Click to play videoAre there differences within the BJP over the 123 Agreement? Or is there confusion in BJP leader LK Advani's own position on the Indo-US nuclear deal. Those were the two issues Karan Thapar explored in an interview with Yashwant Sinha on Devil’s Advocate.
Karan Thapar: Mr Sinha, let me start with a simple question. Are senior leaders of the BJP saying different things on the 123 Agreement?
Yashwant Sinha: Not at all. Unfortunately what has happened is that on the Indo-US nuclear deal, not only is the country divided, but also the media. So, a section of the media campaigning for the deal is hanging by every straw they can find to create confusion.
Karan Thapar: You are such an outward politician. You are blaming the media and doing it with a smile.
Yashwant Sinha: No that's not true.
Karan Thapar: Speaking to the Indian Express on August 27, L K Advani said, “there is no problem with the 123 Agreement.” And he has never denied saying that he hasn't detracted from those words.
Speaking to India Today in the same week, you said 123 Agreement is a bad deal for India, and that the deal with the US must be scrapped. That's a wide difference between of you.
Yashwant Sinha: If you read what precedes this particular quote of Mr Advani you will find that he asked, "If we were to amend the Atomic Energy Act of India, will that take care of the objections that we have?"
And this was the suggestion made by him that we should look at it from his point of view. Let me make it very clear that only a selective part has been smuggled by you without the background.
Karan Thapar: I let you on purpose say this. It's only fair that you should put your side of the story. Actually, if you look at the sentence that precedes the quotation, this is what it says: "There is no problem with the 123 Agreement. Our opposition is to the Hyde Act."
Now let me quote to you what the BJP's official position articulated on August 4 in a press release. That press release says that the BJP is of the clear view that this agreement is an assault on our nuclear sovereignty and our foreign policy options.
We are therefore unable to accept this agreement. But what does Mr Advani say? He says, "There is no problem with the 123 Agreement."
Now isn't he just contradicting you, but also his party?
Yashwant Sinha: That is the point I'm making. What you are reading is only one part of it. Suppose he said that we should amend our laws and then see whether the objections to the 123 Agreement could be taken care of. And in that context he said, 'we will have no objection to the 123 Agreement.'
Karan Thapar: It's interesting that you claim he has been quoted either out of context or that half the quotations have been used.
In the statement that Mr Advani put out, he neither said he hadn't said these things nor did he say he was quoted out of context. Nor did he say his words were twisted. In fact he hasn't said anything to contradict what he said to The Indian Express.
Yashwant Sinha: What has he said? Finally if you are looking at his statements, he has said that the 123 Agreement should be renegotiated.
Karan Thapar: That's the point that I'm making. Not only has Mr Advani contradicted the August 4 position of the BJP, but now he has ended up contradicting himself.
On Monday as I quoted to you, he said to the Indian Express, “There is no problem with the 123 Agreement.” Later in a statement issued on Thursday he said, “We should renegotiate the 123 Agreement.” He has flip-flopped, contradicted himself and confused the issue.
Yashwant Sinha: I'm sorry but I don't agree with you. This is absolutely a wrong interpretation of what Mr Advani said. You are reading just one twisted sentence of what Mr Advani might have said. But not reading the whole text of the interview.
Advani said, “It puts India under strategic subservience.” He said it's based on inequality and anybody would say, after saying all this, that ‘I have no objection to the 123 Agreement.'
Karan Thapar: Advani said all of that about the Hyde Act. He distinguished between the Hyde Act and the 123 Agreement. And said that on 123, we have no problem.
Yashwant Sinha: But when he said, "it is an unequal treaty" what was he referring to?
Karan Thapar: He didn't say it's an unequal treaty.
Yashwant Sinha: He said that. You read it.
Karan Thapar: He didn't. In fact Mohan Bhagwat, the General Secretary of the RSS had run up to L K Advani and appreciated the change. Bhagwat clarified that firstly Advani attempted to change the BJP's position – contradicting you and the statement made on August 4 by the BJP. Secondly, Bhagwat appreciated and applauded the change. And then what does Advani do? He goes back on the change and contradicts himself. Not only has Mr Advani contradicted you and the party but he has contradicted himself.
