07-19-2008, 03:04 AM
<b> âUPA Government should be defeated in the interest of sovereigntyâ</b>
Staff Correspondent
CPI(M) interaction in Hassan raises several questions on nuclear deal
PREPARING A CASE: Former MLA and CPI(M) leader G.V. Sriram Reddy addressing an interaction on the nuclear deal in Hassan on Friday.
HASSAN: âThe Manmohan Singh Government will now face a trust vote in the Lok Sabha at the end of a two-day session on July 22 to prove its majority, thus, legitimacy. It requires this legitimacy to provide political and moral legitimacy to the India-U.S. nuclear deal which will be set on an auto-pilot course once the IAEA Board of Governors approves the Safeguards Agreement with India. For this reason, the Government needs to be defeated to ensure that the India-U.S. nuclear deal does not get this legitimacy. Those of us opposing this deal will have to vote in full strength to ensure this,â said S.Y. Gurushanth, State Communist Party of India (Marxist) Secretariat member, here on Friday.
He was addressing an interaction on âNuke agreement and price riseâ organised by the district CPI(M) at the Kannada Sahitya Parishat Bhavan.
Mr. Gurushanth said this raised the question whether the CPI(M) and the Left would like to be seen on the same side as the BJP and the communal forces in voting against the Manmohan Singh Government. Particularly, since the Leftâs outside support to the United Progressive Alliance Government, based on a Common Minimum Programme, was aimed at keeping the communal forces away from power.
The question here was to protect the country from the consequences of the India-U.S. nuclear deal which imply protecting Indiaâs sovereignty, independent foreign policy and independence in dealing with the countryâs security concerns. The only solution was that this Government should be defeated in the trust vote. The Left would, thus, discharge its responsibility in national interest by voting against the Government, he said.
Mr. Gurushanth said the objective was not and could never be contingent upon who else was voting against the Government and for what reasons. The Left was clear. It should work to achieve its objective of upholding national interests and preventing India from becoming a subordinate ally of U.S. imperialism.
Mr. Gurushanth said the BJP had its own reasons for voting against the UPA Government because it wanted to return to power. The process of strengthening the strategic relationship with U.S. imperialism was, indeed, begun by the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance Government. If the BJP was against the nuclear deal, then why did it not move a no-confidence motion during the tenure of the 14th Lok Sabha, though it [BJP] was the principal Opposition. The fact that it chose not to do so showed that it did not wish to displease the Bush administration.
Mr. Gurushanth said during these last four years, in 13 State Assembly elections, many of them being ruled by the Congress and its allies, the BJP and its allies defeated the Congress and set up governments there. It was the failure to implement alternative policies by the Congress that rendered it helpless to stop popular discontent arising out of its own policies from benefiting the communal forces.
Former MLA and senior CPI(M) leader Sriram Reddy, who addressed the gathering, charged the UPA Government with misleading people on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal and said that it was running a disinformation campaign.
He recalled that even in the issue of oil, more than 50 per cent of Indiaâs oil consumption was in the transport sector â cars, buses and trucks and the rest in petrochemicals and fertilizers. Only a negligible amount was used in power plants. Nuclear energy had little to do with oil. It could not be used as a substitute for oil.
On the other hand, natural gas from Iran would insulate India substantively from oil price shocks. The Government had been dragging its feet over the Iran gas pipeline project at the behest of the U.S. and in consideration of the Hyde Act.
Mr. Reddy, referring to power shortage, said this had little to do with lack of nuclear energy but more with starving the power sector of public investments over the last two decades. In the last three Five Year plans, capacity additions had been of around 20,000 MW per Plan, less than what we had added in the 7th Plan.
He said that even if the deal was signed today, it would take about eight years before any electricity was produced from imported reactors under the deal. The cost of installing nuclear power plants using imported reactors was three times that of coal-fired plants of the same size.
Mr. Reddy said that the quickest and cheapest way to tackle electricity shortage was to build coal-fired plants which needed half the time required for setting up nuclear plants. He said that the nuclear plants required imported uranium, which was controlled by an international cartel.
The price of uranium had gone up by five times in the last few years because of this cartel.
Nuclear energy had an important place in Indiaâs energy option and this route needed to be kept open. However, this should be based on indigenous technology and indigenous resources to ensure energy security.
Mr. Reddy said that even with the most optimistic nuclear scenario that the Government had projected, nuclear energy would at best meet only 8 per cent of the electricity demand and about 4 per cent of the total primary energy demand.
While the nuclear option should be kept open, it had little importance for meeting the immediate energy needs.
CITU district president Dharmesh presided over the interaction.
