[Sreekar]

PM seeks support on N-deal from Vajpayee
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday appealed to former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to rise above "narrow" party politics and support the Indo-US nuclear deal.

"Bhishma Pitamah of Indian politics Atal Bihari Vajpayee should listen to his conscience and let national interest prevail upon narrow politics," Singh said in the Rajya Sabha seeking support of his predecessor on the nuclear deal.

In his reply to the debate on the Motion of Thanks on President's Address, Prime Minister assured Parliament the government would not compromise on requirements of national security in inking the nuclear deal with the US.

While the Prime Minister mounted a strident attack on the previous NDA Government, he had words of praise for Vajpayee for his "courageous" steps to foster peace with Pakistan.

"The most courageous steps to build peace were taken by Prime Ministers Nawaz Sharif and Atal Bihari Vajpayee," Singh said in an identical reply in the Lok Sabha.

The Prime Minister said his government has continued the process with President Pervez Musharraf.

Singh noted that the dialogue process was started by the then Prime Ministers late Benazir Bhutto and late Rajiv Gandhi.

Singh was also happy with former National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra "coming out openly in defence of the Nuclear Cooperation Agreement,".

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

Survival of Govt more important than N-deal: Pranab

(source:www.Timesofindia.com)

Scotching speculation about early polls, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee has made it clear that the survival of the government was more important than the Indo-US nuclear deal and Left parties will have to be taken on board.

He ruled out the possibility of a minority government signing the nuclear agreement, saying the US was not ready for it.

Mukherjee also said that India had not conducted negotiations on the agreement with a "fixed timeline", in an apparent response to the US which has set the deadline of May.

"We are trying to evolve a consensus and first the consensus will be with the supporting parties because that is primary importance for which the (UPA-Left) mechanism was created. Then we shall try to evolve a larger consensus," he said in an interview to a news magazine.

He said the government will have to discuss the India-IAEA safeguards agreement with the Left but declined to elaborate.

On the speculation about early polls, Mukherjee said "nobody is talking of elections now except journalists."

When pointed out that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi had said in October last that survival of the government is more important than the deal, he said "that position is still there."

He added "what the Congress president says is the final word of the party and what the Prime Minister says is the final word of the government."


-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

N-deal: India misses date with IAEA
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

The nuclear deal, now a veteran of several near-death experiences, is beset with deadlines. It's not merely the US giving a July deadline or a March deadline by the IAEA, or even the Left parties giving their own deadline for a meeting of the UPA-Left committee.

There is one deadline that India has already missed. The IAEA board of governors started its meeting this week, and would have worked on the Indian agreement. It will now need an extraordinary meeting for the Indian safeguards pact.

Given the nature of the agreement, the board will ideally need a month to consider it, unless it gets railroaded into a quicker decision.

The NSG will be no walkover either. The NSG plenary is scheduled for May 19 in South Africa, and the expectation is that the Indian dossier will be on the table by then.

Then there is the consideration of whether the international community would want to take up the Indian case if the UPA government falls. The US may not particularly care, and neither will the other major nuclear trading nations. But the deal sceptics may make this a reason to delay giving India a clearance in nuclear commerce.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh: This is why we need N-deal

(source:The Economic Times: Latest business, finance, markets, stocks, company news from India.)

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was perhaps targeting the in-house critics of the Indo-US nuclear deal when he said that the government is “committed” to developing civilian nuclear energy at a function for a power project in the Capital

His remarks are also perfectly timed with the visit of external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee to the US and seemed to be part of the effort by the government to reassure the US and other countries about the government’s sincerity with going ahead with the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal.

“Our government is committed to further development of nuclear energy, both as an environment-friendly source of power and as a means of widening the energy basket available to us,” he said after laying the foundation stone for a gas-based power project at Bawana, which is to be commissioned before the 2010 Commonwealth Games.

Mr Singh further said that India does not have the “luxury” of depending on only one or two sources of energy and needed a multi-pronged strategy for energy security. “While some sources of energy may be cheap today, we have to think for the future. We have to think for future generations,” he said.

The prime minister further said that the demand for electricity is outgrowing existing sources of supply and that the government had to plan for future generations. “Our energy needs are bound to grow. We will be failing in the duty to our nation and to posterity, if we do not look ahead and take steps for not just today and tomorrow but for future generations,” he said.

Highlighting nuclear energy as a clean fuel, the prime minister also said the government had to keep in mind environmental concerns while developing coal-based and hydel energy.

“India is blessed with vast reserves of coal. Our government has taken many steps to increase coal production. We are also trying to develop hydro-electricity. But, we also have to keep in mind environmental concerns and concerns about people displaced by mining and dams,” he said. He further said that it would be some time before India can tap solar energy in a large quantity.

What the prime minister did not mention in his speech was that it would also be some time before the country can tap the benefits of Nuclear energy. The government’s projection for nuclear energy, which at the moment accounts for 3% of installed power generation capacity, is 63,000 mw by 2031-32.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

US agrees for 'more time' on N-deal
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

The Bush administration has accepted New Delhi's call for some more time it says it needs to forge a national consensus on the nuclear deal.

Even as India's External Affair Minister Pranab Mukherjee left Washington DC on Tuesday, White House spokesperson Dana Perino agreed that there is still time remaining to consummate the deal, rejecting the proposition that a ''now or never'' moment had arrived.

''Well, we have a little bit of time before we have to say 'now or never.' We've got several months to continue to work with them,'' Perino told reporters when asked for an update on Mukherjee's meeting with Bush. The comment was a departure from earlier exhortations from U.S officials and lawmakers that the clock was running out to consummate the deal.

During his 48-hour visit to the US Capital, Mukherjee repeatedly sought a more time to evolve common ground with dissenters in India, primarily the Left parties opposed to the nuclear deal. More than once, he stressed the government's intention to move ahead with the deal, while declining to provide a time-frame for resolving the political gridlock.

Now, in the context of the White House's observation that there are several months remaining to work with India on the deal, it would appear that the whole exercise may extend well into summer. Mukherjee himself let it slip that he didn't know when --''whether in June...or August'' -- the matter will be resolved.

While mid-level US officials and law-makers have repeatedly stressed that time is running out for taking the last steps to implement the deal, some analysts think that the legislative calendar can still accommodate the final vote on the deal in late summer. Some of the rules pertaining to bringing the matter for a final vote are thought to be elastic and subject to overrule by the legislative committees.

A key Indian official involved in the talks on the deal told ToI that there was no pressure from the higest levels of the administration on the nuclear deal and they had been very gracious in understanding the government predicament and the working of India's political system, although there was a degree of bewilderment and disappointment.

If anything, it was the Mukherjee who showed a degree of helpless exasperation about the workings of the Indian system.

Dispensing with the convention of not bring domestic politics abroad, the external affairs minister blamed both the Left parties and the BJP for holding up the deal, while insisting that it was in long-term national interest to bring them on board. He described the Left's opposition to the deal as "ideological."

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

Rising prices could sound death knell for nuke deal
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

Unconnected as they might appear, price rise might deal another blow to the India-US nuclear agreement as the rising inflation graph, with its adverse political fallout, could sap the Manmohan Singh government's will to push the contentious deal.

The deal, already on the backburner with foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee essentially presenting a "no progress" report on the UPA-Left deadlock, could slip further off the agenda as price rise threatens to tarnish the Budget's "feel good".

The pro-deal quarters had hoped that the government would be able to seize the initiative with the Rs 60,000 crore mega farm loan waiver and tax breaks coupled with aggressive positioning on minority issues and salary hikes for large constituencies like central employees. But this leverage is now being swiftly undercut by galloping inflation.

Senior Congress sources said that price situation had only added to a muddled political scenario. There were no clear gains for the party or UPA with the overall picture appearing "fragmented". This meant that no party or coalition looked well placed to emerge at the front of the pack.

It is quite clear to the Congress leadership that taking the deal forward will mean breaking up with the Left. This was evident enough even though CPM was itself not well placed to face elections any time soon. But the uncertainty over the electoral returns of a confrontation with its "Red" supporters has inhibited Congress from any adventurism.

"This is not the time to break alliances," said a member of the Congress core group. The price rise factor is hurting Congress's allies in UPA and Left. In both West Bengal and Kerala, incumbent Left governments will not find it easy to blame the Centre for rising food expenses. UPA partners are also not keen on any move which introduces instability into ties with Left and affects the ruling coalition's grip at the Centre.

Some Congress leaders feel that the current situation does not give the Opposition NDA much of an advantage. But they do admit that BJP, despite its in-house distractions over blame games being played out over the Kandahar hijack, has still managed to derive some traction. The potential of price rise to play spoiler had been demonstrated in last year's municipal elections in Delhi and assembly polls in Punjab and Uttarakhand.

What is also worrying for the Congress leadership is that regional parties could be growing at the expense of the party in several states. The incumbency cycle may see parties like TDP, INLD, AGP and AIADMK make gains while others like BSP prove to be voter stealers. All this even as Congress finds itself locked out of major states like UP and Bihar. The reckoning in the Congress is that it will not be able to do without the Left in any future permutation at the Centre.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

US still optimistic about finalising N-deal with India
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

Facing timelines to finalise the civilian nuclear agreement with India, the US on Thursday expressed optimism about the deal getting cleared in the next several months, saying there was still time left with the Congress to see it through.

"... we certainly believe it's still possible for this deal to move forward and for our Congress to have an opportunity to consider it," State Department Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey said.

" ... it ain't over until it's over. And Congress will be in session for quite a ways more this year and we would certainly hope to have an opportunity to present them with this agreement and give them a chance to vote on it," he added.

Casey said the deal strengthen the non-proliferation regimes.

"We continue to believe that the civil nuclear deal is good, not only for India and for the United States, but also good in terms of strengthening the non-proliferation regimes that are out there," Casey said.

He said the Indian political system has to make some decisions to finalise the deal.

"We do, though, respect the fact that there are still issues that the Indian political system needs to work through. And that's been the case for a while. But we certainly hope we can get there," Casey said.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

[top]'India should go ahead with nuclear deal'

(source:IBNLive News | India News Homepage)

QUOTE UNQUOTE: Brajesh Mishra says it will be a loss for India not to go ahead with the N-deal.

What does Brajesh Mishra, former national security advisor, think of the Indo-US nuclear deal ? Karan Thapar asked him on Devil’s Advocate.




Karan Thapar: As a former national security advisor are you satisfied that if India goes ahead with the deal it won’t in any way damage or constraint its strategic nuclear deterrent?


Brajesh Mishra: Well, after the talks I've had with various representatives of the Government of India at a fairly high level and some scientists, I'm convinced that there is not going to be any major impact on the strategic programme through the deal. If there is any impact on the programme it is because we have other constraints, like lack of fuel. That is a possibility but not through this deal. This deal doesn't stop us from continuing our strategic programme in the way we have tried to do in the past.


Karan Thapar: Are you satisfied with the Government’s claim that the deal won’t in any way lead to India losing its rights to carry further nuclear tests?


Brajesh Mishra: There is no doubt about it that there's no bar on India undertaking nuclear tests. Of course exercising that option means a lot of hardships, economic and otherwise, because sanctions will inevitably follow. People talk about the Hyde Act not permitting nuclear tests but that is not really true. It is the 1954 Act of the US Congress and the mother of all Acts—it imposes conditions and sanctions on those who undertake nuclear tests.

We're not barred from undertaking tests if we're ready to pay the costs of sanctions, etc.


Karan Thapar: So, both in terms of future nuclear tests and in terms of any damage done to India’s strategic nuclear deterrent you are relatively satisfied that if India signs the nuclear deal there will be no deleterious effect in either case?


Brajesh Mishra: Yes, as far as the testing is concerned there is really no bar and as far deterrence is concerned, knowing the conditions in this country and knowing what has happened in the past, I would say I am more or less satisfied.


