Pragati February 2008: What Kautilya would say

Issue 11 - Feb 2008

Issue Contents

PERSPECTIVE

Common interests Rory Medcalf
Closer Australia-India relations need greater political will

A disarming argument Nitin Pai
Non-proliferation isn’t working too well. Will disarmament fare better?

Beyond marking time R Hariharan
The problem with India’s Sri Lanka policy is there is no common agreement on it

Letters
On sovereign wealth funds and West Bengal politics

FILTER

African technology goes “brown”; Leaky Bottom; The new Big Three?; There is a story in the nuances

IN DEPTH

What Kautilya would say Balbir S Sihag
Some aspects of the relevance of the Arthashastra in the contemporary world

ROUNDUP

Getting ahead in the rankings Deepa Vasudevan & Mukul G Asher
Many small things can make a big difference in business friendliness

The Nano opportunity Rohit Pradhan & Pratik Mhatre
Time to address urban transport in a holistic manner

America’s command capitalism V Anantha Nageswaran
…and its economic consequences

BOOKS

Down the Red Corridor Chandrahas Choudhury
A review of Sudeep Chakravarti’s book Red Sun: Travels in Naxalite Country

Read excerpts | Download | Subscribe

02 Feb 2008 | Concerning Economy, Foreign Affairs, Public Policy, Security
Tags: ,

4 Responses

  1. anuj February 3rd, 2008 at 21:35

    nitin – who is the handsome man on the cover?

  2. Invalid February 5th, 2008 at 12:31

    Is acorn affected by undersea cable snaps ?

  3. Rohit February 6th, 2008 at 01:41

    Anuj,

    I suspect that is Mr Pai himself. :)

  4. NotReallyAnonymous February 12th, 2008 at 16:09

    Re “Common Interests By Rory Medcalf”,

    Indo-Australian relations probably need a steroid shot like that given to Indo-US relations by the Jaswant Singh-Strobe Talbott talks. With US fortunes moving towards a low ebb and China moving closer towards India’s land borders, both countries need to ramp their relations up soon.

    Also, Rory Medcalf says India-Australia relations should be made the core of the Look East policy. I dont think thats a good idea. Our Look East policy has mainly been aimed at countering Chinese influence in the region, i.e. SE Asia, whereas our relations with Australia should be based on higher objective(s), most of which were clearly defined by Medcalf in the article. My point is, we should engage Australia, not as part of the Look East programme but as a separate and comprehensive campaign by itself. Australia is big enough to deserve such attention.