Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

            We have been expressing our concern.  We have developed independently the first breeder reactor in our country.  After 1974 nuclear tests and Pokhran nuclear tests, restrictions were imposed on us.  In spite of the restrictions we independently developed, our scientists independently developed the first breeder reactor.  Our scientists had done a commendable work.  In both the deals, USA is shifting the goalpost.  The Prime Minister very categorically stated on 29th July – the concern we have expressed – that India will not compromise its strategic interest. 

“Accordingly, after concluding this limited testing programme, India announced a voluntary moratorium on further underground nuclear test explosions.  We conveyed our willingness to move towards a de jure formalisation of this obligation.  In announcing a moratorium, India has already accepted the basic obligations of the CTBT. ”   MAJ. GEN. (RETD.) B. C. KHANDURI : It was a voluntary imposition of the State. … (Interruptions)
SHRI ANAND SHARMA: Madam, I may also say, as I said right in the beginning when I started, that the hon. Prime Minister and this Government have repeatedly come before the Parliament.  There was a time when for 11 long months there were talks between the then Foreign Minister of India and Mr. Strobe Talbott.  This Parliament was never informed; this country was never informed.  We were kept in dark.  Today, we see the Delegations of Malhotraji’s Party – you all were there – in the newspapers going to Rashtrapatiji petitioning against this Government as if we have done something which totally compromises India’s sovereignty.  But, at that time I would have respected all my friends on the other side if they had protested and demanded what was transpiring between the two, between hon. Jaswant Singh ji and Strobe Talbott.  … (Interruptions) The country had to wait not for 11 months but for years. … (Interruptions)

My humble opinion is that, July 18 deal would benefit both India and the United States.  We are emerging as strategic partners.  It is the result of an `out of the box’ approach to nuclear and technological challenges we face in our bid to emerge as an economic giant by the end of the first quarter of the 21st century.  We were informed that the Left was happy with PM now, after, at last, his reply in the other House.  Yet, this discussion has been initiated by the Left. 

I have  three points to make.  Among our nuclear scientific establishment, sections of the academia and some of our political parties, both on the Left and on the Right, there is an understandable fear of the Indo-US nuclear deal getting India entrapped. The fear is understandable because of the history of past 60 years. Even after nuclear tests in 1998, during the Jaswant-Talbott talk, the US always attempted to get India into the CTBT and to cap, reduce and roll back Indian nuclear arsenal.  Successful US administrations have consistently aimed at curbing Indian nuclear arsenal.  US will always try to advance United States interest.  They are still out to sustain their pre-eminence in the international system but let us not be blind towards the US strategy towards India that has changed because of the change in times and circumstances.  Those, who have reservations on the Indo-US Nuclear Deal, also should become aware to the fact that Russia, which is now emerging as the leading energy power, fully backs this Indo-US Nuclear Deal and so do the European Union and Japan.

            Therefore, we have decided to take these steps rather than allow intrusive inspections of nuclear facilities of high national security importance. I would like to assure the hon. Members that these steps do not impact at all on the needs of our strategic programme nor will they hinder on going research and development. If and when required, we have the full freedom to build new facilities to cater to our national requirements.

            Questions have also been raised about the detonation of nuclear tests in the future. Sir, we have made it quite clear to the United States that India is not willing to give any commitment about the future tests. All that we are willing to state--and that is the position which was also stated by the previous Government--is ‘unilateral moratorium on nuclear tests.’             Now the question arises, what happens if our national security considerations require us to have it? Who can contemplate all the possibilities in the future? I think in that case, we will, of course, have the sovereign right to take whatever measures we can to protect our interests. But I cannot accept… (Interruptions)