|
Manmohan
Singh government is suddenly in crisis. Leftists
have given its warning to stop going any further
on nuclear deal with US or face the
consequences. The lack of political consensus on
nuclear deal with US has already done the
damage. Many feel Manmohan Singh and Sonia
Gandhi would have been in better position if
they had been in constant dialogue with BJP,
shaking off their ego, on this issue. How can
other nations take India seriously when its
government is facing such a crisis because of
the ideology of leftists on whom Sonia depended
to run the government and opportunistic
maneuvers of the main opposition party that had
initiated the breakthrough in Indo-US relations?
Even a new government after election, if held,
will find it almost impossible to go ahead with
the deal unless the electorate brings back
Congress and its allies in power in clear
majority, which is doubtful. Manmohan and his
team certainly did a creditable work to get the
deal in place and they deserve credit too. The
scientists’ community is for the deal agreed and
so are the heads, present and past of Atomic
Energy Agency.
The media is agog with the negativity of
leftists with many self-explaining headlines:
‘The government appeals to the leftists for not
taking any precipitating action, but to hear to
it on N-deal’. ‘Experts say, left is helping
China, and Pakistan’. ‘China is already miffed
as India goes ahead with strengthening ties with
Japan, Australia, and US’. ‘Experts are against
calling off deal as it will isolate India
globally’, and if we go by them, ‘the deal is
essential to counter China’s might in Asia’.
‘India’s credibility will take big hit if deal
is nuked. Interlocutors will have no faith,
knowing the government can’t defend pact at
home.’
Many columnists have come out with the real
story behind the leftists’ insistence to damage
the deal. Many claim that the leftists are
helping China and Pakistan who would be the
happiest if the deal drowns in turbulent
political water of India. Let us see what the
lead articles of Hindustan Times and Times of
India on August 21, 2007, says:
"It is not without significance that the
vigorous campaign of the Left parties against
the Indo-US agreement and against the growing
strategic interactions between India and the US
has coincided with the beginning of the Chinese
campaign against the so-called ‘quadrilateral
strategic interaction’ involving India, Japan,
the US and Australia, and the naval exercise
with the additional involvement of the Singapore
Navy.”- From “The Manchurian candidates" by
B.Raman in Hindustan Times.
"Sections of the government believe that the
Left’s campaign against the Indo-US nuclear deal
is inspired by Beijing. China is reportedly
unsettled by India’s growing strategic ties with
the US and next month’s planned joint naval
exercise with the US, Australia, Japan and
Singapore in the Bay of Bengal. The Chinese sent
a demarche to all participants wanting to know
the nature of the exercises. When the Left
raised the ante on the Indo-US pact, the Chinese
media reported and commented on the events; this
was considered a first because the Chinese media
hardly ever focuses on India". - Chinese
whispers by Rajiv Desai in Times of India
According to all the polls by media, more than
90% of the responses from the people are
favouring the deal. How can the politicians or
more correctly parliamentarians be so away from
the people?
Leftists are anti-America since ages. To many,
and me, leftists today are nearer to China
rather than India. They have been against many
national movements in pre-independence era too.
The biggest danger today to the nation is from
Maoists or Naxals, who work on ideologies
evolved from the one of the same leftists. In
communists’ states, the Chinese are winning the
projects and getting the foothold, even though
their quality and efficiency of the equipment
are under suspicion.
Let us decide about the first thing first.
Between the ideology and national interest, what
must come first? Naturally the national
interest. But for the leftists, the single
reason to oppose nuclear deal is that it will
bring India nearer to US. Leftists don’t want
that, China does not want that to happen. A
close US-India relation will affect China’s
bigger game plan to rule the world.
Is there any other alternative today but to go
nearer to US through this deal, when all the
developed nations including Russia and China are
doing that? Will the other nuclear nations be of
any significant assistance to India in nuclear
programme if US doesn’t sponsor India’s case? Is
India strong enough as China is, to stand on its
own? Do leftists want India to move nearer to
China? Will it be in national interest when we
know that China is already surrounding India
with its unethical friendship moves and gestures
with India’s neighbours? China has all along
been supporting and encouraging Pakistan. It is
even facilitating the anti-Indian feelings to
spread in Myanmar, Bangladesh and Nepal. It is
dumping its goods in the Asian market. It is
alluring all the Asian countries by increasing
bilateral trades and African countries by aids.
It is going after procuring all the energy
resources all over the world.
Congress would have understood Leftists before
it formed the government with its support.
