NEW DELHI: Wednesday's discussion in the Lok Sabha on the Indo-U.S. nuclear agreement was tempered by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's reply on the issue in the Upper House last week. With an odd exception, member after member lauded the firm stand he took in the other House. However, there was a general apprehension that the United States might use the deal to arm-twist India on other issues.

"Spell out strategy"

Initiating the discussion, Basudeb Acharia (Communist Party of India-Marxist) urged the Government to spell out its strategy if extraneous conditionalities were incorporated in the U.S. legislation on the nuclear deal. As there were many departures from the July 18 statement on the deal in the legislation drafted by the House committees of Congress and the Senate, the Left insisted on a discussion. For, India did not have a provision whereby international treaties had to be ratified by Parliament. "That is why we asked that the `sense of the House' be taken note of."

B. C. Khanduri (Bharatiya Janata Party) said energy security should not take precedence over security considerations. Though the deal moved in the right direction initially, recent developments in the U.S. were cause for concern. In particular, there appeared an attempt by the U.S. to disrupt India's nuclear weapons programme.

Mohan Singh (Samajwadi Party) said a clear message should go out from Parliament that the entire legislature was with the Prime Minister on this issue. This was a sentiment articulated by Devendra Prasad Yadav (Rashtriya Janata Dal).

While conceding the need for an energy mix and shifting to clean fuel, Suresh Prabhu (Shiv Sena) said: "We should not be guided solely by our energy interests." Welcoming the Prime Minister's statement in the Rajya Sabha, he wanted to know whether India would walk out on the deal if its interests were not addressed.

"Be flexible"

Biju Janata Dal member B. Mahtab urged the Prime Minister to stay committed to his decision while remaining flexible in his approach. Of the view that having a discussion on the issue should not be seen as lack of confidence in the Prime Minister, C. K. Chandrappan (CPI) said doubts were being expressed because India was dealing with a country that did not have an enviable track record. "The U.S. has a tricky past and is into arm-twisting friends," he said making out a case for continuing with India's policy of non-alignment.

The discussion could be wrapped up in three-and-a-half hours because of the intervention of Parliamentary Affairs Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi. Two hours into the discussion, he went round the House asking members — listed to speak — to desist from making their interventions.

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