Howsoever the Posco story may have unfolded subsequently, when it entered India in 2005, its decision to put in $12 billion for an integrated steel project in Orissa was hailed not only as the largest overseas investment that the company was making but also as the largest-ever foreign direct investment India was to receive. Posco was one of South Korea’s leading chaebols, a giant in the global steel industry, and its entry into the core sector of steel opened up the possibility of India becoming an exporter of steel to different parts of the world in the future.
It was good news for India’s foreign policy establishment too. “It was really a cause for celebration for all of us who were tasked with showcasing India as an attractive investment destination to the outside world,” says former MEA secretary, N. Ravi. Subsequent delays, litigation, protests from locals and the whole bureaucratic maze turned that celebration into embarrassment for Indian diplomats and officials while engaging with the outside world. “It became an issue of concern not only with the South Koreans but also for all other foreign investors since at every meeting from 2010 onwards they were keen to know the status of Posco,” Ravi adds.
The cheer is back for the South Block mandarins circa 2014, with the government announcing that it had not only reissued the environment clearance certificate for Posco’s steel plant, but it was also trying to work in close coordination with the Orissa state government to clear the other pending issues. “Every time a sticky issue that has been stuck for a long time gets resolved, it has its demonstrative value,” says a senior MEA official.
And what better timing than the visit of the South Korean President Park Geun-hye. Even as she was settling down at the presidential suite in New Delhi’s Maurya Sheraton hotel on January 15, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was said to be chairing a meeting with close aides to take stock of the Posco project, so that it wouldn’t cast a shadow over the delegation-level talks the two leaders would be holding the following day. After the meeting, the two sides duly issued a joint statement saying they welcomed the progress made on Posco and expressed hope work on it would start early.
Earlier, though, the South Korean diplomats had seemed less enthusiastic about India’s long-overdue gesture, their reaction best described by that indeterminate term: “cautious optimism”. “We have been told the environment clearance will soon be followed with a certificate on forest clearance. But till we get the mining certificate, it makes no sense. After all, Posco is here to make steel, not to build houses,” says one diplomat.
This scepticism aside, policy planners on both sides agreed that India and South Korea had huge potential to give their ‘Strategic Partnership’ real meaning through cooperation in a range of areas. South Korean diplomats listed five such areas: India providing a big market for South Korean goods, being an attractive investment destination, partnership in hi-tech fields like space and information technology, cooperation in defence and the country’s influence in the region and the world. The fact that President Park is here in the first year of her presidency only underlines India’s growing stock as a potential partner for South Korea.
“There is no dispute between us and we are a perfect match for each other,” says a senior Korean diplomat. “As we see it, our relations with India can grow and scale new heights with each passing year.” Posco remains a dangling sword nevertheless, as the diplomat adds, “Between the two sides stands the Posco project and over the years it has gathered huge symbolic value.”
India’s former ambassador to the country, Skand Tayal, agrees. “We should take advantage of the South Korean president’s visit and put in place a mechanism where we have regular visits and engagements at the highest political level,” he says. However, he cites another reason why it is necessary for India to find an early resolution to the Posco affair. “The Koreans have been here for a while and they understand how the system works here. But the long delay for such an important project does not send a very good signal to other potential foreign investors,” adds Tayal.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Ali Baba and His Forty Thieves
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT