Amid India’s jubilant celebration of the Chandrayaan 3 success, the world witnessed an unusual request from a British gentleman inquiring about India’s plans to repay what has been characterised as “aid” provided by the UK between 2016 and 2021. This request, though it invites reflection, has raised eyebrows globally, leaving us to ponder whether this gentleman might still harbour some colonial sentiments.
First and foremost, let’s clarify that no substantial “aid” for humanitarian or poverty alleviation has been extended by the UK to India since 2017. While India did accept aid from the UK in its early post-independence years, the landscape has significantly evolved since then. Present-day India neither seeks nor requires financial assistance from the UK or any other nation. The financial inflows from the UK to India today are predominantly motivated by mutual economic interests, rather than a charitable gesture. In essence, what is being referred to as “aid” constitutes strategic business investments.
Before 2017, only a fraction of the funds could genuinely be considered as “aid,” with the majority being channelled through foreign Commonwealth and Development offices, multilateral organisations, and the British International Investment (BII), engaged in a wide range of endeavours, from mid-sized banks to coffee chains and media companies. When comparing these “aid” numbers with the substantial financial assistance India provides to other nations, the scale of this discussion seems somewhat skewed.
It is also important to note that the so-called “aid” from the UK was not directly allocated to the Government of India itself. India maintains a long-standing policy of not accepting foreign aid directly. Instead, these funds were directed towards selected companies and non-governmental organisations chosen by the UK based on their criteria. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) reiterated in 2022 that no financial aid had been allocated to the Government of India since 2015. The primary focus, as it turns out, is on promoting business investments, creating new markets, and generating job opportunities.
Since 2017, the UK has consciously refrained from getting deeply involved in India’s growing concerns related to democracy, human rights, and civic space—a few issues that have occasionally surfaced in global indices. The “aid” portfolio has seemingly shifted its emphasis away from poverty reduction, which remains the primary objective of UK Aid.
While I appreciate the inquisitiveness of the British gentleman and welcome open dialogues, it is paramount for all parties involved to be well-informed and precise in their assertions. The revelation that the UK proudly stands as India’s sixth largest investor might sound nice. But one needs to also ponder over the fact that India is the second largest investor in the UK, not sixth but second, according to none other than the UK’s own Department for International Trade FDI figures and the government data.
For a moment, let’s consider history. A report from Columbia University Press, authored by economist Utsa Patnaik, reminds us that between 1765 and 1938, the East India Company and the British Raj managed to accumulate an astounding £9.2 trillion (or $44.6 trillion today) from India. Now, that’s quite the historical backdrop. If there are considerations for repayment, perhaps the UK should commence with settling accounts from the colonial era before scrutinising contemporary financial dealings.
In conclusion, the recent discourse surrounding India repaying UK “aid” is based on a series of misunderstandings, perhaps with a touch of historical reflection. These financial transactions more closely resemble strategic investments in India’s sophisticated democracy, aimed at bolstering economic cooperation and mutually beneficial opportunities. While the British gentleman’s homeland grapples with its own economic challenges, including unemployment, it may be wise to prioritise domestic matters over international financial affairs.
