Title: Nehru & Indira drove away Intel from India; it went to China: BJP
The recent statement made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey has sent shockwaves across the nation, sparking a heated debate about India’s industrial development and its relationship with foreign companies. Dubey, while addressing the Lok Sabha, claimed that the former Prime Ministers Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi drove away semiconductor companies like Intel and Fairchild from India, forcing these companies to go to China. The MP’s statement has sparked a flurry of reactions, with many questioning the accuracy of his claims. In this blog post, we will delve into the history of Intel’s relationship with India and explore the reasons behind the company’s departure from the country.
Intel, one of the world’s leading semiconductor companies, was founded in 1968 by Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce. In the early 1970s, Intel began to expand its operations globally, setting up manufacturing facilities in various countries. India was one of the target markets, with Intel establishing a presence in the country in the late 1970s.
However, according to Dubey, Intel’s stay in India was short-lived. The MP claims that Nehru and Indira Gandhi’s policies drove away Intel and other semiconductor companies from the country, forcing them to seek greener pastures in China. But what were the circumstances that led to Intel’s departure from India?
One reason that has been cited is the restrictive trade policies of the Indian government during the 1970s and 1980s. At that time, India followed a protectionist policy, imposing high tariffs and quotas on imported goods, including electronics. This created an environment that was hostile to foreign investment, making it difficult for companies like Intel to operate in the country.
Another factor that contributed to Intel’s departure was the lack of a clear policy framework for the IT industry. In the 1970s and 1980s, India’s IT industry was still in its infancy, and there was a need for a comprehensive policy that would attract foreign investment and create a conducive environment for growth. The absence of such a policy led to uncertainty and confusion, making it difficult for companies like Intel to operate in the country.
In contrast, China, which was also emerging as a major player in the global IT industry, had a more welcoming attitude towards foreign investment. The Chinese government had implemented policies that encouraged foreign investment, provided tax breaks and other incentives, and created a favorable business environment. This attracted companies like Intel, which saw China as a more attractive destination for investments.
It is worth noting that Intel did not completely leave India. The company still maintains a presence in the country, with a design center in Bangalore that focuses on developing chips for the Indian market. However, the company’s departure from India was a significant blow to the country’s IT industry, which was still in its early stages of development.
Dubey’s statement has also sparked debate about the role of the Indian government in promoting the IT industry. Many have questioned whether the government has done enough to attract and retain foreign investment in the industry. The BJP MP’s statement has highlighted the need for a more proactive approach by the government to promote the IT industry and create a favorable business environment.
In conclusion, while the statement made by Nishikant Dubey is provocative, it has also sparked a necessary conversation about India’s industrial development and its relationship with foreign companies. The departure of Intel and other semiconductor companies from India was a significant setback for the country’s IT industry, but it has also provided an opportunity for India to re-evaluate its policies and create a more conducive environment for growth.
As Dubey pointed out, it was because of Intel that Silicon Valley developed in America, where more than half of the jobs are held by Indians. This highlights the importance of attracting and retaining foreign investment in the IT industry, and the need for the government to create a favorable business environment that encourages growth and development.
Sources:
