CPM rips PM's 123 speech, reminds him not to proceed with N-deal

New Delhi

14 August 2007

An unrelenting CPI(M) on Tuesday reiterated that the UPA

Government should not proceed with operationalising the 123 Agreement. The terse

reminder came within hours of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's breakfast meeting with

CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat.

The CPI(M) Politburo said: "The Prime Minister's statement in Parliament does not shed

any new light on the India-US nuclear agreement that calls for a reassessment on our

part. He has reiterated his position on the agreement and has not addressed the issues

that we have raised."

In a point-by-point rebuttal of the Prime Minister Singh's statement on the proposed

India-US civil nuclear cooperation agreement, the Politburo listed certain issues of

divergence between the Left and the UPA and also sought to explain the reasons for the

CPI(M)'s opposition to the nuclear deal.

"One of the more important issues raised by the Left right from the beginning," the party

said, "is the link that the agreement has had on India's foreign policy. Here, the issue is

not what the Prime Minister is saying but what his government is doing."

It referred to joint naval exercises and Iran to state: "It is difficult to agree with the Prime

Minister that this agreement has no impact on our independent foreign policy, especially

when the US officials are busy selling the agreement to the US Congress on the strategic

value of India aligning with the US as a consequence of the agreement."

The party questioned the Prime Minister for saying that the US cooperation with India will

not be subject to an annual certification process. It said: "A simple reading of

Constitutional practice of the US would clarify that this annual certification is an

obligation of the US President, which he is bound to fulfil. That it does not find a place in

the 123 Agreement is not relevant."

It explained: "The issue that we have raised is if a "good conduct certificate" is not

forthcoming or if the US Congress does not accept the good conduct certificate given (on

issues ranging from Iran to anything that may come up in the future) what would be the

implications for the 123 Agreement. In our understanding, the US could terminate the

agreement with all its consequences for our civilian nuclear energy programme."

The CPI(M) disagreed with the Prime Minister that life term security for nuclear fuel has

been achieved in the 123 Agreement. It said that full access to technology for the fuel

cycle will not be available to India either. "The Prime Minister has essentially confirmed

this; the only concession finally secured is forward-looking language," the Politburo

said. It went on to point out that the right to reprocess is only a notional right at present

and subject to conditions that might emerge in the future.

The CPI(M) also saw no basis for the Prime Minister's "continued optimism" of the NSG

changing its guidelines without conditions and dismantling the restrictions on the

transfer of dual use technologies to India. "This is the same belief he had expressed in

Parliament when he had stated that the US would give full access to civilian nuclear

technology, an expectation, which he has now conceded has been belied," it added.

The leader of the CPI(M) in the Rajya Sabha, Mr Sitaram Yechury, said that all

outstanding issues, including a reappraisal of the CPI(M)'s ties with the UPA, would be

discussed threadbare in the Politburo on August 17 and 18. The meeting is also likely to

decide whether to persist with the UPA-Left coordination committee.

Alleged supply of chemicals to Iran: India tells US that sanctions on Indian firms not justified

New Delhi

28 December 2005

Amid the negotiations with the United States on the

civil nuclear deal, India on Wednesday termed as unjustified the reports

about imposition of sanctions by the Bush administration on two Indian

companies for allegedly selling chemical materials to Iran.

The spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs, Mr Navtej Sarna, told

reporters that it was New Delhi's view that the two companies named had

not acted in violation of Indian laws or regulations.

A US media report on Tuesday said that the two Indian chemical

companies -- Sabero Organics Gujarat Limited and Sandhya Organics

Limited -- along with Chinese and Austrian firms will soon be sanctioned

by US President George Bush's administration under the US Iran

Proliferation Act, 2000, for allegedly selling missile goods and chemical

arms materials to Iran.

The spokesman said that the "imposition of sanctions by the US on our

firms, which in our view have not acted in violation of our laws or

regulations, is not jusified." "The Government," he said, "also reiterates

that sactions against Dr YSR Prasad should be removed."

He said the sanctions related to the transfer of some chemicals to Iran.

"Our preliminary assessment is that the transfer of such chemicals is not

in violation of our regulations or our international obligations," he said.

The spokesman observed that the government's commitment to prevent

onward proliferation was second to none and that it has instituted a

rigorous system of export controls. "Our track record in this regard is well

known. India is working with international community including with the

US as a partner against proliferation," he said.

The spokesman said the government has also seen the reports about the

removal of sanctions on Dr C Surendar by the US Government. "The

removal of sanctions on Dr C Surendar vindicates Government's position

on this matter. Since the imposition of sanctions in September 2004,

Government has maintained that this had no justification. Accordingly, we

had urged the US Government to review the issue and withdraw the

sanctions," he said.