Criticism has begun to grow over the arrival of foreign universities in India. Is this criticism justified?After news broke that eight British universities were going to open their campuses in India, a debate followed. The University of Southampton has already set up its campus in Gurugram. Permissions have been granted for the University of Liverpool and Lancaster University in Bengaluru, the University of York, the University of Aberdeen, and the University of Bristol in Mumbai, and for Queen’s University Belfast, Coventry University, and the University of Surrey in Gujarat’s Gift City, Gandhinagar.Following the recent meeting between the prime ministers of India and Britain, both leaders expressed their delight over this development. The British prime minister proudly announced that the UK had now become the largest provider of higher education in India.His happiness has a clear, practical reason. He told his people that the expansion of British higher education institutions in India would bring Britain a profit of about £50 million. For a struggling British economy, this is not a small figure. There are other advantages too. In recent years, Britain has grown uneasy about the rising number of foreigners entering its borders, and efforts have been made to limit their entry. Among these are many students who go to Britain for study and then stay back in search of work. The demand for work visas has steadily increased – something the British government wants to contain. But if student visas are curbed, how will the lost income be compensated?A large portion of that income, after all, comes from Indian students. Their numbers have now surpassed even those of Chinese students. Britain wants their money, but not their presence after graduation. For Indian students, one of the great attractions of Britain has been the possibility of working there – not merely for earning but for living a life that appears more dignified, more comfortable than life in India. Over the past decade, their numbers have multiplied many times.But this growing foreign population has provoked resentment within Britain. Visa norms for students have been tightened. The balance that the British government seeks lies in what it now calls the export of higher education. British universities had already begun running short-term courses aimed at Indian students – a strategy to recover from financial distress. Exploiting India’s deep-seated fascination with the “British stamp” of education, these universities started offering courses whose academic worth is questionable but which are profitable. Even within Britain, the academic community has criticised this. Yet, much like in India, the government there too seems more concerned with money than with the quality of education.On one hand, teachers are being laid off; on the other, dubious short-term courses – sustained largely by Indian enrolments – are being launched to make money. But since visa restrictions have reduced the inflow of students, there is now a new solution: take the courses to the students, in their own countries.This makes sense for Britain. Costs in India are lower – salaries, maintenance, everything. The profits, however, can be repatriated to Britain. From an economic point of view, it is a sound business venture for them.What does India gain from this arrangement? The Indian prime minister did not have anything to say. But according to policy documents of the NITI Aayog, the University Grants Commission (UGC), and the Ministry of Education, the rationale for inviting foreign universities is that Indian students will gain access to ‘world-class education’. The second reason – perhaps the first in importance – is that it will help save foreign exchange. The money that went abroad will now remain in India. Students will receive global education at a fraction of the cost – saving travel, living expenses, and paying lower tuition fees compared to Britain.It is also argued that this will force Indian universities to improve their quality. They’ll be in physical proximity to world-class educational institutions. To attract students, they will have to match the standards of these foreign institutions. Since research and academic rigour are valued by these foreign institutions, Indian institutions will have to work harder to match them. So, their entry is one of the measures by the government to awaken the local universities to the need for quality education.The government also claims that this will eventually help India become an educational hub. But what does becoming an educational hub actually mean? It could mean that students and researchers from other countries will want to come to India. Yet the very fact that foreign universities are opening campuses here suggests something else: that there already exists a large Indian class willing to pay handsomely for a foreign degree. So, sellers are setting up shop where the buyers are. This is a market transaction – not the making of an educational hub.America once could call itself such a hub. Britain too. Even now. But after Trump, America’s appeal to those seeking the best education has diminished. Even good academics are now thinking of leaving American universities. The greatness of American universities lay in their freedom – the freedom without which knowledge cannot be created or transmitted. Research, curriculum design, classroom discussion, faculty appointments, and student admissions – all require academic autonomy and freedom. Without it, business knowledge is not possible.In both the US and the UK, that freedom is under siege. If their universities are losing their charm, can India ensure that freedom to the foreign ones that arrive here? The government promises full autonomy within the framework of Indian law. That is welcome. Some private universities in India already enjoy such autonomy – in designing courses, choosing faculty, and setting academic priorities.Yet, how strange it is that this freedom – extended to private and foreign universities – is denied to our finest public ones like Delhi University or Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). Each day, the UGC or the Ministry of Education issues fresh directives that they must obey. For example, the imposition of “Indian Knowledge Traditions” across all disciplines. Will the foreign universities also have to follow this rule? If not, why is it mandatory for Patna University, Madras University, or Delhi University? Aren’t the students in these foreign campuses also Indian? Why should they be deprived of this “Indian” knowledge?We also know that in the past decade, the teachers recruited at Delhi University or JNU are unlikely to be invited by any foreign university to be on their faculty. What does that tell us? Why should Indian students enrolled in British campuses in India be denied the scholarship of such teachers, or is it because they are not considered scholars at all?There is another fear – that foreign universities will lure away the best Indian teachers. But if one looks at the hiring patterns of private universities in India over the past ten years, most of those appointed there would never have been hired by JNU or DU. This is true of both the young and the senior faculty. What does this say about our public universities?Is the entry of foreign universities a calamity? Not necessarily. If we can buy foreign shoes, phones, or cars, why not education? Why should capitalism stop at the gates of the university? If foreign school boards have already been allowed in India, why should universities be an exception?There is, in fact, one reason to be pleased by their entry. Those young scholars whom our public universities refuse to appoint may now find a place in these institutions. In private or foreign universities, appointments are likely to be based on competence, not loyalty to Hindutva nationalism. At least such scholars will not be condemned to wander endlessly without a home to their scholarship.Moreover, these universities might design curricula around disciplinary needs rather than nationalist propaganda. There, the study of history might still mean the study of history; sociology might still be sociology; and literature might continue to be literature – and thus, the ‘sense of the discipline’ itself may survive in India.For now, these universities have announced only those courses that do not attract nationalist scrutiny – programmes in information technology, management, and technology. Courses in sciences, social sciences, or the humanities will come later, if at all. When they do, perhaps someone will one day compare their syllabi with those of our best public universities. Then it will become clear how much inequality has been created in the field of knowledge. And what it is that the students in our public universities are getting.We can imagine academic conferences where teachers from these foreign campuses sit alongside teachers from JNU, Jamia Millia Islamia, or Delhi University – and where students witness the stark difference between genuine scholarship and what their own institutions offer to them. Or perhaps these foreign universities will build such high walls around themselves that we will never know what goes on inside.Yet one truth has already been revealed: the government itself says that Indian institutions will learn about quality and knowledge from these foreign ones. Which means, even after eleven years of nationalist reform, the government admits that India still lacks a sense of quality and expertise – and must look abroad to rediscover it.What does that say about these eleven years? The answer is given by the entry of foreign universities in India.Apoorvanand teaches Hindi at Delhi University.This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.