ONE … JULY 2006 JOINT STATEMENT
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visits the US on July 18-20, 2005. In a joint statement President Bush declared, "As a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states." This is a path-breaking declaration. It ends 30 + years of “nuclear apartheid” of India.
"In sum, the Manmohan-Bush nuclear deal is to be understood as a constructive …." – an endorsement by The Hindu editorial on July 22, 2005.
TWO ... MARCH 2006 SEPARATION PLAN
President Bush visits New Delhi on March 1, 2006 in the midst of anxiety and high expectation regarding the civil nuclear cooperation. Bush agrees to allow India to keep 8 out of its 22 reactors outside the IAEA inspection regime. According to the plan, 14 civilian nuclear reactors will come under IAEA safeguards and will be allowed to access advanced technologies and much needed nuclear fuel from the US and other nuclear suppliers. The 8 military nuclear reactors outside IAEA supervision will not receive outside assistance.
THREE … HYDE ACT and 123 AGREEMENT
The United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 (also known as Hyde Act) was passed and signed into law by President Bush on 18th December, 2006. This law is India specific and allows the US Government to do business in nuclear commerce with a country that is not among the five nuclear powers or a signatory of the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty). The opposition parties and many retired nuclear scientists in India raise serious objections to the Hyde Act. The big issues of concern are the potential adverse impact of the act on indigenous fast breeder research, reprocessing of nuclear fuel, right of return of fuel and technology, safeguards in perpetuity, future testing of nuclear device, and India's independent foreign policy. Setting the oppositions’ apprehensions to rest, PM assures the nation by declaring in the Rajya Sabha that no foreign legislation would be allowed to take away the country’s sovereign right to make its own decisions.
Indian team headed by National Security Advisor, M K Narayanan drives a hard bargain with the US team and finalizes the 123 agreement. The bilateral pact between the US and other countries on nuclear cooperation is known as 123 Agreement (based on the section 123 of a previous US law). Indian team extracts maximum out in India's favor. In spite of a few restrictive clauses of Hyde Act, the 123 agreement is made consistent with the assurances PM made in the parliament.
GO ... INDIAN CABINET APPROVES 123 AGREEMENT
Atomic Energy Commission’s chairman Anil Kakodkar finds the agreement satisfactory. The cabinet reviews and approves the agreement. The PM meets the alliance partners and opposition leaders and apprises them on the agreement. The opposition does not raise any serious objection to the deal at first. Most of the commentators (even those who were antagonistic to the deal) seem to agree all Indian concerns had been addressed satisfactorily.
“A sound and honourable 123.” – declares the Hindu editorial on August 6, 2007.
A poll among the urban Indians shows that the supporters of the Indo-US deal outnumber the opponents by 3 to 1.
STOP? … LEFT PARTNERS SINGAL END OF HONEYMOON
However, the Left Front, key supporters of the UPA government, is ideologically opposed to any strategic relationship with the US. The left leaders scrutinize the text of the123 agreement intensely for days, and fail to find anything objectionable. They say 123 agreement is not the problem. The Hyde Act is the problem. This act mandates that Washington halt nuclear cooperation if India tests a nuclear weapon. The Left leaders do not like that even though they have vehemently opposed the nuclear tests in 1998 by the previous BJP Government. Also, the Hyde Act has a non-binding requirement that India actively participate to contain Iran for its pursuit to develop nuclear capabilities. The Left Front which does not support India to have nuclear weapons, want India to support Iran's nuclear ambitions. For the India's Left, it is partly ideological and partly vote bank politics. They say it is impossible for them to support an agreement with the US. They advise the Singh's government not to "operationalise" the 123 agreement.
“Put the nuclear deal on hold” – the Hindu editorial changes its tune on August 20, 2007.
NOT! … LEFT DOES NOT WANT MARRIAGE TO END
The Prime Minister Singh mounts a strong defense of the civilian nuclear energy deal with the US, saying it was crucial for the country's prosperity. “When we aim for a 10 per cent growth rate, we must recognize the critical importance of energy security. India’s energy needs, which will grow with the pace of economic development, cannot be met with oil and gas for long.”
