But the manner in which the Left carps at the governance or makes an issue of every economic step the government contemplates or takes gives the impression that the arrangement faces a perennial danger. The Left too suffers in the process because the ruling United Progress Alliance (UPA), of which it is a member, lessens in stock. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) in the opposition is banking on the differences to grow.

The coordination committee, constituted under the chairmanship of Congress president Sonia Gandhi, is the forum to discuss the lapses in the Common Minimum Programme (CMP) which they jointly prepared. But the apparatus doesn't seem to be working properly. When a Left leader says publicly that they can also "bite" it only exposes the UPA to ridicule.

In fact, the Left should have joined the government. It was offered the Deputy Prime Ministership and 10 ministries. By rejecting such an arrangement, the communists committed their second historical mistake. The first one was when the name of Jyoti Basu was proposed for the Prime Ministership before the choice fell on Deve Gowda eight years ago. The communists, with the exception of Basu and comrade Harkishan Singh Surjeet, were against joining any government until they had a majority of their own in the 543-member Lok Sabha. They put forward the same argument this time.

But this does not look like happening although the Left has increased its strength in the Lok Sabha from 50 to 62, the highest since India's independence. However, differences between the communists and the Congress are not new. They have been fighting over the economic policies for the last 40 years. The scene was relatively quiet during the Jawaharlal Nehru rule (1947-64) because his socialistic pattern fitted into the communist philosophy of public sector's pre-eminence.

Things have changed since. So much so, Finance Minister P Chidambaram has said publicly that Nehru's policies are "responsible for the country's poverty." How far he alone is to blame is a matter of discussion. But if the taste of the pudding is in its eating, India's growth rate till the beginning of the 90s has averaged 3.5 per cent which the late leading economist Raj Krishna describes as the "Hindu growth rate."

Seeing the prospect of large foreign investment in the country, the Manmohan Singh government wants to open up many sectors. There is also resentment in the Congress that good money is being thrown on bad public sector undertakings. The Left is sensitive on this point. It feels that their closure will throw thousands of workers in the market which is already inundated with the unemployed. The determining factor should be progress. If the losing projects have shown no improvement in the last six months, they should be closed. This point should be hammered out at the coordination committee. On the other hand, the Left should keep in mind that the continuous loss of public sector undertakings might force the exchequer to withhold funds from the social sectors like health and education.

The Left is, however, justified in its complaint that the Manmohan Singh government does not consult it. Things have improved a bit after the Prime Minister's personal intervention. But there seems to be a lot of backbiting to spoil the atmosphere. Also, the functioning of the cabinet system leaves little room for prior discussion when a decision is taken contrary to a ministry's note. Still, I do not recall any decision which has gone against the basic structure of the CMP. Too much hair splitting is not desirable. What the Left should ensure is that the decision taken is within the precincts of the CMP.

For example, I did not see any harm in associating foreign experts, whether from the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank, for assessing the gains accrued from the past 50 years of planning. This would have ensured "transparency" as Planning Commission's Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia said. Maybe, we do not see the wood for the trees. We need not accept the suggestions by outside experts -- not a single one -- but we should at least know why the 10 Five-year Plans have not broken the back of poverty and unemployment.

The Chinese, on the other hand, have reportedly invited foreigners to head some of their segments of economic development to know how the pace of progress can be accelerated. An ideology that wilts at the touch of a foreigner is dogmatic in character. The yardstick should be the gain which accrues. In that sense, the CPI (M) government at Kolkata is more pragmatic because it is interested in the foreigners' expertise, not their domicile.

I saw Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri, with whom I worked as press secretary, proposing a plan holiday for taking stock of the situation. He did not invite outsiders for assessment but halted the plan for one year to find out where the country was going. Perhaps there is something in the allegation that India is a soft state and cannot take hard decisions. Are we afraid that outside assessors may suggest something which we may find difficult to implement?

Ideological differences of the left are understandable. But when they are aired every third day, they make the performance of the Manmohan Singh government look still more ordinary. The Left's disappointment over the non-performance of the government is understandable. But the communists' first task should have been to expose the BJP's anti-democratic methods.

Take the campaign against tainted ministers. True, it was a mistake on the part of the Prime Minister to induct Laloo Prasad Yadav and his Rashtriya Janata Dal members into the cabinet. But the Prime Minister was under compulsion and explained the dictates of the coalition dharma. The support of the 23 RJD members was important for the formation of the government because that gave him the crucial numbers for a majority. I think that the communists would help him if they were to prevail upon Yadav to drop at least his tainted party colleagues until the cases against them were cleared.

A few days ago, the NDA paid a compliment to the UPA for ironing out differences through talks. Still more needs to be done. The Left tends to go to the media first and the coordination committee later. On the other hand, the Congress should keep in mind that the globalisation as such does not sell with the Left or, for that matter, with most of the country's population.

Now that the NDA has closed its ranks on Hindutva and allowed the BJP to ventilate its views from its platform, the task of the UPA -- to take the mukut (mask) off the NDA -- will be onerous. The BJP has been told that the NDA members will not object to its preaching communal hatred and frenzy so long as it does this form its own forums. At the NDA pulpit it should look pure, prim, and proper. Ambition can, indeed, make political parties combine even fire with water.

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.