The assembled businessmen wore black ties and listened politely to a string
quartet under crystal chandeliers in a magnificent ballroom. The room buzzed
with talk of the old country, but more importantly with commercial
speculation about their new domain. What was to be their next takeover
target in the local economy?
It could have been a sepia print of the British East India Company, which
effectively ruled India as a private colony for 100 years, but a closer look
revealed a different kind of burra sahib. More Chandigarh than Cheam, the
men gathered at the Grosvenor House hotel in Mayfair, central London, last
year were the representatives of a new Indian raj, powerful men intent on
buying up chunks of the homeland of their old imperial masters.
They included the host Subodh Agrawal, dealmaker for some of India’s tycoons,
and the Hinduja brothers, fourth on The
Sunday Times Rich List. An aide to Lakshmi Mittal, the world’s
wealthiest steel baron, was there, along with the Birlas and the Jindals,
representing India’s oldest industrial families. Britain’s new Indian
aristocracy – such as Mike Jatania, who bought Yardley cosmetics – were also
in attendance.
They have been called the Indian Billionaires Club and last week one of its
celebrated members pulled off the most symbolic corporate takeover in Indian
history.
When Tata, the Mumbai-based conglomerate headed by Ratan Tata, bought
Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford last week, a nation still reeling from a
few cannabis-infused bhang lassis over the Hindu festival of Holi extended
the party. The £1.15 billion takeover was worth far more than the money
paid. The acquisition of Jaguar – a symbol of British style and engineering
superiority, albeit until last week owned by Americans – was a moment of
national triumph almost matching India’s victory in last year’s Twenty20
Cricket World Cup.
Tata has been buying British since 2000 when it purchased Tetley, which had
been selling Indian tea to the UK since 1856. Last year it completed the
£6.2 billion takeover of Corus, the British steel giant, in the biggest
foreign takeover by an Indian company.
Its purchase of Jaguar and Land Rover was smaller in scale but greater in
symbolism. The Indians had bought the makers of James Bond’s new wheels,
Inspector Morse’s classic and the workhorse of the British Army for a song.
“It took a company from a former colony to come to the rescue of a
beleaguered British brand,” said The Times of India with undisguised pride.
Tata is not the only Indian firm on a buying spree in Britain. In the past
year Vijay Mallya, the airlines and breweries magnate, has bought Whyte &
Mackay, the Scottish distiller which makes the Dalmore and Isle of Jura
single malt whiskies as well as Vladivar vodka.
Last week Hichens Harrison, Britain’s oldest independent stockbroker, announced
that it was considering a £49m offer from Religare, a Mumbai-based
stockbroker which wants to cash in on the Indian rush to buy British
companies.
The deep pockets of the reverse colonists is revealed in the bidding for
Jaguar. Had Tata not been successful, next in line was Mahindra, its Indian
rival.
Britain is beginning to look like a significant outpost in a new Indian
empire.
WHEN Agrawal told executives of an American finance company in 2001 that
Indians would be involved in $10 billion takeovers in Britain by 2010, his
audience had laughed. Spurred on by their disdain he set up Euromax Capital
in London in 2003 to finance Indian takeovers and has already become a
multi-millionaire on the back of it.
Britain is the beneficiary of the startling growth of the Indian economy,
which is often overshadowed by the attention focused on that of China. Last
year India’s economy grew at 9% and Goldman Sachs, the US investment bank,
has predicted that the size of the country’s gross domestic product will
outstrip that of Britain between 2015 and 2020 if it continues at the same
rate. Germany and Japan would be overtaken in the following decade.
China has spent more on global takeovers than India – in 2007 it bought 84
companies for $21 billion, compared with India’s 110 deals for $17 billion –
but when it comes to Britain, the shared history of empire gives India a
clear advantage. It is now the third biggest investor in the UK after the
United States and Japan.
Agrawal said this latest Indian takeover spree had been made possible by the
immigration of senior Indian bankers, lawyers and entrepreneurs in the 1980s
and 1990s. Mittal, the Hinduja brothers, Naresh Goyal, the airline boss, and
Anil Agarwal, the aluminium tycoon, made vast fortunes in Britain during
this period.
“Mittal brought India and Indians to the forefront of the international stage
and turned us from being perceived as second-class citizens to emerging as
first among equals,” said Agrawal.
