An Asian Age

In November end, VOICE&DATA organized an industry meet to discuss various
issues, opportunities and challenges for telecom service providers. Part of the
discussion focused on the experience and learnings so far. Where did CLECs go
wrong, where global carriers erred, what mistakes did vendors make, and so on.
And how broadband succeeded in Korea, mobile Internet in Japan, voice over IP
networks in China, and the regulatory regime for convergence in Malaysia...

For the first time, I consciously began to wonder: why all the positive
examples from Asia and all the negative ones from the West?

The Western world has always had this conception that Asians can do hardly
anything with technology, till some Japanese companies taught them a lesson. So
the grudging admission finally came with an explanation that Japan was an
exception because it was too closely integrated with the US economy, and also
came a footnote that Asian companies could only do product enhancements but not
innovate. Then came the Koreans who innovated. Then the Chinese who
cost-effectively manufactured. And finally the Indians, who through their
brainwork in software, built the intelligence, first into the computers, then
into networks.

With all explanations running out, it was said that the market was there, in
the West. Well, that was true. Not any more. Look at GSM. By December 2001, Asia
had close to 215 million GSM subscribers as compared to Europe’s 365
million... and was growing at a much faster rate. However, in the ETSI
standardization process, Asian operators are only indirectly represented through
the GSM MoU, whereas much smaller service providers from Europe are represented
directly.

In other words, some are still considered more equal than others. Some may go
to the extent of terming it racism. If it can be there in cricket, why not in
telecom?

I disagree with Dalmiyaism there. I feel we cannot simply blame them. Here is
Japan, which has made the world sit up and take notice. India or even China have
not bothered to go there and find out why it has succeeded. We have willingly
been part of the good-and-the-bad-in-WAP debate. Considering the fact that we
are a relatively new market and are free to choose any model, we should have
seriously studied i-mode’s success. Very little is known in India about NTT
DoCoMo except the name but we know everything about Vodaphones and Verizons.

It is time to act.

To start with, why can’t we decide what technology we will use in future?
Each of our markets are unique, no doubt. But they are more similar to each
other than they are to the US or European markets. We can make a beginning.

I am–let us be very clear on that–not suggesting that we should have
separate standards. What I am saying is that since we have the fastest growing
markets, we should have a bigger say in standards making.

And if you say regional politics will come in the way, I refuse to believe.
In the height of Indo-Pakistan tension, the visiting Chinese premier talks more
about business than about cross border terrorism or Kashmir. Business, not
politics, can today dictate relations. Who knows, it may change the political
equations as well.

Wishful thinking, did you say?

I concede. But all success stories start with a little bit of wishful
thinking. Don’t they?

Shyamanuja Das