Opinion - Letters to the Editor   

123 Agreement

The article, ‘123 questions won’t go away — a rejoinder’ (Sept. 19) by Brahma Chellaney is enlightening. It uncovers, piece by piece, the political veil the UPA government is trying to cover the 123 Agreement with. It is ironic that instead of joining an honest and comprehensive debate, the government is just trying to harp on populist points such as “recognition of India as a nuclear weapons state,” “energy security,” and “can’t afford to miss the nuclear bus.” The Left-UPA joint committee is time and again being utilised by the UPA members to suggest to the nation at large that the government just wants to push ahead with the deal.

Arivendu Bhardwaj,

Gurgaon

In his rejoinder to Union Minister Kapil Sibal, Mr. Chellaney has raised many contentious points of law which, considered with the views of several other authorities from the scientific fraternity, indicate that the question of operationalising the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal is fraught with serious hazards. It will be wise therefore not to rush to get it operationalised.

C.P. Srinivasan,

North Carolina

With regard to Kapil Sibal’s ‘123 Agreement: a response to Brahma Chellaney,’ (Sept. 17), I have a few questions: It is true that meeting the energy demand is a challenge, but why has Vision 2012 for Energy sufficiency not been implemented even by 50 per cent in the past? What exactly is the benefit of being recognised as a de facto nuclear weapons state or being granted de jure nuclear weapons state status? Is there any commitment or clause in the 123 Agreement granting access to U.S. technology and information, as mentioned in the article?

Mukund Prasad,

Pune

The articles in The Hindu on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal have been excellent, especially the debate between Kapil Sibal and Brahma Chellaney. This is what is called “serious journalism.” I appreciate the hard work put in to throw light on the finer details of the agreement.

Shikhar Sharma,

Hyderabad

You have argued in many articles that, in the interests of stability, the UPA government must defer to the Left on the 123 Agreement. To me, the Left’s concern about an inextricable embrace with the U.S. in foreign policy, defence, and the nuclear industry appears to be unwarranted. If we have confidence based on innate strength, India can maintain the necessary bonds with other big powers with flexibility and without being subservient to anyone. And that includes the many grey areas and loopholes in the 123 Agreement.

P. Zachariah,

Vellore

The handling of the nuclear deal through Parliament and the maze of objections from different parties has shown that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh lacks leadership. However, if the the various objections to the deal from the opposition parties and the Left were deliberate, considering that this deal is crucial for India’s energy security and foreign policy, it is a sad commentary on India’s current political system..

S. Kamat,

Bardez, Goa

With the proposed nuclear deal generating a lot of heat, the CPI(M)’s plea to the government to refrain from taking any step to operationalise it for the next six months (Sept. 19) seems to be in order. CPI(M) general secretary has said that “the government is not telling the people that the nuclear power will cost dearly, at least twice the amount in comparison to the power generated through conventional means.” It would have been more convincing if Mr. Karat had thrown some hints on the availability of other conventional alternatives which would enable the government to avoid going in for nuclear power. Power generation cost is only one aspect of the problem.

K.D. Viswanaathan,

Coimbatore

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

Stories in this Section

The right choice
Hints of economic slowdown?
Vladimir Putin and the succession questions
In Islamabad, a dream comes true
A model of global cooperation
How climate change will affect the world
Corrections and clarifications
123 Agreement
Minister’s stand
Flood preparedness
They need our support

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu