Since his election as the leader of the Conservative party, David Cameron has posed some searching questions for the British political terrain. With the Labour party in the middle of intense warfare over Blair's succession, the principal beneficiary of its paralysis has been Cameron. Like a prized blue chip share in a bullish market, the Cameron stock continues to soar. Last week, as he flew Jet Airways back to London after visiting India, his presence among India's political elites also unwittingly poses some revealing questions for the Indian political culture. Age is a good place to begin. David Cameron is just 39 years old - he'll turn 40 this October. Michael Howard, his predecessor was in his mid-sixties. By electing Cameron as leader, the Tories boldly jumped a generation. His youthful persona is turning out to be a vital facet of his appeal. Contrast this with the tepid approach of India's mainstream political parties towards newcomers. In the context of India's electoral make-up,...

It is too soon to tell whether Manmohan Singh's robust and elegant defence of the Indo-US nuclear deal in last Thursday's debate in the Rajya Sabha marks a turning point in his prime ministerial tenure. Nonetheless, his impassioned address before the Upper House is an event of some significance. Perhaps not since Atal Behari Vajpayee's fiery parthian volley during the no-confidence motion that stymied his thirteen day government in 1996 has any other prime ministerial speech induced an equal sympathy. The prime minister's assertive intervention in the nuclear debate is important given the political background that preceded it. First, through most of the year, Manmohan Singh's isolation within the Congress party hasn't exactly been classified information. It does not take a "mole" to figure this out. In several areas of policy, some in the cabinet and in the Congress fold have had little hesitation in departing from prime ministerial initiatives or have sought deviously to bypass Manmohan Singh altogether. For example,...

The monsoon session of the current parliament has been brimming with a torrent of farcical activity. As MP's groggily recover from their current obsession of excessively pouring over a raft of 'manufactured' issues such as, the comical treasure-hunt for a mole and fretting over what a breach of privilege means, some urgent domestic and foreign policy issues that deserve parliament's attention are waiting on the anvil. The prospective Indo-US nuclear deal of civil nuclear energy cooperation is one such pivotal issue. Recently, the US House of Representatives approved the US and India Nuclear Cooperation and Promotion Act 2006 by an overwhelming margin (359 to 68). It now awaits the US Senate's consideration in September. In India, a high-pitched opposition to this deal has been expectedly led by the sanctimonious leftists, an insecure SP and a shrill BJP. While the left's opposition stems from their ideological aversion to the wealth creating philosophy of the US and the SP's from a fear of...

The idea of a common world trade policy is a fantasy.
Trade and politics have always been intertwined. A country's trade policy cannot operate independently of its political climate and domestic pressures. Attempts to forcibly sever a country's approach to trade from its political compulsions usually end in disappointment. Seen as such, the failure of the recent Doha round of global trade talks isn't particularly surprising at all. The blame game began swiftly. Peter Mandelson, the EU's interlocutor had little hesitation in pointing the finger at the US for the impasse: "Having been mandated by heads of government at the G8 to come together to indicate further flexibility, I felt that each of us did, except the United States." Agreeing with him, Commerce Minister Kamal Nath said, "Everybody put something on the table except one country..." On the other hand, Susan Schwab the US representative saw it rather differently: "What became evident was that several of the others had not moved off of...