Nuclear Thread - 4

[acharya]

Nuclear deal
<b>The editorial “Devastating blow to nuclear deal” (Sept. 5) has indeed hit the nail on the head. Why did the U.S. State Department keep the Bush administration letter of January 16, 2008, a secret even though it was not a classified document? Did the U.S. resort to the suppression of this important document with the knowledge and understanding of the Indian government or present the latter with a fait accompli? If the first is true, </b>the UPA government’s credibility becomes the casualty. If New Delhi was unaware of the spin, the claptrap of George Bush stands exposed. It appears that India has fallen into the U.S. trap and cannot come out unscathed.

Tarsem Singh,
New Delhi

* * *
<b>The editorial and the article “Revelations unravel hype and spin” expose the UPA government’s dismal record in handling vital national issues. After the Shrine Board fiasco, we now have the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. </b>The U.S. has been clear in its stand all along. It is our government that has been lax in its approach. Since the days of Homi Bhaba and Vikram Sarabhai, India has ploughed a lonely furrow and built considerable nuclear technology. Given the time and resources, it will develop enough technology to meet our needs.

H.N. Ramakrishna,
Bangalore

* * *
<b>The “revelations” contained in the Bush administration letter are shocking and in total contradiction of Manmohan Singh’s assurances to Parliament. They expose Washington’s Machiavellian diplomacy and dual standards. Who is betraying whom? Did the U.S.</b> keep our government in the dark or was it our government which, despite knowing the truth, misled the country? Whatever the case, it is time India adopted a tough stand.

Rohit Gupta,
Shimla

* * *
<b>The recent development has proved that signing the nuclear deal would amount to surrendering to nuclear blackmail.</b> The deal is nothing but trickery to make us believe that the U.S. is doing us a favour. In view of the undue importance given to the 123 agreement by the UPA government, one is forced to believe that it has a hidden agenda in pursuing it.

R. Venkita Giri,
Thiruvananthapuram

* * *
<b>The suppression of the letter was doubtlessly done with the intent of aiding our government in misleading Parliament on the connection between the 123 agreement and the Hyde Act.</b> The Left relentlessly reiterated the inherent dangers in the deal, even at the risk of being accused of aiding the BJP. Yet the Prime Minister flaunted his notional honourable stature to buttress the unequal deal, consciously or naively, surrendering the non-aligned sovereign nature of our foreign policy drawn up by Nehru. Will Dr. Singh at least garner enough courage to abandon his attempts to defend the indefensible?

Kasim Sait,
Chennai

* * *
<b>What for is this ruthless agreement being thrust upon us? The UPA government, which survived the no-trust vote in Parliament,</b> has lost the trust of the people of India. Certainly, it has lost the moral ground to continue in office. The deal should be re-negotiated, without losing our sovereignty and self-respect, by a new government.

M.S.R.A. Srihari,
Khammam

* * *
<b>The cat is finally out of the bag — the editorial has used the correct expression to describe the crisis of development. </b>The Manmohan Singh government has tried its level best to make up and present attractively the nuclear deal to the common man. Whether or not the U.S. modifies the 123 agreement, India must reconsider the deal before proceeding to the next stage, at least for the sake of its people who still have faith in sovereignty.

S. Regis,
Chennai

* * *
<b>Why does the UPA government, which takes the credit for giving us the right to information, hide the details of the nuclear deal from the common man? Why does not the Prime Minister address the nation and clear the air?</b> While the government claims there is no restriction on India conducting further nuclear tests, the Bush administration letter says just the opposite. Suppose in future, there arises a strategic need for India to test, will it not be able to do so because fuel supply to the nuclear plants would be disrupted? The deal is nothing but CTBT in disguise.

Hemant Kumar Chauhan,
Rourkela

* * *
<b>Now that Dr. Singh is being accused of misleading the entire nation on the terms of the nuclear deal, he should, in the overall national interest, take Parliament into confidence and discuss the same.</b> He should not stand on prestige as the stakes involved are very high and long-lasting.

Seshagiri Row Karry,
Hyderabad

* * *
<b>The latest revelations regarding the nuclear deal have left us disappointed. The Prime Minister’s claim on the U.S. promise of detailed fuel supply has been thoroughly exposed, although it would be interesting to see his stand when Parliament convenes. It is hurting to see democracy fall so blatantly, for it has now become obvious that the government under Dr. Singh has been promoting an unequal treaty with the U.S.</b> Neither has India been given the right to test a weapon, nor is there an assured supply of fuel from the U.S.

Nandhini Narayanan,
Chennai

* * *

This refers to Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar’s statement: “Let us finish the cooking process, taste it ... <b>If it is appetising, we will eat it.” I would like to point out that the U.S. is the birthplace of junk food which is very appetising but extremely unhealthy.</b>

C.G. Senthilkumar,
Sunnyvale

* * *

Speaker of the House of Representatives Tip O’Neill believed that all politics is local. The same is true of the State Department letter. Politicians have different obligations to their local constituents. <b>The compulsions are different at home and abroad. Nothing more should be read in the letter. The deal is in India’s interest and it should avail itself of the opportunity</b>.

Tanvir Salim,
Canton, Massachusetts

* * *

The Hindu has done a creditable service by keeping the people better informed by presenting all sides to the issue, through articles over the last 18 months and more — right up to the September 5 editorial. It helped trigger discussion by getting people involved. <b>Otherwise, even the educated were being left out while the nation was planning a major step for the future.
</b>
Ramesh Krishnamurthy,
Secunderabad