Karan Thapar: Do you accept that if a future Democratic President in America were to sign the CTBT, which many believe would be likely to be the case, he or she would inevitably set in motion a chain of events which would leave India also signing and thus foreclosing forever the option of nuclear tests?


Brajesh Mishra: But why do you think it is only a Democratic candidate who might do it. There is a possibility that a Republican President would seek Congressional approval for ratification of the treaty.


Karan Thapar: So whenever an American President signs CTBT a chain of events would be set in motion which would lead to India singing as well and therefore the option of nuclear tests would be closed forever at that time.


Brajesh Mishra: The US has already signed it, the question is of ratification. Since one is fairly certain that the Democrats will continue to control both Houses of the Congress I would say the ratification will come through. In that case will India stand in the way of the treaty coming into effect—I doubt it.


Karan Thapar: Therefore, in due course—possibly within two-three years— America will ratify CTBT, India will be forced to follow through and the option of nuclear tests will be closed.

Brajesh Mishra: It is bound to be closed. But unlike the NPT, which was a discriminatory treaty because it allowed some countries to have nuclear weapons and not others, CTBT is applicable to all. There is no discrimination in CTBT.


Karan Thapar: Which is why it would be impossible for India to hold out.


Brajesh Mishra: India cannot hold back. India will have to sign it and we will have no argument to go against it.


Karan Thapar: Given that what you have just said are political parties mistaken in rejecting the Indo-US nuclear deal on the grounds that it would stop India from carrying out further nuclear tests or on the grounds that it does damage to India’s nuclear deterrent?


Brajesh Mishra: Well so far as these two questions are concerned, in my view we are not restricted from carrying out tests and, more or less, the programme we had devised before we left the NDA government is on-going.


Karan Thapar: So it follows to reject the deal on these two grounds is mistaken?


Brajesh Mishra: Rejecting is too strong word. Rejecting is too strong a thing to do and I would not agree with it.


Karan Thapar: On these two specific issues has the BJP consulted you and sought your advice?


Brajesh Mishra: I have not been consulted by the BJP in the last four months or more.


Karan Thapar: Even though you were National Security Advisor of that government.


Brajesh Mishra: I had resigned from the party before I took over, so my connections with the BJP were severed at that time.


Karan Thapar: You have an authoritative opinion and they have not sought your advice.


Brajesh Mishra: Well, you may consider it to be authoritative opinion, I may consider it to be (but) they need not.


Karan Thapar: Do you accept the view that if the nuclear deal is not passed while George W Bush is the US President, it is unlikely the same favourable terms will be offered to India by any successive administration?


Brajesh Mishra: Yes, my view is the following. In any negotiation you have two parties. If you want to renegotiate any clause or aspects of the treaty, the other party is equally entitled to it. A new administration, whether Republican or Democratic, may have some other ideas regarding the treaty. It will become very, very difficult to renegotiate the treaty and have the same treaty for you to sign.


Karan Thapar: So if you want the same treaty on the same favourable terms, it is now or never?


Brajesh Mishra: It is now. It is now.


Karan Thapar: How serious a loss of face it would be for India if the Government were unable to clinch the deal?


Brajesh Mishra: In my view it will be a severe loss of face for the Government both domestically and internationally. Having promoted the deal in India and abroad—after all, our negotiators have been talking to various countries in the NSG (Nuclear Suppliers Group)—having promoted the deal so much and so strongly, not to go through with it is a loss of face for the Government of India and for India.


Karan Thapar: Would it also be a serious set back for India's hopes of acquiring dual use technology and India's hopes of being able to develop a civil nuclear energy sector?

Brajesh Mishra: Obviously dual-use technology will not be available to us if we don't go through with this and, of course, it's a set back.


Karan Thapar: And we also won't be able to develop civil nuclear energy effectively?


Brajesh Mishra: I am not a scientist, so I am not able to say what we will be able to do or not. But I do believe that the three-stage programme we have will suffer a setback. This is my belief but I am no scientist.


Karan Thapar: So, in other words, your advice is that this is a deal we need, let's go for it?


Brajesh Mishra: I think we should go ahead with the deal. Yes.


