TiesbetweenBritainandIndia解析印英关系.doc

Ties between Britain and IndiaHow great?Feb 18th 2013, 16:38 by A.R. | DELHIIN INDIA this week, for his second time as Britain's prime minister, David Cameron argued gamely that a "great relationship” could be formed between the rising power and its former colonial ruler. He is right to try. Both countries would gain from more open trade and closer educational, cultural and other ties, even if (as my colleague, Bagehot, wrote in this week's issue) Britain increasingly looks like a supplicant to a more powerful India.Britain5s interests are obvious・ The country needs more export markets and hopes especially to tap into Asia's higher rates of economic growth, while also forging a closer diplomatic and security relationship. Mr Cameron is frank about that: he travels with a big trade delegation. The cooing over meetings with Ratan Tata and other Indian businessmen in Mumbai will probably turn out to matter as much as, or more than, any political meetings in Delhi.Yet talk of an especially close bond with Britain does not really ring true in India. Of course Britain has much to offer—investment, tech no logy, un iversity excellence, links to 1.5m people of Indian origin in the British Isles and so on. But important foreigners turn up in India with steady regularity, each claiming some special link to the subcontinent. Last week it was the turn of France's president, Francois Hollande・ The local press made much of the fact that he was in India before having visited China. The pomp and enthusiasm were accompanied by details of valuable commercial ties in defence, space tech no logy and nuclear power.How can Britain一a small island on the edge of a continent of diminishing global clout一hope to stand out from the crowd? It could perhaps try to atone for historic wrongs. One British columnist argues this week that an apology for old crimes and the ill-treatment of ordinary people in India—the arrests and massacres of those who demanded democracy and independence, the man-made famines and economic exploitation—is essential. Morally, he is right. Practically, however, it may make little difference to the relationship ・Many India ns care relatively little about history. After all, if I ndia shu nned countries with whom it had had an antagonistic or bitter past there would be no talk now of freer trade with Pakistan. China, which invaded and humiliated India as recently as 1962, would not be such a big trading partner. And since America and India were, in effect, on opposite sides in the cold war, there would be little scope for happy relations now. The British-Indian history, too, is mixed. For example this correspondent was in Nagaland earlier this month, at the impressive war cemetery in Kohima, where Indian and British soldiers are commemorated together for their efforts against invading Japanese soldiers in the second world war.Mr Cameron talks of ties nof history, language, culture”. But sit down with the most senior Indian diplomatic staff and they judge countries by a harder measure: what does Britain offer India tod a y. A high ・ranking civil servant bats away a suggestio n that historic links would help make Britain (to use Mr Cameron's phrase) India's “partner of choice". He points in stead to high levels of German in vestme nt; Japa nese state-backed projects such as the Delhi-Mumbai industrial corridor; or the rush of Korean firms into India. France, in particular, enjoys credit for its political support from the time when India became an openly nuclear power in the late 1990s (when Britain was unwelcoming). He talks, too, of Britain having ua tendency to be soft on Pakistan： because of intelligenee links between spooks in Islamabad and London.A problem for British diplomats and politicians, too, is that British firms usually operate without state subsidies and are guided not by governments but by their own ideas of where to search for profits・ For example Britain—unlike, say, Japan—does not offer soft loans to encourage its firms to get into India. Thus while Mr Cameron talks hopefully of Britain supporting a newly conceived industrial corridor from Mumbai to Bangalore, the Indian government is sniffy, saying that since British aid is about to be scrapped there is no scope for British funds to help get such a scheme moving.More like the Japanese, the French government encourages its state-backed nuclear firm to develop business in civil-nuclear power, despite an Indian law that puts full liability in the case of an accident on the foreign investor. By contrast, entirely private investors without such government support, notably American ones, say the liability law imposes too great a risk・Does all that leave Britain out in the cold? Not really・ Measure the past dozen years or so, and Britain is still one of In dial biggest investors. If India liberalises its services more during a current round of reforms一perhaps opening up for more foreign investment into insura nee and pensions—m。