The Hindu : Opinion / Letters to the Editor : Non-deal with Russia

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Dec 01, 2007
ePaper

Opinion

Opinion - Letters to the Editor

Non-deal with Russia

The article “Explaining the non-deal with Russia” (Nov. 30) should serve as an eye-opener in the debate on the India-U.S. civil nuclear deal in Parliament. It is unfortunate that the UPA government’s newfound love for the United States has prevailed over India’s time-tested friendship with Russia. By not going ahead with the intergovernmental agreement with Russia, which was ready to supply two light-water reactors at Koodankulam, with conditions less restrictive than the 123 agreement and the Hyde Act, the UPA government has betrayed its intent to keep the U.S. in good humour. We have come a long way from being an independent sovereign country to one veering to become a strategic partner of an imperialist nation.

Syed Sultan Mohiddin,

Kadapa

* * *

The article and the editorial “U.S., India, and Iran” (Nov. 30) reflect the apprehension that the Manmohan Singh government is sidling up to the U.S. upsetting India’s longstanding non-aligned status, and compromising its independent foreign policy. The government should explain why it is ignoring long-established foreign policy imperatives and trying to fashion a policy to suit American interests, even when they hurt India’s interests.

K. Vijayakumar,

Bangalore

* * *

Even as the government continues to reiterate that the nuclear agreement will not affect its independent foreign policy, the apprehension to the contrary has been enhanced by the reasonable inferences drawn by N. Ram in relation to the non-deal with Russia. Do the drumbeaters of the deal still want to delude themselves as well as the unsuspecting people about the hidden U.S. agenda, and ride the one-trick pony?

Kasim Sait,

Chennai

* * *

That the UPA government has failed to clinch the agreement with Russia while it was just one signature away has raised many eyebrows. The non-deal explains the obvious — that the Prime Minister is apprehensive of American displeasure, which is not in the country’s interest and confirms that his government is a one-trick pony in the international nuclear arena.

R.M. Manoharan,

Chennai

* * *

A careful analysis of the points raised by Mr. Ram gives the clear impression that the Prime Minister backtracked from the MoI because of apprehension of American displeasure. He is dutybound to clear the air and satisfy the people of India that our government has not become a one-trick pony.

M.P. Padmanabhan,

Chennai

* * *

It is quite clear that the Prime Minister went back on signing the agreement with Russia because he did not want to ruffle the feathers of the U.S. But can he be faulted for that? Had the opposition not thrown a spanner in the government’s works, the India-specific IAEA safeguards, followed by the NSG clearance, would have been in place by the time the deal with Russia was to be signed. India could still have signed it had Russia kept it under the original 1988 agreement. Obviously, Russia did not want to antagonise the NSG. While the U.S. has undertaken to get NSG clearance in favour of India, no such offer is on the table from Russia. Displeasing the U.S. now will make international nuclear cooperation with India a pipedream.

Group Captain P.V. Iyer,

Bangalore

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

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

LTTE supremo’s plaint

Why go to the Moon?

Reconceptualising girls’ education

Corrections and clarifications

Non-deal with Russia

Outrageous

Rural service