Author: Kanchan Gupta
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: August 31, 2007
Even as the Prime Minister continues to conduct
negotiations, this time with comrades shaken by the possibility of China's
long march to superpower status being halted by an incipient India-US strategic
entente, on the 123 Agreement behind a veil of conspiratorial secrecy, the
BJP's helmsman has sought to remove misperceptions about his party's approach
to the civil nuclear cooperation deal. For the past several months, the distinction
between the position adopted by the Left and the BJP's criticism of the deal
has been increasingly perceived as becoming blurred, and hence indistinguishable.
Beginning with the ill-advised move to forge a common front with the Left
to force a 'Sense of the House Resolution' on the UPA Government, which was
engineered by a disgraced courtier of 10 Janpath to spite his patron-turned-foe,
the BJP has been seen to be echoing the Communists' strident anti-Americanism,
thus suffering erosion in its brand equity, especially among urban
voters.
In all fairness, it needs to be stated that
this perception is deeply flawed, not least because even the most casual scrutiny
of what the BJP's key speakers, Mr Arun Shourie and Mr Yashwant Sinha (we
need not be distracted by loudmouths and gadflies eager to comment on each
and every issue in the hope of making it to prime time news) during parliamentary
debates on the nuclear deal will show that nothing has been said which stems
from visceral hatred of America. The BJP's criticism has been based on technicalities
of the deal which the party believes are not in India's national interest.
The party has also been harsh on the Prime Minister for not being upfront
and slyly, ever so subtly, misleading Parliament, and thus the nation. It
is difficult to berate the BJP for fulfilling its responsibility both as a
'nationalist' party and as the main Opposition in Parliament.
On the other hand, the Left has never made
an effort to hide the fact that it is driven by anti-Americanism in its criticism
of the India-US nuclear cooperation agreement. It can be argued that had India
signed an agreement with China which would have allowed Beijing to operate
our nuclear facilities with Chinese scientists, the CPI(M) would have organised
public ceremonies to felicitate the Prime Minister and his political benefactor;
the lesser Left parties, including the CPI, would have cheered from the margins.
Of course, it is preposterous to suggest the possibility of such a pact, but
it is equally ridiculous of the comrades to claim that the deal gives Americans
a run of Indian territory.
No less laughable is the Left's poppycock
objection that the 123 Agreement is aimed at defanging India's strategic deterrence
and that it negates India's 'sovereign right' to conduct nuclear tests in
future. Let us not forget that in the weeks following Pokhran II, the Left
had worked itself into a frenzy, denouncing the nuclear tests and lashing
out at the NDA Government even while justifying the Chagai Hill explosions
that were made possible by China's surreptitious assistance to Pakistan. The
Prime Minister, who was then Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, had
joined the Left in flaying the BJP-led Government, though his script was written
by Americans incandescent with rage at being taken by surprise and Mr Atal
Bihari Vajpayee's audacious demonstration of India's true power.
A comparison of what the BJP and the Left
have said between July 2005 and August 2007 will show that while the former
has busied itself with the nuts and bolts and the fine print of the agreement
without rubbishing it in principle, the latter has resisted it citing ideological
opposition to supping with the Americans. The BJP cannot disown the fact that
it was the initiator of the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership dialogue with
the US. And nothing in the BJP's conduct, whether while in power or in Opposition,
even remotely smacks of blind anti-Americanism.
If the BJP has been consistent in pursuing
closer, equitable strategic relations with the US, the Left has been equally
consistent in repudiating the very notion of the two largest democracies working
in tandem, whether in promoting bilateral trade and commerce or in the realm
of strategic affairs. Despite this, if there is a perception, especially in
the middle class which has come to define urban India's aspirations, that
the BJP is seconding the Left's anti-Americanism, we can only blame it on
either, or both, of two things: Sound byte journalism which is the staple
of television news and newspapers aping the idiot box; and, the BJP's inability
to effectively communicate, largely because of too many voices wanting to
be heard, its distinctive position on the nuclear deal.
Seen against this backdrop, Mr LK Advani,
who still remains the sharpest strategist and the tallest leader in the party,
after Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee on whom the inevitable vicissitude of old age
has begun to show, has done the right thing to clarify the BJP's position
and thus remove doubts that had begun to creep into the sphere of public debate.
In brief, what Mr Advani has said can be summed up thus: The Left is propelled
by anti-Americanism, the BJP is motivated by national interest; nuclear deterrence
is an article of faith for the BJP and it cannot countenance an agreement
that threatens India's strategic programme; the BJP stands for strategic independence,
not strategic subservience; the BJP welcomes strategic partnership with the
US provided it is a partnership of equals; and, the BJP is opposed to a foreign
law seeking to dictate India's foreign policy.
None of this amounts to posturing against
the US, just as the BJP's criticism of the deal inside and outside Parliament
does not smack of anti-Americanism. So, the BJP's middle class voters who
want to see their children migrate to the US or, in the least, be blessed
by America with an H1B visa need not fret; the time has not yet come for them
to switch loyalties to the Congress which has suddenly woken up to the fact
that Jawaharlal Nehru's disparagement of the US was no more than so much bunkum.
There is something more that Mr Advani has
said: That India should have a national law, matching the Henry Hyde Act that
will govern US participation in the nuclear deal, to safeguard our interests.
In this context, he has suggested that perhaps Government should consider
suitably amending The Atomic Energy Act of 1962 to pre-empt the US from reneging
on its part of the deal as it did in 1974 after Pokhran I whose declared intention
was vastly different from that of Pokhran II. That would be a non-starter;
if anything, the atomic energy law as it stands today needs to be amended
to facilitate the operationalisation of the nuclear agreement, not build in
caveats and riders, since it prohibits the Government, in both letter and
spirit, from implementing the separation plan without which there is no 123
Agreement, apart from shutting the door on private sector participation. American
industry will not be terribly thrilled to learn about this bar that exists
on the statute book.
A far better option would be for the BJP to
demand, without any let-up, an amendment to the Constitution that will make
it mandatory for Government to seek parliamentary approval for all bilateral
and multilateral agreements and treaties which involve -- they may not necessarily
impinge on -- national security and national territory, and enact enabling
laws for implementing them. For starters, we could begin with enacting our
version of the Hyde Act to, as Mr Advani has said, "insulate our strategic
objectives" and "renegotiate the 123 Agreement". Yes, this
would mean a tectonic shift in our system of governance, which is hostage
to both Cabal and Cabinet, and perhaps amount to a first, small step towards
a new Republic.
Let Mr Advani and the BJP initiate the making
of history.
