The United States-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF) was formed last month by 29 major companies, splitting from the larger and much older US-India Business Council (USIBC) that had dominated bilateral business dialogue between the two nations. The new group includes top executives from Mastercard, PepsiCo and Cisco among others. Heading the USIBC as its chief executive officer (CEO) for many years, Mukesh Aghi, has now been picked to head the USISPF. In a visit to Delhi, he clears the confusion around what led to the split and tells Subhayan Chakraborty that it is looking to facilitate investments into newer segments, such as healthcare in new destinations like Uttar Pradesh.
What led to US-India Strategic Partnership Forum's creation from the original US-India Business Council?
You have to look at the direction US-India relationships are headed. It's not only about trade anymore, but about geopolitical, commercial, educational, cultural and innovation.
Also, they are about a common value system. So, the board felt that we need to have an organisation that focuses on all these issues. We decided by a 29-0, unanimous vote that we needed to create this entity and drive the relationship in a much more stronger and deeper fashion.
We are now an independent entity. Our board consists of CEOs and chairmen of large companies and most of them have some form of investment in India. So, I leverage my board in different sectors to see what policy challenges those businesses are facing, and then we can inform both the governments.
The second factor is my management team. I have been a CEO earlier of a multi-billion dollar company in both countries, hence, I understand issues from a ground level perspective.
What are your main focus areas?
India's requirements as a nation are on two broad issues. One is job creation and improving the quality of life of its citizens. Job creation is going to come through foreign investments.
From a US perspective, they are again looking at India on two broad areas. One is economic prosperity, which is good for the US and the other is a militarily strong India good for regional stability.
Our main focus today is on how to bring more US investments to India and assist in technology transfers.
How do you hope to do that since there's already an inherent push against tech transfer within US companies?
Well, Boeing and Lockheed have already committed to producing in India while technology companies like Cisco are already doing some manufacturing and a lot of advanced research in India. Most of the companies on our board are actively looking to step up their activities in India and shore up investments.
If you look at the healthcare sector, we are working on a state level with US companies to find solutions that are local in nature. We are trying to create public-private partnerships with the Uttar Pradesh government.
Therefore, we'll ask US companies to set up a dialysis centre in a government hospital. They make the full capital investments and get returns based on volume. The outcome will be citizens getting world-class healthcare.
Are all the board members of USISPF working in their personal capacity because a number of the companies they represent, including CISCO, still continue to be a part of the original USIBC?
CISCO may be a part of the USIBC but is represented through John T Chambers in USISPF. Also, we have Executive Chairman of the Mahindra Group Anand Mahindra, CEO of Warburg Pinkus Charles R Kaye, President of Boeing International Marc Allen.
Absolutely not, they can have membership in both. There's nothing wrong with that. We have set up the secretariat in Delhi with a full team apart from the ones in New York, Washington and Palo Alto.
On the trade front, the US government has recently underscored the nations significant merchandise trade deficit with India. Given the nature of both economies and the way they operate, is there any way around it?
I feel trade cannot be dictated through artificial sets. Global trade is defined in a way that you automatically find balance. However, if you start manipulating your currency, then you can have a much stronger trade balance in your favour, just like what China has done with the US. That's the reason behind all the sentiments expressed by the President. But, India has remained a much more open economy. Also, overall, India is a trade deficit nation. So, I don' think it is manipulating anything.