annual report1-final.qxd - Overseas Indian

Pravasi Bharatiya Divas
Pravasi Bharatiya Divas
Pravasi Bharatiya Divas
Pravasi Bharatiya Divas
based on knowledge. Like the Chinese, India
would have to collaborate with the rest of the
world for its future development, he said.
Prof. Devesh Kapur demonstrated that human
capital was an important indicator of development.
Pointing out that the Indian diaspora had access to
both global and local knowledge, he said it should
help India to create resources to enter the growing
demand for higher education. According to Kapur,
the diasporic community could help in the following
ways:
(1) Play a strategic role in streamlining the primary
education sector and persuade the Indian
States to provide free and decent primary education.
(2) The young and the idealist should come to
India to do voluntary work.
(3) They could help in improving research
activities.
(4) They should help in setting up world-class
universities.
Dato Seri S. Samy Vellu argued that India and the
diasporic community should collaborate in areas,
which were strategically beneficial to both. He passionately
pleaded for improving the infrastructural
facilities in India, to which the Malayasian diaspora
would contribute immensely. He said that in
order to modernise India, one needed to modernise
its roads first. It would create not only freeways but
also help people from small towns to export.
He also said that there is a need for a Diaspora
News Network, not CNN, to connect people of
Indian origin across the globe. He advocated
strengthening of higher education, which would
have a snowball effect on economic development.
He requested that deliberations of the diaspora
conferences should be documented and sent out to
participants.
Dr. Prem Misir said that the majority of the
Indian diaspora were average working people. The
diaspora had grown over a period of more than
2,000 years and had a unique worldview. A distinction
should be made between PIOs and the NRIs.
He felt that the Government had a slant towards
NRIs and that PIOs tend to be ignored. He cited
from the history of Guyana and Fiji since 1870s and
said that the nature of migration had influenced
the identities of the diaspora. He suggested that
ethnic identities should be recognised and any
marginalisation should be prevented.
He also suggested the following in the context of
the Caribbean:
(1) Co-existence of all cultures in the process of
institution building.
(2) Linkages with India must be sustained.
(3) Enlightened Indians must recognise the
diversity of the Indian diaspora.
(4) The diasporic Indians should take interest
in investment in India.
Lalit Mansingh outlined a common agenda and
basic principles since the diaspora was so diverse.
He suggested that there were three broad types of
diaspora:
(1) Southern Diaspora
(2) Western Diaspora
(3) Communities Diaspora.
He said that his experience of 41 years with diaspora
engagements revealed that no matter where
the diaspora was located, they have tried to achieve
economic stability, maintain values and cultural
centres and gradually participate in local politics.
He pointed out that a common pattern of diaspora
behaviour makes it easier for us to format a common
agenda (a common minimum programme for
overseas). Though, the first effort must be to define
the items we do not wish to include in the agenda,
he said. According to him, the following three
guiding principles would be useful while defining
a diaspora agenda. He said that
(1) Nothing should be done to offend local
sensibilities.
(2) There should be no interference in the
country’s internal affairs.
(3) India’s policy of secularism should not be
compromised.
According to him, a common agenda must have
the following principal objectives:
! A common pursuit of universal values like
democracy, human rights, anti-discrimination
! Major areas of activities — political (there should
be more political dialogue), economic (more economic
engagement) and culture heritage (overseas Indians
7