Sunday, March 07, 2004
Burnt by the spotlight?
I figured it has been long enough since my last post on outsourcing and so here's Amy Waldman in the New York Times writing about India's reaction to the great outsourcing debate raging in the United States.
Long caricatured in many American minds as home only to snake charmers and poor people, India is now being caricatured as a nation of predatory brains set on stealing American jobs. The strong reaction to the shifting of jobs is spawning frustration in India, a country the United States was cheering not so long ago as it began to open a largely socialist, closed economy and enter the global arena. It is also surfacing as a potential irritant in relations between the countries. Indians say they are doing exactly what the United States wanted, and bridle at the new criticism as a double standard.
Indeed, the furor in the United States is highlighting India's own ambivalence toward the economic reforms that began here in the early 1990's. The competitiveness of India's new industries stands in sharp contrast to the high tariffs and red tape that still shelter many other parts of the economy.
American officials have repeatedly expressed frustration at the relatively low level of American imports to India. While total exports from American companies to India grew to $4.1 billion in 2002 from $2.5 billion in 1990, the United States still has a trade deficit of about $9 billion with India. On a visit to New Delhi in February, United States Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick cited India's high tariffs — like a 38 percent applied agriculture tariff, which is three times as much as America's. "We want to keep our markets open," he said, "but to do so we need to be able to open markets abroad."
Mr. Shourie said that when India finally opened its agriculture markets, it would affect "millions of people" — far more than are being affected by India's success in information technology. "If the United States feels we must understand their political compulsions," he asked, "why is it that American politicians or trade negotiators sitting at the table would not understand our political difficulties?" He worries, he said, that the reaction in the United States will strengthen the opponents of India's own economic reforms. "It gives a very strong handle to persons in India who oppose opening up," he said.
Indians say that the beneficiaries of outsourcing are far fewer than Americans realize. Well under a million people work in information technology services. Most of India's population of more than a billion, still largely rural, has never heard of outsourcing or benefited from it. Unemployment in India — far higher than in the United States — is at its highest level in decades, many economists say. Officially pegged at 7 percent, with more than 40 million registered job seekers last year, the real unemployment rate is probably three times that, economists say.
Vivek Paul, vice chairman of the Bangalore-based Wipro Technologies, calls it "perceptual amplification.""If three million jobs have been lost in the U.S., and 100,000 jobs created in India, every one of those three million thinks, `That's my job,' " he said.
Long caricatured in many American minds as home only to snake charmers and poor people, India is now being caricatured as a nation of predatory brains set on stealing American jobs. The strong reaction to the shifting of jobs is spawning frustration in India, a country the United States was cheering not so long ago as it began to open a largely socialist, closed economy and enter the global arena. It is also surfacing as a potential irritant in relations between the countries. Indians say they are doing exactly what the United States wanted, and bridle at the new criticism as a double standard.
Indeed, the furor in the United States is highlighting India's own ambivalence toward the economic reforms that began here in the early 1990's. The competitiveness of India's new industries stands in sharp contrast to the high tariffs and red tape that still shelter many other parts of the economy.
American officials have repeatedly expressed frustration at the relatively low level of American imports to India. While total exports from American companies to India grew to $4.1 billion in 2002 from $2.5 billion in 1990, the United States still has a trade deficit of about $9 billion with India. On a visit to New Delhi in February, United States Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick cited India's high tariffs — like a 38 percent applied agriculture tariff, which is three times as much as America's. "We want to keep our markets open," he said, "but to do so we need to be able to open markets abroad."
Mr. Shourie said that when India finally opened its agriculture markets, it would affect "millions of people" — far more than are being affected by India's success in information technology. "If the United States feels we must understand their political compulsions," he asked, "why is it that American politicians or trade negotiators sitting at the table would not understand our political difficulties?" He worries, he said, that the reaction in the United States will strengthen the opponents of India's own economic reforms. "It gives a very strong handle to persons in India who oppose opening up," he said.
Indians say that the beneficiaries of outsourcing are far fewer than Americans realize. Well under a million people work in information technology services. Most of India's population of more than a billion, still largely rural, has never heard of outsourcing or benefited from it. Unemployment in India — far higher than in the United States — is at its highest level in decades, many economists say. Officially pegged at 7 percent, with more than 40 million registered job seekers last year, the real unemployment rate is probably three times that, economists say.
Vivek Paul, vice chairman of the Bangalore-based Wipro Technologies, calls it "perceptual amplification.""If three million jobs have been lost in the U.S., and 100,000 jobs created in India, every one of those three million thinks, `That's my job,' " he said.
