07-03-2008, 09:15 PM
'It is immaterial what others think of us, if we decide that something is not good for us'
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the yardsticks we should apply are two: one, whether the deal is necessary and useful for us in its present form and conditionalities, and two, whether a democratic consensus is available for such a major foreign policy decision. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->if we decide that something is not good for us, for our self-respect, for our country's freedom of action. We have always done things our own way. Why this sudden obsession with what other countries may think? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, by the time the NSG waiver is sought, as far as India is concerned, there is a fait accompli in that we have tied ourselves hands and feet, in perpetuity, to the IAEA. Even if the NSG is waiver is unpalatable, we can't revisit the IAEA safeguards agreement or seek correctives. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->On balance, my feeling is that Congress is overreaching. The deal may please influential corporate houses. It may even help Congress get a slice of the middle class votes that would have been with the BJP. But in the ultimate analysis, all that may still not add up. The nuclear deal is not exactly going to set the Ganges on fire.
Too much elitism -- that is what makes prime minister's media managers speak in terms of his 'credibility' problem. The prime minister's 'credibility' ultimately lies in securing a renewed mandate for the party to rule. The remaining eight or nine months of stable governance and a programmatic approach in the run-up to the April 2009 elections -- that is what is needed. Instead, what do we see? The prime minister can have a pleasant meeting with George W Bush on the sidelines of the G-8. Doesn't it sound pathetic? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->National interests reign supreme. I think the Left's opposition is to the strategic cooperation with the US, which is not in India's national interest. Nuclear cooperation with India is possible without the draconian underpinning of the Hyde Act, as Russia and France have shown. The US can demonstrate its friendliness toward India by removing from its statutes the embargoes on technology transfer that it imposed unilaterally without any UN mandate or anything.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the yardsticks we should apply are two: one, whether the deal is necessary and useful for us in its present form and conditionalities, and two, whether a democratic consensus is available for such a major foreign policy decision. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->if we decide that something is not good for us, for our self-respect, for our country's freedom of action. We have always done things our own way. Why this sudden obsession with what other countries may think? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, by the time the NSG waiver is sought, as far as India is concerned, there is a fait accompli in that we have tied ourselves hands and feet, in perpetuity, to the IAEA. Even if the NSG is waiver is unpalatable, we can't revisit the IAEA safeguards agreement or seek correctives. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->On balance, my feeling is that Congress is overreaching. The deal may please influential corporate houses. It may even help Congress get a slice of the middle class votes that would have been with the BJP. But in the ultimate analysis, all that may still not add up. The nuclear deal is not exactly going to set the Ganges on fire.
Too much elitism -- that is what makes prime minister's media managers speak in terms of his 'credibility' problem. The prime minister's 'credibility' ultimately lies in securing a renewed mandate for the party to rule. The remaining eight or nine months of stable governance and a programmatic approach in the run-up to the April 2009 elections -- that is what is needed. Instead, what do we see? The prime minister can have a pleasant meeting with George W Bush on the sidelines of the G-8. Doesn't it sound pathetic? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->National interests reign supreme. I think the Left's opposition is to the strategic cooperation with the US, which is not in India's national interest. Nuclear cooperation with India is possible without the draconian underpinning of the Hyde Act, as Russia and France have shown. The US can demonstrate its friendliness toward India by removing from its statutes the embargoes on technology transfer that it imposed unilaterally without any UN mandate or anything.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->