To get real, we must first get over our obsession with the state. Some principles and facts need to be understood. First, while it is the duty of a state to protect its citizens, there are and must be obvious limits. The Indian state is not wholly and solely responsible for Indians who have voluntarily taken private sector jobs in dangerous countries; a Bahrain telecom company employed Suryanaryan. There is a risk-reward ratio that applies in situations like these. The state must make the risks clear to its citizens, by issuing advisories, for example. But if a citizen decides the rewards outweigh the risk (white collar jobs in dangerous places always pay very well), at some level the principle of caveat emptor – buyer beware – must apply. As in private financial investments that end up badly, the state should not be expected to bear the full burden of the consequences of a free individual decision. This may sound heartless to some. But to argue the opposite is mindless.

Second, as India’s foreign policy gets more worldly-wise and as its supply of educated professionals rise – Rightwing and Leftwing fantasies/dreams not intervening, both should happen – the number of Indians working in private sector jobs in hostile environments will increase, probably sharply.

Therefore, the currently popular and politically correct notion of white collar Indians abroad as permanent protectees of the Indian state must be revised soon. Otherwise foreign policy and Indian economic activity abroad will become hostage to 24x7 televised “emotions”.

... contd.