Yashwant Sinha: Have you spoken to Mr Mohan Bhagwat? Nobody has the time to go on and deny things like that.
Karan Thapar:For something as important as the nuclear deal?
Yashwant Sinha: Mr Thapar, going by this way, it might become a full-time job for all the politicians to clarify what you people say and write.
Karan Thapar:Do you know the consequences of what you are suggesting? You are allowing the confusion to continue, the leader of the Opposition party appears as contradicting the party and himself. By saying that Bhagwat is not denying anything, you are just letting the confusion prevail.
Yashwant Sinha: That's absolutely immaterial. In the surcharge atmosphere of the country on the Indo-US nuclear deal, everyone has been adding chips to his own case. This is very unfortunate. This is not how it should be.
Karan Thapar:It is very interesting for you to use the phrase 'everybody is trying to add chips to his own case.' Actually the problem is: Mr Advani has added chips to the Left's case. Because his new position saying that the '123 should be renegotiated' is identical to the Left's. Far from differentiating the BJP from the Left, he has in fact collapsed the BJP opinion with the Left. He has adopted the Left's position.
Yashwant Sinha: I don't agree with that at all.
Karan Thapar:Isn't it the identical position taken by the Left?
Yashwant Sinha: Let me tell you this. When we had a debate on the nuclear deal last year in Rajya Sabha, soon after the Prime Minister gave his reply, Sitaram Yechury got up and said, “Whatever the Prime Minster has said, represents the sense of the House." To this, I immediately got up and contradicted. I said that this does not represent the sense of the House.
Karan Thapar: You may have contradicted Yechury but not L K Advani. He is today speaking Sitaram Yechury's language.
Yashwant Sinha: He is not. BJP put out its statement first and that was on August 4. The Left came out with its statement many days later.
Karan Thapar: And who contradicted the August 4 statement? It was LK Advani. Who then failed to clarify? Again it was L K Advani.
Let me pause and understand then what L K Advani is suggesting when he says that amendments need to be considered in India's Atomic Energy Act. What specific amendments does he have in mind?
Yashwant Sinha: A suggestion was made to him that may be we can take care of our concerns (on the nuclear deal) by amending the Atomic Energy Act, and then those amendments could be examined. There could be at least 10-12 amendments.
Karan Thapar:But what are these amendments?
Yashwant Sinha: Let me give one or two of them. Suppose we were to say in our Atomic Energy Act that India has the sovereign right to conduct tests in its supreme national interest.
Karan Thapar:But you don't have to say that. India does have the right to do so. You don't have to put it in an Act to give ourselves a right.
Yashwant Sinha: Not after the 1954 Act of the US and the Hyde Act.
Karan Thapar:This is really strange. You can't give yourself a sovereign right by putting it in the Parliamentary Bill. That right is there, regardless of the Parliamentary Bill. It's as if you are suggesting without legislation you don't have a sovereign right.
Yashwant Sinha: If another country's legislation is denying you a right, then you can assert it by incorporating it. The second thing is, you could say it in that amendment that once we have received supplies of nuclear material from a country, it will not be returned.
Karan Thapar:This is a position that Siddharth Varadarajan took in The Hindu on August 20. Are you talking about those amendments?
Yashwant Sinha: There could be many amendments.
Karan Thapar: Are these amendments – the ones you are now bringing up –your own or are they amendments that Mr Advani had in mind? Because the interesting thing is Advani having suggested amendments would help, but didn't tell us what these amendments were. He left that vague and in fact unsaid.
Yashwant Sinha: He left it unsaid because the suggestions that he had received needed further examination.
Karan Thapar:But then why did he go public, if these needed examination. It's a half formed idea which he is presenting as a fully formed solution, isn't it?
Yashwant Sinha: It's not a half formed idea and not a fully formed solution. A suggestion was made to him, like you just said. The suggestion was written about in The Hindu. He looked at the suggestion and said, 'could we examine this solution also?' And we are to examine it. So where is the problem?
