People's Democracy

SPOTLIGHT ON INDO-US NUCLEAR DEAL

DUJ-DMRC Seminar Blasts 123 Agreement

Dinesh Chandra

SPEAKERS at a seminar held in the capital on August 11 came down heavily on the 123 agreement, which gives effect to the bilateral civilian nuclear deal with the US. They termed it as prejudicial to the national interests and asserted that it compromises the country’s sovereignty.

Questioning the UPA government’s claim to represent national interests on the issue, they underscored that the majority in the parliament is opposed to the deal. They called for not operationalising the agreement in its present form as it would abridge our freedom to pursue an independent foreign policy.

Setting the tone for the discussion organised jointly by the Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) and the Delhi Media Research Centre (DMRC), foreign policy expert and former diplomat M K Bhadrakumar said: “Let us not be dreamers about being made into a superpower of world class. Let us be a bit more realistic and understand the fluid international situation. We should remember our non-aligned past rather than seek greener pastures for a policy that seeks to divide Asia.”

Bhadrakumar said the 123 agreement amounts to an infringement of national sovereignty despite prime minister Manmohan Singh’s protestations to the contrary. The prime minister’s stand, made in a interview to a newspaper, that since the union cabinet has already approved of it, there could be no discussion on the Indo-US nuclear deal militates against the democratic ethos of the country. This is not done in a democracy, and therefore, a discussion in parliament is a must, emphasised Bhadrakumar.

He also saw a method in the US manoeuvres and naval exercises scheduled to be held in September involving US, Japan and Australia. The US stratagem to bring India into the orbit of the security system it has in mind has the objective of containment of China, whom the US sees as a potential rival.

The CPI(M) central secretariat member Nilotpal Basu also strongly favoured a discussion in parliament on the deal. The prime minister’s contention that the deal was final is unacceptable, he said. “No arrangement that forecloses our foreign policy options is acceptable to the CPI(M)” asserted Basu. Besides, a reading of the 123 text, he said, belies the prime minister’s claim that the US has met all the commitments he had made in parliament.

Anti-nuclear weapons activist N D Jayaprakash took strong exception to the country’s virtual volte face on the 1988 Rajiv Gandhi’s action programme on disarmament. He said the prime minister must make a renewed commitment to the disarmament plan before it was too late.

Noted TV personality and media analyst Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, who moderated the discussion, wondered what was there in the deal for India. Summing up the discussions he said the speakers have raised various questions about the deal, which are pointers to the future.

Defence analyst and media person Sandeep Dixit saw a clear link-up between the past and the present and said these were ominous portents for the future. Scientist D Raghunandan in a paper distributed at the seminar called the deal “a deal between the devil and the deep sea.” He noted, “At some point in a bargaining session the buyer should know where to draw the line and walkout of the shop.” The time for that is now, he said, adding that the agreement is a culmination of a long process, which is still to run its full course.

In his intervention, DUJ president S K Pande welcomed the enlightening debate. The deal, he said, should not be seen in isolation from the strategic alliances that India is being drawn into since the time of the NDA regime culminating in the present deal by the UPA government in more sinister ways. He noted that it was well known that the ground work for some connected deals was made in the regime of P V Narasimha Rao. In fact, in 1995 the Narasimha Rao government had signed the first agreement on defence relations that had provided for joint exercises and training programmes.

Pande and some other speakers also noted with some concern preachings being made to India questioning the relevance of Non-Aligned Movement by Condolezza Rice. Perhaps it was the first time that a significant symbol of US military power, the USS Nimitz docked in Chennai. Nimitz had some role in the Gulf region before coming here. Where is the policy of making the Indian Ocean into a zone of peace going to? Where is the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Non Aligned Media Movement, the Namedia, being hijacked to?, he wondered

Other speakers warned about India being entangled into a dangerous web of ‘strategic partnerships’.

Arvind Malhotra, who was the programme coordinator for the first DUJ-Media Centre spotlight series, said that more such debates would be organised on contemporary issues in public interest.