NEW DELHI : The Bharatiya Janata Party on Thursday virtually questioned the unilateral commitment given by the former Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee — immediately after Pokhran II in May 1998 — that India would not conduct further tests as it had accepted a unilateral and voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing.

Even as the party criticised the New Delhi-Washington deal in the light of the bill on nuclear cooperation clearing the first hurdle in the U.S. Congress, it said: "The `no testing' commitment will render India's capability to have a credible minimum deterrent completely infructuous and frozen permanently at a very low level of technology and at permanent parity with Pakistan."

Senior leader Murli Manohar Joshi said that while Pakistan was free to continue its research and test nuclear weapons, India would be bound not to do so by the agreement to be reached with the U.S.

Asked about the unilateral commitment made by Mr. Vajpayee, Mr. Joshi admitted that such a commitment had been made, but added: "We had reserved the right to detonate a bomb whenever we want."

He chose to ignore the fact that even in Lahore on February 21, 1999, India and Pakistan had agreed "to abide by their respective unilateral moratorium on conducting further nuclear test explosions" unless either side declared, in exercise of its national sovereignty that "extraordinary events have jeopardised its supreme interests."

"Onerous restrictions"

Mr. Joshi said the Bill made it clear that "onerous restrictions" were to be placed on India that would "emasculate Indian nuclear options" in the military and civilian sectors, and the U.S. seems to want to make India "perpetually dependent on the U.S. for all initiatives in application of nuclear energy ..."

Mr. Joshi was addressing a press conference at the party headquarters here. The fact that he, rather than the former External Affairs Minister, Jaswant Singh, was fielded was seen as a pointer to the party's hardening stance towards the nuclear deal.

Mr. Singh is seen by some hardcore pro-Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh leaders, and Mr. Joshi is among them, as being "soft" on the U.S.

Mr. Joshi's argument against the deal was that it would make India virtually bound by conditions of the nuclear non-proliferation regime without signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. He also alleged that American negotiators had succeeded in getting India's nod for signing the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should allay all apprehensions; he should have tried to build a consensus and he should not do anything that would take away India's right to continue with its research programmes in the nuclear field, he said.

Mr. Joshi painted a scenario of India's nuclear deterrence building capability being stunted as a result of the agreement; India being opened up to an inspections regime by the International Atomic Energy Agency; and India's nuclear reactors becoming totally dependent on the U.S. Finally, he argued that this deal would make India completely energy dependent on the U.S. with the country getting "locked into a cycle of reactor and fuel requirements and massive payouts."

In return, there was no sign of the promised "parity" for India with other recognised nuclear weapons States.

And, the BJP finally held out the threat that even if the "deal" goes through, it "cannot bind India in the future." This implies that a BJP-led government in future could, or rather would, renege on the deal.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail