult for both buyers and sellers to enter into property transactions with complete confidence.

Thus, there is a tendency among sellers with disputed records to demand payments in cash.

The only buyers who can enter such a market are those with access to illegal money.

Now, the government has proposed that only those states that have their land records online can access central funds for welfare schemes like the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission.

STATES' DISCRETIONARY POWERS

Although every city and town has its master plan, which designates areas meant for agriculture, residences and offices, these can be arbitrarily changed at any given time by the local authorities.

Thanks to such official discretionary powers, there is a tendency among builders, estate agents and powerful individuals to abuse political patronage to change the land use of their properties.

As is indicated from the allegations made against Mr Vadra, changing land use from agricultural to commercial can treble and quadruple its price within a few months.

Similarly, there are huge opportunities to buy land in advance near an upcoming highway or metro train track, whose value is likely to multiply once the project comes through.

Here too, political links help to know the status of such projects in advance.

These anomalies lead to under-the-table payments and bribes to grab such favours.

RED TAPE AND BUREAUCRATIC RULES

To complete a sizeable property project, any builder in India has to get almost 60 approvals, produce about 175 documents, and deal with 40 central, state and local government departments.

Estimates indicate it may take a builder three to four years to complete the official paperwork and get all the requisite bureaucratic clearances.

There is, therefore, a tendency to pay bribes to politicians and bureaucrats to speed up the process.

At the same time, individual sellers who are unable to deal with the red tape demand their pound of flesh in cash payments so that they can evade taxes and earn extra bucks.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

In light of the previous post, an article on the future of mapping and GIS in India

Major General Kaliprasad Kotagal (Retd.) on evolution of the mapping industry in India

Major General Kaliprasad Kotagal (Retd.) former Additional Surveyor General, shares his views on the evolution of the geospatial industry in India.

1. Can you share your views on the transition in the Survey of India over the last 3-4 decades?

Initially raised as arm of the military, Survey of India has made a tremendous progress in terms of technology development in the domain of field survey, data /capture, manpower training and data storage. The organization has expanded being data provider for disaster management, urban planning etc. Today, Census of India, Election Commission, NRLMP, infrastructure projects etc. all are using SoI stats. In the field of earth science it is responsible for providing tide data for a large port area from Suez to Singapore. It is also sharing data with Indian National Center for Ocean Information Services (INCOIS) on various platforms.

2. What do you consider as milestones for the Indian mapping and surveying industry over the last couple of decades?

The Indian mapping from the period of first surveyor general Major James Rennell to the present Surveyor General Dr. Swarna Subbarao, the milestones are plenty . After independence there was a huge demand of data for developmental project. Hence,surveys and metrication of basic map scale from 1” to 1 Mile to 1: 50,000 was undertaken. The Survey of India (SoI) adopted various techniques in the modernization of field control instruments, photogrammetry, cartography and printing. Accordingly, the training at Survey Training Institute changed. The new technologies were adopted by Government of India and the task force was set up to go into the details of computerization in the Survey of India in early 1981- 1983 and the automated cartography cell in R&D of SoI started to explore the automation. Subsequently, modern cartographic centre came into establishment. The systems like AUTOMAP came into being for storing data in digital form and to draw the maps on demand. The Survey of India switched gear in around 1986 to adopt digital mapping technology with the establishment of three digital mapping centres to go into and established standard operating procedures in symbols, map layouts and digital vector data formats. The National Cartographic Data Base Structure was adopted keeping in view the user demands. The 1: 250,000 and 1: 50,000 mapping of data in digital format has been completed and by adopting the New Map Policy Open Series Maps (OSM) and Defense Series Maps (DSM) in the year 2005, with a view the availability of maps to the public has been made easy. The Survey of India based on the user geospatial demand adopted new strategies and organized in 2002 into State Geospatial Data Centre, NGDC, GIS & RS, B&P were established around 2003. Survey of India joined the Antarctica expedition (the tenth ) in 1990. GPS technology was adopted in around 1990. The work of establishing the new “horizontal” and redefinition of Indian Vertical Datum were taken up at the same time. Under this program 17,000 linear Km of fore leveling was completed and back leveling with gravity observations were done during 2006.Gravimetric method using both dense network of terrestrial gravity data and global geopotential model were adopted. An important project was the establishment of GCP LIBRARY PROJECT AND MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION OF INDIAN TIDE GAUGE NETWORK AND REAL time information on tide, current, temperature, pressure was collected by establishing satellite technology and establishing of National Tidal Data Centre and Andaman & Nicobar Islands were connected for Tsunami warning.

