|
Round The World
Nuclear Deal
AN OBITUARY IN OFFING
By Monish Tourangbam
New Delhi, April 07, 2008
The Shakespearean question “To Be or Not To Be?” over the
Indo-U.S. Nuclear Deal has been answered in the negative,
albeit, subtly. The recent visit of External Affairs Minister
Pranab Mukherjee to Washington, although significant for the
growing Indo-U.S. relations in diverse areas, seems to have
given an obituary to the deal in spite of high sounding
official optimism.
Though the U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and
Mukherjee expressed confidence of continuing the deal, which
the former termed as a “landmark agreement”, the domestic
realities in India and the ambiguity of the Minister’s
statements in Washington present a different picture. Two
governments in their last stages of tenure are reluctant to
admit that the deal is collapsing. India, during Mukherjee’s
visit last week, said that it would not move forward on the
deal until a political consensus was achieved.
While stating that India was aware of the time-frame suggested
by members of the U.S. Congress, the Minister also said that
“events have their own momentum.” Although India had finalised
the language of the safeguards text with the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), he said it was not in a position
to give a time-frame by when the deal could be wrapped up.
Statements from the U.S. Congress and Bush Administration have
been sounding the bugle continuously on the time-frame.
According to American officials like Senator Joseph Biden, for
the Congress to make a final vote on this issue in 2008, it is
necessary that the agreement must land on the doorstep of the
Congress by latest May or June, which is a tall order given
the volume of processes that India has yet to go through.
India needs to firm up the agreement with the IAEA and secure
changes in the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) to
enable nuclear commerce with it.
On March 1, The Hindu reported some plain and aggressive
statements from the U.S. Government explaining the futility of
a scenario in which India would bypass the US to engage in a
civilian nuclear deal with another country. According to the
report, the US advises India against such a step for the fact
that no decision could be finalised at Nuclear Suppliers Group
(NSG) without a consensus. In effect emphasising that the U.S.
was the vanguard of the group..
It is reasonable to believe Mukherjee’s statement that it will
be an embarrassing situation for the country, if the
successive government doesn’t honour the deal, thus
necessitating a resolution of domestic differences, before any
decision is taken. But, we cannot deny, at the same time, that
this will not mitigate the emergency of the time-frame and the
fact that both the governments are at the dusk of their
tenure. Moreover, India has already had a credibility gap by
failing to sell a deal it had signed at the international
table, back home. Thereby, pointing to the lack of
“politicisation of foreign affairs” in the Parliament. The
Americans have said the pact may fall through if it doesn't
reach the Congress by July as a short legislative calendar
before the November 4 elections could complicate its passage.
On the other hand, India says that it cannot work to a
deadline. Now, what could complicate the issue more?
On March 17, the Government and its Left allies had failed to
break the deadlock over the controversial deal, however,
hoping to make progress in a meeting the following month. But,
knowing the Left’s stand viz India’s relations with the U.S,
the procrastination will only bring more frustration for the
Manmohan Singh Government. We all know that the Left’s stand
is rooted in instinctive anti-Americanism: a policy centred on
anything and everything to do with America.
Despite its long history in politics, the Left has never been
this close to the corridors of power and at least in this
case, its new found power seems to have affected the
realisation of a pragmatic deal. As for the BJP, this is a
deal that it would have accepted with fanfare and “cries of
victory” when in power. Its preoccupation seems to be dictated
by a goal to pull down the government. Just as the present
deal cannot be de-linked from the Strobe Talbott-Jaswant Singh
Talks, the 1998 tests carried with it the physical and
political preparations of the previous Congress governments.
The domestic cacophony over the deal and the fragility of the
UPA coalition has not stopped unravelling. The helplessness of
the Congress party in its negotiations with the Left ally over
the deal, is being seen increasingly. And the political
rhetoric over the deal and larger Indo-U.S. engagement
continues to flow from the Left. It continues to criticise the
presumed shift in India’s foreign policy. Speaking at the
inaugural session of the CPM 19th Congress at Coimbatore last
week, its party general-secretary Prakash Karat, said that the
party and other Left groups had been instrumental in
preventing the deal from going through and that effort should
continue to undo the military collaboration agreement.
“The struggle to disentangle India from the ‘strategic
embrace’ of the U.S. must continue,” Karat said. A.B. Bardhan,
re-elected CPI general secretary , who was a special invitee
to the Congress said, “the text of the nuclear deal negotiated
with the IAEA is before the UPA-Left Panel. We have not yet
come to grips with it. But, the stand of the Left parties
remains unchanged: to oppose the deal.” So, it should be clear
that the Left parties come with a pre-condition, i.e., to
oppose the deal, whatever the rhetoric. In this scenario, the
chances of a consensus seem bleak.
In an interesting development, Terrie Albano, a leader of the
communist party in the US, who was attending the CPM Congress
told the The Hindu that she gave full support to the CPM’s
stand.
It is unfortunate scenario for Indian politics and the
interests of the country at large. With a growing economy and
a modernising society, energy security will become a core
challenge for India in the coming years. If India is to meet
its target of nuclear generation capacity of 250 gig watts, or
25 per cent of India’s power by 2050, it has to import energy
resources and nothing could be more satisfying yet pragmatic
than the current deal. As to the concerns of India becoming a
stooge of American power, India’s power vis-à-vis the American
power has relatively changed since the days of the Tarapur
issue. It would be totally unpragmatic for the U.S. to try and
hurt the Indian economy looking at the kind of inter-linkages
that globalisation has brought and the growth of the Indian
economy. Moreover, India is not inexperienced in battling
isolation politics.
All these facts might seem like an effort to burn wet wood
considering the fate that beckons the deal, but it is
important to know the kind of opportunities that fall victim
to political rhetoric. The governments in the U.S. and in
India have sounded optimistic in public, probably, keeping in
mind the coming elections in both the countries. They would
not like to jeopardise a revival of the deal by making the
obituaries public.---INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)
E-Mail :
newseditor@sarkaritel.com |
