Political
Fallout Of Indo-US
Nuclear Deal Turns Severe
By Praful Bidwai
21 August, 2007
Inter Press Service
NEW DELHI, Aug 17 (IPS) - The United States-India nuclear
cooperation agreement, tabled in India’s Parliament on Monday,
has precipitated the worst-ever political crisis for the Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh’s United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government
since it was formed a little over three years ago.
Although the existence of
the ‘left-of-centre’ UPA government is not immediately threatened,
it has clearly lost the support of the communist parties on this defining
foreign and security policy issue.
Support from the 59 members
of parliament of the Left parties, led by the Communist Party of India
(Marxist), has been critically necessary for the survival of the UPA,
which lacks a majority of its own in the 543-strong Lower House of Parliament.
This means the UPA will remain
isolated on a major issue pertaining to India’s external relations
and her strategic posture, with a strong bearing on her energy options.
The alliance will become politically vulnerable and might find itself
in an impasse in the coming months.
Singh, who has staked a lot
on the nuclear deal, faces an unpleasant choice. A majority of India’s
legislators oppose it for a variety of reasons. If he tries to bring
them on board by addressing their concerns, he will have to go slow
on the deal’s implementation.
Here, he risks losing a narrow
window of opportunity for the agreement’s ratification by the
U.S. Congress by the end of 2007, before it goes into election mode.
Alternatively, he can quickly
ready the deal for U.S. ratification after getting it approved by the
45-nation Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) and by the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But that will deprive it of domestic legitimacy
and broad-based support.
Ironically, Singh brought
this crisis upon himself. On Aug. 11, two days before the text of the
"123 agreement" (so called because it will amend Section 123
of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, 1954 to lift prohibitions on nuclear
cooperation with India) was laid in Parliament, the Kolkata-based "Telegraph"
newspaper carried an interview with him.
In the interview, Singh staunchly
defended the deal, attacked its critics, and dared the Left to withdraw
support to the UPA. He said: "I told them that it is not possible
to renegotiate the deal. It is an honourable deal, the Cabinet has approved
it…if they want to withdraw support, so be it..."
He also said: "They
are our colleagues and we have to work with them. But they also have
to learn to work with us." He chided the Left for not having "thought"
things "through" on the nuclear agreement and the welcome
accorded to it by nuclear scientists and experts.
This brought a sharp rebuff
from CPM general secretary Prakash Karat, who said the UPA was running
the government with the Left’s support; it should decide whether
"it wants to run this government". Karat also sarcastically
remarked that Singh is "very sensitive about his government’s
relations with the U.S., but this (the deal) is a matter of serious
national import."
"After Singh so openly
challenged the Left, and made disparaging remarks against it, Karat
had no choice but to join issue with him," says Anuradha Chenoy,
a social scientist with Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, and a
keen observer of Left politics.
Chenoy added that it could
not have been ‘’an accident that Singh chose to grant the
interview to a Kolkata-based paper, rather than a national daily published
from New Delhi’’. Kolkata is the capital of CPM-ruled West
Bengal state which has gained a reputation for being extremely market
friendly.
Singh, said Chenoy, wanted
to reach out to the West Bengal leadership of the CPM, which is considered
more "pragmatic" than the central leadership. ‘’Singh
has a good equation with Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhatttacharjee, whose
‘free-market’ policies he often praises."
However, it is unlikely that
Singh’s stratagem of playing off differences within the CPM will
produce a major shift in the party’s stand on the deal. India’s
communist parties tend to close ranks when attacked. Bhattacharjee might
be sympathetic to right-wing economic policies, but has a different
stand on foreign policy issues. He has recently made strong statements
criticising the nuclear deal for its pro-U.S. strategic dimension.
On Monday, the Left parties
reiterated their opposition to the deal by walking out when Singh finished
reading his statement on it in the Lower House of Parliament amidst
relentless slogan-shouting by regional party and right-wing MPs.
When it became clear that
the Left would not cow down and dilute its opposition, the Prime Minister
sought a breakfast meeting with Karat on Tuesday, to which Karat agreed
after much persuasion. Singh also talked to Bhatttacharjee, whom he
is likely to meet on Friday.
"Going by past experience,
the Left parties are unlikely to change their stand against the deal,"
argues Achin Vanaik, a political scientist at Delhi University. "They
usually act in unison. And it is known that the Left parties other than
the CPM are even more critical of the UPA’s policies and would
like the Left to reconsider supporting it unconditionally. The Communist
Party of India (CPI), for instance, advocates issue-based support."
Vanaik explained that more
will be known after political bureaux of the CPM and CPI meet this weekend.
'We’ll soon know whether they dilute or maintain/harden their
stand. Their biggest constraint is that they cannot risk toppling the
UPA government because that would help the Hindu-chauvinist and jingoistic
Bharatiya Janata Party. But they can continue to oppose the nuclear
deal without formally voting against the government and thus risking
the possible return of the BJP.'
At stake here is the Left’s
distinct ideological-political identity. In the three states (including
Kerala and Tripura) in which it rules, but especially in West Bengal,
its economic policies are not markedly different from the UPA’s.
This has produced some discontent among Left cadres.
If the Left parties lose
their image as staunch opponents of U.S. "imperialism", they
risk serious erosion of core support and loyalty. Both the CPs are scheduled
to hold party congresses early next year, where their leaders will face
the scrutiny of the rank-and-file."
Unlike the Right and centrist
parties, which focus primarily on asymmetries in the "123 agreement"
in the rights and obligations of India and the United States, and some
of whom (not the BJP) oppose close relations with Washington, the Left
concentrates its criticism on the deal as part of a U.S.-India "strategic
partnership" or India’s strategic embrace of the U.S.
The Left too speaks of asymmetries
at some length and is worried that the U.S. can terminate the agreement
arbitrarily, while India must accept safeguards (inspections) on some
of its nuclear facilities in perpetuity.
The Left at least refers
to the impact of "123" on India’s advocacy of universal
nuclear disarmament, which the UPA promised to return to in 2004. The
Left also mildly questions the relevance of nuclear power, which the
deal promotes, to India’s long-term energy security.
"These are strong suits
which the Left would do well to develop," says Vanaik. "This
will help it demarcate itself sharply from others. In particular, it
should emphasize that the nuclear deal will increase India’s capacity
to make nuclear weapons; and this cannot give us more security. On the
contrary, it will fuel a nuclear arms race not just with Pakistan but
also with China."
The International Panel on
Fissile Materials, a group of independent scientists, estimates that
the nuclear deal will allow India to produce and stockpile enough plutonium
for more than 300 Nagasaki-type bombs every year. This can be done through
reprocessing fuel in unsafeguarded power reactors, diverting domestic
uranium from civilian to military uses, and continuing/expanding fissile
material production in unsafeguarded civilian and military facilities.
Meanwhile, the political
fate of the nuclear deal remains unclear. How the UPA handles the issue
will determine its longevity.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.