However, as it seems the honeymoon is over. If
leftists are equally concerned about the
interest of the nation, I and many like me, will
not be able to appreciate the leftists move to
press for abandoning the nuclear deal that
provides an opportunity to remove many years of
isolation from the scientific community of the
advanced nations. I am sure beside the political
aspect of the deal an in-depth study of the
legal, scientific and long-term foreign policy
aspects require the help from the experts on the
subject. Why can’t leftists agree to go by the
advices of such a group instead of getting the
future of the country decided by a group of
people who are essentially politicians who are
considered people of below average intelligence
by many studies?
As it appear the country is going to have
another mid-term poll. The composition of the
parliament even after the election will produce
only an equally vulnerable government. But will
the two national political parties be united in
unmasking the real face of leftists who are
holding the nation away from becoming a
developed nation faster? Leftists as well as
regional political parties with local agenda are
to go out of the scene or transform
significantly. The sooner the people of India
realize this, the better it will be for the
nation.
Let God save India from leftists, as they don’t
believe in God.
|
Comments: |
I
couldn't agree more with Mr. Indra
about the leftists in India. These
people (Karat, Yechuri et al) are
cancer to the Indian society and
should not be given any importance
in the Indian political system. It's
a pity a majority of the Indian
population does not see through
their evil design and allows them to
ruin the country for their own
political survival. - Anil Kumar
- Aug. 23, 2007
We
Indians rise early morning with many
grumpy and happy faces. One such
grumpy face belongs to “left” taking
morning walk on stinking
pedestrians, garbage filled parks
reaching via chaotic traffic at
roads while blaming "United States
of America" for the same and at the
same time -- unable to check their
loved ones visiting/studying/
residing in the same west.
Self-centric hate may be the part of
communistic democracy. It is nothing
but a sheer hypocrisy. But I am
surprised to see the reaction of the
“rightists” who do not understand as
“opportunists” what is written
between the lines of 123 N-deal.
Searching previous form of
opportunity into this N-deal is
going to backfire, once mid-term
(2008) or general election (2009) is
held under these circumstances.
Although common mass does not
understand the 123 N-deal because
vernacular press initially has not
given sufficient coverage writing
specific pluses or minuses. I feel
that young voters (urban and rural)
are going to strike hard silently on
this particular issue in coming
election due to the ongoing
political tussles, broad media
converge and changing perception of
younger generation.
Besides many agreements, one such
agreement will provide 20,000 MW
electricity from this N-deal by
2020. To live in a better condition
one has to find out and/or to show
the path of innovation against
lantern age or simply follow the
path shown by others in the form of
coal-based, gas-based, and
nuclear-based technology. Falling
and freezing nuclear deal will make
Bihar a significant loser amongst
all states, where the power
situation can get better as
early/quickly as possible through
nuclear power plants. Moreover,
under current situation, Bihar
and/or entire India has no chance to
place herself in the field of
renewable energy research program
such as solar cell, Bio-mass, Wind
energy etc.
At least Laloo’s lantern will be
glowing in our cities and villages
in coming years. For Congress, it is
a time for either compromise or
start a NAYA DAUR. - Dr. Sudhir
Ranjan, USA - Aug. 23, 2007
I
have been reading comments on left's
stand on India's proposed N deal
with US with much amusement. Let us
accept one thing first that
democracy comes as a complete
package and dissent and divergence
of opinion is a core ingredient of
democracy. We can not wish it away
even if it looks inconvenient at
times. In fact that is a sign is of
a vibrant democracy (which most
agree ours is). If we agree on this
then any decision making has to go
through pulls and pressures of
various lobbies. A final decision on
any vital issue has to withstand the
scrutiny of all ideological shades
of which Indian parliament displays
resplendently and in abundance.
Recent demonizing of left on this
issue in my opinion is sinning them
more than they actually might have.
The very being of left is based on
opposition to capitalism and
associated (perceived) notions of
its exploitative nature. US is today
greatest symbol of capitalism and
its triumph. Antagonism towards US
in parties with left moorings is
understandable in that sense. Indian
left is no exception. And they are
very consistent with that. In case
of Indian communists they have
legitimacy of being part of
parliamentary democracy. They have
been sent to Indian parliament with
their known stand on many issues. At
least they have a consistent view
point and worldview. In contrast to
that there are our friends from
right in the parliament whose stand
is ludicrous on this issue to say
the least. BJP's amazing volte face
on this issue can only invite
contempt. They were initiators of
nuclear deal and now are opposing it
and raising all kinds of alarms. It
is even so when the current draft is
much more refined in India's favor
(thanks to hard bargain of Manmohan
Singh's govt at times spurred by
left's constant objections! and
America's increasing eagerness to
win India as an ally in its grand
strategic plans).
The opposition of left towards 123
deal does not seem to be as much
against the civil nuclear
co-operation aspect as it is towards
its apprehensions of the compromises
India will have to make on its
independent foreign policy. For
example on the same larger future
energy security issue (of which this
123 agreement is one part) India
wants to have direct gas pipeline
from Iran. India has been advised
and cautioned (can be read as -
attempted to be pressurized) against
that as in American assessment Iran
is a rouge state and should be
treated as pariah. If left wants
Indian govt to ensure that we should
not be vulnerable on other counts
due to any deal which we enter with
US on nuclear issue it is not as
unpatriotic as some are trying to
attribute to them. There are after
all sections in US policy making
bodies who are crying full throated
foul on concessions granted to India
on 123 deal. But no one is accusing
them there as being unpatriotic for
that, even though they might be
appearing to be throwing spanner in
the improving relationship of US
with India which is an important
element in their future strategy of
counter balancing a rising China. I
think we should see the left's
objections and related development
on 123 deal as a tribute to healthy
and functioning Indian democracy
which is validating this issue
(which is vital to its future and
has long lasting ramifications) from
all angles.
Govt of Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh, however, can not be faulted
on not having consultations with
various sections of political
opinion in India on this vital
issue. At every crucial stage
incumbent govt has tried to take the
parliament in to confidence. However
prime minister Singh can be faulted
on uncharacteristically upping the
ante on this issue by publicly going
with take it or leave it stand. That
has left very little room for left
to maneuver on this issue. Little
more tact and back room discussions
would have saved the threat that
looms on continuation of this
government.
An election at this time would be
absolutely undesirable and
avoidable. There are still chances
that better counsel will prevail on
all sides and some face saving
formula will be found out on this
difficult issue. However if country
has to go to polls on this issue at
least there would be a silver lining
that we would be going to polls on a
very real and futuristic issue of
our energy security. Believers of
god in past have thrusted elections
on this country with heavy scars of
one section pitted against another
either in the name of religion or
caste. Let us see how things turn
out when non-believers have taken a
hardened position on an issue. -
Abhishek Kumar, Chennai - Aug. 23,
2007
Dear Mr. Kumar, please allow me to
humbly differ from you on some
issues.
While I have no intention of
defending the right (read BJP) on
their stand on this 123 deal
(Congress, BJP – what's the
difference?), I don't see how can
you defend the left parties when
they have done absolutely nothing in
the last 60 years except to prove a
huge hurdle in the development of
the nation and giving birth to
extremism in the form of Naxalite
and Maoist movements. Please tell us
what the left group has done to make
the country economically stronger.
Besides being a perpetual nuisance
to the country, what are their
contributions in nation building?
Raising awareness among the poor?
Helping poor economically? If that
was the case there would not be a
single poor in India by now. Or
could it be teaching the poor how to
take up arms against their own
people, government, or in other
words, terrorism?
Just because there are enough
ignorant/illiterate people in the
land of 1 billion who continue to be
fooled by the leftist ideologies and
send them to the Parliament each
election year still does not justify
their skewed political thoughts.
The specter of 'foreign hand' (read
America) is an old, worn-out
strategy employed by the leftist
loons and is designed to keep India
a third-world nation because a
prosperous India will mean the
natural death of such radical, and
dare I say useless, forces otherwise
known as the Communists. The
'foreign hand' strategy worked in
the bygone Cold War era but now the
time has changed – even the Russians
have realized that now.
I agree with Mr. Indra when he says
that "for the leftists, the single
reason to oppose nuclear deal is
that it will bring India nearer to
US. Leftists don’t want that, China
does not want that to happen. A
close US-India relation will affect
China’s bigger game plan to rule the
world." He is right on the mark.
India cannot afford to coddle these
leftists if it wants to rise above
the humiliating title of being a
'Third World Country'. This is not
to say that India has to toe the
line with America. Far from it!
India can learn from America's
mistakes and avoid making those
mistakes. That's the sign of a
matured democracy but I see
absolutely no redeeming value in
patronizing the Communists who have
been a menace and a major
detrimental force in the development
of the nation since they came into
existence. - Anil Kumar - Aug.
