Book Review
By Dr. Satish C. Aikant
Secession of the Successful: The Flight Out of New India
By Sanjaya Baru
Penguin Random House India, Gurugram, 2025, Pages xxix+ 289, Rs. 799
The acronym NRI used for ‘Non- Resident Indians’ is increasingly getting the overtones of ‘Not-Returning Indians’ considering the proclivity of the growing Indian diaspora, especially in the US and other developed countries, unwilling to return to the native land. The spectacular rise in the out-migration of upper-middle class and wealthy Indians, who constitute the nation’s social, political and economic power elite, is a phenomenon that Sanjay Baru explores in his new book Secession of the Successful: The Flight out of New India. Baru is an economist and was media advisor to former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Worldwide migrations have taken place since earliest times for trade and cultural exchange. With the passage of time, they became more pronounced. In the context of India Baru profiles three consecutive phases of Indians’ emigration. The early phase that took place in the mid -nineteenth and early twentieth century, was characterized by those who went as indentured labourers to British colonies like the Caribbean, Mauritius, Fiji and South Africa during the British colonial period. They were mainly driven by poverty and unemployment.
In the second phase, through the 1980s and 1990s the information technology revolution in India created a demand for software engineers and programmers, enabled by the easing of US immigration laws. Professionally trained Indians took advantage of this and moved to the US. It became common for bright young Indians to go overseas, acquire academic qualifications at some of the world’s best universities, get some work experience, and then return home to work for the government or private establishments. The nationalist commitment of scientists like C.V. Raman and J. C. Bose and engineers like M. Visvesvaraya encouraged scores of Indians to either opt to receive education in India or, after acquiring qualifications oversea, return home to be part of the Indian development process. Incidentally C. V. Raman, a Nobel Laureate, was a fully home-grown product with his entire education in India. Several other scientists, including Meghnad Saha, Homi Bhabha, Vikram Sarabhai and their entire generation, created and built up such institutions as the Indian Institute of Science and the nuclear and space programmes. One must take pride in the fact that ISRO developed entirely on home grown talent. Most of the scientists and engineers engaged in high profile Moon and Mars Missions are not only India trained but are from provincial non- elite institutions.
What is currently underway is the migration of India’s wealthy elite seeking permanent home in developed countries. The super-rich are not only the permanent residents in foreign countries but are also relinquishing their Indian citizenship. In 2024, 4300 millionaires had relocated out of India. The UAE has recently emerged as the top choice, overtaking Singapore, the UK, Australia, and the US. Many of these destinations offer the security of non-intrusive banking regulations, enabling India’s wealthy to keep their wealth far away from the prying scrutiny of the Indian government.
The author underscores the phenomenon of ‘brain drain,’ the talent migration from developing to developed economies. The trend has often been justified deploying concepts such as ‘brain gain’ and ‘brain circulation.’ Yet, as the author insists, what is ‘brain drain’ for India, is ‘brain inflow’ or human capital investment for the revitalization of host economy by contributing significantly to it.
There is a view shared by the Indian elite that ‘brain drain’ is better than ‘brain-in-drain,’ and that brain drain was a consequence of India’s inability to gainfully employ its own educated population. This supercilious view ignores the contribution of hundreds of talented Indians who stayed home, or returned home, to build the nation after Independence. The ‘temples of modern India,’ as Jawaharlal Nehru described the new research and teaching institutions, the public sector industries, the atomic energy and space capabilities and so on, were built by Indian brains that chose to stay home.
Baru identifies two factors that work in tandem driving the migration of talent to developed counties: the ‘pull factor’ and the ‘push factor.’ The pull factor is obviously the promise of a better work environment, the ease of living and enjoying the comforts of the First World. The push factor on the other hand is related to the quality of governance at home. Many talented Indians are emigrating to escape from the incompetence and iniquity of governance in India, lack of social and communal cohesion and declining quality of political and administrative leadership. Those opting to migrate believe that their destiny is no longer tied to the future of India.
On 9 January 1915, Mahatma Gandhi returned to India after 21 years in South Africa, having successfully mobilized resistance against colonialism. He was arguably the first and the most famous NRI to return home. Since 2003 every year, the day is celebrated as Pravasi Bharatiya Divas. Atal Behari Vajpayee the then Prime Minister of India urged the delegates to the Pravasi Bhartiya Colloquium that conditions would be created for the return of the natives enabling them to contribute to the development of their own country. Few, however, harboured this desire. The day has become little more than a celebration of the success of Indians overseas who are more than happy staying in their host countries rather than return home.
Economists like V.M. Dandekar believe that free India continues to privilege western education and qualifications. As long as this mindset remains there would be brain drain. The objectives of ‘brain gain’ and ‘brain circulation’ can only be achieved by creating institutional, intellectual and liberal social environment at home.
When the country’s power elite go overseas to study and work, they reinforce the view across society that migration is an aspect of upward mobility. Elite migration raises concerns among the vast majority whether they would also not be better off making their future overseas. It is a comment on our times and on the values that guide the power elite of the so-called ‘New India’ that many among them view this flight of the wealthy as a sign of progress.
Donald Trump’s campaign slogan was ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA). Our NRIs are happy to be inducted into this project. One cannot miss the irony when US Congressman Jim Himes showered praises on the thriving Indian- American community calling them ‘a secret weapon for economic growth and the future of US innovations.’
Even as the US President Trump clamps down on immigration in general, he is willing to sell US citizenship at a price, with a Golden Visa for $5 million. Many countries are willing to sell citizenship and the Indian millionaires are willing to buy their way out of their home country. For the Indian elite, the world is an oyster.
Overseas Indians visibly manifest their patriotism and religious nationalism by lustily cheering the visiting Prime Minister Modi with slogans like ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ and ‘Vande Mataram,’ knowing full well that their own lives are intertwined with the destiny of their host nation, a link they will rarely forsake. Their nationalism is restricted to raising slogans hailing the motherland while being happily settled far away from Bharat Mata. A question could be raised that if one is so proud to shout ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai,’ why abandon her? The nationalism professed by the overseas Indians does not translate into patriotism and a desire to return to their motherland and participate in her development.
There is little point in holding individuals guilty when the phenomenon is social. That the migration of the elite has gained momentum in recent years is a comment not only on the character of India’s post-Independence elites but is also an indictment of the current political dispensation.
Sanjaya Baru’s book calls attention to issues that face contemporary India and need to be addressed. However, I have some problem with its title which suggests equating success with material affluence. This can only be one dimension of being ‘successful.’ Material advancement, though a legitimate aspiration, should not preclude the larger ethical and social dimensions. A successful individual, irrespective of personal wealth, cannot abdicate social and nationalistic commitments. It is easier to deliver homilies from abroad than face challenges at home.
(The reviewer is former Professor and Head of the Department of English, H.N.B.Garhwal University and former Fellow of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla)