“Indians are most at home in Britain, especially London. The English language,
friendly culture and familiar legal and commercial environment make it far
easier to consummate deals here than anywhere else. Indians regard a UK
acquisition as the biggest trophy prize.
“I don’t know if this can be termed a ‘reverse raj’ – I’d rather call it a
coming home to the empire.”
There is more to the new Indian raj, however, than just money. There is
culture and sport, too. The British Council in Delhi, which once celebrated
English literature, music and drama, has been downgraded. It is closing
much-loved libraries of Chaucer and Shakespeare around the country and
instead selling English courses and A-levels to the young Indian tycoons of
tomorrow.
The council also uses almost entirely British-Indian artists to promote the
cultural life of the UK. The impression is that Britain is being sold as an
Indian satellite – don’t be afraid, it’s just like India really.
Even cricket, the game that Britain’s high-handed sahibs introduced to Indians
only to “teach them a lesson”, is slipping away from the grip of Lord’s. The
new Indian Premier League has dangled previously unimaginable sums in front
of the world’s best cricketers and the England authorities are being forced
to fight a rear-guard effort to keep their stars in the domestic game.
As England cricketers consider flying out to play for new masters, India’s
tycoons and Bollywood’s most glamorous film stars are preparing to come the
other way.
At the height of the British empire, its officials used to escape the
oppressive heat of Calcutta in the summer by decamping en masse to Shimla in
the cool of the Himalayan foothills. Now the great and good of India are
using London as their “summer capital” for the same reasons.
Karan Johar, India’s leading television interviewer and media player, and Shah
Rukh Khan and Hrithik Roshan, the screen heart-throbs, are part of an annual
migration to Chelsea, Knightsbridge and Mayfair which sees them arrive in
June and stay until the monsoon brings relief a month later.
Sunil Mittal of Airtel, India’s biggest mobile phone operator, will be there
along with K P Singh, the world’s richest property developer, the Birlas,
the Ambanis, and the Ruias of Essar, all of whom have London homes.
According to Agrawal, “living in London is like living in a cleaner version of
India”.
The shift in power has been noticed by Britain’s own Indian population, which
migrated here in the 1960s to escape Indian poverty. In an echo of the time
when Britons stationed in the subcontinent sent their children back to the
homeland to be educated at public school, British-Indians are now sending
their children to Indian boarding schools to make sure they are well placed
to thrive in the new raj. At Woodstock, the 150-year-old boarding school
built by the British in the old hill station of Mussoorie, teachers say they
have had a sharp increase in applications from British-Indians who want
their children to experience the country, absorb its culture and be prepared
for a new future in India.
Jagjit Johal, 48, had been in Britain for more than 20 years and worked
overseas for an investment company. But when he finished his last posting,
he decided to return to India to make sure his sons were fluent in Hindi,
unfazed by India’s street-level poverty and able to prosper in the
motherland.
“We wanted them to be familiar with the Indian environment, the cultural
aspect. The education standards are higher in India, it’s more rigorous.
We’re British citizens, and it is home in so many ways, but with all of
these mergers going on, the Indian-British community can play a much bigger
role. As families with both cultures we can understand the subtleties and
have a better chance of succeeding,” he said.
FOR many Indians, their country’s new-found wealth and the power over its old
colonial masters bring with them a sense of a natural order being
reestablished.
Pavan Varma, a former Indian diplomat and now head of the Indian Council for
Cultural Relations in Delhi, said there was a sense of “historical
vindication” in India at its return to global influence after centuries of
submission.
“When the first British envoy came to meet Emperor Jahangir in the 17th
century, he was not allowed to sit in the royal presence, he had to stand,”
he said. “Then India controlled 24% of the world’s gross domestic product
and a quarter of international trade.
“Now there’s a sense of pride that the wheel of history is changing. The
biggest success of colonialism was the colonisation of our minds. It takes a
great deal of time to reverse that, but there is a reversal.
“Indians take pride that the relationship is now one of equality, that India
is an emerging power and Britain is a former power.”
