‘One difficulty the Congress has is that we cannot compete in regional politics’

Of those 53 GoMs, 33 have completed their work. This Government has used GoMs extensively. In coalition governments, it is better to have a small group for intensive discussions, who then make recommendations.

This has been a new experience for us — never before have we been in a coalition. In the past, coalitions have been used to defeat the Congress. Now, we have to work with political parties that have anti-Congress roots. When we started out, I had many doubts if this would work, but somehow we have managed to carry our partners. One lesson we have learnt is that you have to adhere to the Common Minimum Programme, you cannot follow your own policies.

• SHEKHAR GUPTA: How do you perceive the role of the media in this political scenario?

• SHISHIR GUPTA: Last week, the media carried a number of defining images — a regional party leader, Mayawati, was given sweets by an officer on her birthday; Sonia Gandhi and L.K. Advani smiled at each other; and then there was Nano. How do these reflect the future of India?

The images reflect a mature democracy in which two opposing leaders smile at each other. The Nano is the reflection of a progressive India.

• RAVISH TIWARI: Was the outcome of the Gujarat election a blow to the Congress’s resolve on the nuclear deal?

No one expected the Congress to win in Gujarat. We expected (Narendra) Modi to come back with reduced numbers and the Congress to increase its numbers. So the question of our resolve on the nuclear deal being affected after the setback in the Gujarat elections doesn’t arise.

We always knew there would be strong resistance to the deal. Then, in the Rajya Sabha in September 2006, the prime minister detailed nine specific points that India wanted recognised in any deal and CPM leader Sitaram Yechury said he was satisfied with those. The 123 Agreement takes those nine points into account, so we were optimistic.

However, there have been disagreements over the Hyde Act. I think there has been an over-reaction — it is a case of reading too much between the lines. The Act is mandatory on the U.S. administration, not us. But for the IAEA or U.S., it would be difficult to have such an agreement with a government that has lost majority. So we have to try to carry our partners along. Our resolve remains, but let’s see how far we can progress.

... contd.