Lok Sabha Debates
Requesting The Minister Of External Affairs To Make A Statement On The Signing Of ... on 26 February, 1999
p;
Title:Requesting the Minister of External Affairs to make a statement on the signing of CTBT agreement.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH (BHARATPUR): Sir, we are in the same position as Dr. Subramanian Swamy with regard to the statement made by the External Affairs Minister in reply to Dr. Kurien's question as to whether India will sign the CTBT or not. Today, we see in the papers that the US Secretary of State has said that they are going to sign it. We seek a clarification on this. Let the Government come forward and clarify this.
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): Sir, this is a serious matter. Only two days back the Minister makes a statement and today his American counterpart says something totally different. All sorts of confabulations are going on between them and the country is taken for a ride. We demand that it must be clarified here.
DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY (MADURAI): Is this why the talks are being held in secrecy? We want to know what the gist of the talks is. We want to know what the minutes are. Let the minutes be placed on the Table of the House.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : Ms. Albright has made a statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It is extremely a serious matter, and we seek clarification from the Government.
SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM (SIVAGANGA): Sir, this House has been told only once through a very ambiguous statement about the status of talks between Mr. Strobe Talbott and Shri Jaswant Singh. Even when Shri Jaswant Singh was saying that `matters are confidential', Mr. Talbott was delivering a lecture to an institution in America, and he was granting an interview to The Times of India. When we confronted Shri Jaswant Singh, then he very reluctantly came forward with a very ambiguous statement. Just at the same time when we was telling the Parliament that India has decided not to sign the CTBT, his counterpart in America was telling in American Parliament that `India has agreed to sign the CTBT.'... (Interruptions)
The question is, will Shri Jaswant Singh come and tell us, what did he talk to Mr. Strobe Talbott. Will he share with us, will he share with this House the gist or the summary of his talks? He cannot tell us one thing, which Madeleine Albright is saying completely a different thing.
Sir, I have no doubt in my mind that this Government is making a secret deal behind the back of the Parliament...(Interruptions)...Unless they come forward, we will not believe them, we will not accept their bona fides. (Interruptions)
SHRI I.K. GUJRAL (JALANDHAR): Sir, I get up with a degree of regret. The hon. House will recall that for the last three years, our policy regarding the CTBT was a product of consensus in this House and backing of the national will. We have been following that policy. That policy has rejected the signing of the CTBT.
Then, the Government suddenly changes the policy and enters into a sort of negotiations with Mr. Talbott. Mr. Talbott comes here seven or eight times. Mr. Talbott takes the trouble of talking to some of us but the Government never bothers to tell us anything neither in the House nor in private, nor in the Committee, nor to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The end result, Sir, is that there is not only confusion but a great deal of suspicion about the intentions of the Government. So, I think, it is very important for us, in view of the facts and what has been said in America, that the Government should tell us about the exact position. I urge that let there be a full debate on this issue.
PROF. P.J. KURIEN (MAVELIKARA): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, is it that the hon. Finance has misled the House? Now, I am quoting from the proceedings. I had asked the other day in the House. It says:
"It has been the consensus stand of this country that the CTBT in the present form is discriminatory, and we will not agree to sign it in the present form. I would like to know whether the Government has agreed to sign the CTBT."
In the answer, the Minister says:
"The answer is clear, explicit and unembigious, `no'. The Government has not agreed to sign it."
This is the specific answer, the hon. Minister had given...(Interruptions)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : The Foreign Minister should be called here... (Interruptions)... He should come here and clarify the position immediately ... (Interruptions)...
PROF. P.J. KURIEN : Sir, I am not more inclined to believe Mr. Talbott than the hon. Minister. I am ready to believe our hon. Minister more. But here is a question of contention. It is for the hon. Minister to come here and clarify the position.
Sir, you should call the hon. Minister now itself. He should come here and clarify the position... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please speak one by one.