Karan Thapar: There is no problem, except for the fact that it's not what he said the first time around. In his amended statement (Thursday one) he moderated what he said, "let's examine a suggestion." To express what he said, was that in fact "if amendments are made," without specifying what they were, "we will have no problem."
He shifted from a certain and definite position to a tentative and exploratory position. Once again, even on this little issue, he has changed his position, flip-flopped and apparently contradicted himself.
Yashwant Sinha: He has not. You are trying to convince me that he has contradicted himself. And I am not convinced at all. Let's live with this difference.
Karan Thapar: In the Asian Age on July 30, you said, "The Indo-US nuclear deal is neither good for us, nor for our future relationship with the US." Does the leader of the Opposition agree with this?
Yashwant Sinha: I don't know. Mr Advani must have seen that article but I have not particularly discussed this with him because what I wrote in the Asian Age was my view.
Karan Thapar:But does the party agree with the view?
Yashwant Sinha: I have not really gone around asking the party whether they agree with this view or not. We write in our personal capacity. And I too wrote that piece in my personal capacity. I expressed what I felt.
Karan Thapar: Couple of days before you wrote that piece, in an interview to India Abroad News Service you said, “If we return to power, we will reconsider the deal." Does L K Advani, as the leader of the Opposition and your possible future Prime Minister, agree with that position?
Yashwant Sinha: We had already discussed this matter and had agreed that if the deal were to go through in its present form, which we decided was unacceptable, then what flows from it logically is that we will reconsider and renegotiate.
Karan Thapar: Who is 'we' here that you are referring to?
Yashwant Sinha: We is the senior-most leadership of the BJP including LK Advani which considers our responses to a developing situation.
Karan Thapar: So are you telling me that LK Advani is party to a decision? That you will reconsider the deal if you come to power particularly if it goes through in its present form?
Yashwant Sinha: Absolutely.
Karan Thapar: And does L K Advani support this position?
Yashwant Sinha: Discussing L K Advani's statement a little while ago, I told you that believe the sentence where he says, "renegotiate". Then if the present government were not to renegotiate, we will do it.
Karan Thapar: To be honest, it seems you are adding two and two and coming to a four. While he hasn't said it, you are saying that it is an implication that logically flows from the position he has taken on other issues. And the fact that he was a part of the leadership that found the deal unacceptable. You are interpreting it.
Yashwant Sinha: No, what I am saying is absolutely correct. There is no other way of looking at it.
Karan Thapar: Let’s look at your specific concerns with the 123 Agreement. In the press release put out by you on August 4 you said "India had not got a clear cut assurance on lifetime supplies of nuclear fuel" and that it hadn't got access to nuclear technology. Tell me, how will amending the laws tackle this problem?
Yashwant Sinha: As I mentioned to you, the right to reprocess for instance has been postponed and all kinds of conditions have been attached to it (by the deal).
Karan Thapar: But Mr Sinha we may claim whatever rights and may pass it into bills in our Parliament but that doesn't mean that the world outside is going to give us all those rights. So, if you haven't got these two important things in the 123, changing India's laws is not going to give them to you either.
Yashwant Sinha: Changing India's laws is going to ensure that the 123 Agreement will be renegotiated in the light of the changes in our law.
Karan Thapar: Speaking to the CNBC on August 20, you said, "123 raises the bar making it very difficult for us to go for any test in the future, if in case such a test becomes necessary." Once again, how will amending India's laws change this?
Yashwant Sinha: What I meant was that if you have made a billion dollar investment and you are going to depend for the fuel supplies on foreign countries, what will happen if they stop the fuel supplies as a result of our testing?
Karan Thapar: Quite right, but how will changing India's laws bring the cost down?
Yashwant Sinha:Changing India's laws will make it clear to the world that they are negotiating on terms which we have clearly spelt out in our laws. For instance, let me say that we receive supplies of nuclear reactor from any country in the world. We will say, ‘You undertake to give us a guarantee to this commercial agreement that you will assure us fuel supplies for the lifetime of the reactor.’
Karan Thapar: Once again you are quoting an amendment written about by Siddharth Vardarajan in The Hindu.
