In India, the Tata name is ubiquitous. People see it on the packet of tea that wakes them up in the morning, on the buses that carry them to work and in the hotels where they go for a drink after work. No other name is as representative of the possibilities, and failures, of India’s private sector — and so all Indians would have felt the passing of the group’s patriarch, Ratan Tata, this week.
In his ambition and through his mistakes, Tata captured the potential of a global, modern India. The centuries-old conglomerate he led has grown along with his country, from the first stirrings of an industrial economy in the subcontinent with its steel plant in Jamshedpur, through the dreary years of socialism and the burst of post-liberalization optimism.
Tata took over in 1990, a year before India began to deregulate and open up. Under him, a group that made steel, trucks, and chemicals quickly diversified into small cars and information technology.
The shift exemplified India’s move away from a state-directed, capital-intensive growth model to one based on consumer demand and services exports. Today, Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (TCS) accounts for the largest share of the group’s value.
Unfortunately, deindustrialization has not worked out so well for the rest of the country. A services-led economy cannot quite produce enough jobs, nor does it appear able to ensure economic security.
India’s current government is desperately working to turn back the clock with sweeping industrial policies. However, transforming a high-cost, relatively uncompetitive manufacturing sector has proved to be a difficult task.
Perhaps that is because Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s efforts have tended to focus on tariffs, subsidies and protection for domestic manufacturers, rather than on improving productivity. The government would like companies to stay home and indigenize their entire supply chains.
Tata Sons Ltd CEO N. Chandrashekharan agreeably promised Modi in 2022 at the opening of a new airplane plant that “Tata Group will now be able to take aluminum ingots at one end of the value stream and turn it into an Airbus C295 aircraft for the Indian Air Force at the other.”
The Tatas are also building, in response to a push from the government, three semiconductor fabrication factories and one chip testing and assembly complex.
Ratan Tata’s own instincts seemed to have nudged him in a different direction. While he never gave up on manufacturing, he always believed that Indian companies should be global.
He used TCS’ profits to make big bets on both — wagers that did not always pay off. In 2008, Tata Motors Ltd bought Jaguar Land Rover. That deal might be considered a success, given that the company reported its highest revenues since 2015 last year.
Other decisions do not look so good in hindsight. In 2007, Tata bought Corus Group Ltd, which made steel in the plants that used to belong to the Dutch and British national producers Koninklijke Hoogovens and British Steel respectively. Tata probably overpaid and has lost billions on that bet; the former British Steel’s last blast furnace just shut down. The week that Ratan Tata passed is also the first week in centuries that no steel is being poured in the UK.
Nevertheless, India trusted his judgement, even in matters of politics: When Tata Motors Ltd picked the Modi-run state of Gujarat as the location for a new car factory in 2008, it was seen as a sign that the private sector trusted then-controversial Modi above all other chief ministers. The country followed Tata’s lead a few years later.
Why not also back his commercial instincts? India’s ambitions should be global, not local. Its companies should manufacture in and for the world, not just focus on the domestic market. Whatever his faults, Ratan Tata always benchmarked himself and his group’s products against the world’s best. The rest of India should, too.
I grew up in Jamshedpur, the beautiful company town that the Tatas built around their giant steel plant. Ratan Tata was already a larger-than-life figure then. Jamshedpur, with its world-class facilities, its orderliness and its productivity, seemed a harbinger of what India could become. The country might not have lived up to that promise yet, but, like Ratan Tata, it should not stop believing.
Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, he is author of Restart: The Last Chance for the Indian Economy.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —