Not many were willing to touch JLR in 2007 mainly in view of its outdated technologies, high rehabilitation cost, fading brand image and shrinking market.

Many considered JLR as high-cost, low-performance products. The Tatas did it probably because the acquisition would give Tata Motors a head start in India in the growing market segment for sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and luxury cars. Both the brands enjoy a high recall value among India's well-to-do and discrete consumers. The Tatas, one would think, certainly looked forward to building these vehicles in India as well, leading to sizeable reduction in production costs, while injecting more sophisticated technologies to revamp the performance of vehicles in UK plants.

However, the mid-year bank collapse in the United States, UK and the European Union, followed by a worldwide economic depression since the end of 2008, changed everything and shattered the Tata dream. While most US auto makers went practically bankrupt - even the Japanese auto giant Toyota reported huge losses last year, its first ever- no one expected JLR to duck the depression-blow to stay afloat under such unprecedented recessionary pressure in the western market. Like its western rivals, JLR too needed a good fund support, if not a full-scale rescue package, from the UK government to tide over the present crisis.

The UK auto major, now owned by the Tatas, wants a sovereign guarantee to raise only around 350 million pounds from local and other international banks to stay in the business. But, the British government has set such terms that tantamount to almost a government take-over of the company, which the Tatas had acquired for around US$ 2.3 billion. The attitude of the UK government is most unreasonable and unfortunate. If the Tatas were a British Industrial house, it would certainly receive a different treatment from the Gordon Brown government. Nearly three years ago, the Tatas had saved another UK conglomerate, British Steel, part of Anglo-Dutch Chorus from near collapse by taking over the company. The Indian business house is the largest foreign investor in the UK, with a combined exposure of well over US$ 12 billion in the two projects alone, employing some 40,000 people.

The question is: can the Government of India resort to subtle diplomacy to influence the Labour government to honourably help the Tatas out of the present crisis in the best interest of its own economy and better bilateral business ties between the two friendly countries? The answer is: Yes, India can but it is not doing it. It is unable to do because India simply does know the art of the present-day business diplomacy. In recent times, ONGC Videsh Limited (OVL) has lost heavily in so-called friendly Sudan. It was made to pack up after the company made substantial investment in the Arab country and suffered huge losses in the process. The Indian government and its embassy in Sudan remained a mute spectator. OVL's joint venture offshore oil and gas project in Myanmar is under threat from the China Petroleum Corporation after the Indian public sector company invested a lot of time and money on commercial exploitation of hydrocarbon from the Bay of Bengal basin with the help of a South Korean firm for equity oil.

Smaller Indian firms are facing even bigger problems in other parts of the world, including Nepal, Sri Lanka and Malaysia. Indian electronic software professionals, holding valid job visas, are regularly harassed by Malaysia's internal security men. In 1970s, they were booted out from Ghana. In Nepal, Indian business men are constantly under threat from local goons enjoying political shelter. India's failure to strike gas deals with Bangladesh and Iran are glaring examples of its total failure in business diplomacy.

What is the point in India's boasting of a trillion-dollar plus economy growing at the rate of 6-8 per cent and maintaining one of the world's heavily manned armed forces, if it is unable to make use of this economic and military strength to pursue a well-meaning business diplomacy to gain better market access for Indian industry, products and intellectual personnel in the countries which are benefiting from the country's burgeoning domestic market? For instance, India is the single largest buyer of Malaysian edible oil, contributing sizeably to the growth and prosperity of Malaysian economy over years. Malaysia was the first country to enter India's once.-guarded telecom sector. Its light engineering and construction companies are camping in India for lucrative business tie-ups. What did India extract in exchange?

India has constantly supported and helped land-locked Nepal in trade and business for the benefit of the Nepalese people and government. India has been second home to young, ambitious Nepalese youth for years. How do they help India? Indian immigrants and the people of Indian origin are often subjected to rough treatment in almost every part of the world. Till the 1970s, centuries-old Indian settlers in Malaysia formed 11 per cent of the country's population. Today, it has come down to about seven per cent. Most of them are poor plantation workers and live like second-class citizens. In contrast, the Chinese population, the second largest after the ethnic Malays, have maintained their population ratio at 30 per cent and are the richest community in Malaysia. China's overt and covert business diplomacy has opened great opportunities for Chinese companies in several parts of the world, including oil-rich Sudan, Iran and Venezuela, sworn enemies of the US. No country plays foul with Chinese businessmen and immigrants. It has established a strong influence over India's other neighbours, including Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Myanmar.

Chanakya might have been the world's earliest thinker on diplomacy, or K M Panikkar's treatise on diplomacy may be the most-talked-about theory on the subject in the modern times. But few will disagree that India's worst performance has so far been on the diplomatic front, especially when it comes to protecting or fostering its business interest and supporting the business people and those of Indian origin elsewhere. India is the only country of its size and economic potential in the international community of nations without a single friendly neighbour. The biggest challenge of Indian diplomacy is to manage good relations with its nine neighbours, eight of which are much smaller and poorer than India, and promote and protect India's commercial interests there. These countries are; Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Only the ninth neighbour, the Peoples Republic of China, is much bigger than India in size and far stronger, militarily and economically.

The United States, Japan, China, the UK, Germany and France pursue a highly proactive business diplomacy to promote and protect their trade and business interests across the world. They are known to protect their private corporate assets and people in another country often using gunships for a back-up. On the contrary, India's business diplomacy always lacked vision. It probably never existed. A political philosopher and romanticist, Nehru never understood business and business people and their merits in modern economy. It is high time the Indian Government started asserting its weight in a subtle manner to protect the interests of its leading companies on foreign soil. (IPA Service)