Very interesting that two of the amendments that you are suggesting, that could strengthen India's position vis-à-vis the Hyde Act, are in fact amendments suggested by Siddharth Vardarajan in The Hindu. A man who is palpably on the left side of the divide.
Once again I come back to the point I made earlier, by going down this particular road you are collapsing your opposition in the Left's position.
Sidharth Vardarajan has advocated it, Sitaram Yechury has said he believes there is a lot of merit in it. The Business Standard says that the CPI is considering the same thing. And now what do I find? The BJP is in an agreement with exactly the same set of policies.
Yashwant Sinha:So what is the harm in that?
Karan Thapar: No harm except that you are not distinguishing yourself from the Left.
Yashwant Sinha:No, we are distinguishing ourselves from the Left, let me make it clear. What we are saying is in our national interest and not borne out of anti-America sentiments.
Karan Thapar: Left says, what they are saying is in the national interest too. They deny being anti-American. That's a label you are sticking on them. Not that they want to accept it.
Yashwant Sinha: No it’s not like that. Unlike them, we are not opposed to the naval exercises.
Karan Thapar: Let me come to your specific concerns on the 123 Agreement. Speaking to CNBC on August 20, you said, "The Hyde Act has many prescript positions which we regard as humiliating for India. No independent sovereign country should ever accept these kinds of conditionalities."
How will amending India's laws take care of this?
Yashwant Sinha: It will take care in the sense that we will never escort an agreement that flows into the Hyde Act. The Hyde Act is US Domestic Law.
Karan Thapar: But don't you see the problem that you are creating? Mr Advani is now advocating amendments and it has become the position of the party after the clarification put out on Thursday that amendments to India's laws will take care of the problems that we have. I am saying that the problems you are facing cannot be tackled. Either Mr Advani doesn't share your concerns or he is advocating a solution which doesn't take care of that.
Yashwant Sinha: Let me make it very clear. You are harping repeatedly, going back to what Mr Advani had said.
Karan Thapar: Because that is where the confusion is.
Yashwant Sinha: No that's not where the confusion is. Let me explain once again. Mr Advani said this is a suggestion worth examining. Now we will examine it. If we find that the objections to it are valid, then we need not take that suggestion.
Karan Thapar: So this is not the party's position. This is an interim half measure that is yet to be examined. If you found it invalid, you will jettison it.
Yashwant Sinha: Karan if you are determined to project BJP in a bad light...
Karan Thapar: I am not projecting BJP in a bad light.
Yashwant Sinha: Again and again you are coming back to the same issue that there is confusion in the BJP. I am saying that there is no confusion in the BJP.
Sidharth Vardarajan made a similar suggestion in The Hindu. Nobody is finding fault with him. But if Advaniji says the same thing, you are ready to rip him apart and rip BJP apart and say this is what it means. No, it is only a suggestion, let's examine it. If it works fine or if it doesn't, we will give it up.
Karan Thapar: I only say that it would have been right if you were in a position to defend your party's position and the leader of the Opposition. Of course the viewer will decide whether the questioning was correct or the answer. Let me come to a last point.
Many people say that both the BJP and the Opposition have created a mess in the position on the 123. They have contradicted each other with Advani contradicting the party and himself. In a situation where you could have scored points against the Government, separated the Government from the Left and embarrassed both, what you have done is embarrassed and divided yourself.
Yashwant Sinha: I don't agree with that at all. I don't think that it's anybody's conclusion except your own. And I don't think that your viewers are going to agree with that either.
I will repeat once again. Mr Advani was totally misinterpreted. All that he said was completely ignored and just a few words were picked up. And now you are trying to create confusion around those few words by saying that we are in confusion. We are in no confusion.
Karan Thapar: The only problem with that articulate defense is that Mr Advani hasn't made it. You are making it for him. He hasn't said it himself. He could have said it. His defense is just a clever silence.
Yashwant Sinha: Mr Thapar please go and interview Mr Advani. Give him a chance to say what he wants to say. I will defend Mr Advani as I understand him.
Karan Thapar: Mr Sinha, a pleasure talking to you on Devil's Advocate.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
More on IBNLive Right Now
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