3. What you think about 1:10K mapping by Survey of India?

The government of India  decision and subsequent meetings at task force under  Dr. Shailesh Nayak , Secretary ,MOES, as chairman and other 9 members was constituted in 2009 to bring out a standard methodology for mapping on 1:10K scale to be carried out by survey of India. The positional accuracy should be 2.5; vertical interval of 2m and DEM of accuracy of 1m is required. The data model structure was developed by Survey of India, Andra Pradesh State Remote Sensing Centre (APSRAC), Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology (KSCST) and Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU). A pilot project and few maps have been prepared and released. The present initiatives of Survey of India, 1:10K mapping is aimed at addressing needs of industry and government departments. The PPP mode of working is also visualized by the present Surveyor General which is in the interest of the country to speed up the work. The present thinking is NRSC, SOI ANS APSRAC will together prepare these maps. The required budget is being sought from Department of Science & Technology.

4. What is your view on the National Land Records Modernisation Programme (NRLMP)?

The National Land Records Modernization Programme (NLRMP) was launched by Government of India in 2008, to modernize management of land records, minimize scope of land disputes  and enhance transparency in the land records sale ,purchase and to give titles to all immovable properties in the country. The major works of the project are computerization of all land records including mutations, digitization of maps and integration of text and spatial data, updating of all survey and settlement records including creation of original cadastral records wherever necessary, computerization of registration and its integration with the land records maintenance system, development of core Geospatial Information System (GIS) and capacity building. This is a very time consuming project and along with this a survey act is necessary defining all legal aspects.

5. What is more important technological or social intervention to help create map based land records?

It is social intervention followed by technology. There must by a social acceptance to the change in all aspects of survey and updating and mutation. Few states in India have attempted this with varying degree of success.

6. According to you, what role industry can play in large scale mapping and survey?

Industry can play a very big role. However I find the industry is concentrating only on government segment and very little effort is being done in research suited to our country. In addition, except for few institutions others are clueless about mapping. I feel industry must sponsor free organized workshops at college level.

7. Can you provide the overview on the evolution of geospatial industry and how do you perceive the future of the industry in India?

Geospatial industry has played so far a very good role in bringing the technology to this country.  The big players have exploited the early catch.  The computers came around 1980 and the things we all see like PDA, mobile, and other electronic gadgets / communication were scientific fictions have become reality.. Then came the electronic measuring devices and GPS TECHNOLOGY. This revolutionized into GNSS , wireless communication , space technology , advancement in photogrammetry in to digital environment and having seen them, came GIS technology . Imageries, aerial photos became a house hold talk; Google changed the look of the common man. The LiDAR and CLOUD  are going to change the geospatial scenario ,new challenges of space , time and economics in 3D to 5D and more in GIS may take us to the endless limits.The technology was largely used by government and the assimilation in government is slow. Let us use the early technology and bring results. If the industry can step in convenience the system in PPP mode it will be good. I would like to mention the good work being done by NSDI in all aspects of GIS and spread of technology to other user organizations.

About Maj Gen Kaliprasad Kotgal (Retd.): He has nearly four decades of service at Survey of India, from where he retired as Additional Surveyor General. During this professional service he looked after topographical survey and mapping, large scale mapping using photogrammetry, planning control and survey etc. He holds a graduate degree in Civil Engineering from U V C E , Bangalore University.

article from http://www.directionsmag.in/articles/major-general-kaliprasad-kotgal-retd.-former-additional-surveyor-gener/306587?goback=.gde_49657_member_209859447
.

 

[CougarKing]

In a big step towards securing India's nuclear deterrence capabilities, the reactor on board the indigenously built nuclear-powered submarine INS Arihant is set to become operational within three weeks.

The submarine, which is over 100 metres long, has been undergoing trials in Visakhapatnam for the last three years.

Dr VK Saraswat, the chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation or DRDO, shared these exclusive details with NDTV.

more at this link

 

[CougarKing]

An infographic of the INS ARIHANT:

 

[a_majoor]

I wonder if this isn't an opportunity for Canada's Indian diaspora. The combination of education, exposure to Canadian and Western culture and norms could provide Canadians an edge in project management and other ways to maximize investment return in projects in India (or tap Indian investment and trade with Canada). Overcoming poor education and corrupt officialdom are the two keys for Inda's future:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/05/is-india-wasting-worlds-biggest.html

Is India wasting the world's biggest economic opportunity ?

In the past 35 years, hundreds of millions of Chinese have found productive, if often exhausting, work in the country’s growing cities. This extraordinary mobilisation of labour is the biggest economic event of the past half-century. The world has seen nothing on such scale before. Will it see anything like it again?

India is an ancient civilisation but a youthful country. Its working-age population is rising by about 12m people a year, even as China’s shrank last year by 3m. Within a decade India will have the biggest potential workforce in the world.

Corruption, Inept Leadership, Inflation, and Bad Education

Although India’s dreamers have faith in its youth, the country’s youngsters have growing reason to doubt India. The economy raised aspirations that it has subsequently failed to meet. From 2005 to 2007 it grew by about 9% a year. In 2010 it even grew faster than China (if the two economies are measured consistently). But growth has since halved. India’s impressive savings rate, the other side of the demographic dividend, has also slipped. Worryingly, a growing share of household saving is bypassing the financial system altogether, seeking refuge from inflation in gold, bricks and mortar.

What India lacks is a Mittelstand of midsized, labour-hungry firms. Even during the boom years, it created many more jobs in construction than in manufacturing. It is hard for India’s young to raise their sights when they are carrying bricks on their heads.

To fill this “missing middle” the government should remove some of the bureaucratic bricks that now weigh on the heads of India’s entrepreneurs. These include India’s notorious labour laws which, on paper, prevent factories firing anyone without the state’s permission. It is true that by hiring labour from third parties the country’s employers have blunted the law’s effect. But in so doing they have also blunted their own incentive to train their workers—and lead to more abuse.

And a lot of training is required. Many of India’s young leave school ill-prepared even for rudimentary jobs. Standards are stagnant, even slipping. By their fifth year of schooling, only half of rural pupils can solve a calculation like 43 minus 24, according to the Annual Status of Education Report. Barely a quarter can read an English sentence like “What is the time?”

This is an extract from a much longer article:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21577372-how-india-throwing-away-worlds-biggest-economic-opportunity-what-waste?fsrc=nlw|hig|5-9-2013|5681828|36448386|NA

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So India is now planning in getting into the Icebreaking business. On the bright side expect Curry houses North of 60 (and south of the other 60)

NEW DELHI: India is in the process of acquiring an icebreaker for a whopping Rs.800 crore ($144 million) for conducting scientific and business exploration in the polar regions.

The Ministry of Earth Sciences has submitted a proposal to the government and is likely to get a go ahead by the end of 2013, Shailesh Nayak, secretary in the ministry, said.

The hi-tech ship that can cut through 1.5-2 metre thick ice is equipped with several laboratories for carrying out experiments in the Arctic and in Antarctica. It will be custom built for India.

"We are in the process of acquiring an icebreaker ship for carrying out exploration in the polar region. We have the design ready about what kind of ship we need and what facility and labs we need," Nayak said.

"The ship would cost somewhere around Rs. 800-900 crore. We have to go through a long process of approvals and hopefully we will get the final approval by this year. Our estimate as of now is that we should be able to get it by the end of 2016," he said.

While India is in the process of acquiring, China has commissioned a new polar ice-breaker, its second after the Xuelong, or snow dragon.

Besides scientific interests, both India and China have business interests related to mineral resources, fisheries and shorter sea routes in the Arctic.

India has one research station in the Arctic, Himadri, and three in Antarctica.

Explaining India's interest behind buying the ship, Nayak said: "This signifies that we are serious about studying changes in climate change happening in the polar regions. Right now for experiments, we hire or charter the ships from private parties in Russia and Norway for short durations."

"Scientists have to collect a lot of data to study the changes happening in the region. With this ship you can take long cruises as it has a capability of 45 days' endurance and cut through not very thick but 1.5-2 metre ice. If you have thin layer of ice you can cut it and go there and take measurements," he said.

Indian scientists can then carry experiments like studying change in the ocean temperature and how the temperature and salinity vary in different areas.

"Based on that you can find the structure of currents in the ocean and how it has changed during the course of time," he said.

The ship can be used in North Pole and South Pole as both have opposite summer season, he said.

"Basically the idea is that we should be able to use the ship round the year and if you can't use it round the year, then investment is not justified. So we can use the ship for six months in Antarctica and for the same period in the Arctic," he said.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-02/science/39690091_1_xuelong-hi-tech-ship-icebreaker