Dr. Singh in an interview with Calcutta based newspaper dares the left allies to withdraw their support for the ruling Congress-led coalition if they are unhappy with a landmark Indo-US civilian nuclear deal - "I (have) told them to do whatever they want to do, if they want to withdraw support (for the Congress coalition government), so be it."
CPI’s Bardhan responds to PM’s dare by declaring that the "honeymoon (between UPA and Left) is over" and the Left would not hesitate to "file divorce papers" if it comes to that. But the enlightened (Prakash) Karat of CPM jumps quickly to say, “The honeymoon period may be over but the marriage will continue." The BJP chides the Left Front, “STOP BARKING… START BITING” and invites them to pull down the UPA Government. The Left goes into another politburo meeting.
PAUSE … GO TO VIENNA, BUT DO NOT NEGOTIATE
After the Politburo meeting, the Left Front leaders advise the government to send Anil Kakodkar to the IAEA meeting in Vienna, but not to negotiate the deal. They say, “All we are asking from the government is to press the pause button on the deal and properly evaluate all the implications and objections before proceeding further,” a senior CPI(M) leader said.
This is a typical prescription of India’s communists. That is what Jyothi Basu did in West Bengal. He pressed the pause button for 20+ years. Budhadeb Bhattacharya is struggling hard to take this historical heavy weight off the pause button for West Bengal to move forward, but is having tremendous hurdles.
India’s Left Front which got 11% of popular vote in the last national elections and has 61 MPs in the current Lok Sabha is enjoying disproportionate and unprecedented power, and using it to “pause” India’s progress.
The right wing BJP, instead of taking pride in the fact that the process they started on the civilian nuclear deal with the US has come to fruition, is focused on a narrow political game of dislodging the alliance between the left and the Congress to force untimely elections. It does not matter to them that their party is not organizationally ready for elections. The UPNA, formed recently by the three defeated (ex-) chief ministers (Mulayam Singh Yadav, Chandrababu Naidu and Jayalalitha) is clueless about the civil nuclear agreement. They just want to extricate their leftist friends from the Congress to (re-)form the old Third Front and fight the next elections sooner. Only three years ago, The BJP and some UPNA constituents were most friendly to the US. Their opposition to the civilian nuclear deal is phony.
What the critics of the civilian nuclear deal should understand is that the Congress Government of Indira Gandhi conducted a “peaceful nuclear explosion” in 1974 which lead to India’s isolation. The declaration of “de facto nuclear power status” by the Vajpayee Governmemt’s nuclear tests in 1998 lead President Clinton to “come down like a tone of bricks” on India. India came under more stringent sanctions. Also, the bloating pronouncements of George Fernandes that these nuclear tests were conducted to counter China quickly lost steam by Pakistan’s tit-for-tat tests. Thus India was effectively tied down at the bottom of the ladder along with Pakistan much below China strategically. The current civilian nuclear deal with the US and forthcoming negotiations with Nuclear Suppliers Group offer India the first real opportunity to dislodge itself from the current precarious position and move closer to be a declared nuclear power. Dr. Singh’s Government achieved this longstanding goal without exploding a device. And George Bush, “the US president friendliest to India” actively helped India to achieve the status.
Hopefully, the Indian communists do not commit another historical “red” blunder like they did in 1942 and 1962, and support India’s national interest by not forcing the government to “press the pause button”.
posted by Govinda Bhisetti @ 9:55 PM
5 Comments:
Bengal Reds forced CPM to ease stand
New Delhi, Nov. 21: The West Bengal leadership has prevailed upon the CPI(M) politburo to give the government a “long rope” on the civil nuclear energy agreement with the United States and not to take any steps that could precipitate an early general election. Sources said that West Bengal chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee and other ministers in his government have insisted that the Left should allow the Union government to go to the International Atomic Energy Agency so that elections are delayed, and it can weather the Nandigram aftermath and go through the May 2008 panchayat elections in the state with reasonable equanimity.
