The fact that British Prime Minister Theresa May’s two-day visit to India was oddly timed – smack in the middle of the US presidential polls – should not take away from the fact that it was a very important visit for both the UK and India. True, there was nothing much to show at the end of the visit, but it did indicate which way the wind was blowing. For Ms May, who has become Britain’s face for negotiating the actual exit from the European Union (EU), even though she herself did not lead that charge during the Brexit referendum, the key concern is to shore up markets other than the EU. During the referendum, the “leavers” had hoped that the over 2-billion-strong Commonwealth population could be propped up as an alternate market. India’s significance is that it is more than half of that promised land. However, for the most part, she returned empty handed. Not surprisingly, her Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi, too, could not achieve any breakthrough.
India’s main concern is Britain’s tough stand on immigration. The pullout in the June referendum was a direct outcome of the seething anger among Britons against immigrants both from within EU and outside. New Delhi, on the other hand, is concerned about the fact that the number of Indian students enrolling in British universities has reportedly fallen by 50 per cent since 2011. Curiously enough, it was Ms May, in her role as home secretary in 2010, who had made it necessary for Indian students to return home instead of being handed a two-year work permit. In fact, days before her visit, the UK announced a new set of tighter visa rules that would further curtail the number of eligible Indians – by raising the base salary requirement from Rs 17.4 lakh per annum to Rs 25 lakh per annum – who would be allowed to work in Britain. But during her visit, Ms May made it quite clear that any flexibility with visas would depend on the “speed and volume of the return of Indians with no right to remain in the UK”. Predictably, the visa concessions that the UK did offer eventually left Indian officials underwhelmed.
There was little real movement on the other two big concerns. One, the UK raised the issue of how India’s tax department had treated British companies such as Vodafone and Cairn Energy unfairly and the Indian side merely iterated these issues were being looked into; and two, the possibility of a free trade agreement between the two countries was discussed but ruled out until Britain exited the EU. There were some deals that provided a saving grace. For instance, it was announced that India and the UK would sign business deals worth more than £1 billion (Rs 8,300 crore). The two sides also agreed to expedite pending extradition requests — with New Delhi providing a list of 57 people, including Christian Michel, the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland helicopter deal, and industrialist Vijay Mallya. However, none of these developments can paper over the harsh global trend of countries turning increasingly protectionist and inward-looking. Otherwise, the UK’s expertise in sectors such as finance and law and India’s competence in high-value technology, and easier trading norms, including movement of people, would have provided a much-needed boost to both economies.
