Tensions between the two countries have been rising since June, when
they engaged in their worst conflict in decades: a bloody clash along a
disputed border in the Himalayas that left at least 20 Indian soldiers
dead. In the following weeks and months, Indian officials banned apps
from Chinese tech giants Bytedance, Alibaba (BABA) and Tencent (TCEHY),
and reportedly restricted embattled telecommunications equipment maker
Huawei from participating in India's 5G network.
Both countries
agreed to deescalate military tensions in September, but that hasn't
brought much relief for businesses caught in the dispute. ByteDance's
marquee international app, the short-form video platform TikTok, is
still banned in India. And last month, the Indian government banned
dozens more Chinese apps, citing national security concerns.
The
pressures are a problem for companies based in both countries, but the
pain is particularly acute for Chinese companies trying to grab a piece
of India's explosive internet growth. India is now home to nearly 750
million internet users, more than double the number in 2016, according
to the latest government data. Atlas VPN, a market research firm,
estimates India will have 1 billion internet users by 2025.
Locked
out of that market, Chinese companies "stand to lose riding the ascent
of possibly the world's third-largest economy by 2050 and the market
with the world's second-largest internet users," said Shirley Yu,
visiting fellow at the London School of Economics and founder of a
company that assesses strategy, business, and political risk for
companies working in China.
Several Chinese tech companies are already feeling the loss.
ByteDance's
TikTok lost 200 million Indian users when it was banned in late June.
That's twice as many users as the app has in the United States. The
Beijing-based company hadn't yet made money on TikTok in India,
according to Greg Paull, principal at market research firm R3. But the
company had spent heavily on establishing and expanding its slice of the
market.
"And now they can only watch the local, copy version apps taking over their users and do nothing," said Paull.
ByteDance
and other tech companies also need a lot of data to build better
products. India's internet users are demographically diverse and speak
many different languages, making the country's data highly prized,
according to Gateway House, an Indian foreign policy think tank.
Google
(GOOGL) CEO Sundar Pichai said in a blog post earlier this year that
the company's efforts in India "have deepened our understanding of how
technology can be helpful to all different types of people."
"Building products for India first has helped us build better products for users everywhere," he wrote.
For
internet applications developed by Google and other tech companies,
data is like oxygen, said Gateway House director and board member Blaise
Fernandes.
Apps need a lot of up-to-date data to keep algorithms
competitive, according to Fernandes. He predicts that the deprivation
of data from India will handicap Chinese apps' development for global
markets.
"The global strategies of Chinese tech firms are now
being hijacked," said Abishur Prakash, a geopolitical futurist and
co-founder of Center for Innovating the Future, a consulting firm that
works on technology and geopolitics.
Chinese companies that had relied on India to build and test new products have seen those plans thrown into jeopardy, he said.
"As
India pushes out Chinese tech, a chaotic business landscape is
emerging. Now, everything that Chinese tech firms have bet on to succeed
in the Indian market is being picked apart," Prakash said.
Beyond
developing their own products, Chinese tech companies had been
investing heavily in India's tech startups, pouring some $4 billion into
the sector since 2015, according to Gateway House.
But India's tightening rules on foreign investment could constrain China's ability to cash in on the country's internet boom.
In
April, the Indian government signaled it was taking steps to curb
China's growing influence. It announced that foreign direct investments
from countries that share a land border with India would be subject to
more scrutiny.
The move was "indicative of India's desire to
carefully control the inward flow of Chinese investments and assets into
the country," according to Sukanti
Ghosh, South Asia head for the Washington-based think tank Albright Stonebridge Group.
Then,
amid the border clashes in June, the otherwise investor-friendly
government of Maharashtra, a western state in India, paused or canceled a
number of agreements signed with leading Chinese companies earlier this
year, Ghosh said.
Questions have already been raised about the long-term viability of at least one splashy tech investment.
Reuters,
citing four people with direct knowledge of the matter, reported last
week that Alibaba affiliate Ant Group was thinking about selling its 30%
stake in One97, the parent company of popular digital wallet Paytm,
because of the rising tensions and tougher competitive landscape.
Both
companies denied the report. Ant said in a tweet that the Reuters story
is "untrue." Paytm said in a statement that the story is false and
misleading.
"There has been no discussion with any of our major
shareholders ever, nor any plans, about selling their stake or becoming
the controlling shareholder," a
Paytm spokesperson said.
When
it comes to digital payments and financial technology, Ant is widely
considered to be a global leader. And if Ant and other Chinese tech
companies disengage because of political tensions, India could miss out
on leading edge technology.
"In the short term, India will lose
out. Tencent is the biggest 'strategic investor' in India's startup
world. Meanwhile, Xiaomi invested almost $500 million in India — in a
single year," said Prakash.
"Clearly, Chinese tech firms are pumping huge amounts of cash into India's economy," he added.
Smartphone
maker Xiaomi invested heavily to build factories in India, and has so
far generated employment for some 50,000 Indians, according to local
reports. The anti-China sentiment in the country and calls to boycott
Chinese products could put those jobs at risk.
Fernandes, of
Gateway House, said that other tech companies are already rushing in to
fill the void left by Chinese investors, and predicts that India will
not suffer for long.
"Post the ban on Chinese apps it is
estimated that $25 billion [of foreign direct investment] has found its
way to the Digital India story, so in no way" is India losing out, he
said.
Indian billionaire Mukesh Ambani's digital company Jio
Platforms may have accounted for much of that. It alone has secured more
than $20 billion from marquee investors, including Google (GOOGL
GOOGLE), Facebook (FB) and KKR, this year.
For the world's two most populous countries, there appears to be no resolution in sight.
India's
Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar suggested it could
take years for negotiations between China and India to reach their
conclusion given the unprecedented build-up of military forces on both
sides of the border.
Progress in relations with China requires
peace and tranquility along the countries' shared border, Jaishankar
told a local newspaper last week. If that's disturbed, as has been the
case this year, then obviously, the rest of the relationship cannot be
unaffected, he added.
In its own way, India is taking a page out of China's playbook.
Beijing
has barred many foreign tech firms from operating freely in China. Some
of the world's most popular platforms like Google search and Facebook
are banned in China, because of the country's strict censorship laws.
Locking out global players also had the added side effect of helping
homegrown companies like Baidu (BIDU) and Tencent (TCEHY) flourish.
Even so, India still remains far more open to foreign tech firms than China.
"While
India may be going after Chinese tech firms, it is not going after
anyone else ... [and] still remains open to the world," Prakash said.
"With that said, the one area where New Delhi and Beijing are on the
same page is that both nations want to define tech on their own terms,"
he added.
"For these two nations, controlling tech is equal to sovereignty."