Karan Thapar: Should the Government go ahead with the deal even if the BJP and the Left remain adamantly opposed to it?


Brajesh Mishra: That's a political question. It is a political decision that they have to take. My personal view is that given the harmful effects of not going ahead perhaps we should go ahead and do it. Perhaps. But I am not a political man.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar
BanChildLabour

[Sreekar]

Nuclear deal is in our national interest: Govt
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

Ahead of next week's talks with the Left on the stalled Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement, the UPA government has said that it hoped that "national interest" will prevail and it will be able to persuade its allies who have important reservations on the deal to go ahead with it.

"The Indo-US civil nuclear deal by an overwhelming public opinion is regarded as pre-eminently in the national interest," Ashwani Kumar, Minister of State for Industry, told reporters here.

Noting that the UPA-Left Co-ordination Committee would meet in New Delhi on May 28, Kumar, who had earlier served as Additional Solicitor General of India, hoped "we will have a better picture and understanding of the situation" after the meeting.

"I hope that interlocutors of the government will be able to persuade our allies who have reservations on the deal to go ahead with it," the minister said on Monday evening.

Kumar said "it is just incomprehensible why this is being objected to" keeping in mind the demands for clean energy, consistent with India's commitment with the Millennium Development Goals and the requirement of an economy on the high growth trajectory.
"It is generally believed and in my personal opinion, rightly so, this is the best deal that we could have negotiated," the minister said.

Noting that if the deal has to go through, it has to be cleared "very soon", Ashwani Kumar who represented India at the World Economic Forum at Davos last year, said "I am an optimist. It is my fond hope that national interest will prevail."


-Thanks much,
Sreekar
www.banchildlabour.com

[Sreekar]

N-deal not dead, India tells NSG
(source:The Times of India: No 1 site for Breaking news, views, reviews, cricket, business, lifestyle, sports)

Within the country, the UPA government has not managed the promised consensus on the India-US nuclear deal with the Left parties, even postponing the next UPA-Left committee meeting scheduled for May 28. But internationally, the government is signalling to its interlocutors that it is not giving up just yet.

At last week's plenary meeting of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in Berlin Indian officials briefed the grouping on the state of play on the nuclear deal and the IAEA safeguards agreement. The briefing was done by senior officials of the DAE and Venkatesh Varma, MEA's pointperson on the IAEA safeguards negotiations.

The message from India was that the deal was not dead and would be completed. The briefing was done on the sidelines of the meeting, and concentrated on the safeguards agreement. India is not a member of the NSG and can only brief the members informally.

The real work of getting an exemption from the NSG will be done by the US and other countries like France, UK and Russia, who want to start nuclear commerce with India. The chairmanship of the nuclear body has just passed to Germany from South Africa.

In 2007, Indian officials had briefed the NSG at Cape Town on the 123 agreement which was close to completion at that stage.

On Monday, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee announced the postponement of the N-deal talks with the Left. No further dates have been announced. Over the weekend, the Left parties had issued a statement opposing the rationale of depleting uranium supplies for going ahead with the nuclear deal.

The government is hobbled, facing the opposition of the Left and an institutional reluctance to bring the government down on this issue and go to polls ahead of schedule. On the other hand, senior government leaders have said that India should not have to bear the responsibility of killing the deal. But none of this stands the test of political calculations, specially in the aftermath of the Karnataka poll results.

Interestingly, the NSG meeting saw a thawing of the Australian position vis-a-vis the nuclear deal and uranium sales to India. The Labour Party under Kevin Rudd had summarily reversed the earlier government's decision to sell uranium to India.

However, in a clear sign that the winds could change in Canberra, Australian foreign minister Stephen Smith told a group of Indian journalists in Canberra recently, "The Labour Party has a strong policy of not exporting uranium to any country that has not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). We have made this clear to Indian officials that we are bound by the party policy. But if the 123 agreement is passed by the Indian Parliament, we could consider joining a consensus of the NSG and IAEA." He added, "We will wait for the 123 agreement between India and the US to emerge and then make a judgment."

-Thanks much,
Sreekar
BanChildLabour