Cong keeps mum as party wary of political impact

NEW DELHI: The Congress, which usually rushes to take credit for the government’s foreign policy initiatives, was on Wednesday remarkably reticent about the strong bipartisan support in the US House International Relations Committee for the Indo-US nuclear deal.

The party refrained from commenting on the vote, seen as a major success of Indian diplomacy. When reached out, party spokesman Rajeev Shukla said the majority support for the deal in the US panel was a welcome development.

While he admitted that some clauses were bound to attract criticism, he said that those controversial clauses were not binding on the Indian government. This lack of hype is understandable as the ruling side is yet not sure how the issue would play out in the domestic political scene.

With the Communists, ‘Socialists’ and hardline elements in the minority community continuing to back the Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, there is fear that the offer for “full and active participation in the US’ efforts to dissuade, isolate and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran” in the nuclear deal could further widen the distance between the Congress and the Muslim community.

This fear is not unfounded as the pro-Iran sections in the domestic political spectrum have been successful in mobilising opinion of the minority community against the government over nuclear cooperation with the US.

These sections, who had rejected the government’s stand that a nuclear power in the neighbourhood is not in the interest of the country, organised several protest marches in areas which respond to extra-territorial issues.

It be recalled that the support for Tehran’s nuclear ambitions helped the Left to make major inroads into the Muslim heartland of Kerala during the just-concluded assembly elections. Conversely, the Congress’ poll project was hit adversely in the Muslim-dominated districts of Assam.

All these point to the possibility of the community voters getting swayed by the issue. The Left has already come out against the deal, and is branding it as sell-out to the US. The Left and the Samajwadi Party have already made their intentions known by addressing pro-Iran gatherings in poll-bound Uttar Pradesh.

In one of the protests that Prakash Karat addressed, participants even carried placards saying that they are willing to become fidayeens for the anti-US cause. Mulayam Singh, who is desperate to hold on to his Muslim support- base, is certain to use this issue in the run-up to the assembly election.

With Muslim organisations floating their own a political outfits in the state, he’s likely to use even more “radical” themes for averting any split in its votebank. All these do not augur well for the Congress.

In a state where caste and community affiliations decide the reflexes of the voters, the backward quota issue is already putting severe strain on the party. Its leaders concede that they cannot afford Muslim disaffection at this juncture.

It is these fears that has been prompting the Congress not to highlight the quota issue and the nuclear deal in its political discourse. On its part, the CPM appeared determined to persist with its attack on the government for signing the deal with the US.

In a statement, CPM’s politburo said that the details of the deal completely contradicts the assurances given by the UPA government to Parliament that India will not become “prey” to US’ carrot and stick policy. “The bill says that Presidential waiver will cease to be effective of India conducts a nuclear test.”

The politburo said that India’s unilateral moratorium on conducting nuclear tests cannot be subservient to such US conditionalities. “India’s soverignty on these matters cannot be compromised”.

It has also taken exception to the clause that states that US President must first determine that India and the IAEA have concluded the safeguard agreement requiring the application of IAEA safegards in perpetuity.

“This runs completely contrary to the assurance given by the prime minister in both Houses of Parliament that India will approach the IAEA for safeguards only after the US endorses the July 18, ’05 nuclear deal,” the Polit Bureau said.

mentation of the nuclear deal with Washington has been removed with Tuesday’s crucial voting in a committee of the US Congress.

Notwithstanding the bipartisan support a draft US legislation providing India-specific waivers received in the House international relations committee, officials were cautiously optimistic about the deal, signed between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and president George W Bush on July 18 last year, crossing the last lap by August when the US Congress was expected to clear it. “I won’t say we are already there.

There is still work required to be done. This (house committee vote) was the first and the most important hurdle. I can’t say all hurdles have been crossed,” an official said apparently trying to underplay the significant progress made on Tuesday.

He said the most important development in ensuring the success of the July 18 deal was to get the US administration fulfill its commitments that includes a presidential waiver to India to provide for civil nuclear cooperation that would also involve fuel supplies to Indian reactors.

The draft law that was adopted by the House committee on Tuesday night, which would go before the Senate foreign relations committee on Thursday exactly provides for it, he said.

The US Atomic Energy Act of 1954 bars export of nuclear material, equipment and technology to nuclear weapon states other than P-5 nations and countries which have tested atomic devices and have a strategic programme unless they have accepted full scale IAEA safeguards or signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The draft US law under discussion gives the president powers to invoke a waiver in the case of India. India has already committed itself to separation of civilian and military facilities, which will come under fullscale IAEA safegards, and has declared a unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing.

This, the officials said, the US would be doing despite India possessing reprocessing capability. They dismissed fears in some quarters about the language used in the amendments, many of which were rejected by the House committee, that could be considered “offensive and intrusive” by India.

But they said these were being made in the context of the situation in the south Asian region and in Iran, but would have no impact on Indian foreign policy postulates. The officials said what India would do to implement the deal with the US has been precisely put in the agreement and other things being said in the draft law did not not really matter to New Delhi.

India has already made it clear in the agreement that it would have its right to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent, conclusion of an agreement with the IAEA on safeguards and signining of the additional protocol.

Besides, the officials said what the us lawmakers want the president to do was entirely an "internal working" between the administration and the congress and india and that could not not impinge on the bilateral deal.

They said India had its own views on the nuclear programme and what should be done to tackle the nuclear crisis there. And the US lawmakers apprehensions would not not deter New Delhi from attending the coming meeting of Non Aligned countries or going along with the consensus on any issues including Iran.

“We have every right to decry these elements. Our view is we would do what we consider is best in our interests,” they said apparently referring to amendments that would ensure that imported uranium would not not assist India’s nuclear weapon programme.