By IANS
New Delhi : The Indian government’s efforts to forge a political consensus over the India-US nuclear deal failed Wednesday with a defiant Left and opposition parties insisting it should not go ahead because a majority in parliament was opposed to it.
In a clear message to the government, leaders of the Left Front and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) walked out of the upper house even as External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee pleaded that the government would take a sense of the house after completing the nuclear deal but before making it operational.
“We have never said we will not take the sense of the house. We have begun the process, but the process is not complete,” Mukherjee said in his formal reply to a discussion in the Rajya Sabha.
But as the Left and BJP leaders trooped out, Mukherjee remarked: “They have no reason. They have no case.”
The Left, which supports the Congress-led government, explained why it walked out.
“We are not fully convinced. My opposition to the deal continues. A majority of the house does not agree. We are a democratic people and we should go by democracy,” Sitaram Yechury of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) said.
Yechury also reminded the house of the US flip-flop on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) in the late 1990s, saying then US president Bill Clinton arm-twisted 30 countries to sign the CTBT but the US Congress ironically rejected the treaty later.
Yechury deployed the CTBT example to underline the importance of democratic consensus before proceeding with an agreement of this magnitude, with serious repercussions on the country’s foreign policy and security.
The July 2005 India-US joint statement provides for the resumption of global civil nuclear commerce between India and the US after a gap of nearly three decades in return for New Delhi placing 14 of its civilian nuclear reactors under international safeguards.
The government has begun negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for a safeguards pact after the Left relented on this issue last month. But with the Left reiterating its rejection of the deal, it is not clear how the government will tackle the situation.
Former foreign minister Jaswant Singh, who heads the opposition in the Rajya Sabha, alleged that the then Congress government did not conduct a nuclear test due to US pressure.
Singh also asked the government to take a sense of the house before proceeding with the deal.
“It’s important that we take a sense of the house. Don’t proceed in a hurry. First convince the parliament. A very large majority of parliament is not with you,” he said.
“Why don’t you work for bipartisan consensus in India? I don’t see any bipartisan consensus,” he said in a reference to the bipartisan consensus in the US Congress for the nuclear deal.
He also warned the government against taking the house for granted and insisted that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reply to this crucial debate.
The prime minister, however, had to leave the upper house towards the end of the debate as he had a prior appointment.
Mukherjee, however, passionately defended the deal saying the deal intended to bring much-needed energy security to India without compromising its credible minimum deterrence or its indigenous atomic energy programme.
He also rejected the critics’ contention that the 123 agreement with the US will constrain India’s strategic options, saying the pact did not prevent New Delhi from testing in case of a real national security threat.
The minister rejected the demand for a joint parliamentary committee saying it was a matter between coalition partners.
“We are committed to common minimum programme. Our foreign policy is independent. Non-alignment is very vibrant. South-South cooperation is an important element of the non-aligned movement,” he said.
“In the 123 agreement, it (testing) has not been banned. If the geopolitical situation arises, we will go for it,” Mukherjee asserted.
The government of the day will have to determine what is the threat perception and act accordingly, he said.
“If India considers it necessary, it will conduct the test and follow the consequences as we had done before,” he said.
Mukherjee rebutted BJP leader Yashwant Sinha’s charge that the deal would dent credible minimum deterrence, saying it will be up to India to decide whether to opt for the testing of a nuclear device as it did in 1974 and 1998.
The minister also repudiated the contention of the Left and the BJP that India’s strategic autonomy will be constrained by the Hyde Act, the enabling US legislation that provided a waiver from the US Atomic Energy Act, 1954, for resuming nuclear commerce with New Delhi.
“We are not bound by the Hyde Act. We are bound by the 123 agreement. If it is operationalised – and there are hurdles – then we will know who is right or who is wrong,” he said.
The minister said the deal was necessary for meeting the burgeoning demands for energy of a growing economy.
“We require energy. We require technology. We want to achieve 9 to 10 percent growth. That is important for aam admi (common man). We have to go in for cost-effective energy,” he said.
Enunciating the nuclear doctrine of the UPA government, he said: “We don’t want to be a major nuclear weapon power, but we want credible minimum deterrence for security purposes.”
Participating in the debate Tuesday, the Left allies asked the government not to proceed with the deal, alleging it will make New Delhi a “subordinate ally” of Washington. The BJP slammed it as a “grave mistake”.
At the end of nearly eight-hour debate that went on close to midnight Tuesday, it appeared that a majority of the MPs were opposed to the nuclear deal either because they suspected it will affect India’s strategic programme or they had misgivings about the handle it will allegedly give to Washington to manipulate New Delhi’s foreign policy.