London, March 8: Kamal Nath and Peter Mandelson sat side by side at India House in London yesterday but India’s Commerce and Industry Minister and the European Union’s Trade Commissioner are coming across increasingly as a couple in a bad marriage.

They began with short opening statements, which made it pretty clear that India’s still unresolved negotiations in the Doha round of the World Trade Organisation and India’s separate talks to conclude a trade and investment agreement with the European Union are not making much progress.

The EU, in the shape of Mandelson, wants greater access to India’s agricultural sector. India, in the shape of Kamal Nath, will not allow this because he realises this will be suicide for the UPA government.

At this point, Mandelson said he had to leave as he had a prior appointment but before departing he could not resist a swipe at the Indian budget in which P Chidambaram, the Finance Minister, certainly surprised India watchers in the west by announcing his loan waiver for poor Indian farmers.

It was not clear whether Mandelson was making just a cheap jibe or a serious political point but he said with a smirk: “I notice the Indian budget has done rather well for agriculture. I hope it does not involve too many trade distorting subsidies. It would violate WTO rules.”

Kamal Nath has in the past witheringly compared EU farming subsidies with a very fat cow that could barely stand – he, sitting with Mandelson by his side, had spotted the animal from a train window in France.

He and the EU trade commissioner are supposed to be good friends in private but Mandelson’s comment visibly irritated him. His reply also suggested that the Congress High Command is now thinking ahead to the next general election.

Although the two senior politicians have known each other for years, Mandelson still cannot pronounce “Kamal” correctly, calling him “Kamaal” (as in the Hindi, “Dhoni ney kamaal kar dia…”)

Kamal Nath first slapped down his friend with: “We are taking a leaf out of (the) EU. Our write-off of loans is Dollar15 billion. It is still a fraction of EU subsidies and they have it on an annual basis — for us (it’s) a one time. It’s not a subsidy. It’s distress.”

Then came a statement perhaps meant for consumption back in India: “What has happened by taking on the debts of farmers, it is a rural stimulus. In (our) rural economy, (it) was extremely necessary. While someone may connect with election, connect this with politics — we are a political party undoubtedly. So saying that this is not a political party and this is disassociated from it is not correct.”

He elaborated: “We are a political party; whatever we do is political action in a way. But most important of all we have been talking of creating a stimulus in the rural economy. It puts in the hands of millions of people greater economic strength in the rural populace. Nobody can deny that.”

Earlier he had said: “We have also discussed the WTO multilateral process in Geneva and India is committed to a rule-based multilateral system. India is also committed to the protection of its subsistence farmers and the livelihood security issues in its rural sector. Commerce is up for negotiation, not livelihood security.”

Kamal Nath was cautious when answering a question on how India was affected by the American sub-prime crisis and the talk of recession in the US economy.

India would be affected, he conceded, but not as badly as other countries more intimately linked with the American economy.

“It’s in the backdrop (the sub prime crisis in the US),” he said. “Our multilateral talks are in the backdrop of seeming slowdown in the global economy because of the US perceived slowdown. And US being one of the major economies does impact – India does not a coupled economy with the US so the sentiments of a global economic slowdown will affect India sentimentally. There will be some impact if US purchasing power contracting takes but it won’t be as much as other countries who are dependent on US markets, who are dependent on US investment flows. India is in a much better position than other countries.”