Speaking In Two Voices

Mr. H. V. R. Iengar’s statement at the International Industrial Conference at San Francisco on September 12, is an interesting example of how India could Speak in two voices, one for the dollar empire and another for the Soviet socialist empire. The Governor of the Reserve Bank of India did his best to make out that India was not really socialist but was more than ninety per cent a free enterprise country with bright prospects of progress in the American way of competitive production. He made it plain, however, that the success of the monetary and fiscal policies of the Government of India depended “to a major extent” on the availability of external assistance of the order of 32 billions. He could not, at that conference, talk loosely as our politicians can do in India about how the loans could be returned. They could be discharged only by suitable exports and by “competitive ability in world markets on the basis of quality of goods and their price”. He admitted “as a late comer in the export field for diversified manufactured goods, India will find her task difficult”. He later sank into the politician’s vague talk and said “the debt looks burdensome as of now and for some years to come, but with the growth of the economy, India’s ability to service the debt will also steadily rise and over a period the problem should not prove intractable”. He assured the American audience that “Government enterprises accounted for hardly one-sixth of the total output in India and that even at the end of the Third Plan, it would not be more than a fourth”. All these assurances of non-socialistic conditions will, however, have to be weighed against the news and propaganda issuing from Moscow about the Khrushchev-Nehru mutual congratulations. The double voice may appear successful for a time, but ultimately there is danger of its being scanned and the results will be unfortunate.