They came, they spoke, and now they are gone. India and its problems are back to square one. But was it wrong for the Indian government, industry, and even Bollywood to celebrate the non-resident Indian? No. What's wrong, however, is this: in wooing the NRI what we are doing in effect is telling them, 'We envy you for all your wealth and success, won't you please share some of it with us? We are, after all, your brothers.' It is almost as if we want them to be guilty for having left us behind, literally and figuratively. We are chasing the NRI dollar because we want investments despite our problems, and not because we think we can deliver on the promise that is India.

Fine, these are smart, successful, and rich people who've done very well for themselves. But are they the solution to India's problems? We don't think so. Let's for a moment explore the NRI phenomenon. These are people who are easily categorised, and belong to one of the two sets: the intelligent, and the industrious. The former largely come from the IITs and IIMs, and the latter from the villages of Punjab, Kerala or UP. Some from both the categories turned entrepreneurs during the course of their lives abroad, but the rest remained white-collar workers. Now, what does India want from them? It could only be one of the two things: their money, or their non-tangible resources. But what is the country likely to get? Some sympathy and a whole lot of advice.

Don't blame the NRI for that. The solution to India's problems lies not in the hands of our pravasi kin, but in the hands of people living in the country. We know exactly what our problem is: we talk too much and do too little. Can the NRI do anything about the perverse psyche? No. Don't forget that these are people who probably tried battling the system, gave up, and found better opportunities elsewhere. To expect them to help us with our problems is not only foolish but unfair.

Whenever the topic of foreign investment comes up, it is inevitable for the Indian diaspora to be compared with its Chinese counterpart. And the point usually is, 'the non-resident Chinese plough so much back into China, why don't the NRIs?' For two good reasons. One, typically the non-resident Chinese is a trader, while the non-resident Indian is a worker. So when the former puts his money to work back in China, it is because the country offers him a great business opportunity. The latter, in contrast, invariably invests in real estate or at best in stockmarkets. The money invested in business multiplies faster and has a wider economic impact, while the one locked up in real estate inflates property prices without any sustained benefits to the economy.

To be sure, the NRI club does have its share of big-shot industrialists and businessmen. Why don't they invest in India? Simple, they are businessmen first and Indians later. Charity, at least in this case, can't begin at "home". India must provide them with a compelling case for investing in the country. And a tenuous-even if fond-link to the homeland isn't sufficient enough reason. In case we do manage to cut down on red tape, improve infrastructure, and make the business environment attractive, the logical question then is, why only woo the NRIs? Why not the big global corporations? Why not fuss over those who have no choice but to invest in emerging markets like India? If we can convince them, the NRIs can get back to being what they essentially are: successful people who happen to be Indians. And not India's messiahs.