Informed sources told this newspaper that some of the West Bengal leaders, who had been identified by the government as the “weak link” in the Left resistance to the nuclear deal, have succeeded in getting more time with the assurance that they would not oppose the final decision to pull out support, but that should be only when no other option remains available. It is for this reason that the other Left parties were recently compelled by the CPI(M) to accept its decision to allow the government to approach the IAEA on the condition that it would bring the results of the ongoing negotiations back to the UPA-Left joint committee for clearance.
The talks for a India-specific safeguards agreement with the IAEA began in Vienna on Wednesday. The Left Front meeting held before the UPA-Left joint committee meeting on November 16 saw some fireworks as several leaders objected to the CPI(M)’s decision to allow the government to go to the IAEA. It was pointed out that the IAEA, which is a multilateral UN body, was being approached by India as a nation and it would be difficult for the government to walk out of any agreement concluded after discussion.
Deccan Chronicle News
Nuclear Society chief backs nuke deal
Rodriguez says deal will pave the way for lifting sanctions against country
‘Reasons cited by opponents of deal misleading’
‘Multiple players needed in nuclear sector’
Read full story at http://www.hindu.com/2007/11/22/stories/2007112253880400.htm
Sense of the House nonsense by BJP and the Left
All were passionate about a debate on the n-deal in parliament but when it happened:
•Advani left House after his speech only to come back towards the end of debate and to stage a walkout minutes later.
•Left’s strength in the House varied from 20 to 30 members — one-third to half of its strength.
•At 3.50 pm, 13 of the 22 NDA Benches were unoccupied,five Benches had just one member each.
•Two hours later, six of 11 BJP Benches empty, seven leaders occupied the remaining five benches.
•Several Congress MPs also did not show up, Sonia Gandhi and Pranab Mukherjee present most of the time. PM sat through the debate except for a half-hour absence.
•At one point in debate, there were only 66 members in the entire House.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/244647.html
PARLIAMENT APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED FOR N-DEAL: SUPREME COURT
The Indian Express
Posted online: Friday, January 25, 2008 at 1645 hrs IST
New Delhi, January 25:
The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL seeking to restrain the government from going ahead with the Indo-US civil nuclear deal without legislative approval, saying the Constitution did not debar it from signing a treaty without Parliament's nod.
"There is nothing in the Constitution which prevents the government from signing a treaty (without approval of Parliament)," a Bench headed by the Chief Justice said.
The Bench was hearing a PIL filed by a Bangluru-based lawyer, M Ravi Prakash, who contended that the Centre could not enter into an agreement or a treaty with a foreign state without getting the nod from Parliament.
"The treaty-making power and foreign affairs power is exclusively within the domain of the Parliament, therefore legislation is required before the proposed agreement for nuclear co-operation with US which infringes on the sovereignty of the nation," he said.
The Bench, however, was not satisfied with his contention and asked him to show a provision of law which said that Parliament's approval was mandatory for such agreement.
"Hundreds of treaties are being signed by the government. Is there any provision which prevents the government from entering into it," the Bench said.
"In all treaties like WTO, GATT or others you surrender some rights and gain some rights," the Bench observed when the advocate said that after this agreement the country would lose its power to conduct nuclear test which would have serious implication on the security of the nation.
The SC earlier had dismissed two similar petitions which had sought to restrain the government from going ahead with the Indo-US civil nuclear deal on the ground that these were ‘policy matters’ and it could not examine them.
Congratulations Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Bush for transforming the relationship between the largest and the oldest democracies!
With 86-13 overwhelming majority in the senate and 298-117 vote in the house, the agreement that was conceived 3 years ago will become the US law with the expected signature of President Bush
It is interesting that all 13 of Nay-sayers in the senate are democrats (which is supposed to be India friendly party). Senator Byron Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, called the deal a “grievous mistake”. He and Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, tried to amend the agreement to explicitly require the United States to cut off nuclear trade if India conducted a new nuclear test. However, the amendment was defeated.
All the 49 republican senators voted Yes to approve the deal. Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said in the Senate debate that “The national security and economic future of the United States will be enhanced by a strong and enduring partnership with India... With a well-educated overall middle class that is larger than the entire United States population, India can be an anchor of stability in Asia and an engine of economic growth.”
Post a Comment
<< Home