The United States and the IMF are applauding India’s recent reforms, just as India itself is revising its growth estimates. Last week India’s World Economic Outlook – a quarterly prediction of the state of the world’s economy – warned of a general contraction and a dramatic revision of Indian growth estimates. Just three months ago India’s growth was predicted at 6.1%, but now that has been revised downwards to 4.9% for 2012, the lowest result in the past ten years. Evidently, the Indian downturn is more significant than the Washington-based institute previously thought, and the report highlights some dramatic Indian shortcomings – lack of infrastructure, liberalization, and reforms to facilitate new businesses – but praises the leadership for recent reforms that open the door to foreign investment in some strategic sectors, allowing foreign capital into large organized distribution, aviation, the television industry, and private insurance. US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner also praised these measures during his visit to India, saying, “The reforms outlined by the government of India offer a very promising path to improving growth outcomes for the Indian economy.” Beyond this, it is easy to see the welcoming attitude towards industries in which the United States excels. During the meetings, the Indian leadership requested the lifting of certain market obstacles impeding Indian IT companies that d o most of their business with the US. The negotiations touched on access to public contract bidding, the extension of social protections for Indian workers, and the concession of visas. The summit between Federal Reserve president Ben Bernanke and his counterpart, governor of the Reserve Bank of India Duvvuri Subbarao, also managed to place the blame of international uncertainty about the markets on the Euro, and expressed doubts about a recovery. Bernanke did not skimp on complimenting India and its progress within the G20. Subbarao was less diplomatic, expressing concern for the nonchalance with which Q3, the third round of quantitative easing, was introduced. He doubted its effectiveness, the unilateral nature of the US decision, and its repercussions on inflation. Using an evocative example, Subbarao contested Q3’s effectiveness in solving the trilemma facing every nation in the world’s economy: maintaining the balance between sustainable public spending, stability of prices, and stability of finance. He did not use indirect language, with full knowledge that many in India share his concerns.