¸ÉÒ ¨ÉÖ±ÉÉªÉ¨É ÊºÉƽþ ªÉÉnù´É (ºÉ¨¦É±É) : ={ÉÉvªÉIÉ VÉÒ, {É®úºÉÉäÆ ½þÒ ½þ¨ÉxÉä ªÉ½þ ºÉ´ÉÉ±É ÊEòªÉÉ lÉÉ +Éè®ú Ê´Énùä¶É ¨ÉÆjÉÒ ¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ VɺɴÉÆiÉ ÊºÉƽþ VÉÒ ºÉä {ÉÚUôÉ lÉÉ* =ºÉ {É®ú ½þ¨ÉÉ®úÒ iÉ®ú¡ò ºÉä ÊEòºÉÒ EòÉä EòÉä<Ç §É¨É xɽþÒÆ ½þè* EªÉÉäÆÊEò +¨ÉäÊ®úEòÉ Eòä Êb÷{]õÒ Ê´Énùä¶É ¨ÉÆjÉÒ º{ɹ]õ Eò®ú SÉÖEòä ½þèÆ ÊEò VÉÉä +Eòä±Éä ¨ÉäÆ ¤ÉÉiÉ ½þÉäiÉÒ ½þè, =ºÉ ¤ÉÉiÉ EòÉä ºÉÉ´ÉÇVÉÊxÉEò °ü{É ºÉä ¦ÉÉ®úiÉ º{ɹ]õ Eò®úä* ´É½þ iÉÉä {ɽþ±Éä ½þÒ º{ɹ]õ Eò®ú SÉÖEòä ½þèÆ* ¨ÉèÆxÉä ªÉ½þ ºÉ´ÉÉ±É {ÉÚUôÉ lÉÉ ¨ÉÉxÉxÉÒªÉ VɺɴÉÆiÉ ÊºÉƽþ VÉÒ ºÉä ÊEò +¤É ºÉ¨ÉªÉ xɽþÒÆ ®ú½þÉ, ´É®úxÉÉ =ºÉÒ ÊnùxÉ ½þ¨É ªÉä ºÉÉ®úÒ ¤ÉÉiÉäÆ º{ɹ]õ Eò®úxÉÉ SÉɽþiÉä lÉä* उन्होंने मेरा नाम लेकर कहा कि इस तरह का कोई सवाल ही नहीं उठता। जो अंदर बात होती है, वही बाहर है, लेकिन अब यह स्पष्ट हो गया है इसलिए अंदर वाली बात बोलने के लिए उनको बुलाइये। इसमें अब हमारी तरफ से कंफयूजन है, अमरीका की तरफ से कोई कंफयूजन नहीं है। ={ÉÉvªÉIÉ VÉÒ, º{ɹ]õ ½þè ÊEò +Ænù®ú ºÉä ºÉÒ.]õÒ.¤ÉÒ.]õÒ. {É®ú ½þºiÉÉIÉ®ú Eò®úxÉä Eòä ʱÉB ºÉ½þ¨ÉÊiÉ ½þÉä SÉÖEòÒ ½þè, ªÉ½þ ½þ¨ÉÉ®úÒ VÉÉxÉEòÉ®úÒ ½þè* +MÉ®ú ½þ¨ÉÉ®úÒ VÉÉxÉEòÉ®úÒ MɱÉiÉ ½þè iÉÉä iÉiEòÉ±É |ÉvÉÉxÉ ¨ÉÆjÉÒ VÉÒ ªÉÉ Ê´Énùä¶É ¨ÉÆjÉÒ ªÉ½þÉÆ +ÉEò®ú ¤ÉiÉɪÉäÆ* SHRI MADHUKAR SIRPOTDAR (MUMBAI NORTH-WEST): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this categorical statement without having any ambiguity was made by Shri Jaswant Singh on the floor of this House. Whatever has been stated, we will have to have faith in that rather than in what Mr. Strobe Talbott has said. That simply may also be the problem. That is my contention.
DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY : Sir, the issue is whether Shri Jaswant Singh has misled our Parliament or he has misled Mr. Strobe Talbott.
... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: It is a serious matter. Order please.
DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY : I do not know whether the Foreign Minister, Shri Jaswant Singh has misled the House or misled Mr. Strobe Talbott or misled himself. We do not know whether records are maintained. For such discussions, normally records are maintained and minutes are kept. I do not know whether it has been done and the summary of discussions has been kept. But the US officials have been speaking in all world capitals and then an assurance has been given by this Government that after the Budget session of Parliament, they will sign the CTBT. That is what they are saying. We necessarily believe it. But why this confusion there? Why would Mr. Strobe Talbott stick to his prestige before the US Congress would say India would sign, if they have not misled them? Therefore, let him say what was also said in the Consultative Committee of External Affairs that there is no question of signing CTBT. There is no harm in saying it again and place it on the Table of the House the proceedings and the summary of discussions that have taken place so far.
SQN. LDR. KAMAL CHAUDHRY (HOSHIARPUR): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, you mentioned in the beginning that a ruling has been given by the Hon.Speaker that there will be no zero hour today and that the zero hour has been dispensed with today. Has that been the ruling of the Hon.Speaker?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Yes. Thank you.
SHRI RUPCHAND PAL (HOOGLY): Sir, the day before yesterday when I had asked a specific question whether Mr. Strobe Talbott has said that the lifting of sanctions is directly related to India agreeing to sign CTBT, in answer it has been said that the core issue to be taken will be only in the next talks in March. But only yesterday the Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has testified before the Senate Committee that India had pledged, not agreed, that they will sign CTBT and not only CTBT, along with that, the NPT, the COPU and others, that is, control regime and also the last one of the four things and within the CTBT, the export control, the defence procedure and everything.
SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA (BANKURA): It is a total surrender.
... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now the hon. Minister will speak.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI BUTA SINGH (JALORE): Sir, I will take just one minute. (Interruptions) This is a very serious matter. Shri Natwar Singh has raised a very serious matter. I will make only one point that I want to get clarified from the Government. (Interruptions)
There are two versions: one given by the hon. Minister of External Affairs of India and the other by the U.S. Secretary of State. May I request the hon. Minister to assure this House even if he has agreed to sign the CTBT that he will not do so without taking Parliament into confidence. I want that assurance. (Interruptions)
THE MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS (SHRI JASWANT SINGH): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I regret that I have got only the latter part of what is quite rightfully agitating some hon. Members of the House. But if I have got the sense correctly, hon. Members have raised an issue concerning what I stated in the House the day before yesterday and what has appeared in some newspapers on the very same subject. (Interruptions)
SHRI SHARAD PAWAR (BARAMATI): That is your counterpart's statement.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH: I am not aware of it. (Interruptions)
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : Give him that newspaper. Let him study it for two minutes and then answer.
SHRI P.J. KURIEN : Mr. Minister, you said in this House to my question that India has not agreed to sign the CTBT. You gave a very specific answer. (Interruptions) But your counterpart has reported to the American Senate that India has pledged to sign the CTBT. We are not inclined to believe her more; we are ready to believe you more. (Interruptions) You have to clarify the correct position. Or, have you misled the House? (Interruptions)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister of External Affairs.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: It is already over now.
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : The Minister is here and he has to clarify the position.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: It is already over. Please sit down.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : I am merely making a request to the hon. Minister.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Mr. Minister, would you like to answer?
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : I have only one point to get clarified. (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Hon. Members, please sit down. He is not yielding.
... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: What is wrong if he asks a question? He has raised the matter.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH : Have you received any telegram from our Embassy in Washington with regard to the alleged statement made by Ms. Albright before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? If not, will you ask them to send you the correct account? (Interruptions)
SQN. LDR. KAMAL CHAUDHRY : Sir, is this a debate?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: No. ... (Interruptions)
SQN. LDR. KAMAL CHAUDHRY : But hon. Members are repeatedly raising questions.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please resume your seat. ¸ÉÒ +VÉÒiÉ VÉÉäMÉÒ (®úɪÉMÉgø): ={ÉÉvªÉIÉ ¨É½þÉänùªÉ, ªÉ½þ nùä¶É EòÒ +ʺ¨ÉiÉÉ +Éè®ú ¨ÉÉxÉ-ºÉ¨¨ÉÉxÉ EòÉ ºÉ´ÉÉ±É ½þè* MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Hon. Members, please take your seats. I am on my legs now.