THE NEW COLONIALISTS
Ratan Tata
The 70-year-old heads the Tata Group, which is the biggest Indian investor in
Britain. Inherited his money but has shown he is a visionary in his own
right. Earlier this year he realised his dream of developing a super-budget
car, the Tata Nano, which at about £1,250 is expected to revolutionise the
Indian car market
The Hinduja brothers
With a combined wealth of £6.2 billion, Gopichand and Srichand were ranked
fourth in last year’s Sunday Times Rich List. The family have interests in
banking, entertainment, defence and transport. Best known in Britain for
their involvement in the scandal that brought down Peter Mandelson
Vijay Mallya
Known as ‘India’s Richard Branson’ for his eccentric public profile. He
transformed his family brewing firm United Breweries and made Kingfisher into
India’s bestselling beer. His Kingfisher Airlines, which is known for its
saucy hostesses, is set to go global
Lakshmi Mittal
Named the richest man in Britain by the Rich List last year with a fortune of
£19.25 billion. Originally from Rajasthan, his family moved to Calcutta to
establish a steel business which now forms the basis of his wealth. He lives
in a Kensington mansion
The Ambani brothers
Mukesh and Anil make up the richest family in the world, but they don’t talk
any more. The sons of Dhirubhai Ambani, who began as a petrol pump attendant
and started in business melting down silver coins for sale as scrap, fell
out years ago. Their companies now span a variety of industries. The
brothers have not invested in Britain yet, but it is only a matter of time
The Brits ruled India, but they left behind a few things of value. The Power of the Rich now in Britain came through from those who in the days of partition championed the rights of the poor. Why is this generation not giving back to those same poor who still crowd the streets of mumbai and kolkuta
M. V. Thompson, Suffolk, USA
Jane and Ganpat: You guys are right. British came to India to educate us civilize us and be our benefactors. We savages were waiting for such deliverance for thousands of years. And finally it came in the form of East India Company.
Chandra, Cherry Hil, USA
No doubt, Britain is an interesting proposition for business. But I would rather aim for America. Backing a dead horse won't win you the prize money at the Grand National. The British horse isn't dead yet, but it will be soon. We of course, write them off at our peril, their rule was a blip in history, but they could bring us all down with them. The fading Englishman's agenda's should be watched very closely...
Gurbaksh Singh, Vancouver , Canada
Jane Fleming, Ganpat Ram and their likes,
You mean what did the 'Britishers who came to India as spice merchants and ended up illegally occupying the country' take from India? Well plenty to recount here. Still, I will give a few examples which you can search yourself: Koh-i-noor diamond (now part of the crown jewels), Imperial Crown of India, etc. Why don't you do a Google search for General Dyer and read what comes up as well, while you are at it? Perhaps you could also visit the British Museum once, to see all the things accumulated from various corners of the world by your forefathers.
Sure there were numerous bickering fiefdoms before the British occupation, but whose responsibility it is not to exploit that situation for personal gains? The fact of the matter is, whether it was the infrastructure development on one hand or the atrocities inflicted by the British Raj on the other hand, both were unsolicited and forced upon.
DG, Bangalore, India
Jane Fleming: Why did indeed Britain come to India??
Kara Swart, London, UK
(continued)
Today private rather than state capital drives international commerce among free-trading nations; the ruling force of this commercial activity is the market, rather than the military; and its movement is motivated most certainly by interest in profit, rather than by retribution or sense of entitlement. In other words, I highly doubt that the investment in British industry by such men as Tata and Mittal has anything to do with claiming just deserts from their former 'imperial master.' More likely it's to do with identifying and exploiting legitimate business opportunities. So long as the likes of the aforementioned entrepreneurs don't send paratroopers down onto Trafalgar Square to teach protesters a lesson on who's boss, I don't think it's fair to call them 'colonialists' or the 'Reverse Raj.' To do so is counterproductive to building together a solid relationship based on mutual respect and friendship in a world where mistrust and disharmony is ever so sadly common.
A Chakravarti, London, UK
Ganpat Ram , London , UK
You are too much influenced by the British colonial era ... Your thinknig supports Nazi atrocities as it gave birth to Israel .... Vietnam war as it gave birth to united Vietnam .... and many more ...
Buddy, it is just because talent that these Tatas and other great Indian buisnessmen have that they are taking the advantage of globalization and growing India's influence on world economy .... Congrats them for their good work and don't try to dig out old graves from history ....
Vitthal, Mumbai, India
G'day, vishy, new britain, USA.