Former MLA Maruthi Rao Manpade and CPI(M) leader Sukumar spoke.
Staff Correspondent
CPI(M) interaction in Hassan raises several questions on nuclear deal
PREPARING A CASE: Former MLA and CPI(M) leader G.V. Sriram Reddy addressing an interaction on the nuclear deal in Hassan on Friday.
HASSAN: âThe Manmohan Singh Government will now face a trust vote in the Lok Sabha at the end of a two-day session on July 22 to prove its majority, thus, legitimacy. It requires this legitimacy to provide political and moral legitimacy to the India-U.S. nuclear deal which will be set on an auto-pilot course once the IAEA Board of Governors approves the Safeguards Agreement with India. For this reason, the Government needs to be defeated to ensure that the India-U.S. nuclear deal does not get this legitimacy. Those of us opposing this deal will have to vote in full strength to ensure this,â said S.Y. Gurushanth, State Communist Party of India (Marxist) Secretariat member, here on Friday.
He was addressing an interaction on âNuke agreement and price riseâ organised by the district CPI(M) at the Kannada Sahitya Parishat Bhavan.
Mr. Gurushanth said this raised the question whether the CPI(M) and the Left would like to be seen on the same side as the BJP and the communal forces in voting against the Manmohan Singh Government. Particularly, since the Leftâs outside support to the United Progressive Alliance Government, based on a Common Minimum Programme, was aimed at keeping the communal forces away from power.
The question here was to protect the country from the consequences of the India-U.S. nuclear deal which imply protecting Indiaâs sovereignty, independent foreign policy and independence in dealing with the countryâs security concerns. The only solution was that this Government should be defeated in the trust vote. The Left would, thus, discharge its responsibility in national interest by voting against the Government, he said.
Mr. Gurushanth said the objective was not and could never be contingent upon who else was voting against the Government and for what reasons. The Left was clear. It should work to achieve its objective of upholding national interests and preventing India from becoming a subordinate ally of U.S. imperialism.
Mr. Gurushanth said the BJP had its own reasons for voting against the UPA Government because it wanted to return to power. The process of strengthening the strategic relationship with U.S. imperialism was, indeed, begun by the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance Government. If the BJP was against the nuclear deal, then why did it not move a no-confidence motion during the tenure of the 14th Lok Sabha, though it [BJP] was the principal Opposition. The fact that it chose not to do so showed that it did not wish to displease the Bush administration.
Mr. Gurushanth said during these last four years, in 13 State Assembly elections, many of them being ruled by the Congress and its allies, the BJP and its allies defeated the Congress and set up governments there. It was the failure to implement alternative policies by the Congress that rendered it helpless to stop popular discontent arising out of its own policies from benefiting the communal forces.
Former MLA and senior CPI(M) leader Sriram Reddy, who addressed the gathering, charged the UPA Government with misleading people on the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal and said that it was running a disinformation campaign.
He recalled that even in the issue of oil, more than 50 per cent of Indiaâs oil consumption was in the transport sector â cars, buses and trucks and the rest in petrochemicals and fertilizers. Only a negligible amount was used in power plants. Nuclear energy had little to do with oil. It could not be used as a substitute for oil.
On the other hand, natural gas from Iran would insulate India substantively from oil price shocks. The Government had been dragging its feet over the Iran gas pipeline project at the behest of the U.S. and in consideration of the Hyde Act.
Mr. Reddy, referring to power shortage, said this had little to do with lack of nuclear energy but more with starving the power sector of public investments over the last two decades. In the last three Five Year plans, capacity additions had been of around 20,000 MW per Plan, less than what we had added in the 7th Plan.
He said that even if the deal was signed today, it would take about eight years before any electricity was produced from imported reactors under the deal. The cost of installing nuclear power plants using imported reactors was three times that of coal-fired plants of the same size.
Mr. Reddy said that the quickest and cheapest way to tackle electricity shortage was to build coal-fired plants which needed half the time required for setting up nuclear plants. He said that the nuclear plants required imported uranium, which was controlled by an international cartel.
The price of uranium had gone up by five times in the last few years because of this cartel.
Nuclear energy had an important place in Indiaâs energy option and this route needed to be kept open. However, this should be based on indigenous technology and indigenous resources to ensure energy security.
Mr. Reddy said that even with the most optimistic nuclear scenario that the Government had projected, nuclear energy would at best meet only 8 per cent of the electricity demand and about 4 per cent of the total primary energy demand.
While the nuclear option should be kept open, it had little importance for meeting the immediate energy needs.
CITU district president Dharmesh presided over the interaction.
Former MLA Maruthi Rao Manpade and CPI(M) leader Sukumar spoke.