... (Interruptions)
SQN. LDR. KAMAL CHAUDHRY : The House has rules and the House is run by the rules.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Now, you are breaking the rules. Please do not do that for Heaven's sake. What I said initially was, the Zero Hour was not to be there but only one matter has been allowed by the hon. Speaker and that is the matter that we have taken up. You should understand this. (Interruptions) I am still on my legs. You hear me completely and then take the floor. You are a senior Member. When a matter is raised in the Zero Hour and if the Minister is there - he is here now - if he wants to react, he can do it or if he wants to clarify, he can clarify. Please do not mistake me. Allow me to conduct the House.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH: Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I understand very well the concern of the hon. Member. The gist of the matter is that the hon. Members want me to clarify whether what I stated in the House is the correct position or what is reported in the newspapers as an account of a testimony before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee is the correct position.
My reply is exactly what it was the day before yesterday. How can I possibly come to Parliament and say what I stated in the House is incorrect? It passes my imagination. This is the fact of the matter. I do not have any difficulty in repeating it because some queries have been raised. There will naturally be a debate on the Demands for Grants of the Ministry of External Affairs. ... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Buta Singh, please do not interrupt. Let him complete.
SHRI BUTA SINGH : Sir, now the question is that of CTBT. ...
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The question of CTBT will also come during the discussion of the External Affairs Ministry. ... (Interruptions) Shri Buta Singh, please let him complete.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH: When the discussion or a debate takes place, naturally this issue and the other issues of concern to the House and to the hon. Members shall get taken up. Nevertheless, as the issue has agitated the minds of the hon. Members, I have no difficulty at all in again stating what I said in the House, simply because I am duty bound to state. Moreover, it is the correct position.
SHRI P. SHIV SHANKER (TENALI): Will you counter the statement of Ms. Madeleine Albright?
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: He stands by the statement that he made here. Why do you want that to be done?
SHRI JASWANT SINGH: When I am doing it here, what does it amount to? I really do not understand what the hon. Member is attempting to do. The position of the Government is explicitly, clear and unambiguous. It has been stated in the House. It constitutes a part of the Prime Minister's statement to this House. The very position has been reiterated by the Government through the hon. Prime Minister in the UN General Assembly. ... (Interruptions) I would be happy to yield.
SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM : The position which the Prime Minister articulated in the United Nations is certainly not the same position that he took here. There is a dilution of the position.
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: He categorically stated in his answer day before yesterday here; and he is sticking to the same position.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH: The position has been stated both in this House and in the other House. In the other House where a discussion took place on the same subject, it was stated. The position has been repeated in the UN General Assembly. That is explicit; it is unambiguous; and it is categorical.
Secondly, some hon. Members are raising a new point on the testimony to the US Senate. Surely, I can hardly be held to account for what happens in the US Senate. I am stating in the Indian Parliament as to what we have to do.
Thirdly, some hon. Members raised the question of Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. The Fissile Material Cutroff Treaty is still under negotiation. The position of the Government of India is again categorical and clear -- that we shall engage in negotiations about the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, for an early verifiable and a comprehensive treaty on the control of fissile materials.
The hon. Member raised the issue of export controls. On export controls, India's record is impeccable. Indeed, it is better than that of some of the P-5 countries. It is a point that we have made here and we make it repeatedly.
So far as export control or export of either technology or weapons of mass destruction or related aspects to it are concerned, we are ready to engage with any one in the world so as to improve our systems.
On the defence posture, I have already stated our position. I have said that the defence posture comprises of minimum deterrence, no first use, non-use against non-nuclear weapon states, not engaging in an arms race, that we shall determine what the minimum deterrence is, that we shall not accept what others tell us what our minimum deterrence is, and that we shall decide the minimum deterrence because it is not a fixity in time or a physicality. We shall determine it in accordance with the altering security environment.
This is the position that the Government has repeatedly and clearly said in both the Houses of Parliament and outside also. This is all that I have to say in the matter.