No historical atlas I have seen shows either the Mauryas or the Mughals or any other regime controlling the whole of India from the Himalayas to Cape Comorin at the southernmost tip of the subcontinent, although the last great Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb 1658-1707, came closest. Ironically, this expansion is seen by some historians as one of the causes of the empire's decline, along with what we would now call Islamisation, such as trying to impose shariah. Perhaps the best answer to the Indian version of the Life of Brian question, "What have the Romans ever done for us?", is that India is not an Islamic / Islamist theocracy, but is a modern, secular, pluralist democracy with its Hindu culture intact and enriched by some of the best features of the 18th C European enlightenment, not forgetting trains that usually run on time, and even a brand new New Delhi Metro which makes the London Tube look tired and worn out.
Leonard Colquhoun, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
Hi Ganpat Ram,
Please learn more about Indian history (HINT: Bharat-Vasha) before making remarks like Raj united India. (Look for maps of Maurya empire, Mughals or Maratha rule) before making these remarks.
vishy, new britain, USA
Rajiv Sreenivasan:
As a person of Indian descent I alawys feel discouraged and ashamed of your kind of boastful Indian argument.
Was there a unified India before the British? You know there wasn't: - just a bunch of often warring despotisms. The place called India was a pre-domantly Hindu cultural zone, that is all. The British unified India. In fact, india asa unified state is as British as bully beef or rugger.
The British built the first Indian army that could protect the country from Muslim invasions from Central Asia. Hindus owe the British a lot. maybe even their survival.
How about putting a compound-interest price on what India gained from a century and a half of British-imposed peace? From the railroads the British built? From the protection from far more rapcious possible invaders like the Russians or the Germans or the Japanese ?
Ganpat Ram , London , UK
I agree. But, still India's crown with Koh-i-Noor diamond is in London's museum, which shows how much Britain looted from India. Anyway, past is past. India now is not looting. I feel, UKs pride is getting taken away by all other countries by way of free-trade, globalization
jinishans, Hartford, CT, USA
History is often seen in terms of "eras". European colonialism is a distinct era. Many commissions and omissions happened because the people in charge then, acted on their world view as to what was "best" for them and the natives of their Asian domains. We are now in an era of "global business". In this new era, It may not be that relevant to recall past history . Should Indian businesses in Britain be treated unequally. a brief reference may be made to the past.
Thus, Indian businesses are investing in Britain NOT in any spirit of "pay back" for past injustices suffered. It would be absurd to think so. They invest because Britain, they judge, has a good business-friendly climate. Indians are at home with English commercial law and related processes and procedures. This generation of Indians are more concerned with the inadequacies of governance in India than what happened before 1947 during the Raj. All of us have to move on. Mother Time will ensure that, in any case.
Kris iyer, Chennai, India
Well said Rajeev Srinivasan.
Western arrogance rooted in Western "superiority" (a false sense of superiority) is what has lead to such naked hypocrisy compounded with immense ignorance. Hence all the preaching for things like "human rights" and "concerns for the environment" concepts which are thrown out the window when they get in the way of Western advancement. They are tools of control to varnish up real intentions while riding the moral high horse. Like how colonialism (and theft of India's wealth) is called "civilising the world" or "white mans burden".
Brundi, Ho Chi Minh City , Vietnam
Jane Fleming from Whittlesey,. you obviously dont know much about history, or have only studied history that reads more like a warped fairlytale. You would be right at home at Stormfront.
Andrew, Chennai,
The British took an enormous amount of capital out of India. A rough estimate is $10 trillion. Robert Clive, an early buccaneer, had a salary of pounds sterling 5,000 a year, but he declared his wealth at roughly pounds sterling 400,000 when impeached in the UK Parliament. That 400K is now worth, with the magic of compound interest, some $200 billion. As a result of this loot, India's share of world GDP went from 24% in 1750 to 2% in 1850, and Britain's went the exact opposite. This led to massive poverty.
Medicine: the British banned Ayurveda and burned all the manuscripts they could lay their hands on. The inoculation of cowpox to prevent smallpox was banned as a barbaric practice, until Jenner 'rediscovered' it
Sanitation: Britain was filthy then until it became rich through plunder. Nobody bathed, either.
Rule of Law: The Indian systems of law had sufficed for 3,000 years.
Music: India's native Hindu music system is 5,000 years old.
Rajeev Srinivasan, Stanford, CA/USA
Britain took commercial and cultural advantage of India - that is an unhistorical assertion. The family that built the steel railway track in India are best placed for the steel industry empire today.
Did Britain take cultural advantage of India? medical advances, sanitation, rule of law, music... what did we "take" from India during colonial rule.
JANE FLEMING, Whittlesey, CAMBRIDGESHIRE