New Delhi
6 March 2008
The CPI(M) on Thursday issued an ultimatum to the Congress-led
UPA Government to take a "quick and clear" decision whether it wants to go ahead with
the India-United States nuclear deal and risk destabilising the government or to act
democratically and heed the voice of Parliament.
The CPI(M) also asked the UPA to convene a meeting of the UPA-Left Committee by
March 15. Sources said that CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat has suggested
Minister of External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee to call the meeting before Mr Mukherjee's
proposed visit to the US later this month.
CPI National Secretary D Raja and All India Forward Bloc General Secretary Debabrata
Biswas held talks with Mr Karat on Thursday. The Left parties have warned that if the
UPA Government intends to sign the safeguards agreement with the IAEA, it
will tantamount to signing its "death warrant".
An article appearing in the forthcoming (March 9) issue of People's Democracy, the
CPI(M)'s weekly organ, said: "It is for the Congress leadership to decide whether it wants
to be seen as kowtowing to the pressure of the Bush administration or acting
democratically and heeding the voice of parliament and the people. And this decision
has to be a quick and clear one. The future of this government depends on the decision
they will take."
The ultimatum came barely a day after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Parliament
that he would continue to seek the broadest possible consensus to enable the next steps
to be taken for operationalising the nuclear deal, and three days after Minister of
External Affairs Pranab Mukherjee told Parliament that India will not be bound by the
Hyde Act.
The article, entitled "Nuclear Deal: Turning Point Has Arrived", reminded the UPA
Government of the Left's consistent opposition to the nuclear deal. It read: "If the
government thinks that after arriving at an agreed text with the IAEA (International Atomic
Energy Agency) on a safeguards agreement they can proceed to take the next steps for
operationalising the agreement, they are mistaken."
"It (operationalising the deal) will amount to a gross violation of the majority opinion in
Parliament. The Left parties will take all the necessary steps to stop the government
from taking such a harmful step," it added for good measure.
The article suggested that it has been clearly stated by the Left parties that the
government cannot proceed with the finalisation of the IAEA safeguards agreement and
take the next step to go to the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) given the basic objection
to the Hyde Act and the 123 Agreement.
The CPI(M) recalled the UPA Government's commitment that after the talks with the IAEA
for an India-specific safeguards agreement, the outcome will be reported to the UPA-Left
Committee. After the November 16, 2007 meeting of the committee, the UPA and the Left
had issued a joint statement indicating that all further action would be subject to the
findings of the committee.
"Without these findings, the government will not proceed further with the agreement," the
party has iterated.
"Pure baloney," is how the article described the reports published by a "pro-US media",
which suggested that after five rounds of negotiations with the officials in the IAEA
Secretariat at Vienna in Austria, the Indian side has got a safeguards agreement which
will overcome all the problems posed by the Hyde Act and its "progeny", the 123
Agreement.
"This is, to use an American term, pure baloney! Neither the Hyde Act nor the 123
Agreement grants lifetime fuel supply assurance to safeguarded reactors," the CPI(M)
said.
"At the same time the safeguards are put in perpetuity. It is not within the scope or
jurisdiction of the IAEA to provide any assurance for uninterrupted fuel supply or help
India build a strategic reserve. Neither is it within the powers of the IAEA to spell out
corrective measures that can be taken by India in the event of the termination of the fuel
supply by a party contracted to do so.
"Even a layman can understand that the IAEA is an international regulatory authority and
not a supplier of fuel or nuclear equipment. It is the US which is the supplying party in
the 123 Agreement. And as has been repeatedly stated by the US authorities, they are
bound by the provisions of the Hyde Act. They assert that the provisions of the 123
agreement does not contravene the Hyde Act."
The CPI(M) went on to explain that when the UPA Government insisted that they would
like to go to the IAEA for talks on the safeguards agreement and cover issues such as
uninterrupted fuel supply, build up of a strategic fuel reserve and corrective measures,
the Left parties had made it clear that as far as they are concerned, the problem is not
the safeguards agreement with the IAEA.
"The real problem is the Hyde Act and the bilateral 123 Agreement with the United States.
The Left parties have in the UPA-Left Committee on Nuclear Issue put up five notes which
comprehensively deal with the harmful impact of the Hyde Act on the 123 Agreement,
foreign policy and security related matters," it added.
A visiting United States diplomat on Wednesday told reporters here that India and the US
are "playing in overtime" and they need to take the next steps for operationalising the
nuclear deal without further delay. US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and
Central Asia Richard Boucher said towards the end of his two-day visit to India that the
nuclear deal needed to reach the US Congress for a vote by June. Therefore, working
backwards, the NSG nod should be obtained by end of May. That would mean New Delhi
will have to finalise the IAEA safeguards agreement soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment