Subhas Chandra Pattanayak
It is disturbing to note that after coming back from USA, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi has lost no time to allege that opponents of the nuke deal “are not only enemies of the Congress but also of peace and development”. Every Indian who loves India can be an enemy of the Congress, but how can he or she, for opposing the dubious nuke deal, is an enemy of peace and development?
In normal time, her assertion could have appeared too sophomoric to merit attention. But the time is critical. Under her command, a government of India is running. The Prime Minister of the country is dancing to the tune of the President of USA and the scenario is so bleak, that except the left, no other political party is opposing the nuke deal in right earnest. So, her statement, specifically as delivered after her return from USA, is worth attention.
Whether or not she has delivered a prompted dialogue, is a matter to be determined by the Country’s intelligence wing if the government could be addressed to political probity. But, I declare that I oppose the nuke deal. Am I an enemy of my people as Sonia’s spewed venom defines?
Is she more patriotic than me? Is she more patriotic than the people who genuinely love their motherland and hence oppose the nuke deal? Does she really understand what has she said? Does she want the entire country to be a country of sycophants to dance to whatever are her tunes? Does she take the entire Indian Nation to be a Nation of idiots who should be supporting every anti-nation activity that the Congress-led government has been pursuing?
If her diatribe was designed against any political party or group she should have pointed that out as emphatically as she has alleged and in that case that could have been rejected or accepted by the concerned politicians and then the citizens of this country could have watched a debate for better understanding of the conduct of politicians opposed to Congress vis-à-vis her own party and could have assessed who of them is more responsible for the present impasse. But she has not dared to name any.
Two categories of politicians are opposing the deal.
The Leftists, who work for Political Economy of Socialism, are opposing it on principle and the BJP, which works for Political Economy of Capitalism is opposing it sans any defined principle, but merely to gain out of the damage the Congress would suffer in course of the debate over the deal.
But non-of them is pursuing Political Economy of Americanism like Sonia and her sycophants in the central cabinet. And, the deal is a product of Political Economy of Americanism. Therefore there is no surprise in Sonia abusing either the left or the BJP in the context of the nuke deal.
Tricks of Americanism
But by alleging, after return from USA, that whosoever opposes the nuke deal is an enemy of our people, she has given enough material to infer that the USA trip has invigorated her to bite whosoever opposes American interest in India.
True Indians, who have the intelligence to understand how disastrous will be the nuke deal for India, are opposing it. Eminent members of our citizenry including Professors, Thinkers, Technologists, Nuclear- Scientists, Environmentalists, Jurists and Journalists are opposing this dubious deal. Are all of these Indians enemies of our people?
All of the true Indians, who have the brain to understand the American evil design and who genuinely love their motherland, have been opposing the deal on various grounds. And, they have been highlighting their views in public platforms, in symposiums and in media.
I, in the media, have discussed in many of these pages as to why the nuke deal is against our people. I have cited American authorities, in whose language this deal “is so clearly in the interest of United States”.
When the deal, according to American authorities, is so clearly in American interest, why should we accept that it is in our interest?
I have earlier quoted American sources that have declared that the deal is a “bonanza for US Firms”.
When the deal, admitted by American authorities, would be a bonanza for US Firms, why should we accept that it is for our development?
On the other hand, when, consequent upon the initial joint agreement between US President Bush and our Prime Minister Singh in July 2005, the American Senate voted on December 9, 2006 to approve the Hyde Act (United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006), it was underlined therein that “Indian parliament must agree to the text” of the deal.
To quote World Nuclear News on Nuclear Policy, “Once President Bush has signed the document and it becomes law, four further agreements must be made:
* A specific agreement between India and the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding safeguards of nuclear materials.
* India-specific trade guidelines must be drafted by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a 45-nation cartel which has restricted nuclear trade to NPT signatories since 1992.
* The USA must conclude a ‘123’ agreement with India on nuclear cooperation. Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954 requires an agreement for cooperation as a prerequisite for nuclear deals between the USA and any other nation.
* The Indian parliament must agree to the text”.
Indian Parliament kept in dark
So every conscious Indian was sure that the nuke deal agreement would be tested on the matrix of collective wisdom of the Parliament. But how is it that Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh “signed and sealed” the agreement making it “non-negotiable” without even placing the text of the agreement before the Indian Parliament and the Parliament agreeing to its text?
Motive is to bailout America?
Under the American Laws, US government is bound to “finally dispose off” used nuclear materials coming out of its one hundred and four outdated reactors in order to protect its own citizens and environment from nuclear radiation hazards. Its inside repositories are exhausted. Therefore it is urgent for US administration to ship away used nuclear materials to other parts of the globe. How would the used nuclear materials found hazardous to American health and environment be beneficial to Indian development?
Nuclear power generation in USA has become so uneconomic that it has also decided to discard one hundred old reactors and to install next generation reactors in their places. According to the source cited supra, “nearly 30 civil prototype and commercial reactors are being or have been decommissioned in the USA. A few have been totally dismantled so that the site is released for unrestricted use, notably Fort St Vrain, Big Rock Point and Shoreham. The majorities are in various stages of dismantling or safe store”. Had the right reactionary Prime Minister A.B.Vajpayee (as he then was) not dragged India to this trap and had the deterioration of political quality in India not paved the way for Sonia-Singh combine to grab power, the so-called 123 Agreement to help USA to “export” its uneconomical and outdated nuclear reactors as well as their used and hazardous fuels to India would never have been possible. How can the outdated reactors already decommissioned and / or slated to be discarded as the power they generate is much more costly than generation from other sources in the States be become economical in India? And how the used nuclear materials found most hazardous in the States be of no threat to our peoples and environment? Why Sonia is silent in this regard? Should every Indian honor every mistake its Government makes either without application of mind or with a deliberate design, simply because a lady of Quattrocchi fame is holding the reigns of this Government?
The inherent mischief
The deal is not a trade deal; it is a cooperation deal. The natural stock of Uranium in America is exhausted. Earlier in these pages the data is given. Boycotted in the world due to American conspiracy, India has developed her own method of nuclear fuel cycle using Thorium and having been blessed by Mother Nature with massive reserve of Thorium, we are very comfortably placed to march ahead in generating nuclear power to our own advantage. In this respect we are adjudged “unique” in the world. Face-to-face with paucity of Uranium, the States administration has set its eyes on Thorium stock of India and on the unique technology that we have developed on its use. The cooperation clause in the deal that Sonia is so determined to operate is designed to facilitate usurping of our Thorium stock by the States. Can the opponents of this deal be the enemies of Indian development?
Mrs. Gandhi, if she has any real concern for this country, should come forward to answer these questions first. Every genuine citizen of India has a right to weigh the pros and cons of this deal. Till doubts are cleared, opposition to this deal is the only patriotic step that a true Indian can take.
By calling the opponents of the deal “enemies of peace and development”, Mrs. Gandhi, I regret to note, has behaved only like a circumstantial Indian.
It would be better for the Congress to educate its president that it would be detrimental to its own interest if a circumstantial Indian tries to project genuine Indians as “enemies”.
I do not know if the party of her sycophants and family factotums will dare to educate Sonia in this matter; but, as I love my motherland, I deem it proper to retort her with the declaration that I oppose the nuke deal and to ask her straight: am I an enemy of my people, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi?