Click to play videoNew Delhi: “We will not go back on the nuclear deal with the United States," the message was conveyed sternly by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to the CPI-M, a day after the Left rejected the 123 Agreement. The issue will be debated in the Parliament on Monday.
The PM has ruled out any renegotiation with the US or seeking parliamentary approval for the bilateral civil nuclear cooperation agreement or the 123 Agreement. The Left's key opposition is to India joining an American-led “unequal” global order.
CPI-M leader Prakash Karat has yet again directed the Government not to operationalise the agreement. However one cannot ignore the fact that the Left has traditionally been uncomfortable with anything that is American. So, is the Left’s reaction political posturing or is it sound constructive criticism?
Is it indeed against our national interest to align closely with the United States? Senior Leader, CPI(M) Nilotpal Basu, Professor, JNU R Rajaraman, Senior Journalist Prem Shankar Jha debated that on CNN-IBN Face the Nation
US and them: Should India bother?
India has walked into the US trap, CPI(M) leader Nilotpal Basu said on the show. According to Left, India has given too much to the United States in a poor barter. “The way Nicholas Burns is agreeing for the passage of the 123 text in the US Congress, it is very clear that we have joined the proliferation security initiative,” said Basu.
He said that India is surrendering its independence to a US-led world order by signing the 123 Agreement. “It is against India’s national interest to incline closely with the United States,” he said.
“This nuclear deal is a part of the overall deal that we had in July 2005. In that joint statement there were several aspects, which included economic, political and strategic issues as well. It is gross misreading of the 123 text if we say that the Hyde Act has nothing to do with the overall issues of how Americans are trying to draw us into a lethal embrace,” said Basu.
The proposal to re-negotiate the text has though hardly found any support other than from the Left quarters. The PMO sources told CNN-IBN that renegotiation is unlikely since the Cabinet Committee of Security and the Cabinet Committee of Political Affairs has already given its clearance to the text.
LEFT OBJECTIONS | |
 | Foreign policy prescriptions of the Hyde Act remain valid, for example, isolating and sanctioning Iran |
| Non-compliance can become a cause for terminating 123 |
| Full civilian nuclear co-operation assurance of the Prime Minister not upheld |
| It denies "cooperation or access in any form whatsoever" to fuel enrichment, reprocessing and heavy-water production technologies. |
| Left is worried that the fuel supply assurances may not hold. "Whether fuel supply will continue even after the cessation or termination of the agreement solely depends on the US Congress" |
| Hyde Act requires US to act with NSG to terminate all future supplies |
| India will be deprived of advanced nuclear or dual use technology |
But the Left is equally determined to have its way. CPI(M) says, what was promised by the Prime Minister prior to the Agreement has not been delivered.
“If you look at the 9-point assurance given by the PM in the Parliament, he talks about full Nuclear cooperation. There were several areas where he said there would be no technology transfers. But that has not come out in the 123 Agreement,” said Basu.
CPI-(M) general secretary Sitaram Yechury on Wednesday said that India is surrendering its freedom to test a nuclear device, for what is a very marginal gain on the energy front.
What really “worries” the CPI-M, he said is that “India will become an American stooge” and be forced to go along with international issues like Iran's controversial nuclear programme, post the Agreement.
Karat argues that despite skilful drafting, the 123 Agreement must be seen in the context of the Hyde Act – an American law passed last December.
Spent fuel reprocessing is not allowed under the Hyde Act although it is allowed in the 1-2-3 Agreement. The Hyde Act says India's nuclear weapons inventory must not go beyond current levels. But the 1-2-3 makes no reference to the nuclear weapons.
The Act says all future Indian reactors including Fast Breeders will come under safeguards. But this is also not there in the 1-2-3.
While many amongst the scientist and strategic community say the Left is missing the wood for the trees, others find merit in their argument.
Details of the Indo US Nuclear Deal | |
| According to information on the MEA, the Nuclear Agreement will be valid for a period of 40 years. This can subsequently be extended for 10 year periods. |
| India's military nuclear facilities will not be bound by this deal |
| There is also no mention of nuclear testing on the 123 Agreement. And in case India tests, the US will take into account the changed security environment. |
| The Americans will help India develop a strategic fuel reserve, and would give special priority to fuel supplies to ensure uninterrupted operations of Indian reactors. |
| The US will also help India get clearance from the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and negotiate permanent safeguards with IAEA |
“India is going to have a Naval exercise in September. We are confirming to America’s strategic gameplan in the Asian region. It’s very clear,” said Nilotpal Basu.
“History will absolve us. We had opposed sending Indian troops to Iraq. Now again it’s a crucial issue and we are raising our concerns,” he concluded.
India bending to US rules?
JNU Professor and scientist R Rajaraman denied to any discrepancy in the deal. “There is no problem with the agreement,” he told CNN-IBN.
Rajaraman said that the Left is adopting double standards on the whole issue. “What’s problematic for the Left is the closeness that India will now have with United States,” said Senior Journalist Prem Shankar Jha.
Describing Left’s allegations as “political posturing” Jha said, “This is anti-US knee jerk reaction that the Left is showing.” He also denied that there is anything dubious about the 123 Agreement.
Clarifying why India will conduct a Naval exercise in September, Jha said, “The Naval exercises has been going on for many years. I think Nilotpal Basu is misreading the Hyde Act and the way it’s applied.”
The 123 Agreement will remain in force for 40 years but Article 14.1 gives the U.S. the right to terminate the agreement "on one year's written notice." But the agreement also says that the US will have to provide the reasons for seeking this termination.
Article 14.2 says that before the agreement is terminated, the US and India "shall consider the relevant circumstances and hold consultations based on the recognition that both are States with advanced nuclear technology
Under the 123 Agreement, India has neither given up its right to test nor agreed to sign the CTBT, which prohibits all nuclear testing. India reserves the right to test if other countries do the same. The US also promises to "create conditions" for India's "assured and full access" to the international fuel market.
Coming out in support of the PMs stand to not resort to any kinds of renegotiation on the N-deal, Jha said, “Anybody who did not distrust America today would have to have his head examined. But having said that, I want to say that the 123 Agreement is not with the Bush administration or the Republicans. It’s an agreement with the United States of America.”
Final Result: Is it indeed against our national interest to align closely with the US?
53 per cent said ‘Yes’.
47 per cent said ‘No’.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
More on IBNLive Right Now
TOP NEWS
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
