Left rejects 123 agreement

The Left Parties have rejected the Indo-US nuclear deal and asked the government not to go ahead with the 123 agreement in its current form.

The Left parties said they are unable to accept the agreement in its present form because it has to be read in the context of the Hyde Act.

According to them the deal is inherently flawed as it contradicts the Hyde Act of the US.

After ''careful assessment'' of the text of 123 agreement released on Friday and studying it in the ''context of burgeoning strategic alliance'' with the US, the Left parties said they were ''unable to accept the agreement.''

''The Left calls upon the government not to proceed further with operationalising of the agreement,'' a statement issued by the four parties on Tuesday said.

''There has to be review of the strategic aspect of Indo-US relations in Parliament,'' it said.

Making it clear they would block the deal, the Left parties also said they will press for a constitutional amendment for taking parliamentary approval before signing treaties of this kind.

Unlike the US, where the Bush administration still needs a final go-ahead from the US Congress for the deal to become law, in India the government does not require any parliamentary approval. But that doesn't mean the government can ignore its Left allies.

Withdrawal of support?

To a volley of questions on how the Left planned to ''block'' the government from going ahead with the deal, Karat said, ''we have not discussed our Parliament strategy. We will discuss it further separately''.

Asked whether their unhappiness on the deal would lead to withdrawal of support, he remained non-committal saying it was a separate issue that has not been discussed.

At the same time, the leader said that the Left would have a separate meeting on the issue of review of support to the government, which was to be taken up on Tuesday. CPI has been insisting that it was time the Left redefine its ties with the UPA.

On the deal, Karat said while the 123 agreement is being presented as a victory for New Delhi's position, ''we find that there are a number of issues on which it falls short of what the Prime Minister had assured the Parliament'' on August 17, 2006.

Under the terms set by the Hyde Act, he said, ''it was clear that one of the key assurances given by the Prime Minister, that Indo-US nuclear cooperation would cover the entire nuclear fuel cycle, would be violated.''

Karat said the agreement should not be seen in isolation from the overall strategic tie-up with the US.

''While we have to accept clauses and safeguards in perpetuity, the US will be bound by its national law (Henry Hyde Act). This will be a serious problem for us,'' he said.

Parliamentary ratification

He said the Hyde Act, which was passed after the Prime Minister's statement, ''would be continuously enforced by successive US Presidents and the Congress including the annual certification issue for 40 years when it will be operational.

Observing that there was no law enabling parliamentary ratification of major international agreements, Karat said the Left parties would press for a constitutional amendment for bringing such treaties and certain bilateral accords for approval in Parliament.

He said the ''flawed nuclear cooperation agreement cannot be justified on the debatable basis of augmenting our energy resources or achieving energy security. The motivation for the US side is commercial gains which will accrue for its corporates running into billions of dollars''.

Maintaining that the 123 agreement must be seen as a ''crucial step to lock in India into the US global strategic designs'', Karat said along with the negotiations for the nuclear accord, steps were being taken for closer military collaboration with Washington.

He said the disagreement with the 123 accord stemmed from the fact that there existed an unequal global nuclear order and, under the deal, the idea of universal nuclear disarmament, advocated forcefully by India so far, would be ''given the go by''.

Political posturing

Pointing out that the Hyde Act raised several issues, which were outside nuclear cooperation, he said the question of annual certification and reporting to the US Congress whether India was taking a stand ''congruent'' to that of Washington, was unacceptable.

The Hyde Act was a ''national law which is there at present and will be there in the future,'' Karat said.

He, however, acknowledged the efforts made by the Indian side to take note of the Prime Minister's assurances during the recent negotiations with the US.

So how much of this is political posturing and how far will the Left go to block the deal?

The answer is not clear yet. Unlike the BJP, which has demanded that the 123 agreement be referred to a parliamentary committee, the CPM says parliamentary approval for all international treaties should be mandatory.

The government has ruled out setting up a parliamentary committee and now Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee has been deputed to sweet talk the Left parties into consent.