The first ever India-Africa summit is in progress in the Capital, and what differentiates its approach is the ?soft diplomacy? it practises: it is mentor, chaperone, advisor, guarantor and sounding board. (One example of that is India?s flouting of the sanctions against Somalia?and there are earlier instances of that nature. That has been India?s m?tier for well nigh 70 years, and it presents a great contrast to the ready money that certain developed (and some developing) economies throw about.

Currently, the aim is to enhance cooperation for development?in agriculture, trade, industry and investment, SMEs, peace and security, civil society and good governance, and information and communication technology (ICT). The Africans want cost-effective, intermediate technology and have special interest in partnering up with India in sectors like IT.

Other fields of interest are agriculture, health and pharmaceuticals. The bottom line is cost, ?spread? and access. Only 5 lakh Africans access the ?Net?. They also envy India?s green revolution and its self-sufficiency in staples. The accelerated spread of malaria, TB, and HIV/AIDS in Africa has also made health and (affordable) medicines important?and India beckons since it can offer low-cost medicines.

Interestingly, it is the Africans who would like India to enter the mining sector despite the prior presence of China. Thus, Felix Mutati, the Zambian minister of commerce, expressed this preference because of India?s long-term relationship with the African continent and the degree of understanding that exists.

In New Delhi for the March two-day India-Africa Trade Conclave, Mutati praised India?s ?cost-effective technology? plus the fact that ?we are both from the south?. His remarks stand vindicated by the success attending Jairam Ramesh?s visits to Africa?s diamond producing nations. (Perhaps the most important point to have emerged from his meetings is that he seems to have won over the Africans to the idea that they should sell ?roughs? direct to India, instead of our having to pick them up from Antwerp.)

Even on the political front, India has been the tutor of how Africa should address the UN on the Security Council issue. The Union Minister of State for External Affairs Anand Sharma has promised India?s support for the Organisation of African Union candidates who want Security Council membership. As he just said (on Monday, April 7): ?Both India and the African leadership strongly feel that the United Nations reforms must be all encompassing to make its organs truly representative of the contemporary realities and also democratic in composition.? He stressed that the Security Council expansion?in the permanent category, and the non-permanent?is agreed upon in principle. India, he said, has always declared that it will support the AU consensus on African country candidates for the Council. But the wooing of Africa through Project Partnership (March 19 to 21) and the summit (April 4 to 8) are simply responses to India?s needs?plus China?s intensifying presence in the region. For, these are no longer the days when Beijing?s overtures were restricted to market access via state trading agencies, aid finance and the fomenting of the odd palace coup. IMF?s ?Finance & Development? (March, 2008) actually notes that ?the relationship has evolved to centre on markets for each other?s exports and Africa?s demand for infrastructure (with the) Chinese corporate sector and joint ventures (supplanting) government agencies. In other words, for Africa, China is now a major market, financier, investor, contractor, and builder?as well as donor.?

That is the background against which the PM exhorted Indo-African partnership in October 2007?promising the transfer of technology, and help in honing Africa?s competitiveness.

For example, India is in direct competition with China, its Bric sibling. Their rivalry is mainly about raw materials and markets. But although Essar Oil and ONGC (a PSU) have all struck deals in locations like Sudan, Kenya, Libya, and Nigeria, obviously their pockets are not deep enough.

Thus, ONGC lost to China while attempting to buy a 50% share in an oil exploration project?but China?s $2 billion offer was ten times India?s.