24, 2007
I read with interest wide coverage
of important topics in PT. Indo-US
nuclear deal is a positive action
taken by the Govt of India. Our
country can not meet even 30% of our
energy requirements without nuclear
sources. In modern world, to live
without assured energy is like
taking retrogressive steps. With
better sources of energy, medicare
is also bound to improve.
Establishing nuclear plants involves
lot of money which India alone
cannot afford to spend from its
resources. Availability of clean
drinking water is still a dream for
many in India. Nuclear plants will
provide energy to harness clean
water as well. With better power
availability, agriculture will get
boost through more disciplined
irrigation system and more
availability of fertilisers. More
avenues of employment in all
categories will minimize brain
drain. Information technology will
be augmented. Communication system
will be speeded up . The only care
the political parties should take is
to maintain culture of decency and
decorum in themselves as well as in
the public servants. The youth
should have healthy trend to follow
and healthy path to tread.
India is bound to march ahead with
proper utilization of advantages of
Indo-American nuclear deal. Even
China has opened its doors to
American liberalism. US has lakhs of
Indians working in different fields,
many of them rendering excellent
service. Unnecessary hue & cry
should not be made just for the sake
of being anti-American on the basis
of party affiliation. - Dr Sheo
Kumar Prasad, ENT Specialist, Patna
(currently visiting US) - Aug. 25,
2007
This in response to some comments on
my comment on proposed N Deal with
US. Jury is still out on many
aspects of the deal in its present
form. We must understand that the
issue is nuanced and highly complex
otherwise we would remain at a
superficial level while debating
this. If we take cognizance of the
level of complexity of the issue we
will be in a better position to
appreciate the divergence of opinion
emerging on this issue in Indian
parliament.
Every one agrees that the Indian
negotiators have done commendable
hard bargain on this issue. Some
people like Mr. Ravi Grover (who is
director of strategic planning group
in ministry of Atomic Energy in govt
of India) stood rock solid facing
onslaught of various American
demands. Indian media has
highlighted prominently the view of
the section of scientists (including
present Atomic energy commission
chief Mr. Anil Kakodkar) who believe
that with all its imperfections this
is the best one could have drawn
from Americans on sensitive N issue
and hence is worth going ahead with.
However there are many experts who
have raised serious concerns on the
some aspects of the deal. The major
area of contention is the issue of
reprocessing of the nuclear material
supplied from US. Mr. A. N. Prasad
(A former director of Bhabha Atomic
Research Center) has come out in
open against the draft's portions
dealing with reprocessing of fuel.
His objection is on not allowing
India the reprocessing right of
spent fuel in to plutonium. Another
prominent figure amongst Indian
nuclear experts Mr Placid Rodriguez
(former Director of Indira Gandhi
Center for Atomic Research, an
institute which designs and develops
fast breeder reactors) has objected
it to be called a deal between
equals. He maintains that deal is
heavily lopsided in American favor
and all reprocessing attempts by
India will have to undergo intricate
American laws on this issue which
will reduce it to of having no
operational value as far as
reprocessing is concerned. There are
concerns on 'safeguards in lieu of
supplies in perpetuity' point in the
draft also. All of these have got
coverage in media as well.
My point is that if nuclear experts
have divergence of opinion on it how
can we expect that every body will
be unanimous in Indian parliament in
support of the deal? Left parties
have stated that they can not take
the 123 deal in isolation as they
consider it to be part of American
strategic plans in which they are
trying to rope in India. In their
opinion, it is not the best way for
India to move ahead in the area of
foreign policy. Specifically on the
deal left has objected Hyde Act
which is binding on all subsequent
US administrations and they believe
that wide ranging implications of
this act can be used to coerce
Indian in to compromising on its
independent foreign policy. India’s
prevarication on Iran issue (both
Atomic and gas supply line) is sited
in favor of that.
I am a political free thinker and
not bound by any political dogma. I
prefer taking stand on an issue
based on my understanding of the
issue and assessment of merits or
demerits of it. I certainly am not
an apologist of Indian left however
at the same time tarring the left as
a negative force hindering India's
march to super-powerdom is rather
unpalatable to me. No political
formation is flawless and may be
left is no exception. However they
score very high on being a bulwark
against all kinds of communal forces
in this sub continent. They have
played a big role in eradicating
feudalism and peddling land reforms
in their pockets of influence.
Leaders like EMS Namboodiripad had a
legendary role in purging Kerala of
vicious untouchability that it was
inflicted with. - Abhishek Kumar,
Chennai - Aug. 27, 2007 |
|
Discussion on this topic is now
closed. |
Return to previous Page |
